A REPLY TO A PRETENDED CHRISTIAN PLEA FOR THE ANTICHISTIAN CHURCH OF ROME: published by Mr. Francis johnson ao. 1617.  
Wherein the weakness of the said Plea is manifested, and arguments alleged for the Church of Rome, and Baptism therein, are refuted; By Henry Ainsworth. Anno 1618.  We would have healed Babylon, but she is not healed: forsake her, and let us go every one into his own country: for her judgement reacheth unto heaven, and is lifted up even to the skies; jer. 51. 9 
Printed in the year 1620.   

The Preface.  
TWo things (good Reader) have been heretofore controverted between Mr. johnson and me, the one concerning the Power of the Christian church, which he would have installed in the Ministry thereof: the other concerning the Antichristian church of Rome, with the ministry and baptism thereof, which he hath pleaded to be true, though corrupted; I have proved to be false and deceitful. These things have passed publicly (through mine Opposites occasion) in Mr Richard Clifton's Advertisement, and my Animadversion thereto. The former of these two points, Mr. johnson hath left unanswered; so the prudent may judge of the strife, by that which we both have said: the latter, he hath sought to maintain by a colourable Plea for the Roman church, chiefly underpropped by two reasons, 1. because Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God; 2. and because Apostate Israel (the figure of this Antichristian church,) was the church of God; as he pretendeth. These, with his other like reasons, I have laboured to refel, in this treatise following. His order of handling them, I have altered; beginning with the Church of Rome; then with the Baptism of that church: for so I judge the truth of the controversy will soon appear. His often longsome repetitions, I seek to abridge; as being fruitless, & wearisome to the Readers: his bold and bitter taunts, I pass over; being not willing to answer any man (and least of all the dead,) to such things. As also his marching us among the Anabaptists, for our more disgrace: his dissembling of his own former judgement and accord with us, in the things now controverted; imputing them to us and others, when himself hath formerly spoken and written for the things which he now would pull down; but hath not taken away his own grounds. Only whereas in his preface he intimateth sundry manifest untruths published in the Animadversion, but nameth none: I signify in a good conscience, that to my knowledge ● published not any one untruth, but rather spared him, then pressed things in extremity. That which I suppose he aimeth at, I set down from the report of honest faithful witnesses, (of whom some are now at rest in the Lord,) who would not (as I am persuaded) willingly have related any thing but the truth. Finally, as in all other my labours, so in these controversies following, I endeavour to find out & manifest the way and will of God, by the light of his word; to the glory of his name, and comfort of those that love the truth in sincerity.   

A REPLY TO A PRETENDED Christian Plea, for the Antichristian Church of Rome.  
We are taught of God, that 
* Prov. 28. ●  they which forsake the Law, praise the wicked; but such as keep the Law will contend with them. Wherefore, though my desire hath been to leave off contention with all men, & to labour to build up Zion in peace: yet being provoked by name, & my writings against the 
† 2 Thes. 2. 3▪  Man of sin, that Son of perdition being publicly traduced; I held it my duty to maintain the war which I began to wage against the Beast, whom 
“ v. ●.  The Lord will consume with the spirit of his mouth, and will abolish with the brightness of his coming.  
The state of this controversy is; whether notwithstanding the infinite idolatries and other abominations now of a long time with strong hand practised by the church of Rome; it be to be reputed the true church of Christ; and the Sacraments (especially Baptism) to be esteemed the true signs and seals of the covenant of grace, from God to them, in their present estate. I deny it: mine opposite hath colourably pleaded for it, & inveighed much against me, in his last book called A Christian Plea; ao. 1617. Wherein, though in many things he deserved sharp blame; yet having ended his life with his work, and not being now to answer for himself, or make use of that which is written: I will omit the just reproofs, which might through God's mercy have been 
* Psal. 141.  a benefit unto him: and will address myself, to remove the stumbling blocks out of others way, and to clear the truth which is darkened with the cloud of error. The Lord which hath taken this counsel against Babylon, that 
† jer. 50. 4●▪  the least of the flock shall draw them out; and that he will surely make their habitation desolate with them: enable me with his grace to ●ight the good fight of ●aith, and to declare in Zion 
† v. 28.  the vengeance of the LORD our God, the vengeance of his Temple.  

Of the church of ●ome.  
BEcause the true Church is that people to whom pertaineth 
* Rom. ●. ●.  the adoption of sons, and the glory, and the covenants, & the giving of the Law, and the service (of God,) and the promises: it is requisite that we first handle the state of Antichrists church, so shall we the better discern of the ministry; seals of the covenant, and other ordinances of God which the man of sin abuseth, whether they be true or false unto them, in that their sinful abuse.  
In my former answer, I laid down these grounds; 
† Animad●●rs: p. 76.  The Antichristian synagogue is by the Holy Ghost called a Beast, Rev. 13. 11. which signifieth a Kingdom, Dan. 7. 23. it is named also a great City, Rev. 11. 8. which noteth the largeness of tha tpolitie & kingdom. It cometh up out of the earth, Rev. 13. 11. as being of this world, (which Christ's kingdom that cometh down from heaven Rev. 21. 2. is not:) and therefore is called a man of sin, 2 Thes. 2. 3. and a great whore, Rev. 17. 1. whose head is Abaddon or Apollyon, Revel 9 11. the Destroyer of others, and himself the son of perdition, 2 Thes. 2. 3. and they that follow him are the children of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 12. This wicked generation warreth against the Lamb Christ, and against the Saints,, Rev. 17. 14. 6. and 13. 7. blasphemeth Gods name and Tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven, Rev. 13. 6. that is the true church, whose conversation is heavenly, Phil. 3. 20. Yet do they all this mischief, under show of Christian religion: and therefore this Beast, hath horns like the Lamb Christ, Rev. 13. 11. this whore is arrayed with purple & scarlet, guilded with gold, precious stones and pearls, Rev. 17. 4. as if she were the Queen and spouse of Christ, Psal. 45. 9 13. Ezek. 16. ●0.— 13. Song. 7. 5. she hath Peace-offrings and Vows, Prov. 7. 14. (as if she were devout in God's service, Psal. 66. 13.) bread and waters, Prov. 9 16. 17. (as ready to refresh the weary souls.) Her doctrines, sweet and amiable, lies spoken in hypocrisy, Prov. 5. 3. 1 Tim. 4. 2. but yet confirmed with signs and miracles, as if they came from heaven, 2 Thes. 2. 9 Rev. 13. 13. 14. her power & efficacy great, prevailing over the many and the mighty, the Kings and Princes of the world, deceiving all nations with her enchantments, Prov. 7. 21. 26. Rev. 17. 2 & 18. 23. and if it were possible, Gods very elect, Math. 24. 24. Her continuance and outward prosperity is long, Rev. 13. 5. & 18. 7. & 20. 2. 4. her end, miserable, Rev. 18. 19 21. & 19 20. 21. consumed with the spirit of the Lords mouth, and abolished with the brightness of his coming, 2 Thes. 2. 8. And for her destruction, the heavens shall rejoice, and sing praises to God, Rev. 18. 20. & 19 1. 2.  
The accomplishment of these prophecies, I 
* Animad▪ pag. 77.  there showed to be in the Church of Rome at this day; confirmed by her own canons and doctors, that set forth her profession and practice. These grounds remain yet unanswered by mine opposite; being such as I assure myself neither could he, neither can any sound refute. Now let us see how far he yieldeth, and how he opposeth. First 
† Christian Plea p. 12●  he prayeth all to take knowledge, that his mind and desire in himself is to plead against the present estate of that church, and not for it: acknowledging it to be fallen, into most sinful and deep defection and apostasy, and so to be a notorious harlot and idolatress: which all the people of God ought to forsake, and to witness the truth there against, even unto death.  
How well this his acknowledgement agreeth with his plea in the residue of his book; shall appear in the discussing of the reasons after following. But what saith he to the description of Antichrists church, which I before showed from the scriptures? He 
“ Chr. pl●● p. 141.  saith, I speak of the church and Synagogue of Antichrist, of the Beast, of the great City, of the man of Sin, of the great whore, of Abaddon or Apollyon, the son of perdition etc. whereas I should treat of the Temple of God, whereof Paul speaketh. 2 Thes. 2. Hereupon he chargeth me, 
† p. 242.  to keep what I could from the point of the question in hand, and therefore also to confound things that differ.  
I answer, that the the question was by this mine opposites former 
“ Adverti●▪ p. 58. 59  grant, about the church of Rome, whether it were the church of God or no. Now when at first I show from the scriptures, what manner of Church that Roman church is, in God's account: how could he charge me to keep from the point of the question? 2ly. the place of th'Apostle being alleged 
* Advertis▪ p. 5● 59  by mine opposite for a proof that the church wherein Antichrist sitteth, is the Church of God; I come immediately after 
† Animad▪ p. 77. 78. etc.  to scan that scripture: and yet he challengeth me for keeping from the point; whereas all men of judgement may see it was needful to know what God foretold of that church throughout the scriptures, that so we might understand in what sense Antichrist is said to sit in the Temple of God, 2 Thes. 2. For seeing the Temple of God, is a figurative phrase, taken from the shadows of the Law: it is not wisdom in us, to expound a parabolical speech contrary to the plain scriptures & grounds of Christian religion; but we must understand it according to them. Wherefore, there being no other answer made to the description aforesaid: it standeth in force to prove that the church of Rome, is not the true Church of Christ.  
So for the accomplishment of the prophecies, whereas I 
† ●nimad.  showed from the Papists own writings of their church, how fitly it agreeth with Antichrists synagogue foretold of by God: mine opposite answereth 
* ●●s. ple● 〈◊〉.  I tell them of a Church, such as Bellarmine and others describe, one part whereof lives on earth, an other under the earth, and a third part in heaven etc. Whereas our question is of the Temple of God, whereof Paul speaketh, 2. Thes. 2. 4. and of the court and holy city whereof john speaketh Rev. 11. 2. Thus neither the Prophecies of God, nor the compliment of them showed by the men themselves whom the prophecies concern, may be brought to clear the controversy: but mine opposite will insist upon dark and figurative speeches; that men may be the more easily deluded. For how shall we prove against Papists, that the Pope is Antichrist; if we may not allege the Popes own doctrines and practices, which are contrary to Christ? Yea how shall we judge of any church, but by their own Confessions published, and comparing them with the scriptures? Wherefore the profession of Papists concerning their church, is a strong argument whereby they may be discovered to be none of Christ's: & even the Cretian liars testimony against themselves, is true, as the Apostle noteth, Tit. 1. 12. 13.   

An Answer to the arguments brought for the church of Rome.  
MIne opposite pleadeth thus; 1. First, I take an argument from the baptism had in the churches aforesaid, [the Apostate churches of Christians▪] thus. The Baptism had in the church of Rome, is the Lords baptism, the sign and seal of his covenant, the ordinance of God had in that church from the Apostles times (before Antichrist there arose) Rom. 6. 2. 3. and so is true baptism, which is from heaven and not of men: that one baptism which pertaineth to the body of Christ, Eph. 4. 4. 5. which the Lord hath given to his church, and not man etc. Therefore the church of Rome, is the church of God, and under his covenant etc.  
Answ. Here, let it first be observed, whether mine opposite pleadeth against the present estate of that church, as before he pretended. For if they be under God's covenant, & have it sealed unto them from heaven, by that one true baptism, then are they in the state of grace and of salvation: which is the very thing that all Papists at this day do plead for. Concerning his Argument, I deny, that the baptism had in all Apostate churches of Christians and particularly in the church of Rome, is the Lords true baptism, or the sign and seal of his covenant of grace unto them. Here mine opposite referreth me to an other place of his book, for proof of the truth of their Baptism: whereto I will make answer anon, in their place. And now that my denial may not be so bare as is his assertion here: I will insist upon the two scriptures which he citeth▪ and disprove their baptism.  
In Rom. 6. 2. 3. 4. the Apostle saith; How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not that so many of us as are baptised into Christ jesus, were baptised into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead, by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk ●n n●wnes of life. Here first the Apostle speaketh of such as are dead to sin; that is mortified Christians, which live not in sin, neither 
* vers. 12.  reigneth it in them, but they are 
† v. 7.  freed (or justified) from sin; and are 
v. 11.  alive unto God. But Antichristians (such as are the professant members of the church of Rome,) are not dead unto, or freed from sin: for they are the subjects of the 
† 2 Thes. 2. 3.  Man of sin, the worshippers of the Beast, for whom is prepared the wine of the wrath of God, Revel. 14. 9 10. They are of that church, which by my opposites confession a little before) is fallen into most sinful and deep apostasy, & is a notorious ●arlot and idolatress, which all the people of God ought to forsake: Wherefore they are rather to be counted dead in sins (as th'Apostle speaketh of the Gentiles, Ephes. 2. 1.) and that they are in deed dead, and not partakers of the first resurrection; is evident by Revel. 20. 4. 5. 6. in that they are the worshippers of the Beast, and murderers of the witnesses of jesus. Wherefore, the doctrine of Baptism in Rom. 6. is far from proving the Antichristians or other heretical and apostate churches, to have the true baptism of Christ, or seal of his covenant: but his servants they are to whom they obey, even of sin unto death, Rom. 6. 16.  
The other scripture is Ephe. 4. 4. 5. There is one body and one spirit, even as ye are called unto one hope of your calling: one Lord, one faith, one baptism. By which words it appeareth, that such as have the One baptism, have also one and the same faith, Lord, hope, spirit, and body: which to affirm of the Antichristian church of Rome, and of all other heretical and Apostate churches that profess Christ, is very impious. And most firm arguments there are from the Apostles words to the contrary of that which this man pleadeth for. As, The Romish and other heretical churches have not the one & same faith with the true Churches of Christ; witness, their blasphemous doctrines published by the Council of Trent, and in other books; and the Apostles prophesy, that they are departed from the faith, 1 Tim. 4. 1. etc. therefore they have not the one Baptism. They have not one and the same Lord jesus Christ; but have Antichrist the Man of sin, for their Lord: therefore they have not the one baptism. They have not that one hope, nor that one Spirit, neither are they one body with the true Christian churches: therefore they have not that one baptism. These things are partly proved before in the description which I set down of Antichrists church: they are also acknowledged of all Christian churches, which disclaim the unity with the Antichristians in their faith, spirit, & body. And the scriptures most abundantly disclaim this feighned unity: as 2 Cor. 6. 12. what concord hath Christ with Belial? meaning, none at all. And Belial is there put for Antichrist and his retinue, as in 2 Sam. 23. 6. & 22. 5. The Apostle showeth, that the Antichristians have from God, strong delusions, to believe lies unto their damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 11. 12. That they are departed from the faith, do give heed to ●educing spirits, and doctrines of Divils', speaking lies in hypocrisy, etc. ● Tim. 4. 1. 2. That the false teachers (among Christians) privily bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction, 2 Pet. 2. 1. That the Beast (which is the 
* Dan. 7. 23.  kingdom of Antichrist,) and the false prophet (his ministers) and all that worship him, or take his mark; shallbe tormented in fire and brimstone for ever and ever, Rev. 20. 10. etc. & 14. 9 10. And shall we now say, that these miserable creatures, have one Spirit, hope, Lord, faith and baptism with the saints and true Churches of Christ? My soul, come not thou into their secret, that so affirm.  
The second argument for such churches, is; 
† Chr. plea ●. 121.  If they be not under 
II.  the covenant of God, but divorced from the Lord &c: then is there no salvation for any in those churches.  
Answ. I deny the consequence. For then, after Israel was divorced from the Lord, (as is testified in in jer. 3. 8.) there was no salvation for any among them: which I know mine opposite himself would not say.  
Objection. Why, 
* Ibidem.  out of the covenant of God, there is no salvation.  
Answ. I grant it. But though the church be not under the covenant of God, but without it, or divorced from him, yet some parlicular persons in that church, may through God's grace be in his covenant. For as every true church is in the covenant of God, yet some hypocrites and reprobates are in the same, which perish for ever: so every false church is out of the covenant; yet some truly faithful and elect may be therein, which by the covenant of grace may be saved. Example in Rahab the Canaanitess, the church whereof she was, had not the covenant of grace in Christ: yet she having heard of God's works towards Israel, believed in God, and was saved; and before she joined herself to the church of Israel, she showed the fruits of true and living faith, whereby she was justified, & is put in the catalogue of the Saints, Jos. 2. 1. 9 10. etc. Heb. 11. 31. 39 Jam. 2. 25. 26. The like is to be thought of the other nations, far off from God, who by some means hearing of his name and truth, might embrace the faith unto salvation, though the churches whereof they stood members were false and idolatrous, 1 King. 8. 41. 42. 43. So where mine oppositen 
* Ibid. p. 128  bringeth scriptures to prove, that they which are not in the covenant of God and Christ, cannot be saved: he proveth that which is not denied: but this he should have proved, if he could; that if a church be false, and not under the covenant; none in that church can by any means come unto the faith and covenant of Christ; for this I deny. And his argument if it had been sound, should have been this. If Antichristian churches be not under the covenant of God, but divorced from the Lord; then is there no salvation for any that are under the covenant of that church, and in no other covenant: and so I would have granted his argument; as confirmed by the Holy ghost, that all such are in the state of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Rev. 14. 9 10.  
Here to help the church of Antichrist into the covenant of Christ, he 
† Chr. plea p. 122.  bringeth in the profession of the Jesuits of Rheims, which (as he saith) ●old 
Rheims ●nno●. on 1 Tim. 2. ●.  Christ by nature to be truly both God and man, to be the one eternal Priest and Redeemer, which by his sacrifice and death upon the cross, hath reconciled in to God, and paid his blood, as a f●ll and sufficient ransom for all our sins, etc. again to be the singular advocate and patron of mankind, that by himself alone, and by his own merit● procureth all grace and mercy to mankind. etc.  
I answer, First for the persons that set down this profession they are by the testimony of God that false prophet, which with the Beast shallbe tormented for ever & ever, Rev. 20. 10. or at least, they are those unclean spirits which come out of the mouth of the Beast & of the False prophet, for they are the spirits of Divils', working miracles, which go forth unto the Kings of the earth, and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God almighty, Rev. 16. 13. 14. And this is apparent by that corrupt Testament and blasphemous notes and interpretations upon it, which they there set forth to the world, in stead of the true Christian and catholic faith. Moreover they are a part of the popish hierarchy which mine opposite after maketh to be the Man of sin, the son of perdition, and the Beast, which he will not endure to hear that they should be accounted the church, or married to Christ: yet here he maketh them the preachers of the doctrine of salvation. Secondly for the Profession which they there make, if it were sound and good, yet denying it again in their works, it nothing availeth them: for of such it is written, They profess that they know God, but in works they deny him, being abominable and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate; Tit. 1. 16. But what shall we say, if they deny the truth of the doctrine of Christ, not in work only, but even in word and profession? First then, (to omit their railing against Calvin about the Godhead of Christ being of himself, in their Annot. on John 1. sect. 3.) concerning Christ's manhood, and the truth of his humane nature, how ever they acknowledge him to have taken flesh of the virgin; yet believe they, (and burn to ashes such as will not believe it,) that the bread in the sacrament is transsubstantiated into the very body of Christ; so they have a Christ made of a wafer cake; a Christ whose whole body is in an hundred thousand places and more at once, even in all places of the world, whersoever Mass is said by a Priest: so he must have a fanatical body, which can neither be seen, felt, tasted or by any sense of man perceived as an humane body: & this breaden Christ they worship in that their idolatrous sacrament, and do eat him really & properly with their mouths. And do these now believe Christ's humane nature aright; when as by the plain scripture we are taught, that the heaven must receive him, until the times of restitution of all things, Act. 3. 21.  
As for his office of Mediatorship; whereas they profess him to be the singular Advocate and patron of mankind; by singular they mean not the only Advocate or mediator, as the scripture teacheth, ● Tim. 2. 5. 1 Joh. 2. 1. but a special or chief mediator: for they have innumerable other advocates and mediators, as the heathens of old, had one chief God, and many inferior gods. So the same Rhemists' gloss on 1 Tim. 2. telleth us, that though Christ be the only singular Advocate and patron etc. yet this letteth not but there may be other inferior mediators, though not in that singular sense: And how they believe in their Queen of heaven, let this one song (amongst many other) to the virgin Marie witness, when they sing O regina poli, matter gratissima prosi: Spernere me noli, me commendo tibi soli. i. O queen of heaven etc. I commend me to thee only.  
As for the redemption, the full and sufficient ransom for all our sins, paid by his blood, which they would seem to hold: it is with fraud and injury to Christ's blood, which by their distinction) satisfied for the sin, but not for the punishment; and therefore they have feighned a purgatory fire, wherein men's souls do bear the punishment of their own venial sins: Concil. Trid-sess. 6. can. 30. Bellarm. de Parg. c. 1. From which also they can redeem themselves by money, given to Antichrists priests that sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead. And whereas God teacheth us, that we are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ; Rom. 3. 24. and that we are not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, Gal. 2. 16. the Antichristians teach us a justification by faith and works together; by Christ's merits, Saints and Pope's merits, & their own; and these works by which they believe to be saved in part, are very many of them wicked works of their own devisings, as going on pilgrimage, giving of their goods to maintain Antichrists clergy, and idolatry, and other like works of the Devil. And of their own idols, as of an Agnus Dei made of wax, they believe and profess, 
* Ceremon. Rom. l. 1. 〈◊〉. 7. c. De consecrat. agn. Dei.  Omne malignum peccatum frangit, ut Christi sanguis, et angit. It breaketh all wicked sin, as the blood of Christ doth. Thus blasphemously they tread Christ's blood under their feet.  
Finally, the faith which they profess to have in Christ, what is it? Any trust or confidence such as the faithful have in Christ to be their saviour, as the Apostle teacheth, in Rom. 8. 33. ●. 39 & Gal. 2. 20. Hebr. 3 6. Ephe. 3. 12. Nay, this confidence they reject as a presumption; and their faith, (which is without confidence) being but an assent to the truth of God's promises; & not a confidence of their justification in particular: is such a faith as the devils 
* jam. 2. 19  have, who know and assent to the truth of God's promises unto mankind. See Bellarm. the justific. l. 1. c. 5. 6. etc. Now if this painted face of the Romish jezebel, be so fowl and ugly, being compared with the beauty of Christ's true spouse: what may we think is the faith of that ignorant seduced multitude of Antichristians, who professing Christ in name, look for salvation by the wicked works which the Pope hath learned them, and by the works of the Law of God, and belief in Christ, and their own sufferings, confusedly together; and yet neither know Christ, nor what true saving faith in him doth mean.  
Object. Who dare say but that God by this faith in Christ, saveth some of them, who do thus believe in simplicity etc.  
Answ. And who dare say, but that God, notwithstanding this faith professed by the Jesuits as before, may justly damn them, though they thus believe in simplicity ' Seing even in these things which they profess, they corrupt themselves with horrible idolatries, having many false Gods, and false Christ's in whom they also trust, and daily pray unto them, as did the heathens. And, seeing this their faith, considered in the best, is no true saving faith; but as themselves say, The faith which truly justifieth, is not that whereby they believe that God is merciful unto them; but that whereby they believe with the whole heart without any doubting, that Jesus is the Christ, and the son of God. Bellarm. de justific. l. 1. c. 8. Such a faith appeareth to have been in the devils, as it is written And devils also came out of many, crying out and saying, Thou art Christ, the son of God, Luke 4. 41. But that God giveth some in that church a sounder faith, and saveth them of the riches of his grace; I never denied or doubted of.  
Object. 2. Of this mind concerning them, I have been a long time; see Answ. to Mr. Jak. p. 13. 47. etc.  
Answ. But then and there, this distinction was rightly put, of, some particular men, considered a part from their constitution; that is, from their church estate: now, that church and all other Apostate churches professing Christ's name, are generally pleaded for, to be in the state of grace, having the one true baptism etc. which is to justify the open wicked, and count Christ's enemies blessed.  
Object. 3. Some of them dye Martyrs in defence of the Christian faith, (acknowledging jesus to be the Christ the son of God.) against Turks, etc.  
Answ. If it be in defence of the Christian faith, it is well: but if acknowledging jesus to be the Christ, they die also in defence of the Antichristian faith professed by that church, and for the idolatry of the same, (which is hateful to the very Turks:) than I say with th'Apostle, they may 
* 1 Cor. 13. 3.  give their body to be burned, and it profit them nothing. Neither doubt I, but some of the jews, have died and will dye in defence of the God of Israel as they now profess him from Moses and the Prophets; rather than yield to the heathens. But the extraordinary mercy of God to some in Antichrists church, justifieth no more the estate of that Synagogue of Satan, than his like extraordinary mercy to some of the heathens (of whom we shall speak anon) will justify the heathens synagogues to be Gods true churches. As for Martyrs, our own English acts and monuments and other, do show that many have given their lives for this, that the church of Rome is not the true church of Christ. Now by mine opposites plea they died not herein for the truth but for error: what Martyrs them were they?  
Obj. 4. Many Jndians, Pagans, Jews are by them converted, and brought to the profession of Christian religion, among whom I doubt not, but the Lord hath and saveth his, even by that knowledge and faith of Christ, which by their preaching among them they are brought unto, etc.  
Answ. That many of all nations are converted or perverted unto antichristianity by the Papists, there is no doubt, for experience showeth it, and so it is prophesied, that by Babylon's sorceries, all nations should be deceived, Reve. 18. 23. So the heathens of Babylon, Cuth, Hamath etc. were converted by a Samaritan Priest, and taught to fear the Lord the God of Israel: that they feared the Lord, and served their own Gods; & also, they feared not the Lord, neither did they after their statutes or after their ordinances, 2 King. 17. 28. 29. 30. 33. 34. If that misceline rabble were God's true church, so are these popish proselytes: if they were not (as I never heard any affirm they were,) neither are these. And what have our learned men of England answered to this old popish argument? I deny (saith Dr. Fulk) that ever the popish church converted any to the true faith. Answer to a counterf. Catholic art. 1. Yea what say the Papists themselves, of this point? Hierom Benzo (in Histor. Indiarum) saith, that all the religion the Indians have, is to make the sign of the cross, & to hear a Latin mass, and to perform such like ceremonies. joseph a Costa, a jesuit, in his book De procuranda Judaorum salute, telleth us, 
† Lib. 6. c. 3.  that the Spaniards have baptised many against their wills. He saith, 
“ Lib. 1. ch. 14.  they are like the Samaritans, that worshipped God and idols both together: they make (saith he) a feighned show of Christianity, they serve not God in deed, neither believe they unto righteousness. And are not these converts now, a goodly plea for mine opposite to allege, for proof of a true Christian church? But he proceedeth,  

* Christian▪ plea p. 122.  Yea and who can say, but that whersoever the name of Christ is preached and called upon, the Lord saveth some etc. seeing that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life, and whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, joh. 3. 16. 17. etc.  
Answ. Where Christ is truly preached, and believed, no Christian will say, but the Lord saveth some: but where Christ is falsely preached and believed in, after Antichrists idolatrous manner, none can truly say, that they are a true Christian Church. As for Gods saving some by the doctrine there preached; it is a thing not for us to dispute of: we are commanded to leave secret things unto God, and to hold us unto things revealed, Deut. 29. 2●. God who brought light out of darkness, can cause the truth to shine into the hearts of his elect, by the corrupt preaching of the Papists▪ and so I doubt not but he doth. yet is this no justification of the popish church; any more than the true preaching of the gospel, which is unto the reprobates the savour 
† 2 Cor. 2. 16.  of death unto death, is a condemnation of the Christian Church, and true doctrine of the same.  
Object. 5. But, 
* Chr. plea. pag. 122.  Out of the Church there is no salvation, which I suppose themselves will not deny. And (that which is more) the Lords constitutions cease not to be his holy ordinances, though the people that enjoy them, should have no benefit thereof to salvation.  
Answ. Here we have suppositions in stead of proof. His assertion I deny, though he supposed the contrary: for out of the true visible Church (whereof we dispute) there may be salvation. Many that are not of any true Church, yea are persecutors of it, and excommunicates out of it, may repent and believe in Christ, even at their last hour, and at their death; and so be saved; though they neither have time, place, or means to be joined to any true visible church on earth. If he speak not of a particular visible church, but of the Universal church which is invisible, and comprehendeth all Gods elect: he swerveth from the question, and deceiveth by aequivocation; for we treat of the visible church of Rome, whether it be Christ's true church or no. As for the Universal church, which is all over the earth, and from the beginning of the world to the end thereof, and containeth Gods elect only: out of it in deed there is no salvation. But what is this to the purpose? For so a man might reason thus. In the church there are no reprobates, there is no damnation; for Christ giveth all his sheep eternal life, and they shall never perish, joh. 10. 28. But the Popish synagogue, is (by mine oposites plea) the church, even the true church of Christ. Therefore in it there are no reprobates, there is no damnation. Here (I doubt not) mine opposite would distinguish between the Catholic or universal church in the first proposition, and the particular church of Rome, in the second; and so deny the argument: & why would he then himself obtrude upon us, such a deceitful reason?  
The latter part of his speech I grant: but it helpeth him nothing. For the synagogue of Antichrist, is none of God's constitutions, though every true Christian church is: neither hath he annexed promise of grace, to his ordinances abused by the man of sin, and his subjects, in that malignant church, but hath threatened the destruction of the deceivers and deceived, 2 Thes. 2. 8. 10. 11. 12.  
3. The third 
* Chr. plea p. 122. 12●▪  reason for the church of Rome consisteth of a division of the world into Christians, jews, Turks and Pagans; and of a question, if it be asked, which of these is the Church of God at this day? should we not answer, the Christians: and among the Christians, comprise the churches aforesaid, for the reasons before specified?  
Answ. The first part of his answer, I yield unto, that Christians now are God's church. The second I deny, namely that Antichristians (such as the Papists be,) & other heretical and apostate churches, are to be comprised in the number; save in name only, for in deed and truth they are not. His reasons before specified, I have particularly refuted: & so might here end. But further to explain the truth, I answer; that after this general division, we must make an other subdivision, or else we may be deceived. The subdivision is of Christians again, into true and false, or into Christians and Antichristians which profess Christ in name & deny him in deed. And this I learn of the holy Ghost, who in the Apostles times divided the jews into outward, and inward, Rom. 2. 28. 29. and counted these latter only jews: and such as said they were jews and were not, but did lie, he calleth them the Synagogue of Satan: Revel. 3. 9 Even so, he prophesied of a Beast (or kingdom) which should have two horns like the Lamb (Christ, and so be called Christians) but should speak as the Dragon, work wonders, & deceive men that dwell on the earth, &c, Revel. 13. 11. 13. 14. He also foretold of false teachers among Christians, who privily should bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them etc. 2 Pet. 2. 1. If thus we distinguish not between the true Christ and 
* M●t. 24. 24.  false Christ's, between true prophets and false prophets, and so between true churches and false: we may reteyn the name of Christ and Christian churches, and be in deed nothing less. And according to mine opposites manner of plea, an other might reason thus, Of sinner's in the world, some are 
† 2 Pet. 2. 4. 5.  Angels, and some are men. If then the question be asked, seeing Christ came to save sinner's, 1 Tim. 1. 15. which of these are redeemed and saved by Christ, & are the church of God? should we not answer men; and among men also comprise all peoples upon earth, jews, Turk's Pagans &c. This is the mould of mine Opposers argument; and as colourably as he pleadeth for Antichrists synagogue to be Christ's Church, so others do plead for universal redemption of all peoples & persons borne into the world; from joh. 1. 9 Rom. 5. 18. and other like scriptures.  
4 The 
* Chr. plea, p. 123,  fourth reason is from baptism, a visible sign of God's visible Church among Christians, as circumcision was among the jews etc.  
I answer, the baptism among Antichristians is in deed like their church; Christ's in name, but not in deed and truth. As for that which he annexeth, of our defending and retaining that visible baptism received in the church of Rome; it followeth after to be discussed, when we come to treat of their baptism. In the mean while, let it be observed, that as Circumcision was a sign of the Church of old; so was sacrificing, both then, and before Circumcision was instituted: and all nations retaining sacrifice then, as well as Antichrist retaineth baptism & the Lords supper now; it will also follow by like reason, that all nations were then God's churches; which argument shall be prosecuted hereafter. Again, as the foolish woman calleth passengers to her sweet stolen waters, and pleasant bread of secrecies, Prov. 9 13. 17. so this foolish 
* Rev. 17. 18.  woman (the church of Antichrist) by like stales, allureth the simple unto her: which are no sounder proof that she is Christ's true spouse, than the true man's purse in the thiefs hand, will prove the thief to be a true and honest man.  
5 The 5▪ reason 
† Ibidem  is from the defection of judah and Israel, remaining still God's people notwithstanding: therefore also the church of Rome, in like manner.  
Answ. Of the first part of this reason, touching the state of the Israelites, we are after to speak in particular: but were it granted, I deny the consequence, it followeth not, the Antichristian synagogue is so also.  
Inst. 
* Ibid. pag. 123. 124.  The consequence (saith he) is proved, because these were types of the like state of the Christian churches, recorded for our instruction. 1 Cor. 10. 6.— 11. with Rom. 154. & 2 Tim. 3. 16. 17. 2 Pet. 2. 1. Judas v. 5. 11. Rev. 2. 14. 20. & 11. 2. etc.  
Answ. I grant that he saith, for the Christian churches: but for the Antichristian, it is true in part only. The sins of judah and Israel, are found in Rome: so are the sins of Sodom, Egypt, Babylon, and heathen Rome; which by warrant from God, were types also of this Antichristian Babylon, Rev. 11. 8. and 17. 5. From which I may as truly conclude; Sodom, Egypt and Babylon of old, were so far fallen from God, as they were not his churches or peoples: and they were types of this church of Antichrist, and the things written of them, are for our instruction, Rom. 15. 4. jude v. 7. 2. Pet. 2. 5. 6. Therefore this Antichristian synagogue, is not Christ's true church.  
Further I answer, that the types which were in Israel, prove not that the things typed are in the same degree of good or evil, neither more nor less; as mine opposite would infer that Antichristians are not now more deep in apostasy than were the Israelites. For types and figures agree in some things, but not in all. Moses, Aaron, David and all other types of Christ were sinner's: but it were wicked thereupon to conclude, that Christ himself was a sinner. Moreover Christ's priesthood was figured in Aaron & his sonns: yet did not that Levitical priesthood fully type out his office, but in part: & a more complete figure of him was in Melchisedek, as th'Apostle showeth in Heb. 5. and 7. chapters. Accordingly, it will follow, that Antichrist is answerable to Israel's apostasy in part: and yet a more complete figure of him is to be found in the Gentiles. And as Christ excelleth in holiness all that were types of him: so Antichrist exceedeth in wickedness all the types of him; & therefore hath many sorts of wicked men, to resemble his impiety. Rev. 11. 8. And that his consequence followeth not from the type to the thing typed, that they are both in an equal estate, appeareth further by his own grant (in pag. 126.), where he maketh Antiochus and his captains etc. a type of the Papacy. Now it is confessed of all, that Antiochus and his company were Pagans in religion: so by the like reason, the Pope with his captains and souldjers, must be Pagans also.  
6. The 6 reason 
† pag. 124.  alleged for them is, that it should be sin for Papists and Apostate Christians, to marry with Pagans, to neglect baptism, not to sanctify the Lords day; as it was in judah and Israel to marry with the heathen, to neglect circumcision, to profane the Lords day etc. Dan. 11. 32. with 1. Maccab. 1. 16. 45. 51. 55. and with Mal. 2. 11. Ezr. 9 1. 2. & 10. 10. Neh. 13. 3. 23.— 27. Host 5. 7. & 7. 8. & 8. 12. Amos 8. 5. with 2 Cor. 6: 14. etc. which should not so be, if they were not the church and people of God, under his covenant, and bound to the observation of his ordinances. For Pagans, and such as pertain not to the Lords covenant, being not his church and people, are not in their estate bound to these and the like ordinances of the Lord, which he hath given to his church and people. Psal. 147. 19 20. with Deut. 7. 1.— 11.  
Answ. This reason is sundry ways faulty. 1. Of Pagans he saith, they are not in their estate bound &c: but Papists and apostate Israelites, he would have them bound, yet mentioneth not their estate: whereas if he speak not of them also in their estate, his argument is false and fraudulent.  
2. The scriptures alleged Psal. 147. & Deut. 7. are by him abused, whiles he restraineth them to these and the like ordinances, namely, marriage, circumcision, baptism, and the Sabbath; understanding by the like ordinances, (as I suppose) the Passover and other sacrifices, the Lords supper, &c: whereas the Psalmist speaketh generally of God's Words, Statutes (or Ordinances) and Judgements, Psal. 147. 19 20. which three, do comprehend the moral Law, called the 
* Exod. 34. 28.  Ten Words, the Ordinances of worship and service, and the judicials for punishment of malefactors: all these the Prophet saith, were showed unto Jsrael, and God dealt not so with any nation. Now to conclude from these words, therefore the nations were not bound to observe the ordinances, because God had not showed them unto them, as he had done unto Israel (namely by his written Law given at Mount Sinai,) hath no more weight than this, Therefore the nations were not bound to the moral Law, or to the judicials; and so sinned not in committing idolatry, murder, whoredom, or the like. But this is impious to say, and a false conclusion: therefore his conclusion also touching the ordinances is false, and can not rightly be gathered from this text. The evil of it further appeareth in one of his instances, the Sabbath day: which is one of the ten commandments, and instituted from the beginning of the world, Gen. 2. If then the nations were free from sin when they kept not the Sabbath, because they had it not written in the book of the Law or Tables of stone as had Israel: were they not also by the same reason free from sin in not keeping the other commanments?  
So for the Lords day now, he maketh the church of Christ only (and so the Papists and other like whom he accounteth true churches) sinner's if they keep it not: all others he freeth from sin, as not bound to keep it. Whereupon this paradox followeth, that the further men fall away from Christ, the more free they are from sin. For the church of Rome being fallen to Antichrist the Pope, they are sinner's in his account, if they keep not the Lords day: but the churches of Corinth, Ephesus and other like which are fallen to Mahomet, they are no sinner's in his account, though they observe not the Lord's day: and why? Only because they are fallen so far, as they are no church of God, nor in his covenant of grace. Thus, the further from Christ the freer from sin; if this doctrine be true.  
But I suppose the contrary to be true: and that all peoples how far soever fallen from Christ, are now bound to keep the Lords day, and other ordinances of Christ; and it is their great sin that they do not. For Christ sent his Apostles to teach all nations, & to baptise them, and to teach them to observe all things whatsoever he commanded his Apostles, even to the world's end, Mat. 28. 19, 20. And they went into all the world, preaching and admonishing all men every where to repent, and believe the Gospel, & to be baptised, and observe all the ordinances of Christ: and all that obeyed not, or that have since fallen from their obedience, are guilty before God, and shallbe condemned, because they believe not in Christ, and keep not his commandments. Mark. 16. 15. 16.  
If it be said that a Turk or Pagan in that their estate of unbeleef may not lawfully be baptised or admitted to the Lords supper, till they repent: this is true; yet can we not therefore say, they are not bound to be baptised, or are free from synin neglecting baptism: for they are bound to all the doctrines and ordinances of the gospel in order, first to repent and believe, then to be baptised, then to receive the Lords supper, and so all the rest. If further it be said, that the Papists in their estate of misbeleef and idolatry; may without repentance and without returning to the true faith, be partakers of baptism and the Lords supper &c: it is denied. For if the jews (which were the true church though corrupted) might not be received to baptism without repentance, as the scriptures show, Mat. 3. 6. 7.— 10. Luk 7. 29. 30. Act. 2. 38. then the Antichristians, the members of that church which (by Mr. ●ohnsons own acknowledgement 
* ●hr. plea, ●ag. 120. ) is fallen into most sinful and deep defection and apostasy, and is a notorious harlot and idolatress; may much less be baptised, or admitted to the Lords supper unless they repent. And whereas mine opposite pleadeth for their right in the sacraments & other ordinances which they should sin to neglect: it would be known where they are bound to receive them, whether in their own church, or in some Christian reform church. If in their own; then they are bound to hear Mass, and sin if they be not partakers of it; for that is their idolatrous supper: then do not the Magistrates well to forbid them their Masses, and other ecclesiastical exercises, which they are bound by God to frequent, and should sin if they used them not. If they have right unto them in other reformed churches: then is there to be a communion between true Christians and those Antichristians, in one body, at one Table: for (as the Apostle saith) we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread, 1 Cor. 10. 17. But this were to build a new Babylon, and to make a confused mixture of the members of Christ and of Antichrist, contrary to all the scriptures. 2 Cor. 6. 14. 15. 16. 17 Rev. 21. 27.  
The other scripture which he citeth, Deut 7. 1- 11. helpeth him no more than the former: for there in the 11. verse, the Commandments, Statutes and Judgements (which imply all Moses law) are expressed: if other nations were freed from all these, than were they freed from all law, and so from all sin; for where there is no Law, there is no transgression, seeing Sin is the transgression of the Law: 1. joh. 3. 4. And where he instanceth marriage with Pagans, which is there forbidden Deut. 7. 3. and applieth it to Papists now, that they should sin to marry with such, I grant it. But his inference thereupon, that therefore they are the true church and in the covenant of grace, I deny. For the jews at this day, which profess (after their false manner) the God of Israel, and all things written in the Law and Prophets, should sin if now they married with such, doing contrary to their express Law, Mal. 2. 11, Yet are not the jews now in the covenant of grace, or the church of God.  
Again in Deut. 7. 5. there is commandment to destroy images and like monuments of idolatry: if this was peculiar to Israel, than other nations sinned not, in suffering idols among them undestroyed: whereas the Apostle plainly showeth their grievous sin in making and using such idols, Rom. 1. 23. and consequently it must needs also be their sin, that they did not forsake, destroy and abolish them.  
If any now ask, whether the other nations were then bound to all the ordinances of Israel? I answer, no: for some things were never before commanded, nor unto other than the church of Israel, as the strangers might eat some meats, which the Israelites might not, Deut. 14. 21. Such things having never been forbidden them of God, they might eat without sin, as we may at this day. But this I say of the nations, that all the Laws, Statutes and judgements which were once commanded them of God; they were bound for ever to keep, till God again repealed them. As for example all the ten commandments; and such Statutes (or ceremonies) as were taught them of God, as sacrificing, Gen 4. 3. 4. & 8. 20. not to eat flesh with the blood, Gen. 9 4. and all other the like. And for judgements, to kill murderers, Gen. 9 6. and so to punish other malefactors. And no Apostasy could ever free them from sin, in neglecting any of God's laws once given them. So no Apostasy could free the Israelites from any law of Moses; or the world now, from the Law of Christ. The jews that under Antiochus turned, to Paganism, 1 Maccab. 1. 43. were guilty they and their seed, for neglecting circumcision, the Passover and all other ordinances of Moses; and their apostasy (whereby they went out from the covenant of God and his church,) freed them not from sin at all. So the Christians in like manner that have Apostate to Mahometisme, are nevertheless in their sins for neglect of Christ's truth & ordinances; though they be no Christian church, as all of us grant.  
Only there is this difference to be put; that such as know the will of God, (as did the jews, and many Papists now may, by the scriptures,) and do it not; shallbe beaten with many stripes; whereas the ignorant peoples, and Popish multitude, shallbe beaten with few, Luke. 12. 47. 48. But to excuse them from sin wholly, is to plead for iniquity. And for this cause, both David in Ps. 147. and Moses in Deut. 7. urgeth Israel to thankfulness and obedience above other peoples, in that the Lord had now written his laws and ordinances unto them, and made them an holy people, when he left other people's, only to that doctrine which by word of mouth was delivered them from No and his sons; which if they did forsake (as they had in a great measure,) they should perish for ever.  
7. His seventh & last 
” Chr. plea, 124. etc.  reason for the church of Rome is taken from 2. Thes. 2. 3. 4. Where it is prophesied that Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God. This argument he handleth at large. But first let it be observed, how all his reasons, hitherto, are showed to be insufficient▪ and built upon weak grounds, the first being taken from their baptism, which is adulterate as the church itself: The second, from an inconvenience falsely presupposed, that none in that church can else be saved: The third, from a question, whether Christians, jews, Turks or Pagans, be the church. The 4. is again from their baptism. The 5. is from the types of judah and Israel in apostasy. The 6. is from a supposed freedom that such as are apostate from the covenant of God, should have from sin, if they neglect the ordinances of the gospel. None of these arguments are taken from the essential things whereof the true church consisteth; none from the matter, to prove them saints; or form, to prove them united unto Christ and one to an other, according to the order of his testament; none from the faith, to show it to be true; or from the worship and service of God; or from the ministry, to manifest either of these to be according to Christ. And now, the last of his reasons is from a figurative phrase the Temple of God, which may be diversely understood and applied, as himself cannot deny. Let the prudent reader judge, whether these his seven arguments be any thing like those seven pillars, which Wisdom hewed out, when she builded her house, Prov. 9 1.  
Now let us weigh, his seventh reason. The Apostle (saith he) speaking of Antichrist, in 2 Thes 2. 3. 4. describeth him thus; There shall come an Apostasy (defection or falling away) and the man of sin shallbe revealed, the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped: so that he as God, suiteth in the Temple of God, showing himself that he is God etc. Here the Apostle describing Antichrist▪ speaketh of the Temple of God, where he suiteth etc. Now that by the Temple of God in Jsrael, was figured the church of God among Christians, appeareth by these scriptures, 1 Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2 Cor. 6. 16. Ephe. ●. 21. Rev. 11. 1. 2. 19 & 14. 15. 17. & 15. 5. 6. 8. & 16. 1. 17. compared with Zach. 6. 12. 13▪ and is acknowledged by the best writers of all ages etc. So then from this scripture I reason as followeth.  
If the Pope of Rome with his hierarchy be the man of sin (here spoken of) and the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped: then is the church of Rome the Temple of God here spoken of; wherein he suiteth as God, showing himself that he is God.  
But the Pope of Rome with his hierarchy, is (by 
* Animadv p. 76, 106▪  their own grant) the man of sin of whom the Apostle here speaketh etc. Therefore the church of Rome, is the Temple of God also, that here is spoken of.  
I answer. This argument I might wholly grant, and not hurt the cause I plead for. For though the church of Rome be the Temple of God, which Paul speaketh of: yet followeth it not, that it is Gods true Temple, or true Church, (which is the point that should be concluded;) seeing the scriptures often speak of things as once they were▪ though so they continue not still: as also, they speak of things according to the outward pretence and show that is made of them; though in deed and truth they be nothing less. The first is manifest by these and other like instances: Abigail is called the wife of Nabal, 1 Sam. 30. 5. though Nabal was then dead, and his wife married to David. Simon is still called the Leper, Mat. 26. 6. though he was then cleansed of his leprosy. The king of Tyrus an heathen man that lived in Ezekiels' days, is said to have been in Eden the garden of God, to have been upon the holy mountain of God, and to have walked in the midst of the stones of fire, Ezek. 28. 13. 14. meaning that he had been in God's church, on mount Zion, among the people of God: although not he himself, but Huram his predecessor (many years before, in the days of David and Solomon) was the man that became a proselyte in Israel, and helped to build the Temple; 2 Chron. 2. 3.— 16. even as if a man should speak to the Bishop of Rome at this day, and tell him what he was for a Bishop in th'Apostles days, and how now he is degenerate and become the man of sin. The mountains of Horeb and Tabor, where God once gave his Law and Christ was transfigured; are after still called the mount of God, and the Holy mount, 1 King. 19 ●. 2 Pet. 1. 18. because they had been for the time 
* Exod. 3. 5.  sanctified by the presence of God. And so the Temple in jerusalem, after the jews had crucified Christ, refused the gospel, & were 
† Rom. 11. 20.  broken off, because of unbeleef; and the sacrificing and 
” joh. 4. 21.  worshipping in that place was ended; yet is it until the utter ruin of it by the Romans, called the holy place, Mat. 24. 15. Thus also the City become an harlot, is called the faithful City▪ Esai. 1. 21. the wicked that hath forsaken his righteousness is named arighteous man. Ezek. 18. 26. according to their former and not their present estate. And when these titles are given them, it is not to justify them at all, but to aggravate their sin. So for the second, that things are called according to the outward appearance and pretext set upon them, though they be in deed false; is evident by these and the like examples; false Gods, which are but idols, are called gods, usually: so one Prophet calleth those the Philistians gods, 1 Chron. 14. 12. which an other calleth their images. 2 Sam. 5. 21. False prophets are called Prophets, 1 King. 22. 6. 22: and Balaam a Soothsayer among the heathens, Jos. 13. 22. is called a Prophet. 2 Pet. 2. 16. The evil spirit whom the witch of End or raised up for Saul, is called in the scripture Samuel, 1 Sam. 28. 11. 12▪ 15. 16. 20. by reason whereof, the Papists 
* Bellarm. ●e Chr. ani 〈…〉 a, l. ●. c. 11.  contend that it was Samuel in deed, and not the Devil; urging the letter, as mine opposite doth urge against me this phrase of the Temple of God. The idolatrous Temple which jeroboam made in Israel, in honour of the God which had brought them out of Egypt, is called the house of their God, Am●s 2. 8. yet that it was his true house or temple, I never heard of any that would affirm: though it was the true God whom they worshipped therein; for Baal with his house, was then destroyed out of Israel, 2 King, 1●. 27. 28.  
Now mine opposite hath given us a good rule in this his last book, when answering the Anabaptists he saith, 
* Christi plea pag.  The word of God is not the bare letter or outward syllables, but the intendment and meaning of the holy Ghost by whom it was given. Which should carefully be observed by the due consideration of the scriptures, with the circumstances thereof, and by the conference of other places of scripture, and the proportion of faith laid together. Which whiles the Anabaptists neglict, they look on the scripture partially, and press the letter extremely, without consideration of the true and right meaning thereof. These words of his are true; the more it is to be lamented that he himself would so press the letter against me, and not weigh the meaning of the same, by itself, and other scriptures, and the proportion of faith laid together.  
In alleging this text, he layeth down the words thus, There shall come an apostasy (or falling away): whereas the Apostle saith, except there come an apostasy (or falling-away) first: which word first, may intimate that the church should fall away from the love of the truth, before the man of sin should be revealed: and this is apparent by the 10. verse, where the people whom Antichrist seduceth, are said to be them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Or, if the word first (which mine opposite leaveth out,) be understood before Christ's coming, then is it meant of the apostasy (or the falling. away,) so called by an excellency, as exceeding all other. And is not to be referred to Antichrist the head only, but to Antichristians the body also; who after other sins, should fall away with Antichrist, and be damned with him; as in the 11. verse it is said, God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; shalt they all might be damned who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. So that by the whole scope of this scripture it is evident, the Apostle divideth not the people of the church of Rome, from the Bishop and ministers of the same; as if the people should be Gods true Temple, Christ's true Church, under his covenant, and so in the state of grace; when the Bishops and ministers are the Devil's Temple, Antichrist, the man of sin, and so in the state of damnation: but maketh both bishops and people, deceivers and deceived, all of them under wrath and condemnation; otherweise then my opposite would persuade. For he pleading thus, The Apostle speaking of Antichrist, describeth him thus. There shall come an apostasy &c: would have men think, that the Bishop and ministers of the church of Rome are the apostasy, and the people not: contrary to all the scope of this scripture, contrary also to Paul, in 1 Tim. 4 1. where he foretelleth of some that should apostate (or depart) from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of Divils'; meaning it of the people deceived by false teachers: yea it is contrary also to mine opposites own grant, who said (a little before) that the church of Rome is fallen into most sinful and deep defection and apostasy, and so is a notorious harlot and idolatress. Wherefore his distinction here between the apostasy & the church of Rome, making the one Antichrist, the other God's temple, under his covenant of grace: neither acordeth with the scriptures, nor with his own assertion.  
Next this, where he saith, that by the Temple of God in Israel, was figured the church of God among Christians: it is granted. But withal, let it be noted, that himself can not deny, 
* Chr. plea, p. 58.  but the Temple and tabernacle in Israel, was not the church and congregation of God's people properly, but a sacramental sign of Gods dwelling with them; which I before 
† Animadv. ●ag. 79  confirmed by these scriptures, Exod: 25. 8. 2. Chron. 6. 2. Ezek. 37. 26. 27. Rev. 21. 3. Secondly, he himself affirmeth, that 
* Chr. plea. ●ag. 149.  the temple at jerusalem, did primarily figure out Christ, and secondarily the church, both the catholic or universal, and particular churches likeweise; & particular Christians, and (in several respects) both their bodies, and their souls and consciences. Upon which grants of his, it followeth, that there is no necessary consequence of this his proposition, If the Pope of Rome with his hierarchy be the man of sin spoken of in 2. Thes. 2. then is the church of Rome, the Temple of God there spoken of: for he understanding by the church, the people, (as in 1. Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Eph. 2 21.) and yet granting that the Temple in Israel, was not the people; all may see the weakness and insufficiency of this inference, that because the Pope of Rome sitteth as God in the Temple of God; therefore the people of the church of Rome, are that Temple of God there spoken of; & consequently God's true church. For why now may 
Animad. ●ag. 79. Eph. 3. 17. ●2. 22. 1. ●or. 3▪ 16. Rev. 13. 4. ●. &. 16. ● 1. Tim. 4. ● 2. Thes. 2. ●. 11. 12. ●. Thes. 2. 4.  we not as well (if not much better) say that by the Temple of God, is understood the doctrine and profession of Christ the true Temple; or as in my former † book I showed, thus. As the Temple was an outward sign of God's presence with his people, and of his inward dwelling in their heart's * by saith and by his spirit▪ unto their salvation: so Antichrists temple is an outward show of his presence with that seduced people, in whose hearts † 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 he falsely * showeth himself that he is▪ God: so shall h● not professedly deny the Temple or church of God, but falsely vaunt his adulterous synagogue to be the same. Unto this exposition, mine opposite hath given no answer: and it being according to the scriptures, & truth of the thing in controversy; I leave it to the prudent reader, whether the outward show and profession of Christ and Christian religion, be not the first thing here intended of th'Apostle by the Temple of God. And this is further confirmed by Rev. 11. 1. Where the Temple, Altar, and Worshippers, are three distinct things; and the people are the worshippers there spoken of, & neither the Temple, nor the Altar; of which place we shall treat anon.  
Then whereas he granteth that the Temple in jerusalem did primarily figure out Christ: how is it, that he wholly neglecteth the primary thing figured, and insisteth upon the secondary, the church or people of Rome? Seing it is known, how the Pope pretendeth himself to be Christ's vicar and deputy on earth, and to be the servant and worshipper of Christ in heaven: and may we think that th'Apostle in warning them of the 
* 2 Thes. 2▪ 7.  mystery of iniquity, would not imply the chief point of the mystery, that Antichrist should in pretence sit for Christ and in his stead, as his vicar general on earth? Thus to sit in the Temple (or for the Temple) of God, may well be understood, that Antichrist should sit for Christ, a pretended friend, but in deed an adverse foe.  
Now for that which the Temple secondarily figured, namely the church catholic, and also particular, and so men's consciences: he wavereth in his application. He saith 
† Chr. plea p. 150. 15●.  this term [the church of Rome] is taken either particularly (which he applieth to the Lateran church in Rome, the Pope's parish church:) or more generally, for all other such Christian churches; as are come under the Pope's jurisdiction etc. This later I hold to be most proper here: for what needed there such warning to the Thessalonians & other christian churches through the world, if a Bishop of the Lateran parish (a corner in Rome) had exalted himself above God therein only; and had not usurped also a pretended Christian power over all? And the compliment of the prophecy, is an evident exposition of it: for who knoweth not, that the Pope scorneth to be Bishop of the Lateran parish only▪ it is a jurisdiction over the catholic church throughout the earth, which he challengeth. And now what proof bringeth mine opposite, that the church of Rome as God constituted it, is taken generally for other Christian churches under the Pope's jurisdiction? None at all: neither can he bring any jote of God's word for the same▪ Again what proof maketh he, that the catholic Roman church wherein the Pope sitteth, is the true church of God? None but this, 
* pag. 152.  I suppose these men themselves being better advised, will not deny them to be the churches and Temple of God. But he should have showed (if it had been possible for him) that the Roman church is by divine institution the catholic or universal church: which because I assure myself it can never be done, I conclude that this Roman catholic church is a fiction of the Pope's brain, and a mere idol like himself: and is no otherweise the Temple of God, than the Pope is Christ's universal vicar; namely in lying words and vain ostentation. And so the main ground for the Temple of God wherein Antichrist sitteth, to be the true church of Christ, is overthrown.  
As for the Pope's Lateran parish, I both deny it to be Christ's true church; and that it only is the Temple of God wherein Antichrist should sit. His proof of the former is this. 
* pag. 150.  If we understand it of a particular church, (as the Apostle wrote his epistle to the church of the Romans) how shall we sound deny it either to be the Temple of God, or Antichrist to be set therein? Thus have we suppositions and questions, in stead of proofs. To his demand I answer: it is the Temple of God in pretence, not in truth; even as the Pope is a bishop of Christ in pretence, but in deed is Antichrist the man of sin, as mine opposite granteth. The church that was in Rome in Paul's time, will no more justify the Pope's synagogue there now; then the Christian ministers which were then in that church, Rom. 12. will justify the Antichristian prelate's that there reign at this day. Secondly, the Lateran parish at Rome, is of the Pope's faith, religion and worship: there are like priests like people. Now if the Bishop of that parish be Antichrist, the son of perdition, as th'Apostle telleth us, 2 Thes. 2. 3. then his parishioners which have no other faith or religion than he, are also the children of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 12. and so can not be judged to be Christ's true church, and in the state of grace▪ sealed of God with his covenant unto salvation. In the Lateran Church of Rome, where Antichrist is parish priest; the people are gross idolaters, heretics, worshippers 
† Rev. 9 20.  of Divils', and of him that sitteth as God in the Temple of God; ascribing unto him that Holiness, divine power and jurisdiction, which he doth blasphemously challenge; and mine opposite could not show one man of that parish that differeth at all from the religion of their priest: how is it then possible that he should be Antichrist, and they true Christians; he under wrath, they under the covenant of grace; he the very Temple of the Devil, and they the true Temple of God? For shall not the same religion and faith which justifieth them, justifieth him also; when it is found in him as well as in them? Wherefore either the man of sin himself must be a saint among those saints: or they together with him must be (as the holy Ghost calleth them) an habitation of Divils', Revel. 18. 2. To conclude then, seeing there is no true visible church of God's institution, but a particular congregation; (any other general or catholic visible church of Rome, being but the Pope's own wicked fiction;) and seeing Antichrists parish church can no more be Christ's then Antichrist himself: it can not without injury to the Apostle, and to the proportion of faith, and to other scriptures, and to reason itself, be gathered that the church of Rome is at this day God's true Temple or Christ's true Church. Albeit, for that there was once a true Chrrstian church 
* Rom. 1.  in Rome, and these Antichristians now profess to be the successors of the same, and pretend one faith, religion & worship, and retain some doctrines and ordinances of Christ still, which they sinfully profane: they are therefore said to be the Temple of God; as before I have showed.  
Moreover there can no church be called the true Temple of God, but in respect of Christ the chief corner stone and foundation of the building: for he is called the living Stone, and his people are living stones, built up a spiritual house in him, and so grow up to an holy Temple in the Lord, 1 Pet. 2. 4. 5 Eph. 2. 20. 21. If therefore Antichrist sitteth in the true Temple of God, he sitteth first in Christ the head, and secondarily in his body and people: but Antichrist is no otherweise in Christ then in a feighned profession of him, whom in deed he denyeth, 1 Joh. 2. 22. therefore he is not in the Temple of God, but in respect of his profession of Christianity and of the Christian society in his people, both which are false and deceitful, after the working of Satan, & in all deceivableness of unrighteousness, 2 Thes. 2. 9 10. Now it followeth, that I defend my former writings against which he excepteth; as for the reproaches which he layeth upon myself, and his trifling exceptions against words and phrases, I will omit as fruitless.  
Whereas in scanning the Apostles words, I noted mine opposites omission of Antichrists sitting as God in the Temple of God; which words as God, do give light to the true meaning: he excepteth 
* Chr. plea ●●g. 142.  how he could allege that one Greek copy wanteth those words▪ so doth the Syriakas Mr. Beza observeth, also the Latin. I answer, if one copy want them, and many, or all other have them; it is no wisdom to leave the many & follow one without apparent reason. For the Syriak he was deceived, for it hath those words plainly, though the copy which Tremellius used wanted them, through the copiers' default, as Mr. junius showeth in his notes upon the Syriak version on 2. Thes. 2. 4. As for the Latin, it omitteth sundry other good things in other places, and is no warrant for us to follow.  
Obj. The question was not about the manner of Antichrists sitting in the Temple of God, whether he should sit as God therein or no. Therefore I needed not allege these words.  
Answ. But the question was about th'Apostles meaning in that place; and therefore his words which help to manifest his meaning, should have been alleged.  
Obj. It is known to be usual in all writers sometimes not to mention, sometimes not to insist at▪ all upon such words as perteyne not to the matter in hand etc.  
Answ. Yet I, though I first used the whole phrase of the Temple of God, am 
† Chr. plea ●●g. 146.  taxed for that I do not after always repeat all the words: But to let pass such things, this speech sitteth as God, pertaineth much to the matter in hand: for if the people (which he will have to be the Temple of God,) do so acknowledge and honour the Man of sin for God, as he there sitteth showing himself that he is God: then may we as well doubt whether they be the people of the true God, as whether the man of sin be the true God. But whatsoever honour & divine power the man of sin challengeth to himself, the ●ame do the people of Rome (the Temple of God) give unto him, in word and deed. So the words are needful, and pertain to the matter in hand. For by the worshipping of that Beast, the false church is distinguished from the true church, which refuseth to worship him, Rev. 13. 8. 16. 17. & 14. 1. 4. 9 10. 11. 12. & 20. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12.  
Obj. 
* pag. 143.  Of Antichrists sitting, th' Apostle saith, that he sitteth as God: but of the seat where he sitteth, he saith expressly, in the Temple of God; and saith not as in the Temple of God, as the answer here would import; which therefore is merely shifting, and full of deceit.  
Answ. So the Prophet saith expressly, in the house of their God, Amos. 2. 8. and saith not as in the house of their God; though he speaketh of an idolatrous temple, which jeroboam pretended to be Gods: and the Apostle saith expressly, there be gods many and lords many, 1. Cor. 8. 5. and saith not as gods, or as lords, when yet he meaneth the false gods and idols of the heathen. And the scripture expressly saith, the woman saw Samuel; and Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and, than said Samuel, &, because of the words of Samuel; 1. Sam. 28. 12. 14. 16. 20. and saith not, one as or like to Samuel, though it was but the devil in the likeness of Samuel. Paul saith expressly that Satan is transfigured into an Angel of light 2. Cor. 11. 14. and saith not a● into an Angel; though in the very next words he saith, that his ministers are transfigured as the ministers of righteousness, v. 15. Which term of transfiguring, is sometime used for a true change, as in Phil. 3. 21. he saith Christ shall transfigure our vile body, that it may be conformed to his glorious body: yet in the former place he useth the word but for a counterfeit change. And that the people which worship Antichrist as God, are called the Temple of God, for name, show and pretence; I have before manifested.  
Obj. He doth abuse the scripture etc. as if Paul's words were not plain to such as will understand, that Antichrist exalteth himself above all that is called god, so that he as God sitteth in the Temple of God; and therefore is not the true God, but the man of sin etc.  
Answ. Some may think, by Paul's words, that Antichrist should openly profess himself to be God, and above all Gods: yet the Pope (who is the head of Antichrist) professeth himself to be the servant of the servants of God, & to be but the minister of Christ▪ and Paul teacheth the same, when he calleth his working the mystery (or hidden▪ secret) of iniquity; 2 Thes. 2. 7. Even so some may think, by the Temple of God, is meant the true church of God, the people that in Christ are builded-togither for an habitation of God through the Spirit, and that Christ dwelleth in their hearts by ●aith, Eph. 2. 21. 22. & 3. 17▪ yet the Papists (who are Antichristians) do believe that man of sin, that exalteth himself above all that is called God, to be a most holy man, and Christian bishop, they are of his saith, worship and religion, trusting in his pardons for remission of their sins &c: and therefore are no better Christians than he, but children of perdition with him, and are by Paul in the very same place counted among them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved, therefore God hath sent them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; that they all might be damned who believe not the truth, but have pleasure in unrighteousness, 2 Thes 2. 10. 11. 12. Who now, (except they be blinded with affection) can think that Paul calleth such people the Temple of God otherweise then in respect of their profession of Christianity, and boasting, that they are the only good Christians, when they are in deed the sworn servants of Antichrist, and synagogue of Satan, as Rev. 3. 9  
Object. Difference is to be put, between the man of sin that sitteth, & between the temple wherein he sitteth: he sitteth as God, yet the temple wherein he sitteth, is the Temple of God.  
Answ. There is in deed such a difference as is between the pastor and the flock; (understanding by the Temple of God, the church of Rome at this day:) such a difference as is between the seducer and the seduced, both adjudged to destruction, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Rev. 14. 9 10. 11. Other differences if men feign, that the pastors (or hierarchy) are the man of sin, sons of perdition; and the idolatrous people which be of one faith and religion with them, are men of God, and in his covenant of grace; it is far from the truth.  
Object. See the like in the cases that fell out at Jerusalem and the Temple there: when Baal's idol of indignation was set at the entry of the house of God, Ezek. 8. 3. 5. and when Antiochus Epiphanes and his officers profaned the sanctuary and city of Jerusalem, and set the image of jupiter Olympius, in the Temple and seat of God, Dan. 11. 31. 36. who would not now put difference between the idols and persons aforesaid on the one hand, and between the Temple and city of God wherein they were set, and which they polluted, on the other.  
Answ. The examples are far unlike: first Rome, is not jerusalem but Babylon, Rev. 17. Secondly, the Temple and holy things in jerusalem being made of senseless stones and matter, they could not be polluted with sin in themselves as the 
* 1 Pet. 2. 5.  living stones of Christ's house the people now may soon be, and turned into a synagogue of Satan; as the christian churches in the Apostles days, are now long since turned to be Turks and Papists. Doth not the Law plainly teach us this; for in the yearly cleansing of the Sanctuary, it was because of the uncleannesses of the sons of Jsrael, and because of their trespasses, in all their sins, Levit. 16. 16. and for no uncleanness or sin in itself. Thirdly, the example of Antiochus is fit, but wrong applied: for he speaketh only of Antiochus and his officers; whereas both he, his officers and his people (the common souldjers) were they that defiled the sanctuary of God; as it is said in the story, Antiochus went up against Jsrael & Jerusalem with a great multitude, and entered proudly into the Sanctuary etc. 1 Maccab. 1. 20. 21. So in applying this, he would have the Pope and his officers (the hierarchy) to be the man of sin, as Antiochus and his officers: & the multitude of papists at Rome, he will not have to be (as in deed they should be counted) answerable to Antiochus soldjers; but they must be the Temple of God, answerable to the Temple of jerusalem, a most unjust resemblance. For the Temple then was a mere patient, and suffered that abuse at Antiochus hands: so the thing answerable hereto, should be (if he would have made a fit comparison,) the Christians (God's true Temple,) which suffer for the truth's sake at the Antichristians hands; such as are opposed to the worshippers of the beast, and those that receive his mark, of whom it is written, Here is the patience of the saints; here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus, Revel. 14. 9— 12. and again, I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast nor his image &c, Rev. 20. 4. And such I never doubted but they were the true Temple of God: but I deny that the church of Rome at this day is such a people or such a Temple: they are the marked soldjers of Antiochus the Pope, and honour him as God in the temple of God (their pretended christian church) with high impiety. Or at least, they are like the Apostate jews, which turned to Antiochus religion and became heathens, with worse impiety; 1 Maccab. 1. 13. 14. 15. 43. 52.  
Of this sort is his next allegation, 
† pag. 14  where to make his reader merry, he likeneth me to the old man of Athens, which would compel the jews to call their Temple by the name of jupiter Olympius, because jupiters' image was set up in it; 2 Mac. 6. 1. 2, so I would have the church of Rome called Antichrists church etc. I answer: if the church, the people of Rome were now mere patients, amongst whom Antichrist cometh in by violence, they not consenting unto him any more than God's temple did to jupiters' image; it should be foolishness in me to call it Antichrists church. Or, to put the example more fitly; if a jew had been forced by Antiochus violently to kiss or bow the knee to jupiters' image, when he resisted and testified against it: none could justly call him an idolater, or one of jupiters' people. But if an other jew had revolted to Antiochus religion, and believed in his jupiter and honoured him with heart, profession and action; he now might justly be called the servant of jupiter, or one of his people, (as the Moabites are called the people of Chemosh, Numb. 21. 29.) So the church of Rome now fallen from true Christianity, and believing, worshipping, obeying Antichrist, the Pope's holiness, are and may justly be called his church: or else Antichrist hath no temple, church or people in the world.  
Object. Observe here and throughout his treatise, how still he calleth that the Temple, church and body of Antichrist, which Paul expressly and purposely calleth the Temple of God. And so therein note still his sh●f●s and his errors etc.  
Answ. Lo still an urging of the bare letter, as do the Papists This is my body, to prove their transubstantiation, that there is no bread left but Christ's very body, really and properly. I have (I trust) without shifting or error proved the present church of Rome to be Antichrists temple church and body, if the Pope be Antichrist. And seeing his 
* 2 Thes. 2. 7.  mystery of iniquity, is contrary to Christ's 
† 1 Tim. 3. 16.  mystery of godliness; and Christ hath a mystical temple which is his church and body, Eph. 2. 21. & 5. 23. I would gladly know what temple church and body Antichrist hath, if the church of Rome be not the same. Again, he speaketh too largely, that I still so call it throughout my treatise; for I have other weise written, though it liked him not, thus. 
Animadv. ag. 79. 80.  God's true temple and tabernacle is in mount Zion▪ in heaven▪ (Rev. 14. 1. 17.) where God sitteth on a throne, (Rev. 16. 17. & 7. 15.) and dwelleth among his people; where is the Ark of his covenant (Rev. 11. 19) and from thence, lightnings, voices, thondring, earthquake and h●yle come forth against th● Antichristians his enemies; and vials of his wrath poured out upon the throne of the beast, (Rev. 16. 1. 2. 10.) and on men that have his mark. On the contrary, the Beast, which is the kingdom of Antichrist, ascendeth from beneath, out of the bottomless pit, (Rev. 17. 8.) and blasphemeth this heavenly tabernacle (Rev. 13. 6.) and sitteth in Babylon (Rev. 16. 19) upon the Dragon's throne (Rev. 13. 2.) and fighteth against the Lamb, and against the saints, (Rev. 19 19) treading under foot the holy city (Rev. 11. 2.) and casting down the place of Christ's sanctuary, (Dan. 8. 11.) When th' Apostle therefore telleth us, that Antichrist sitteth as God in the Temple of God, it is to be understood of their invading and destroying of God's church, and people, as the heathens of old deal● with Jerusalem and dwellers therein, (Psal. 79. Dan. 8, 11. 13. & 11. 36. jer. 22. 12. 13. Law. 2. 7. 9) Secondly of their own vain ostentation, whiles they will have it called the Christian catholic church, and the Pope the head of the same. Ezek. 28. 2. 6. Esa. 14. 13. 14. 2 Thes. 2. 9▪ 10▪ Rev. 13. 11. 14. & 17. 4. 2 Cor. 11. 13. 14. 15. Thus I grant, that the Temple which Antichrist invadeth & destroyeth, is God's true Temple: but that wherein the Beast sitteth as God, which he trimmeth, upholdeth and boasteth of; (as he doth the church of Rome at this day) is the synagogue of Satan. But he proceedeth.  
Object. As for the ancient Doctor whom here he citeth, let us hear 
† Pag. 147.  himself speak. His words are these. That which is the Temple of any idolor Devil, the Apostle would not call the Temple of God. Whereupon some will have in this place, not the Prince himself, but after a manner his whole body, th●● is the multitude of men pertaining unto him, together with himself under the Prince, understood to be Antichrist. And more rightly also they think it to be said in Latin 〈◊〉 in the Greek; that he sitteth not in the Temple of God, but for the Temple of God which is the church. As we say he sitteth for a friend, that is as a friend. Augustine de Civic. D●●, l. 20. c. 19 Where note how far differing Augustine is from this man that citeth him, etc.  
Answ. There is not so great difference as mine opposite would pretend. First I cited not Augustine for his own judgement, but for others whom he speaketh of, touching the translation of the Text, in the Temple of God, or, for the Temple. Secondly, he setteth down Augustine's words maimed both at head and foot. For Augustine beginneth thus: But in what temple of God he shall sit as God, is uncertain: whether in that ruin of the Temple which was built by King Solomon; or in the church. For that which is the temple of any idol or devil, the Apostle would not call the temple of God: etc. Now the ruin of Solomon's temple, cannot at this day be called God's temple, otherweise then because it was the Temple of God of old; & hath now no more holiness in deed & truth, than any other place in the world. And thus I have granted that the church of Rome may be called the church of God, in respect that there was a church there in Paul's time, whereas now it hath no more true holiness, than the synagogue of Satan. So we see how for advantage mine opposite baulked Augustine's first words. In the end, he breaketh off in the midst of a period: for Augustine saith, sitteth for a friend, that is as a friend: or if any other thing is wont to be understood by this kind of speech, So he defineth not certainly of this place, but leaves it doubtful: and presently after confesseth his ignorance; For what is this (saith Augustine) For the mystery of iniquity doth already work, only he who now holdeth let him hold, till he be taken out of the way. I confess myself to be utterly ignorant what he meaneth. Thus we need not strive about Augustine's words here: and I grant, that the Apostle would not have called it the Temple of God, unless either it were so in deed and truth, or had been so in times past, or did pretend to be so still. And I think all will likewise grant, that the holy Ghost would not have called the witch's spirit at endor 
* 1 Sam. 28.  Samuel, unless either it had been Samuel in deed (as the Papists do contend;) or some thing in pretence and show like Samuel. Neither would the prophet have said to the King of Tyrus, 
† Ezek. 28. 13.  Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God, (a proselyte in the church of Israel;) unless either himself or some of his predecessors had been there in times past. Neither would Amos have called the Israelites idol temple 
“ Amo. 2. 8.  the house of their God, unless either it were so in deed, or in pretence: which phrase when the Greek translateth according to the letter, the house of their God, and the Chaldee paraphrast (as ancient as the Apostles age) expoundeth the house of their idols, they contradict not one another: seeing the same thing may be Gods in show, and the devils in deed and truth: for even Satan himself is transformed into an Angel of light; 2 Cor. 11. 14.  
Obj. When the Apostle describeth the mystery of Antichrists iniquity, would he teach the church that the place of his sitting is the Temple of God, if he meant that it were in deed the synagogue of Satan and the temple of Antichrist? For that Antichrist should sit in the temple of Antichrist and synagogue of Satan, what mystery is there in it? All the world would easily perceive, that these agreed very well and most fitly together. But for Antichrist to sit in God's temple and Christ's church, this is in deed a mystery.  
Answ. The mystery of iniquity began in the true church, but continued not therein always: for when it was discerned, the church either cast it out, or soon degenerated into a synagogue of Satan, if it accepted Antichrist for God, as the Church of Rome doth at this day. Which I further manifest thus, 1. The Apostle saith, As ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are there many Antichrists, etc. They went out from us, but they were not of us: for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us, but (they went out) that they might be made manifest, that they were not all of us. Who is a liar, but he that denyeth that Jesus is the Christ? he is Antichrist, that denyeth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denyeth the Son, the same hath not the Father: 1. Joh. 2. 18. 19 22. 23. This scripture teacheth us first that all heretics departing from the faith of Christ, are generally Antichrists, though they reteyn the name of Christians still, as did the heretics in th'Apostles time. 2. That such are gone out from the church, and are in deed none of it, though they pretend to be the true church, as all heretics have doen. 3. That both teachers and people departed from the faith and church of Christ, are comprehended under the name of Antichrists, and not the Bishops only. 4. That whosoever is Antichrist (especially the great Antichrist) he denyeth the Son (Christ) and consequently God the Father. Now let us apply these things to the Bishop and hierarchy of Rome, whom mine opposite granteth to be the great Antichrist. If the Pope and his hierarchy be Antichrist, then are they none of the Apostolic church, but gone out of the same: but they are Antichrist (by my opposites own confession:) Therefore they are none of th'apostolic church.  
The Pope and his hierarchy are both in and of the church of Rome, the heads, teachers and principal members of it, of the same faith, religion and worship: but they are not in or of the Apostolic christian church, as before is proved: therefore the church of Rome is not an apostolic Christian church.  
If the church of Rome denyeth both the Father and the Son: then is it Antichrist (as the Apostle saith) and so no true Christian church. But the church of Rome denyeth both the Father and the Son: therefore it is no true Christian church.  
If the Pope & his hierarchy deny both the Father and the Son, than the church of Rome also denyeth them; for they believe as the Pope and hierarchy believeth, have one and the same religion with their priests. But the Pope and his hierarchy deny both the Father and the Son, otherweise they are not the Antichrist, (as mine opposite saith they are:) therefore the Church of Rome also denyeth both the Father and the Son. Now seeing it is thus, how is it possible that it should continued the true Church of Christ, otherweise then by lying pretext and ostentation? And this is the mystery of inquitie, if men could comprehend it that the Bishops and people of Rome, being at first Christ's true church, departed by degrees from the faith & worship of God; till they came jointly to believe lies, and to worship creatures, idols and devil's (Rev. ●. 30.) and became a Beast (or Antichristian kingdom) yet with two horns like the Lamb Christ (Rev. 13.) & 
* Rev. 13. 6.  blaspheming Gods Tabernacle & them that dwell in heaven, (that is the true church,) they pretend themselves to be the only true church of Christ, and that all other are heretics; they pretend succession even from th' Apostles days, without change of religion, and so they sit in the temple of God, or for the Temple, as if they & none but they were the Temple and church of God; the Pope being the head of this sinful corporation, of this Beast or kingdom; and exalting himself above God & Christ, whiles yet he calleth himself Christ's vicar, and the Servant of the servants of God; and by strong delusion keepeth his people in belief of lies, that together with him they all might be damned, who believe not the truth but have pleasure in unrighteousness; as the Apostle saith, 2. Thes. 2. 12.  
Now where he objecteth, what mystery is there in it, that Antichrist should sit in the temple of Antichrist? I answer, it is a great mystery, in that it is done by him and his, under the name and show of Christianity; and as the Apostle saith, after the working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness, 2. Thes. 9 10. And where he further saith, but for Antichrist to sit in Christ's church, this is in deed a mystery; I answer, it is in deed a contrariety and impossibility (not a mystery:) for no man can serve two masters, Mat. 6. 24. of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage, 2. Pet. 2. 19 to whom men yield themselves servants to obey, his servants they are to whom they obey, Rom. 6. 16. Now the church of Rome, yielding unto and obeying Antichrist, cannot be the servants of Christ, if th' Apostles doctrine be true. And after mine opposites manner of reasoning, an other▪ man might say, seeing Christianity is the mystirie of godliness, 1. Tim. 3. 16. as Antichristianitie is the mystery of iniquity, 2. Thes. 2. 7. Christ must sit in the Temple of Satan, as Antichrist sitteth in the temple of God: for for Christ to sit in the Temple & church of Christ, what mystery is there in it? but for Christ to sit in Satan's temple, and Antichrists church, this is in deed a mystery. Were not this (think we) good reasoning, to put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Christ into Antichrists place, and Antichrist into Christ's; for to find out a mystery? But they that have their eyes opened to read the mystery that is not only in the Pope, but on 
† Rev. 17. ●▪  the forehead of the whore of Babylon his church, will soon espy this fraud: though others are bewitched with her painted face. For as Satan can transform himself into an Angel of light, and his ministers can be transformed as the ministers of righteousness 2 Cor. 11. 14. 15. is it such a marvel, that he should transform his temple and church, into the Temple of God, and church of Christ: and yet as he is a Devil still, notwithstanding his transformation; so his Temple continueth still the Temple of the Devil, and church of Antichrist, how ever they are disguised with other names and habits. And to help a little to the discerning of both these opposite mysteries of piety and impiety: we are to know, that Christ's Kingdom beginneth in the kingdom of Satan, and is perfected in the Kingdom of God; and Antichrists kingdom beginneth in the kingdom of God, and is perfected in the kingdom of Satan. For, the god of this world having blinded the eyes of infidels, who are dead in sins, and walk 
* Eph. ●. 1. 2▪  according to the prince of the power of the air: Christ by his Ministers sent into the world, and by his word of truth, the gospel, causeth light to arise unto them, openeth their eyes, and turneth them 
† Act. 26. 18.  from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in him: and thus God delivereth them from the power of darkness, and translateth them 
* Col. 1. 13.  into the kingdom of his beloved son. Then cometh Satan by Antichrists, which are his ministers, 
† Gal. 2. 4.  privily crept into the church, and by the word of 
“ 2 Thes. 2. 11.  lying, (which is Antichrists gospel) he darkneth the minds of them that have not received 
‘* vers. 10.  the love of the truth, and turneth them back again from God, and by 
*‘ 2 Pet. 2. ●▪  damnable heresies privily brought in draweth them even to deny the Lord that bought them, and so bring upon themselves swift destruction. Then do 
“ 1 Job. 2. 19  they go out from the church, & blaspheme 
† 2 Pet 2. 2.  the way of truth, and together with the Beast, do 
Ԡ Rev. 19 19  war against Christ: whom yet in name and pretence they would seem to honour and serve, so accomplishing the mystery of their iniquity, unto assured damnation, if they turn not again unto God.  
This thing not being observed, how Christ beginneth in the world, and draweth men out of it into his church; and Antichrist beginneth in the church, & draweth men out of it into the world again, (as the Dragon's tail, draweth the stars of heaven, & lifts them to the earth, Rev. 12. 4.) mine opposite thought it absurdity and contradiction in me, for writing thus; 
* Animad. pag. 80.  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 
† Psalm. 79. Dan. 8. 11. 13. & 11. ●6. jer. 52. ●2. 13. Lam. ●. 7. 9  dealt with Jerusalem and dwellers therein: secondly of their own vain ostentation, whiles they will have it called the Christian catholic church, and th': Pope the head of the same. Upon this, he thus inveigheth:  

“ Chr. plea pag. 159.  What have we here? Doth himself now by the Temple of God understand God's church and people: yea such as was answerable to jerusalem, and the dwellers therein of old? why then hath he so eagerly oppugned us hereabout? etc.  
Answ. I oppugn the present church of Rome, which Antichrist destroyeth not, but buildeth and adorneth as an alluring harlot: the Christian church which was in Rome of old, that hath he invaded and destroyed long since; for they then were 
* Rom. 1.  Saints, such as he hateth: these now are worshippers of him and of idols & 
† Rev. 9 20. & 18. 2.  Devil's; and are an habitation of Divils'. So there is as much difference between the church of Rome now, and the church then: as between the Bishop of Rome now, & the Bishops then: they were Christ's ministers, this now is Antichrist, as mine opposite himself confesseth. And what cause hath he to insult, as if he had got the victory? Let wise men judge. But he proceedeth.  
Obj. Where can he show in the scriptures, that sitting is put for invading or destroying etc. Otherwhere still he teathe that by sitting is meant abiding, continuing, dwelling, etc.  
What if I cannot prove that sitting is put for invading or destroying: 
Answ.  if I prove my assertion by other words of the text, shall it not suffice? The words Eiston Naon, into the Temple, may imply by a 
* M●talepsis  figure, his invading: and the person that invadeth being an enemy, a thief, a wolf, implieth his destroying; for our Saviour saith, The thief cometh not but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. 1 Joh. 10. 10. The scripture often wanteth words, easy to be understood: so here Paul saith of Antichrist, that he (having entered) into the Temple of God, sitteth as God. And if they regard not my exposition, they shall have his on whom they so much rely, Mr. junius I mean, who so explaineth it, saying, The testimony of sign is this, that Invading the temple of God, he shall sit as God. Jun. Animad vers. in Bellarm. Controu. 3. l. 3. c. 14. not. 18. But what if I confirm it by the word sitting, which he thought so unlikely? In Esai. 14. 13. the Prophet upbraideth the king of Babylon thus, Thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven etc. I will sit also in the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the North; meaning, mount Zion where Gods temple was. But this is meant of Nebuchadnezars' invading of jerusalem to spoil the same, as the history showeth, 2 King. 25. and in him, Antichrists tyranny against the church was lively figured. As for sitting to mean continuing, though it doth so often times, yet not always; Christ sat upon the mount of Olives, Mat. 24. 3. the disciples sat in the house, Act. 2. 2. yet dwelled they not, or continued long there. And when the Babylonian invaded mount Zion to sit there, he continued not there, but having spoiled the city, burned the Temple, and captived the people, he returned into Babylon, 2 King. 25. so Antichrist spoiling Christian churches returneth to his 
* Revel. 17  whore of Babylon, his proper habitation, which he wickedly boasteth to be the Zion, Temple and church of God.  
Whereas mine opposite expounded the Temple of God to be the church, and showed not whether he meant a church particular, or general and catholic; I said for a particular church, it will not agree with the prophecies of Antichrist, whose city or church is so great, as peoples, kindreds, tongues & nations, do dwell in the streets thereof, Rev. 11. 8. 9 He gainsayeth me thus:  

† Chr. ple▪ p. 152.  First, Still he calls that Antichrists church, which th' Apostle calleth the Temple of God.  
Answ. It is his own interpretation, that the Temple meaneth the church; and that he that sitteth in it is Antichrist; and sitting he will have to be continuing: and why may not I call that church wherein Antichrist sitteth continually as God, Antichrists church; yea though it were indeed God's church as he supposeth. Seeing the city wherein Christ did but dwell, was called his own city, Mat. 9 1. And that which God saith, in my house, and in my kingdom, 1 Chron. 17. 14. an other Prophet relateth it, thine house and thy kingdom, speaking to David the governor, 2 Sam. 7. 16. Or to show a fitter similitude, as the holy Ghost calleth the Moabites the people of Chemosh, Numb. ●1. 29. because they worshipped Chemosh for their God; so the church of Rome which worshippeth Antichrist, is fitly called Antichrists church.  
Object. How will he prove that the Beasts city Rev 11. 8. is the temple of God, 2 Thes. 24.  
Ans. It is himself that expoundeth the Templ▪ to be the church▪ and in special the Lateran church in Rome, where the Pope is parish priest. I show by Rev. 11. 8. that the Pope's parish is a larger city or church then either that Lateran parish or Rome itself, even over many nations; and so can not be a particular church such as Christ instituted; but a new catholic church which the Pope hath devised, and would have it accounted the Temple and church of God. Here mine opposite, laboureth to find a difference between the Beasts city and his church: but all in vain. For thus he reasoneth.  
1. 
† Chr. plea pag. 152.  This city in Rev. 11. 8. is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. But the church is here called the Temple of God, or the Court without the Temple, or the holy City.  
Answ. First then he granteth that the same church may be called both a temple & a city: so the divers name helpeth him nothing. Secondly, it is true that Antichrists church is called Sodom and Egypt which was an whole country: let men now judge how fitly mine opposite hath confined Antichrists church within the Lateran parish, a corner in Rome. Shall we rather believe him, or the Holy Ghost? Thirdly that is called the Holy city, Rev. 11. 2. which the Gentiles (the church of Antichrist) tread under foot, as destroyed and waste: whereas the church of Antichrist is a great city called Babylon, sumptuously builded, garnished, and by him maintained, Rev. 17. and that is the church of Rome at this day, as all know: and of the present church of Rome is now our controversy.  
Obj. 2. This great city is that where our Lord was crucified, Rev. 11. 8. Now all know that he was crucified in and under the jurisdiction of the city, not of the church of Rome. For he was condemned by Pontius Pilate etc.  
Answ. The thing he aimeth at, is that the city mentioned in Rev, 11. 8. is a civil polity, as when Rome killed Christ; and not an ecclesiastical polity or church. But he laboureth in the wind: for the city is such as is the Beast or kingdom: the Beast is a spiritual polity most sinful, for it cometh out of the bottomless pit, Rev. 11. 7. that is from the Devil; whereas all Civil polities are from God, though they be heathens, Rom. 13. 1. 2. Secondly he should have known, that the same City which was a civil polity in Christ's time, & killed him: is now subordinate to an ecclesiastical polity, church, or Papacy; and still crucifieth Christ in his members.  
Obj. 3. This city is that which was the Dragon's throne, and by him given to the Beast, Revel. 13. 2. But this was the city, not the church of Rome. Neither I think will these men themselves say, that the church was the Dragon's throne, or was by the Dragon given to the beast.  
Answ. The city or polity which the Dragon gave to the Beast, was civil, but is now subjected to, or become ecclesiastical: for the city of Rome is now by profession Christian, which of old was heathen: and by professed Christians (namely the Pope & his church) are those witnesses of God killed, Rev. 11. 7. 8. so their corpses lie unburied in the streets of the beasts city, that is of Antichrists church or polity, which reacheth over many nations.  
Obj. 4. This city also is the throne of the Beast, and Babylon the great city spoken of Rev. 16. 10. 19 & 17. & 18. chapt. which is to be understood of the city of Rome and dominion thereof.  
Answ. It is granted that this city is Babylon, and Rome, and the dominion thereof: but it is a spiritual polity or church: for who hath dominion now of Rome, but the Pope or Bishop there, the pretended vicar of Christ; and who but he hath killed those Martyrs, within his Diocese or Bishopric, which reacheth over many kingdoms?  
Obj. 5. This city is the woman that sitteth on seven-mountains, Reve. 17. 9 18. And the city, not the church of Rome, is built on 7. mountains.  
Answ. Yes, the same heathen city which was first set on seven hills; is now a pretended Christian city, sitting still on her 7 hills: and being a Christian in name, hath killed Christ in his members, by her Pope's power ecclesiastical, who hath his seat in her, but his Dragon's paws reach into far countries. This city, the woman on 7. hills, is she that hath made the inhabiters of the earth drunk with the wine of her fornication, Rev. 17. 1. 2. etc. and who but the church of Rome hath done this?  
Obj. 6. This city hath 7. kings or kinds of government etc. by Kings, Consuls, Dictator's, Decemvirs & Tribunes (ceased before John's time) Emperors▪ (when john lived) and Popes (not then come:) But how should this be found in the church of Rome, which was not before John's time; and therefore could not have 5. Kings or kinds of government then fallen.  
Answ. Ill do they thrive, that kick against the pricks. Here himself confesseth the Pope's government to be one of the seven: now the Pope's government or papacy, is an ecclesiastical monarchy; by it were the witnesses of Christ slain, as before I showed. As for seven goverments to be found in the church of Rome, that is in the papacy, is absurd; for it is to seek 7. kinds of government in one. But six are gone and the seventh remaineth by the Pope. That city or polity which once was heathen, now Christian in name (Antichristian in deed;) which the Pope menageth: is the malignant church that killeth God's witnesses, amongst peoples, kindreds, tongues and nations, Rev. 11. 8. 9 Therefore it can not be restrained to one particular congregation.  
Obj. 7. This city is that which reigned over the kings of the earth in John's time, Rev. 17. 8. And that not the church but the city of Rome so reigned when John wrote, all do acknowledge.  
Answ. But, that the city the church of Rome now reigneth by the Pope the head of that church, all do acknowledge. And the kill of those witnesses Rev. 11. was not in john's time, but after, when the city or polity of Rome was become Christian in name and title. To say, it was not so in john's time, therefore it is not so now; is dallying, rather than sound reasoning.  
Obj. 8. Finally, the Lord himself putteth difference between this city Babylon, and his people therein, Rev. 18. 4. as of old, in Babylon of Chalde●. jer. 50. etc.  
Answ. This is true; but what can he infer thereupon? It was not God's people in Babylon, that killed those witnesses, Rev. 11. but it was Babylon that killed those witnesses, God's people therein. Because God's people killed not those witnesses, but the Beast in his catholic city or church: therefore (thinks he) that city of the beast, is not his church; a fair conclusion.  
Obj. 
† Chr. plea ag. 154.  Note here, that by the great city, is meant not only the city itself, but the whole jurisdiction, authority and dominion thereof, how far soever extended.  
Answ. It is a good note, and worth the marking: for the great city being the church of Rome, as before is proved; it followeth, that the extents of that church, reach further than the material walls of Rome, even to all nations that are of the Pope's religion: and therefore to bond it within the Lateran parish of Rome, is to restreyn that which God showeth to be more large. It were a happy day, if the Pope's unruly power, were limited within the Lateran parish, and his jurisdiction reached no further. But he must have a larger scope to range in yet a while: and weak warriors are they against him, that plead for his whorish church of Rome, that it is the true church of Christ, and under his covenant of grace. It is the thing that the Pope would most gladly have proved: and I am well assured, Babylon will not fall, till it be otherweise battered.  
Obj. 
† Chr. plea pag. 154.  Where yet observe further, that the church of Rome, being fallen into deep apostasy, and having the man of sin sitting there in as God, who hath that city for his throne: the things that are spoken of this city, are also applied to the apostate estate of that church of Rome, and the other churches that are under the jurisdiction of the prelacy of that Sea, whersoever, and of whatsoever people, kindred, tongue or nation they be: etc. But shall we therefore conclude, that by the Temple of God, 2 Thes. 2. 4. may not be understood the church of God?  
Answ. How glorious is the truth, that forceth those to yield, that fight against it. His former reasons (that by the City in Rev. ●1. 8. the church was not meant,) he now frustrateth himself. But still he cleaveth to his first plea, The temple of God 1 Thes. 2. is the church of God. I may answer hereto, as God by jeremy did to the jews, Trust not in lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are these: jer. 7. 4. Our dispute is, in what sense Paul calleth it the Temple of God; whether as the true temple builded by Solomon, or as the false temple builded in Samaria by the Apostate Israelites, which the Prophet calleth the house of their God, Amos 2. 8. as the Apostle calleth this the Temple of God. Now fain he would have this Romish temple of apostate Papists, to be the true temple of God; and that they notwithstanding their deep apostasy, are Gods true church, under his covenant: which I deny, and have before disproved; and Paul in the very same place, counteth them among those that perish, for believing lies, & which shallbe damned for not believing the truth, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. and Christ teacheth, that being worshippers of the beast, their names are not written in the book of l●fe. Rev. 13. 8. & 17. 8. but they shallbe tormented in fire and brimstone for ever, Revel. 14. 9 10. 11. and that the whorish church Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, which is drunken with the blood of the Saints and of the martyrs of Jesus shallbe destroyed for ever, Rev. 17. 5. 6. & 18. 21. And who now, that have not their right eye blinded, will not rather say, it is the Samaritans Temple, than solomon's; though in pretence and colour, the Temple of God. And seeing every true church now, is a particular congregation in one place; but the church of Rome is a new found catholic church, spread over many nations under one head & Bishop the Pope: it can not possibly be Christ's true church, having neither the constitution, faith, worship, ministry, order or ordinances of Christ; but of his enemy Antichrist.  
Whereas I formerly wrote, 
* Animadv. ●g. 78.  Neither is that (if they mean a particular church) answerable to the Temple in Israel, which was not for one synagogue, but for 
† Deut. 16. 16.  the whole nation of the jews, and for the 
‘* 1 King. 8. ●. 4●. joh. ●. 20. Act. 8. 27.  Gentiles that came to the faith, through the world. To this he saith;  

*‘ Chr. plea ●g. 155.  How greatly forgets he himself, and how presently, seeing but a line before he said, the Temple figured not only the catholic or universal church, Ephe. 2. 21. but also every particular church by proportion, 1 Corint. 3. 16. 17. And may we not then apply it to that whereof it was a figure? etc.  
Answ. No: for mine opposite granteth that the Temple was primarily a figure Christ: but so to apply it in this place, 2 Thes. 2. himself thinketh not fit. I deny not, but some where it may and aught to be so applied: but considering that the Temple of God wherein Antichrist now sitteth is a catholic church spread over many nations, (as was prophesied Rev. 11. 8. 9) I think the applying of Paul's words in 2 Thes. 2. to a particular church, is neither fitting to the type, nor to the prophecy, nor to the accomplishment of it which we see at this day. The priests in Israel figured Christ chiefly, secondarily Christians, Rev. 1. 6. But to apply those things which Paul speaketh of the Priests in Heb. 10. 11. 12. to us Christians, were not only unfitting, but heretical.  
Obj. 
* Pag. 156.  The Candlesticks and Lamps were set in the Temple of God: and the church of Rome was a golden Candlestick, as well as the rest of the primitive churches; and this man himself saith definitely 
† Animadv. pag. 103.  the true churches were many of them apostate when John wrote; whom yet notwithstanding Christ acknowledgeth to be 
Rev. 1. 11. 2. 20. & ●. 1.  golden candlesticks. In any of which, of Antichrist had sit, as in the church of Rome, I suppose this man would not deny, but his sitting then should have been in the Temple of God: whether it were considered as a particular candlestick itself, or a branch of the great & general candlestick etc.  
Answ. 1. If the Candlesticks were churches in the Temple the church: then the Temple in such respect is the catholic church, for one particular church is not in an other. 2. I grant that the church of Rome was a golden candlestick in th'Apostles time: and I think mine opposite would not deny but then also the Bishop of Rome, was a 
* Rev. 1. 20.  star in Christ's right hand. But now the Bishop is a star fallen from heaven, and acknowledged to be Antichrist: why then may not the church be fallen with him, (as Paul forewarned, Rom. 11. 22.) and the candlestick removed from it, as well as from Ephesus, Rev. 2. 5. except Rome have a privilege above all other cities, because it crucified Christ. 3. I grant also that the true church's apostate in Rev. 2. & 3. were still golden candlesticks, though some of them rusty: but I would have it likewise granted me, that there were other churches but copper candlesticks, though they pretended to be golden; namely such Antichristian haeretical synagogues, as of whom it might be said, They went out from us, but they were not of us, 1. Joh. 2. 18. 19 And if those petty Antichrists were no golden candlesticks; much less can the great Antichrist with his synagogue, be a golden candlestick; for he far exceedeth them in idolatry, heresy and impiety. That Antichrist could sit in any true church then, as he sitteth now in the church of Rome, namely as God, and so to be believed with his lies, worshipped, and obeyed; I utterly deny: for that church that so doth, departeth from Christ the foundation, and denyeth both the Father and the Son, 1 joh. 2. 22. 23. and whether it be a particular church, or a more general, it skilleth not: universality in worshipping the Beast, causeth but universality of damnation, Rev. 13. 16. 17. & 14▪ 9 10. 11.  
Obj. Whereas he would be taught how that whorish company that worship the Beast and Dragon, can be the true catholic church and spouse of Christ: though that which I noted before be sufficient for the point in hand; yet let him first remember, how but a little before he told us, the catholic church of the now Romish religion, as themselves describe it, hath one part thereof on earth, an other under the earth, & a third part in heaven: and now here he speaketh only of such as are on earth, and those also such as worship the Dragon and beast, Rev. 13. 4. whereas the catholic church in deed containeth all churches & people of God from the beginning of the world etc.  
Answ. By this than it appeareth, that the church of Rome lieth apparently, when she calleth herself the catholic church: and therefore is not the true church or Temple of God. But I would be taught in deed, how that whorish company here on earth which worship the Beast, can be the true church either universal or particular.  
Here first he asketh whither I think there was no other churches of Christians catholic or particular wherein Antichrist sat since th'apostasy of the man of sin, but such as worshipped the Dragon and the beast? And who then were the Tabernacle and those that dwelled in heaven, whom the beast blasphemed, and the saints with whom he made war 42. months, Rev. 13. 5. 6. 7. and of what church they were etc.  
Answ. He seemeth to use the word sit in two senses; 1. for oppressing, blaspheming, killing the Saints that resisted Antichrist; and 2. for quiet governing and having in subjection the wicked that believe and obey him: with such equivocations his writings are too full. Such churches or persons as resisted the beast, and whom he blasphemed and killed: they were of God; and of them there is no question. But the other sort given over of God to believe lies, and to worship the man of sin as God, like as he showeth himself that he is God; they are not the true church of God, catholic or particular: and of such is the present church of Rome, now i● question. As for the Saints that dwell in heaven, whom Antichrist blasphemeth: they are where he is no●▪ in the true church out of which he is gone, both he and his; and therefore doth he persecute them. The scripture by him cite●, Rev. 13. 6. yieldeth a strong argument against his purpose, thus. The true Tabernacle, church and heavenly people, are blasphemed and warred against by Antichrist. The church of Rome now, is not blasphemed and warred against by Antichrist, but blessed commended & maintained. Therefore the church of Rome now, is not the true tabernacle, church or heavenly people.  
Obj. Jerusalem came to be a 
* Ezek. 16. 2. 35. etc. & 23. 2. 43. etc.  h●●l●t, old in adulteries, and the Jews to be a 
† Esa. 1. 4. 5. etc.  sinful nation laden with iniquity etc. 
“ Esa. 57 3. 4. 5.  sons of the sorceress, the seed of ●he adulterer and the wh●re; a 
*‘ Esa. 65. 2. 3. etc.  rebellious people &c 
“ 2 Chron. 36. 14. etc.  transgressing after all the abominations of the heathens and polluting the house of the Lord, etc. yet they were still notwithstanding the city, people and temple of the Lord. Esai. 1. 3. & 3. 12. with jer. 50. 28. & 51. 11 35. 36. 45. 50. 51.  
Answ. One findeth a dead and stinking carkess of a man; and to prove it a living man he saith, Such an one was so and so diseased, he had the burning ague, the palsy, dropsy, the gangrene & the plague: yet was he a living man, therefore this is likewise. Such is the mould of mine opposites argument. For the Papists the worshippers of the Beast are said of God to be dead men, Rev. 20. 4. ●. not partakers of the first resurrection; that is, 
* Eph. 2. 1.  dead in sin, not revived by Christ: now to prove them alive, examples of other persons and peoples of Israel are alleged; who because they were great sinner's, but not dead in sin, therefore these dead men under Antichrist, must be living also. He hath been answered, that the jews whiles they continued God's Church though greatly corrupted, are not fit resemblances of Antichrists church which the holy Ghost calleth no where judea, but Babylon, Rev. 17.  
Whereas I said, 
† Animadv pag. 79.  The very word Temple (speaking of that wherein Antichrist sitteth as God,) leadeth us to understand Antichrists church to be but a counterfeit: showing this reason, that the Temple in Israel was not the church or people properly, but a sacramental sign of Gods dwelling with his people, 2 Chron. 6. 2. and of his inward dwelling in their hearts by faith, Eph. 3. 17. & 2. 22. so Antichrists temple is an outward show of his presence with that seduced people, in whose hearts he dwelleth by popish faith, and by his spirit of error carrying them to damnation: etc. Rev. 13. 4. 14. & 16. 14. 1 Tim. 4. 1. 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. He answereth,  

* Chr. plea pag. 158.  Then when th'Apostle saith to the church of Corinth, ye are the Temple of God, 1 Cor. 3 16. his meaning should be according to this gloze, ye are a counterfeit church. And when Christ said, Destroy this Temple, Joh. ●. 19 speaking of his body; the word Temple should lead us to understand Christ's body to be but a counterfeit.  
Would any man of good understanding and affection have made such inferences upon my words? Doth not the very word God, when it is spoken of Baal, and of images made with men's hands, lead us to understand them to be but counterfeit gods: or would any adversary, if I had so spoken of Baal and the word God which is applied unto him by the Prophet, 1 King. 18. 27. have wrested my reason against the true God? But sundry such abuses I bear, and forbear to reply unto; because my opposite cannot now hear his reproof: and to other men it would be fruitless.  
Hitherto of th'Apostles phrase, the Temple of God. Now touching the Man of sin there also spoken of, mine opposer in the second proposition of his argument fore-set down, saith. But the Pope of Rome with his hierarchy, is (by 
† Animadv p. 76. 106▪  their own grant) the man of sin, of whom the Apostle here speaketh. Other proof of this position he giveth none, but saith I grant it; which in his understanding I have not granted. For he so divideth the Pope and hierarchy, (which are 
* Con●ll▪ Trident. sess▪ 23. can. 6.  Bishops, Priests, and Deacons,) from the church of Rome, as he maketh the one, Antichrist and Man of sin: the other Christians, and men of grace; which how it can be, when both parties are of one and the same faith, worship, religion &c. it passeth my slender capacity. For if the Bishop's priests and deacons have one faith & religion with the people, as it is known they have; and the people have the true Christian faith and religion, though corrupted, yet so as they are still under the covenant of grace, and sealed of God therein by baptism: how should not the same faith give life to the priests or hierarchy, as it doth to the people? And then, though the hierarchy be Antichrist, the Man of sin, the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, 2 Thes. 2. 3. yet they shall also be true Christians, men of God, and children of salvation.  
Now to prove it to be my grant, he sendeth his reader to 30. pages of my book at once; that if he myss it in one, he may suppose it is in an other, for not one man of many, will read over so many leaves, for such a purpose only. Well, howsoever I will not make nice to call the Pope and his hierarchy, the Man of sin; yea or the Pope alone, the man of sin, because he is the head of that sinful corporation, and the highest exalted for almightynes & holiness: yet do I not exclude the people from this body, and give it to the Pope and hierarchy only, as mine opposite would intimate. Nay the reader shall find there the contrary, most expressly: for in pag. 76. I wrote thus. The Antichristian synagogue, is by the holy Ghost called a Beast, Rev. 13. 11. which signifieth a kingdom, Dan. 7. 23. it is named also a great city, Rev. 11. 8. which noteth the largeness of that polity and kingdom. It cometh up out of the earth, Rev. 13. 11. as being of this world, (which Christ's kingdom, that cometh down from heaven Rev. 21. 2. is not:) and therefore it is called a Man of sin, 2 Thes. 2. 3. and a great whore, Rev. 17. 1. whose head is Abaddon or a Apollyon, Rev. 9 11. the destroyer of others, and himself the son of perdition, 2 Thes. 2. 3. and they that follow him, are the children of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 12. Again in pag. 83. I do not only show mine, but mine opposers own judgement heretofore saying; She (speaking of the church of Rome) being in this forlorn estate, she is but a lump of sin, a man of sin, 2 Thes 2. 3. a child of perdition. The Beast is not one person, but a kingdom, Rev. 13. 11. Dan. 7. 23. and Mr. johnson himself hath acknowledged more than once, that the man of sin, is the false church (and religion) of Antichrist, compared to the body of a man, and consisting of all the parts together. Treat▪ of the Minist. against Mr. Hilders. p. 7. Apolog. p. 109.  
How faithfully now mine opposite hath dealt with me, to make it seem my grant that the Pope and hierarchy apart from the church of Rome, is the Man of sin, all may see. As for his own former confession, he passeth it over, without approving or disproving what himself hath written.  
This point is of weight, to give light to our controversy, for if the whole church, Pope, priests and people, be altogether a man of sin, & son of perdition; then can not any of sound judgement, think they are a true Christian church, or under the covenant of God's grace.  
To show this therefore; first, the scriptures sundry times speaketh of a whole state or company, both governor's and people, as of one person, man, woman, or child: as in Host 1. 4. 6. 9 the three children jezreel, Loruhamah, and Lo-ammi, signified the three estates of the congregation of Israel, then shortly to follow. So in Rev. 12. 1. a woman signifieth the church of Christ; in Rev. 17. an other woman signifieth, the church of Antichrist; even as in Prov. 9 1. 13. the same churches are set forth like two women, Wisdom, and the Foolish woman. In Rev. 12. 5. the Man child which the woman brought forth, meaneth a company of valiant Christians; as further appeareth by comparing Esai. 66. 7. 8. where the Woman that traveleth, is called Zion; and the man child in vers. 7. are called Zion's children in vers. 8. Secondly, as Christ and Antichrist have their several churches, so these each of them are called a man: as in Ephes. 2. 15. Christ is there said to make in himself, of twain (that is, of two peoples, jews and Gentiles) one new man: where the whole church together with Christ their head, is called a new man. Accordingly, Antichrist the Pope, together with his whole church, is called the man of sin. And as in the new man the true Christian church, Christ the head hath in all things the pre-eminence: so in the man of sin, the Antichristian church, the Pope (Christ's pretended vicar) hath in all things the preeminence, exalted for power & pretended holiness. As the new man the Christian church, is to be esteemed in the state of salvation, though some secret hypocrites and reprobates closely creep in among them here on earth: so the man of sin the Antichristian church, is to be esteemed in the state of 
† 2 Thes. 2. 10. 12.  damnation, though some of Gods elect and hidden ones are in the same, Rev. 18. 4. And this man of sin the Pope and his church, sitteth in the Temple of God, the profession of Christ (whom the Temple chiefly figured) and of Christian religion and worship, (even as this beast or kingdom hath two horns like the Lamb Christ, Rev. 13. 11.) that so under the show of Christianity, after the effectual working of Satan, with all power and signs and lying wonders (2 Thes. 2. 9 Rev. 13. 13. 14.) he may deceive them that dwell on the earth, and draw them into the lake of fire. Thus much of the Man of sin sitting in the Temple of God. 2 Thes. 2.  
Other scriptures he 
* Chr. plea 125. 126.  allegeth to confirm his cause, as Manasses defiling God's house, 2 King. 21. the Chaldeans defiling the Temple, Psalm. 79. the king of Babylon's sitting on the mount of the congregation, Esai. 14. The prophet's visions of the Temple polluted, Ezek 8. And the prophecy of Antiochus, Dan. 11. In all which places, I acknowledge the true Temple of God, to be understood. But his error in applying this to his purpose, I have before manifested. For that Temple was not the people, but an outward ordinance of God set among his people: whereas in his understanding the Temple of God, wherein Antichrist sitteth is the people. 2. That Temple was not infected with sin, but the sin rested in the persons that worshipped in it, or came into it; as I showed before, from Levit. 16. 16. Whereas the church of Rome is so infected with Antichrists sin, as mine opposite confesseth it to be 
† Chr. plea ●ag. 120.  in most sinful and deep apostasy, and so to be a notorious harlot and idolatress which all the people of God ought to forsake. 3. That temple merely suffered that misusage at the hands of sinner's, jews and Gentiles: even as Christ, the true Temple in his humanity, & true Christians his members have suffered, at the hands of the Romans, of old heathens and now Antichristians. But to make that temple a type of this malignant church, which together with her head the Pope, persecuteth Christ and his saints, and worshippeth creatures, idols and 
* Rev. 9 20.  Devil's; is altogether amyss. For so we might conclude thus: As the Temple of God though it were defiled with the apostasy & idolatry of the jews and of the Gentiles, with how great abomination soever; yet continued Gods holy Temple still; and could not by any impiety become the Temple of Antichrist or of Satan: so the church of Rome, though it should be defiled with apostasy idolatry profaneness atheism either of Antichrist or of Iewes Turks or Pagans; if it should believe and receive the religion of Maomet or of julian the Apostata; yet should it continue the true church and people of God, and under his covenant of grace. Behold what favour the church of Rome hath found above all churches under heaven: that if she receive judaism or Paganism, if she worship the Beast; the Dragon, or Devil himself by open profession, yet the abideth the church of God: for if Antiochus who set up jupiter Olympius image in the Temple, had set up also the professed worship of the Devil; yet the Temple should have been Gods holy temple notwithstanding; and so by proportion the church of Rome must be, if this comparison of mine opposites be true. By such doctrine, the whole gospel of Christ is overthrown. For faith and sanctimony of life, are the sum of all the gospel: and both of them are destroyed. For though Rome be apostate and departed from the faith, as Paul foretold, 1 Tim. 4. 1. though she believe in a wafer cake, and worship it for her God and maker: though she believe to have forgiveness of sins, by the abominable massing sacrifice of her priests, by the pardons and indulgences of her pope's, and to merit salvation in heaven, by wicked works which she doth, being taught by the Man of sin: though she have many thousands of new Gods and new Christ's, even so many as there be Angels and saints in heaven, and more too: though she be as filthy in life as Sodom, as idolatrous & malignant against God's people as were Egypt and Babylon, (unto which the holy Ghost hath compared her, Rev 11. 8. & 14. 8.) yet so long as she will say to Christ, but as the Devil said, Thou art Christ the son of God, Luke 4. 41. that is, so long as she retaineth the profession of Christianity; she is the Temple of God, the church of Christ, and under the covenant of salvation.  
But he that justifieth the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 16. 15. and woe unto them that say concerning evil, it is good, Esa. 5. 20. Can not men put difference between God's ordinances given unto a people, & the people: themselves that enjoy, use or abuse those ordinances? The Temple was an ordinance given unto Israel, as were the altars and sacrifices therein: so God gave unto all the world by No, commandments for altars and sacrifices, Gen. 8. 20. unto Abraham he commanded circumcision, unto Christians baptism, the Supper of Christ etc. All Gods ordinances continue in themselves holy, (till God do abrogate them,) though men that abuse them, fall to be most unholy, and without God in the world. So the sacrifices of sheep and Oxen were in themselves Gods holy ordinances, howsoever abused by the jews in jerusalem, by the Israelites in Samaria, and by the heathens in their several lands: so circumcision, though profaned by the Sichemites Gen. 34. so baptism and the Lords supper, though turned by Antichrist into abominable idols; remained and do remain in themselves Gods holy ordinances, though men have abused them to their damnation: so the Sun moon and stars continued Gods good creatures, though men made idols of them to themselves. To reason therefore from the creatures and ordinances, unto men which abuse them; and to gather because the creature or ordinance abideth good in itself, therefore the person that abuseth it, abideth good also: or to wrest a type, as mine opposite doth, from a creature or ordinance of old, to a most sinful people now, and make them alike holy; is an high abuse of God's ordinances, and a taking of his name in vain.   

Of the Temple in Rev. 11.  
MIne opposite 
* Chr. plea ●27. etc.  proceedeth to speak of the Temple and court in Rev. 11. 1. 2. and to apply it to his present cause. That which he first speaketh of the word Temple diversely used, and meaning not only the house but the Court yard, or Courts: I grant unto him. How to apply it, he 
† ●ag. 128.  showeth himself uncertain, whether more generally to the Christian church, or more specially to the church of Rome. Yet every way (saith he) it will follow that the state of the said church (of Rome) and Christians, is to be esteemed according to the estate of the Temple at jerusalem, and particularly with reference to the court and holy city given to the gentiles: and therefore is to be accounted the church and city of God, as the other were his court and city, though polluted etc. This I deny: the church or people of Rome at this day, is not answerable to the Temple or court, or city of jerusalem in holiness: but to the gentiles, in profaneness. And I have before manifested his great abuse of that proportion, from the Temple polluted, yet continuing the Lords, and holy in itself; to the people apostate and fallen from the Lord, from his faith and worship, to the faith and worship of Antichrist.  
In stead of proofs, he offereth things to be considered: The first whereof I leave, as not pertaining to our controversy: though it may seem not agreeable, that the most holy place should be omitted as figuring heaven; seeing in the 19 verse, when the Temple was opened, the Ark of God's testament was seen in it: and the Ark, was set in the most holy place, 2 Chron. 5. 7. It is true that that place figured heaven, Heb. 9 24. but it might also figure other things on earth, as the Temple itself, figured both Christ, and the Church, as we have formerly heard.  
His second consideration is, whether by the temple of God here, may not be understood the holy place, and figuratively faithful Christians, and more inward church of God, invisible to men, but seen and preserved of God, etc. And by the Altar and worshippers, be figuratively noted the spiritual worship and mediation of Christ, with faithful Christians and worshippers (made Priests unto God) who wholly and only rely upon Christ etc.  
Answ. Seing here are three distinct things, the Temple, the Altar, and the worshippers: it seemeth unfit to confound the first with the last; the worshippers here are the faithful Christians, which serve God in his Temple, (as Rev 7. 15.) and upon his Altar. To make the Temple to signify faithful Christians here, when the worshippers are the faithful Christians here themselves: it fits not the vision. Rather, as the Temple figured Christ in his humanity, Joh. 2. 19 21. God manifested in the flesh, in whom God dwelled, & in whom all do serve the Lord; and as the golden altar of incense figured his mediation, the brazen altar for sacrifice, figured his oblation of himself for his Church: so here the measuring of the Temple, Altar, and worshippers, signifieth the restauration of Christian religion from the Apostasy of Antichrist; the Temple of God signifieth Christ truly professed for his person, or doctrine of true Christianity, & constitution of the Church therein: the Altar is the true doctrine of his oblation and mediation for us; and the worshippers are the faithful Christians, that worship God in the true profession of Christ and of his mediation and sacrifice, as in the true Temple and altar of God, contrary to the heresies and abominations of Antichrist.  
His third and fourth considerations are, by the Court without the Temple, to be noted in figure the visible church & Christians. By the holy city (Jerusalem) to be noted in figure oyther the visible church and outward state of Christians more generally, or such as are truly godly and Gods holy church more particularly. By the Gentiles to understand hethens and rebellious Jews, that is profane and wicked Christians, the Antichristian hierarchic and Locusts Rev, 9 etc.  
Answ. This is faulty three ways, first in confounding persons and other things, as one: secondly in shuffling true Christians and Antichristians as one body: thirdly in restraining the gentiles or heathens (spoken of in Revel. 11. 2.) to the Pope and his hierarchy only. 1. The thing here showed in vision, was after the manner of jerusalem and the Temple of old: there, the Temple was not the people, neither were the courts, the people, neither the city, when it was distinct from the citizens: but they were holy places and signs appointed of God for the people to worship him in & by them. 2. True visible Christians (which he saith are the court and city) and Antichristians (or as he would have it the Pope and his hierarchy,) whom the Lord calleth Gentiles or heathen; he would have mixed together as one body and church, the Antichristian heathens to be the Bishops and pastors, and the visible Christians to be the flock; and this for the space of 1260. years, as himself numbereth the 42. months, a day for a year. Which is contrary to the whole scope of this book of the Revelation; which showeth the true Christians to be such as are marked and sealed of God, Revel 7. 3. etc. having his name in their foreheads, virgins, and followers of the Lamb, Rev. 14. 1. 4. such as worship not the Beast, or his image, neither receive his mark on forehead or hand, Rev. 20 4. whereas by his exposition, the true visible Christians are those that worship the beast, as the church of Rome doth and have done these many years. 3. That the gentiles should be only the Pope and hierarchy, agreeth neither with truth nor type: for whether he respect the rebellious jews or faithless Gentiles; it can never be showed at any time, that they were only Priests and Levices, or King's captains and officers, that trod down jerusalem, or dwelled in the court without the Temple: but people with priests, and soldjers with captains; that strange it is from whence he should gather this interpretation. And though many of all sorts have expounded this book; yet never read I of any one, neither doth he cite any one man that ever was of his mind, so to interpret these things; but it was his own singular conceit.  
As for the key which should open the door to the understanding of this vision, namely, the commandment to measure the Temple etc. with the reed, vers. 1. this he omitteth. But with that will I begin.  
After that God, for the idolatries and other sins, of the jews, had delivered the holy city jerusalem and the Temple therein, into the hands of the Gentiles the Babylonians, who first 
* 2 King. 24 13. 14. 15. 16.  rob the temple, and carried away all the chief men into captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon; and afterward, for further sins, broke up the City, 
† 2 King. 25 4. 9 10. 11.  burned the Lords house, and the King's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and broke down the walls of Jerusalem round about, and carried away the rest of the people that were left in the city: the Lord pitying the desolation of his church, began to restore and reedisie the same; calling his people 
“ Zach. 1. 3. 4.  to repentance; and unto Zacharie his Prophet, by visions signified that he would 
*‘ Zach. 1▪ 8. 16.  return to Jerusalem with mercies, and his house should be built in it: and showed him 
† Zach. 2. 1. 2.  a man with a measuring line in his hand, to measure the breadth and length of jerusalem, signifying the re-edifying of the same; and thereupon called his people 
* vers. 6. 7.  out of Babylon. He foretold him also of 
† Zach. 6. 12.  the Branch Christ, that should build the Temple of the Lord. And unto Ezekiel, then in captivity, he likeweise showed in a vision, a 
“ Ezek. 40. 2. 3. 5.  man like brass, with a line and a measuring reed, wherewith he measured the breadth and height of the building which Christ should erect; and this in all the parts thereof, as 
“ vers. 6. 7. 8. 9 10. etc.  gates, chambers, windows, posts, courts, tables &c. and also the 
* Ezeh. 41. 1. 2. etc.  temple, posts, doors, walls &c. likewise the 
† Ezek. 42. 1. etc.  utter court, with all things concerning the same. The end of which vision, was to signify, that in that place he would 
“ Ezek. 43. 7.  dwell in the midst of the sons of Israel (as before he had by the sign of 
“ 2 Chron. 6. 2. & 7. 12. 16.  Solomon's Temple;) and he willed the Prophet, that if the house of Israel were ashamed of all (the evil) that they had done, 
†‘ Ezek. 43. 11.  he should show them the form of the house, and the fashion thereof etc. and all the ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the laws thereof; 
“ vers. 10.  and let them measure the pattern.  
Accordingly, when God had set his Temple or Tabernacle among Christians, (as is described in Rev. 4. by the similitude of Moses Tabernacle;) and for the sins of the people, who began to revolt from the faith and to embrace Antichrist even whiles the 
* 2 Thes. 2. 7. 1 Joh. 2. 18. 19 & 4. 1. ●●2. 3.  Apostles lived, and after their decease, fell more and more from Christ, as by the opening of the seals Rev 6. and by the sounding of the Trumpet's, Rev 8. is clearly signified: so that the Sun (wherewith the church had been 
† Rev. 12. 1▪  clothed) was become 
“ Rev. 6. 12. 13. 14.  black▪ the Moon, bloody; the stars (the ministers) fallen from heaven to earth; and the heaven itself departed as a scroll tolled together; and God for the sins of Christians (as of the jews of old) had delivered this rebellious people into the hands of the spiritual 
* Rev. 17.  Babylon; ●●e synagogue of Antichrist, a 
† Revel. 13  Beast (or kingdom) blasphemous, idolatrous, filthy in life, and hating the Saints, as 
* Rev. 11. 8.  Sodom, Egypt and Rome when it was heathenish: then God in wrath remembering mercy to a remnant, the election of his grace: began again to reedify his church. And to signify this, john had in vision a measuring 
“ Rev. 11. 1.  reed given him, to measure the Temple, Altar, and worshippers; but not the Court, or City as yet, because he would renew his church by degrees. Afterward he saw 
* Revel. 21. ●. etc.  the City, gates, & wall thereof measured also, when the church should fully be restored.  
This reed, which was of 
† Rev. 21. 15.  gold, signifieth the word of God, or scriptures; whereby all doctrines, ordinances, churches and peoples are to be measured tried and discerned, whether they be the building of God or no. For God by his word directed Moses to make the Tabernacle and all the appurtenances, according to the pattern showed him in the mount, Exod. 25. 40. Heb. 8. 5. and so they were made, Exod 39 42. 43. Solomon likeweise had the pattern of the Temple, and of the Courts, chambers, treasures &c, the weight of gold for the Candlesticks, tables, bowls, cups &c, as the Lord had made David understand in writing, by his hand upon him, even all the works of that pattern, 1 Chron. 28. 11.— 19  
So then the commandment to measure with the reed, the Temple, Altar and worshippers, Rev. 11. 1. signified such a renewing of Christianity and professors of it, as should be according to God's word, when they are measured and tried thereby, of such as have the Apostle john's spirit. But the Court, City and Gentiles treading down the same, were to be cast out, and not measured: to signify that the holy doctrines and ordinances of the gospel, abused and trodden down by the Antichristian gentiles, can endure no measure or trial of God's word, but are to be rejected as profane, in their sinful abuse of them. Because as the Gentiles of old, changed the truth of God into a lie, Rev. 1. 〈◊〉. and when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, but became vain in their imaginations, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God, into images, Rom. 1. 21. 23. therefore though they retained after their profane manner, many of God's divine ordinances, taught them from No; yet no Prophet or man of God, ever measured their Temples, altars, sacrifices, Priests or people, but cast them out as wicked: so the Gentiles (the Antichristians) now, having likeweise changed the truth of God into a 
† 2 Thes. 2. 1●.  lie, and whiles they profess Christ in word, do in deed 
* 1 joh. 2. 22  deny him; albeit they tread down and sacrilegiously profane the holy things of God, his doctrines and ordinances of faith, worship, church &c▪ yet are they to be cast out, and left unmeasured, being such as will endure no trial by the word of God. How then doth mine opposite seek in vain to measure the church of Rome, and to prove her Gods true church though corrupted, and to be under his covenant of grace: when God here expressly biddeth them to be left unmeasured? How is it, that he pleadeth 
† Chr. pl●● pag. 137.  for a reformation only, and will have no new building or plantation; when Sodom and Babylon, must be reform with fire, that is utterly destroyed; as in the 
“ Gen. 19 24. 25. Ie● 51. 58. 6●  types of old; so in the thing typed at this day? as it is written, she shallbe utterly burnt with sire; for strong is the Lord God, who judgeth her. Rev. 18. 8. We find in the type, how after the Babylonians had burned the Temple, when the jews returned out of captivity, they laid again the foundation of the Temple of the Lord, and then builded it: Ezr. 3. 6. 10. 11. We find also in the Gospel, that Antichrist should destroy the Temple, even to the foundation, which is Christ, 1 joh. 2. 22. 1 Cor. 3. 11. And in Rev. 11. there is measuring, as for a new building: yet now we shall have (by these pleaders) Babylon reform, and no new Temple built, or jerusalem re-edified. If any like to apply this foresaid measuring of the Temple Revel 11. to the defection of the church, rather than to the re-edifying of it; I will not strive here about: neither will it (if so it be understood) any thing help the present state of the church of Rome, about which our controversy here is.  
By this which hath been said, I leave it to the judgement of men of understanding, whether it be more fit to apply these Gentiles to the wicked jews, which whiles the true Temple, courts and city stood; did in hypocrisy abuse Gods holy ordinances Esa. 1. as mine opposite doth apply them: or to the Gentiles of whom the Psalmist complaineth 
* Psalm. 75 vers. 1.  that they had come into God's inheritance, defiled the Temple, laid jerusalem 
† vers. 2.  on heaps (that is ruinous, as Mica 3. 12.) killed God's servants, and left them 
* vers. 3.  unburied, (as here in Rev. 11. 8. 9 the dead bodies of God's witnesses, are not suffered to be put in graves:) that had devoured jakob, and 
† vers. 7. 8  laid waste his dwelling place, for the former iniquities of Israel. Seeing that in Esaias days, there was no measuring for the new building of the Temple, as was after the captivity of Babylon then, and in this place: nor casting out of the court, and giving of the city to be trodden down of the Gentiles for many years, as judah was 
* Jer. 20. 4.  given into the hand of the King of Babylon, when God 
† jer. 12. 7. 〈◊〉.  forsook his house, and left his heritage, to be destroyed, and trodden under foot, seventy years. But as of the destruction of the earthly jerusalem by the heathen Romans, Christ said: jerusalem shallbe trodden down of the Gentiles, (that is, ruined, & not suffered to be built again), until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, Luke. 21. 24. so of the ruin & waste of this spiritual jerusalem, by the Antichristian Romans, he saith, it is given to the Gentiles, and the holy City shall they tread down 42. months: after which time john seeth the heavenly jerusalem measured, that is builded again, Rev. 21. 15. 17.  
But whether we understand it to have reference to former wicked jews (called hethens for their heathenish manners,) or to the Babylonian Gentiles: yet hath mine opposite no reason, or colour of reason, to restreyn it to the governor's only, as he doth to the Pope and his hierarchy. For they that trod in the Lords courts. Esai. 1. were the people, as well as the Priests and princes: the people of Gomorrha, as well as the princes of Sodom, Esai. 1. 10. and they that ruined jerusalem, were the Babylonian soldjers, as well as the King and captains, 2. King. 25. And he should so have applied these Gentiles (that tread down Gods holy ordinances touching his church and worship,) to the papists (the Pope's marked soldjers, that have the 
* Revel. 13. ●. 18.  number of his name,) and not to the Bishops and Priests only. For in the beasts army, there are not only Kings and captains which fight against Christ and Christians, but all sorts of men, both free and bond both small and great, which shall be slain with the sword of Christ which proceedeth out of his mouth, and all the fowls shallbe filled with their flesh's; Rev. 19 17. 18. 21. So not the popish hierarchy alone, but all other of their idolatrous religion, are the Gentiles, in Rev. 11. whom the holy Ghost measureth not amongst his people, but casteth out as profane treaders down of his holy things: though mine opposite measureth them as God's true church and in his covenant, yet counteth their pastors, (which are as faithful and holy as they) to be wicked Gentiles.  
So the Beast which killeth Gods witnesses, Rev. 11. 7. he expoundeth 
† Chr. plea ●●g. 131.  the Antichristian hierarchy & Locusts: which are but the heads, horns, and chief members of the Beast. For as in Dan. 7. the 
* vers. 4.  Lion, is the kingdom of Babel, both princes and subjects; and the 
† vers. 5.  Bear the kingdom of the Persians, and so all the rest; as is there expounded in v. 23. the fourth Beast shallbe the fourth kingdom upon earth, and the ten horns out of that (Beast or) kingdom, are said to be ten kings, v. 24. so the Beast in Rev. 13. is meant of a whole kingdom, and not of governor's only. And the scripture plainly enough cleareth this, saying, And they of the people, and kindreds, and tongues, & nations, shall see their dead bodies &c, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves: and they that dwell upon the earth, shall rejoice over them, and make merry etc. Rev. 11. 9 10. So not the hierarchy only, but popish multitudes also, do belong to this beast and kingdom, that murdereth the witnesses of Christ. And here note, how mine Opposite himself is driven to confess that 
* Chr. i'll pag. 159  the Church of God, and the Beast, do in deed differ much the one from the other: but the Church of Rome, both hierarchy and people, are the Beast, as before is proved: therefore the Church of God, and the church of Rome, do in deed differ much the one from other; and mine adversary granteth that which overthroweth his own plea.  
This will yet further appear by this that followeth. Whiles the holy city lieth ruinous trodden under foot by the Antichristian Gentiles, which keep it from being re-edified and measured so long a time, 1260. years: there is an other great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified, Rev. 11. 8. even Babylon the great, the mother of fornications and abominations of the earth, Rev. 17. 5. which lieth not ruinous, but is stately built, 
* Rev. 17. ●  decked and garnished, 
† Rev. 18. ●  glorifying herself and living diliciously, which saith in her h●rt, I sit 〈◊〉 Queen, and a●no widow, and shall see no sorrow: and this is the great City (Rome) which in th'Apostle john's time reigned over the kings of the earth, Rev. 17. 18. but after that became a Christian city or polity, but soon forsook Christ, and were Christians in name (being in deed Gentiles,) and a Catholic church, sitting and reigning over peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues, Rev. 17. 1●. Which albeit mine opposite before laboured to make it differ from the Church of Rome, yet I also 
* p. 40 &.  before took away his reasons. And here himself yieldeth so much, as will overthrow him. For▪ Note here (saith he) that by the great City, is meant not only the 
“ Chr. ple pag. 154.  city itself &c. for (as 
† Mr. Bagh man on R●● 16. 19  one well writeth) the city is not only the Town or piece of ground, contained within the comp●sse of the walls thereof, together with the Citizens and inhabitants, having order and government etc. but also the whole jurisdiction and government of the cite in all places pertaining thereto. So the streets of this city reach far, even to all places, under the jurisdiction thereof, and comprehend sundry peoples, and kindreds, and tongues and nations, as here is said. Whereupon it is fitly compared to the great city Babylon etc. Where yet observe further, that the church of Rome, being fallen into deep Apostasy, and having the man of sin sitting therein as God, who hath the city for his throne: the things that are spoken of this city, are also applied to the apostatle estate of that church of Rome, and the other churches that are under the jurisdiction of the prelacy of that Sea, whersoever, and of whatsoever people, kindred, tongue on nation they be. Which application thereof I do also acknowledge, as it is observed by and according to the word of God, Rev. 11. 8. with Esai. 1. 10. jer. 23. 14. Ezek. 16. 2. 46. Rev. 14. 8. and 17. and 18. etc. with Esai. 21. 9 and 48. 20. Jer. 50. and 51. 1. 45. Ezek. 16. 2. 35. and c. 23. Ziaoh. 2. 6. 7.  
Thus far he yieldeth: Whereupon it is evident to all that will see, how this great city, the glorious church of Rome, that killeth God's witnesses in it, is a far different thing from the holy City, which that church treadeth down, and keepeth from being re-edified, as the Babylonians having ruinated jerusalem, kept it from being built again, during their reign. So then his comparing of Rev. 11. 8. with Esai. 1. 10. and jer. 23. 14. seemeth to be an unequal match, by which he would make the church of Rome, as truly Gods, as jerusalem and the Temple were Gods in Esaias time and Ieremies, when wicked jews likened to Sodomites and Gomorrheans, worshipped in them. For 1. jerusalem then was standing, here it is tuined and lieth unbuilt, unmeasured, cast out from all measuring by the reed of God's word. 2. Sodom, and Babylon, are never in scripture called the holy city, as 
* Mat. 4. 5. ●ith Luke ●. 9  jerusalem is: yet here he would have that which God nameth Sodom, Egypt, Babylon; to be in deed jerusalem. 3. Neither Esaie nor jeremy do call the holy City Sodom or Gomorrha, but the wicked people in that holy city. Which may fall out in the truest church on earth, that there may as slagitious persons be in it, as any in Sodom. So in the church of Christ and his Apostles, there was judas 
† joh. 6 70. ●1.  a Devil. But Antichrists city hath no other name, than Sodom, Egypt, Babylon, and Rome, by whose power and polity Christ was crucified: and this name is given it spiritually, that is in spirit and truth; as being no way inferior, but beyond them rather in all impiety, cloaked with hypocrisy. In deed Bellarmine pleading for the Pope, 
* De Rom. ●ont. l. 3. ●. 13.  contendeth against Hierom, that Jerusalem might be called Sodom, and citeth this very text Esai. 1. 10. ye Princes of Sodom: but Mr junius (on whom mine opposite so much relieth, as we shall see anon) answereth him, 
* Animadv in Bellarm. Cont. 3. l. 3. c. 13. note 13▪  It is false. The Prophet calleth not the city Jerusalem, Sodom or Gomorrhe; but the Princes and people figuratively, princes of Sodom, and people of Gomorrhe. The comparison is made of men, not of places. Likeweise D. whitaker's answering Bellarmine to the same objection, saith, 
† Cont. 4. An. Pap●. sit Antich quest. 5.  Neither do we ever read Jerusalem to be called Sodom, or Egypt: this agreeth much more truly unto Rome etc. I confess that there (in Esa. 1.) the people of the jews are for their vices compared to Sodom and Gomorrhe, as also in Ezek. 16. but yet it was not called Sodom and Gomorrhe spiritually, but figuratively: whereas this city is called Sodom and Egypt spiritually, that is in a spiritual respect, for spiritual lust, luxury, blindness, all which are found in the popish church.  
But mine opposite putting no difference between the holy city jerusalem ruined; and the great city Babylon, Sodom, Egypt gloriously edified; compareth the phrase of treading the holy city by the Gentiles, Rev. 11. with treading the Lords courts by hypocritical jews Esai. 1. and saith, it may signify, besides a treading down, or underfoot, a frequent continual conversing in the outward visit le church with their bodies. Which if it be granted, yet this must be granted also, that it is here cast out & not to be measured as God's true church: which was not the case of jerusalem and the Courts in Esaies' time. And as for the phrase, it is such as may mean no frequent continual conversing at all, but a violent suppressing of the building thereof. For, (to omit that he speaketh here of treading down the city, and in Esay, of treading down the Courts) the Gentiles treading down the earthly jerusalem, Luke 21. 24. meaneth not the frequenting of that place to worship God in. Neither doth the adversaries treading down of the Sanctuary, in Esai. 63. 18. or, of the Sanctuary and host, (that is the temple and people of jerusalem) Dan. 8. 13. or the treading down of the Lords portion, Jere. 12. 10. or of his vineyard, Esa. 5. 5. signify a frequenting to do good in appearance; as did the jews in Esai. 1. 11. 12. 13. who came with multitude of sacrifices to honour God and that place of his dwelling. Finally, as he dutst not deny but the Gentiles in Rev. 11. were also figured out by the heathens of old, for he saith, 
* Chr. plea pag. 1●9.  not heathens alone, as Antiochus &c, but sinful rebellious jews: so he should have observed, that figures agree not in all things. For if I would prove the Antichristians now to be professed heathens, and no church; because Antiochos, and the Babylonians were professed heathens and no church, in comparison with the jews; he would deny the consequence: even so his matching them with the true church of God in judea, because the wicked of that church were figures of them, is a very weak conclusion.  
His exposition of making the Temple, altar, and worshippers to signify the invisible church of Gods elect; and the Gentiles with the Court and holy City to be the visible church of hypocrites: aagreeth neither with this place, nor with Esai. 1. For no men can know much less measure the invisible church of Gods elect, as john here measured the Temple, altar, and worshippers: this belongeth to God alone, who knoweth who are his. Neither in Esai. 1. were there two distinct churches or places in jerusalem, one wherein the faithful and elect worshipped; and another wherein Sodomites and hypocrites trod the Lords courts. Besides if so it were as he supposeth: what manner of people doth he make the church of Rome which he pleadeth for? a company of Sodomites & hypocrites cast out & unmeasured of God, & of all good men. And how then are they Gods true church, sealed with his covenant of promise? He saith, 
† Chr. plea. ●ag. 130.  the daughter of Zion, left as a cottage in a vineyard etc. Esai. 1. 8. was the faithful church of the sealed and elect. Who ever heard of such an exposition of those words? The daughter of Zion, usually signifieth the Common wealth or church of the jews; as the daughter of Babel, Psal. 137. 8. was the Common wealth of Babylon. And as Esaie here complaineth of the calamities of the church of judea by former wars for their sins; v. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 so where the Babylonians afterward utterly wasted it, jeremy lamenteth, how 
“ Lam. 1. 6. etc.  from the daughter of Zion, all her beauty was departed; the Lord 
* Lam. 2. 1.  had covered her with a cloud, in his anger etc. purposed 
† verse. ●.  to destroy her wall; 
Ԡ vers. 10.  her elders sat on the ground; 
',' vers. 13.  her breach was like the sea, none could heal her; 
‘* vers. 14.  her prophets had not discovered her iniquity, to turn away her captivity etc. all which do concern the general state overthrown by the Babylonian; & not the state of the faithful and elect only.  
He 
*‘ Chr. plea ●ag. 133.  setteth down from my former writing against Mr Smyth, my judgement touching this scripture Rev. 11. when I wrote (as he saith) for the truth. He traduceth me now as a quite other man: but how justly, the reader may see by the very words of mine which he hath set down. For there I said, the commandment to measure the Temple, altar and worshippers, signified the restoring or repairing of God's church and people, after some destruction, and desolation; as the like visions showed 
* Ezek. 40. ●. Zach. 2. 2.  to Ezekiel & Zacharie, after the destruction of Solomon's temple, do manifest: etc. There I applied the Gentiles in Rev. 11. to the Babylonians and other heathens, Jer. 12. 7. & 20. 4. Esa. 63. 18. Further I 
† Defence Script. p. 1▪  showed, (but this he setteth not down) that M. S. enough have seen a figure of those Gentiles, Rev. 11. set forth by the Psalmist, 
*‘ Psalm. 7▪  O God the gentiles are come into thine inheritance etc. where by Gentiles are not meant the Jsraelites, but Babylonians or other heathen persecutors etc. and that Antichrists church is called 
†‘ Revel. 1▪  Babylon; and Christ's, 
“ Revel. 2▪  Jerusalem etc. As M. Io. then well approved of my answer to M. S. so even now he saith still, 
* Chr. pl▪ pag. 145.  I did sound convince him. And who then will not see, that M. I. even by his own grant, is likewise sound convinced. For as M. S. fetched the type of these Gentiles, from the Israelites: so doth M I. fetch it from the Israelites in Esai. 1. and contrary to that sound conviction, will not have it like the restoring of the Temple after the Babylonians had burnt it; but like the afflictions of the jews, whiles their Temple Courts and City stood undestroyed, Esa. 1. So whether of us two, be carried about of every wind, and as reeds shaken hither and thither, (as he 
† Chr. p● pag. 134.  intwiteth me,) I leave it unto the prudent reader to judge. As then, so still I hold the holy City, Rev. 11. to be meant of jerusalem, not of Babylon: how mine opposite now hath expounded it, we have seen. As I did then, so still I hold those Antichristian Gentiles Rev. 11. to be answerable to the Babylonians and other heathens, Psal. 79. Jer. 20. 4. Esai. 63. 18. he now will have them answerable to the jews. I then blamed and still do, that men should make Gods holy courts, city and people, to be figures of Antichristians, of their church and worship.  
But mine opposite (to make his words seem to hang together) 
* ibid. p. 1▪  saith, that now I teach, that the Temple of God spoken of 2 Thes. 2. 4. is Antichrists Temple, church, body, etc. Be it so: yet of that scripture there was no controversy between M. S. and me: and as the house of the Lord God of Jsrael in Ezr. 1. 8. is meant of his true temple; but the house of their God in Amos 2. 8. and in Host 9 8. is meant of an idolatrous Temple: so by the Temple of God in Rev. 11. 1. may be understood his true Temple, and yet the Temple of God in 2 Thes. 2. may be understood of the Temple of Antichrist. And this I said upon mine opposites interpretation, which will have the Temple in 2 Thes. 2. to mean the people or church of Rome; which are in deed the Gentiles in Rev. 11. the Sodomites Babylonians Egyptians that tread down the Lords holy city, and have built a new Babel. For otherweise, if he did understand Antichrists sitting in the Temple of God, to be his treading down of his Temple, as here he treadeth down the holy City, having ruined and burnt it, and keeps it from being re-edified, as the Babylonians did during their reign, I would not have contended with him about it. But then his applying of it to the church of Rome, which the Pope hath builded, honoured, garnished as a most gorgeous harlot: would be altogether unfit; and agree no better than Babylon did with Zion. But of that place 2 Thes. 2. we have spoken at large before.  
Whereas heretofore he pleaded, that Antichrist doth not wholly take away the church of God, and every truth and ordinance of the Lord: and I answered, Neither did the Deviltake away every truth and ordinance of God from among the heathens, but they retained many rites of Gods worship received from their father's etc. First 
* Chr. plea pag. 165.  he blameth me as shifting &c. for not saying, the Devil took not wholly away, the church of God from among the heathens: I answer, if by church, he understand the order and constitution of the church, the heathens strayed not further from it, than Antichrist hath by his counterfeis catholic church: and whosoever will bring them to the trial, it will soon appear. Or, if he understand by Church, God's people, (as he hath now his people in this Romish Babylon, Rev. 18.) I also say, that the Devil took not away the church wholly from the heathens for God had many elect among them, whom by means he called from heathenish idols, to the true faith: of whom there are many instances of sundry persons in the scriptures; and I doubt not but there were many more, whose names are written in the book of life. The dispersion of Israel among the nations, might bring many heathens to the faith; as we have an instance in Esth. 8. 17.  
To that which I said, that the Devil did not take away wholly every truth and ordinance of God from among the heathen: he answereth, it is nothing to the purpose, seeing they are not the church and people of God, under his covenant neither do so enjoy any of them.  
Answ. First, I spoke of the heathens of old, whiles sacrificing was God's ordinance, as the examples that I alleged show. He answereth of the heathens now, whose state is much worse, by refusing or falling from the Gospel. Secondly, his answer is true also of the Antichristian heathens, Rev. ●1. 2. if it be applied unto them: for they are not God's church and people under his covenant, neither do they so enjoy any of them: but they are in the bondage and covenant of Antichrist, as before is proved. So my answer was to purpose, & his reply is but the begging of the question.  
Object. Take an instance (saith he) in one of the particulars which he mentioned, where he said that the heathens reteyn baptisms or washings among them: yet when any of them leave that estate, and come to the faith and church of Christ, they are to be baptised into the Lord's name etc. but so may not be done with those that have received baptism in the church of Rome, or any other apostate churches, when they leave such estate etc.  
Answ. First, he wresteth my words, spoken of the heathens of old, which retained baptisms or washings whiles they were God's ordinances: and applieth them to their washings now, when they are none of God's ordinances. I said, 
* Animadv pag. 76.  the ordinances of God retained in other nations (besides Israel) as Altars, sacrifices &c, and alleged authors, before Christ's coming in the flesh: he setteth down these as my words, the heathens retain etc. Had I thus altered the case, I should have been charged with shifting, and that justly. But I acknowledge not tho legal washings, sacrifices, altars etc. of Gentiles or jews to be God's ordinances now, as they were before Christ's death. That which he saith of baptism not to be repeated, I grant: and so must he have done for circumcision among the heathens, such as retained it for a divine ordinance, as they did their sacrifices. I instanced 
† Animadv pag. 75.  the Colchians, Egyptians, Ethiopians; and the Samaritans, which latter Mr. johnson acknowledged to have still used circumcision, and yet were not Gods true Church. But this he passed over, and answereth not. Now he would bring in the heathenish washings at this day, which is a plain tergiversation. But of Baptism, we shall speak more hereafter.   

Of Revel. 18. 4.  
TO prove the church of Rome at this day God's true church, he alleged Rev. 18. 4, Go out of her my people etc. I answered, These very words are taken from Jer. 51. 45. My people go out of the midst of her, where by My people, the Church of Babylon is not meant, but the Israelites, God's 
* Jer. 50, 6.  lost sheep, scattered there upon the mountains and hills, whom 
† jer. 50. 17.  first the King of Ashshur had devoured, and lastly Nebuchadnerar King of Babel had broken their bones, having 
* jer. 52. 13. ●4.  burned Jerusalem and the temple with fire, etc. These Israelites figuring Gods 
‘† Rom. 11. ●. 5. 7.  elect, are called out of Babylon, which God would utterly 
',' jer. 51. 25.  destroy etc. So from Antichrists church, which is 
* Rev. 18. 2. & 11. 8.  Babylon, Sodom, Egypt, are Gods elect called out: an evident proof, that she is none of God's church, whatsoever she pretendeth etc.  
His replies are, questions. Very well (
† Chr. plea pag. 166.  saith he:) But are not those words My people, the words of the covenant, as I said?  
Answ. They are; but not of any covenant with Babylon: and consequently not with the church of Rome, which is Babylon at this day; Rev. 17. 5.  
2. And were not that people now in Babylon, the church and people of God under his covenant?  
Answ. They were God's people, and his 
* Jer. 50. 6.  lost sheep there: but their Common wealth & church estate was dissolved, their 
† 2 King. 25. ●.  Temple and holy city burned, (when Babylon and Bells temple in it flourished, and was garnished with the 
‘* Dan. 1. 2.  holy vessels stolen out of God's temple.) The Lord had 
Ԡ Lam. 2. vers. 2.  swallowed up all the habitations of Jakob; 
',' vers. 5.  swallowed up Jsrael, and all her palaces; 
* vers. 6.  destroyed his places of assembly, caused the solemn feasts and Sabbathes to be forgotten in Zion; 
† vers. 7.  cast off his Altar, abhorred his sanctuary. 
‘* Lam. 5. 18.  Mount Zion was desolate, and the foxes walked upon it. But was Babylon, (which thus abused God's people, and burned his Temple,) God church? If not, how should the Church of Rome, which now is Babylon 
‘† Revel. 17. ●. 6.  the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, which is drunken with the blood of the Saints: how should she be God's church, people or Temple?  
3. Had not that people also polluted the Temple of the Lord, and fallen into notorious idolatry etc. for which they were given by the Lord into the hands of the Babylonians: and were they not still the Lords church and people, etc.  
Answ. They were, some of them, as before is showed. And so Christians having polluted God's temple of Christianity, and fallen into idolatries and heresies, were given over of the Lord, some into the hands of the Turk (as Israel into the hands of Assur) some into the hands of the Pope (as judah into Babel.) And such Israelites as embraced the religion of the Assyrians & Babylonians ceased to be God's people actually, till they repented: others that resisted evil and kept the truth, as 
* Dan. 1. 8. & 3. 18.  Daniel and his brethren; were Gods holy people. So all in Rome and Turkey that abide in the truth refusing their abominations, are Gods holy people: the rest that have received Maometisme and Antichristianisme, are not God's people actually; albeit many of them are Gods elect, and shall so be manifested when they come out from them. But mine opposite changeth the state of the question, turning it from Babylon itself, to Israel God's people in Babylon; and so from the Church of Rome now Babylon, to the faithful witnesses of Christ therein; of whom none make doubt.  
4. Is there not difference to be put between the people of God in Babylon, and Babylon itself? etc.  
Answ. Yes; which whiles it is not held unto, we are dallied with. The controversy is about the church of Rome itself, which is Babylon: the reasons given, are for God's people (open or secret) in that Babylon. Who seeth not the deceit? For God hath had his people in Rome, not only when it was Antichristian, but when it was heathen: and multitudes have been killed for Christ therein, in both estates. This justifieth not, but condemneth Rome, the murderer of the Saints.  
Obj. To make this matter yet more plain, observe Zach. 2. 6. 7. Ho, ho, come forth etc. Deliver thyself o Zion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon. This plainly showeth that Zion is in Babylon: not mount Zion itself &c. but the people of God, that pertained to Zion: among whom, when God set his Temple, he said withal, 
* 1 King. ● 13. Psalm. 132. 13. 1●  I will dwell in the midst of you: showing that the Temple was a token of his presence among them; a band of the holy and mutual conjunction that was between God and them: whether they were bound to come for to worship God, and to bring their sacrifices.  
Answ. In deed this maketh the matter more plain. For 1. here he granteth the Temple to have been a token of God's presence among his people; but when so I applied it in expounding 2. Thes. 2. he resisted me, and would have it there to be the people, the church. 2. This temple the token of God's presence and band of his communion with his people, God had forsaken. For his people synning in it by their idols, Ezek. 8. God in wrath sent destroyers upon them; Ezek. 9 But before destruction he 
† Ezek. 9  marked his people on the forehead, that cried out for all the abominations. Which being done, he 
* vers. 5.  slayed to destruction all others not marked, both old and young, and began at his sanctuary. Then 
† Ezek. 10.  scattered he coals of fire over the city; removed 
* Ezek. 1● 18. 19 11. 22. 23.  his glory (the sign of his presence) out of his Temple, and from the midst of the city; to signify his departure from amongst them. Then came the king of Babylon God's 
* jer. 25. 9  servant (to execute his wrath) and performed the vision, in 
† 2 King. 25. ●.  burning both Temple and city, and carrying the people thence into Babylon. So Moses prophecy was fulfilled, Levit. 26. 31.— 36. Then both such godly ones as had not been polluted with the abominations in jerusalem, and had been marked of God for his; such sinner's also as by their afflictions were brought to repentance, and 
* Levit. 26. p. 41. etc. King. 8. 46. ●. etc.  confessed their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers, and had their uncircumcised hearts humbled, and turned unto him with all their heart, and with all their soul; he mercifully respected them, & remembered his covenant towards them. The rest perished in their sins, being given over in just judgement, (whiles they were in that dispersion,) to 
† Deut. 28.  serve other goods, wood and stone: though yet by his prophets, God warned them not to do it, jer. 10. So the Lord set the sign of his gracious presence in the Christian church, Rev. 4. but they soon defiled it by their idolatries, & heresies, for which they were chastised, Rev. 6. Wherefore God in justice ready to bring further plagues, marketh and sealeth on the foreheads, such as were his, Rev. 7. then his judgements came forth in greater measure Rev. 8. & by a 
* Rev. 13.  beast (or kingdom) whose chief seat should be in 
† Rev. 17.  Babylon, that is Rome, he suffered the 
“ Rev. 13. 7.  Saints to be overcome, and gave him power over all kindreds and tongues and nations: that such as had not 
vers. 8.  their names written in the book of life, should worship him; and be 
* Rev. 14. 9 ●. 11.  damned for ever. In which Babylon or Popish church, the Lord hath notwithstanding his open 
† Rev. 11, 3. 20, 4.  witnesses, that withstand their abominations unto the death: and many more of his elect, whom he 
“ Rev: 18. 4.  calleth out in his time from that whorish church; and these are the people of God, that pertain to mount Zion: and will no more justify the state of the church of Rome at this day, than Gods lost sheep of Israel, justified Babylon of old.  
Obj. Note here, 1. That the people of God pollute his temple, become apostates and idolaters, and are captived in Babylon.  
Answ. But note withal, that they have their temple of God, and holy city, consumed with fire; and are carried out of their holy land, into an other sinful nation, as before is showed.  
2. That thus now Zion is in Babylon, and consequently the Temple of God (so to speak) the people of G. the church of G. is in Babylon.  
Ans. So to speak! But the speech is unproper, and God no where speaketh so. The visible Temple was burnt; and they had none with them in Babylon, but Bells temple, none of the Lords. The lost sheep, the people of God pertaining to mount Zion, (as whileere he said) were in Babylon. And for his figurative applying of the Temple here, to the people or church; it is amyss: it should be applied to God himself. For so the Lord saith by the Prophet, though I have scattered them among the countries, yet will I be to them as a little Sanctuary, in the countries where they shall come, Ezek. 11. 16. So the Lord, not the people, was the Sanctuary or temple in Babylon.  
3. Still they are acknowledged of God, to be Zion, his people &c, though in Babylon.  
Answ. So I always and still acknowledge God to have his people in Babylon the church of Rome. But it should be proved (if it were possible) that Babylon is Zion; or the church of Rome, to be the church of God.  
4. The Lord calleth them from thence by divers prophets etc. 5. Being so called, they did not all come together at once etc.  
Answ. These things are true: and so for the Lords calling of his people out of Babylon now. But it is not yet concluded, (not ever willbe sound) that the Babylonians are Gods people; except the elect, which belong to mount Zion, though-actually in Babylon.  
Obj. There willbe of Gods people yet called from thence, even then when this Babylon (the city of Rome) shallbe burnt with fire, and cast down, never to rise any more. Rev. 18. 4. 8. etc.  
Answ. This conclusion is partly true, and partly implieth error. It is true, that there shallbe of Gods people called out of Babylon, till she be utterly cast down. But the error implied is, that he maketh Babylon the city (not the church) of Rome: and seemeth also to restreyn it to the city properly, and to the burning of the material city and houses thereof. Whereas this Babylon, is the 
† Rev. 17. 1. 5.  great Whore, who though her chief ●ear is in Rome, yet her ecclesta●●ical jurisdiction reacheth over 
“ Rev. 11. 8. 9  peoples, and kindreds, and tongues, and nations. And when the 
“ Rev. 11. 13.  tenth part of that city fell; it is not meant of the tenth part of the houses in Rome; but of people in that catholic church. And when God calleth his 
† Rev. 18.  people out of Babylon: it is not meant out of Rome only, or Italic▪ but Spain also and all other places where Popery reigneth. Neither is it meant in regard of civil polity, as if the subjects in Italy, Spain and other lands, might not remain in those common wealths still; but they are called out from the heresies, idolatries and extravagant jurisdiction of the Romish church. So the civil bondage of the jews in the old Babylon, typed the spiritual bondage of God's people in this new Babylon, the church of Rome: and out of it are men called, not out of the civil state, or material place. For who will deny, but Christian churches may dwell in Spain, Italy, yea and Rome itself (if the magistrates will suffer them,) and yet not disobey this precept 
* Rev. 18.  Come out of her my people. It is a doctrine of grace, and necessary unto salvation to come out of the church estate of this Romish Babylon, but to understand it of the Common wealth's estate, and to call men out of it, were a doctrine of rebellion, contrary to Rom. 13. 1. 1. Pet. 2. 13. 14.  
Whereas I concluded, God's covenant of grace is not therefore with her at all, for she is appointed to damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 8. 12. Rev. 18. 8.— 21. but the elect that obey God's voice calling them out of her, them he will receive into covenant, he will be a father unto them, and they shallbe his sons & daughters, as he hath promised. 2. Cor. 6. 17. 18. He replieth: As if they were not already under the covenant of God, being his people: or as if they could be the Lords people and yet not be under his covenant. The Jews knew better when they were in Babylon; and thereupon prayed, as in Esai. 63. 17. 18. 19 & 64. 7. 8. 9 Return to the tribes of thine inheritance &c, we are thine &c. O Lord thou art our father etc.  
Answ. The people of God in Rome, being his elect; are under his covenant in regard of his election, which was 
† Eph. 1. 4.  before the world began: but until they be called & come out; they appear not unto men to be under the visible covenant of God's church, whereof Paul speaketh in the place alleged, 2 Cor. 6. That the godly jews in Babylon, figured Gods elect, I before showed from Rom. 11. 4. 5. 7. and mine opposite gainsayeth it not. That God calleth the elect his people, even before they know or obey his voice, was showed him also heretofore, when God said to Paul of heathenish Corinth, I have much people in this city, Act. 18. 10. yet Paul knew not who they were, till after they believed by his preaching. So Christ said, Other sheep I have which are not of this fold, joh. 10. 16. speaking of the elect gentiles, whiles yet they were not sheep actually before men; but wild beasts of the wood. His comparison from Esai. 63. if it be referred to the Martyrs which the church of Rome hath imprisoned, killed, banished for the truth: is fit, and I acknowledge them visibly under God's covenant. But referred to them that are one with the church of Rome, in her faith and religion; it is very unfit. For those people of God in Babylon, were in civil bondage, but in freedom of spirit, and not servants to sin: such were 
* Dan. 1. and 3. 18  Daniel, Ananias, and other saints. But these of the Romish church & religion, are in spiritual bondage to Antichrist, and so partakers of his sins, 
† Rom. 6. 1. 20. 2 Pet. 2. 19  and in state of death, by man's judgement; till they obey their calling and come forth; though God knoweth them before to be his people, by election of grace. By this which hath been said, the wise may discern, what weight there is in Rev. 18. to prove Babylon (the present church of Rome,) to be the church of God, because out of her, God calleth his people. And let all men take notice of the main ground of his error, that he would have Babylon now, to be the civil state or material city; when in deed it is the ecclesiastical or church. For God calleth not people's out of their civil states, (it is a doctrine of rebellion so to interpret it, and contrary to Rom. 13:) but from their sinful ecclesiastical estate. All civil states, though governed by Popish yea or heathenish magistrates, are sanctified to God's people, Act. 25. 10. 11. Rom. 13. 1. 2. etc. 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14. 17. they may lawfully continue under them, have the use and benefit of them: they are all of God, and none of them from the bottomless pit or of the Devil, as is the Beast the Empire of Antichrist, Rev. 17. 8. from which God calleth all his people.   

Of comparing the church of Rome with Israel.  
MIne opposite laboured to strengthen his former reason from Rev. 18. by saying, And so Jsrael is often called the Lords people in the time of their apostasy, 2 King. 9 6. etc. I answered, the Question was not hereby proved. For 1. The Antichristian church is Babylon, Rev. 16. 19 and 18. 2. and out of her, that is Babylon; are Gad's people called, Rev 18. 4. Now to prove her God's church, they flee to Jsrael, whereas the Gentiles were her true types, Rev. 11. 2. 9, 18. though all the wickedness and hypocrisy of apostate Israel, is also found in this Romish Babel.  
His reply is, 
† Chr. ple● pag. 171.  Let the reader judge, whether the point in hand, touching that phrase of God's people to imply the covenant of God, be not proved by the example of Jsrael.  
Ans. I leave it also to judgement, whether the Question touching the church of Rome be proved hereby. As for the phrase of God's people in that church; I never denied it to imply the covenant of God: to some visibly, as the Martyrs of Christ killed in that church; to other some according to the election of grace, which shall appear when they obey their calling, and are come out of her: as before I showed.  
Moreover (he saith) the question was about the Temple of God, 2. Thes. 2. wherabout he alleged that term and estate of the people of God, Rev. 18. 4. but I flee to Babylon etc.  
Answ. A plain evasion. The question was about the church of Rome, as before I showed from his own grant. To justify her to be God's church, he alleged 2 Thes. 2. for one proof; Rev. 1●. for an other: Rev. 18. 4. for a third: and now the state of Israel for a fourth. His other repetitions, I have answered before. I always distinguished in Rev. 11. between the Gentiles (the Antichristians) and the holy city and court, which they have destroyed & trodden under foot, and still do. Neither have I denied but the idolaters in judah and Israel, were types of Antichristians in part: but this I said and still say, that the more full and perfect type of them, is by the holy Ghost showed us to be in the Sodomites, Egyptians and Babylonians, Rev. 11. & 17. & 18. As the Priests of Aaron were types of Christ, but Melchisedek was a more full and perfect type of him; as the Apostle proveth in Heb. 7.  
Again, if that which he striveth for, were granted him, namely that Israel in apostasy typed out Antichristians; and that Israel was notwithstanding a true church: yet will it not follow therefore the Antichristian church of Rome, is a true church also. For the apostasy and idolatry of Rome, is far greater than Israel's, as I have 
† Arrow. ag. lolat. ch. 3. & 5.  elsewhere showed; and can easily confirm against any that shall gainsay it. 2. Mr. Io. himself maketh 
“ 1 Macab. 1.  Antiochus and his captains, (which were of the worst sort of heathens,) to be types and figures of the Pope and his hierarchy (which are the Bishop's priests and Deacons of the church of Rome,) as before we have seen. Yet would he not admit of this conclusion; therefore the Bishop's Priests and Deacons of the church of Rome are heathens; as was Antiochus. So his reasoning for Israel, though it were true; will be no sound proof for Rome. Types, figures and similitudes hold in some things, not in all: and it is a very easy thing to deceive men by figures, similes, allegories. But the plain doctrines in the scripture, they are a sure ground: and if any do wrest a type or similitude against them, it is to be rejected, what colour soever it hath. Now mine opposite reasoneth not from these doctrines; which would soon end the strife. For the scripture plainly saith, that Antichrist, the man of sin, is the son of perdition, and all that believe his lies and follow him are damned. 2 Thes. 2. 3. 10. 11. 12. That Antichrist is a liar, denying both the Father and the Son, 1 joh, 2. 22. they that are of God, do overcome him: they that are of the world, hear him. Hereby is known the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error; 1 Joh. 4. 3.— 6. They that belong to the Lamb (Christ) on mount Zion, have his Father's name written on their foreheads, Rev. 14. 1. and worship not the beast, nor receive his mark, Rev. 20. 4. but they that belong to Antichrist, and have not their names written in the book of life, do worship the beast, and receive his mark, and shallbe tormented for ever, Rev. 13. 8. 16. & 14. 9 10. 11. But the church of Rome believeth Antichrists lies, worshippeth the Beast and his idols, receiveth his mark, and is partaker of all his abominations. Who now without open injury, to the word of God, can make this people the true church of Christ, and in the visible covenant of grace? On the other hand, my Opposites reasons are drawn from that figurative phrase the Temple of God, 2 Thes. 2. and the type of apostate Israel; and an objection cast in the way to stumble at, that else we must be baptised again: (as if men that can not tell how to avoid an inconvenience, must run into a mischief; to justify those whom God condemneth.) And upon these and the like grounds, are his reasons framed; (as may be seen throughout his work;) with some few props of humane authority, to undershore them.  
Though this brief answer might serve unto all his discourse about the state of Israel: yet for to help the weak reader, that might stumble at some things laid in his way; I will annex a few more observations.  
Under his wont title of 
† Chr. ple●▪ pag. 172.  Errors, evasions, contradictions &c, wherewith he chargeth me, this is 1. That the Temple of God 2 Thes. 2. 4. is no more God's temple, than jeroboam's idol temples in Jsrael, and Bells temple in Babylon: yet also I said, it was to be understood of God's church & people invaded and destroyed by Antichrist etc.  
Answ. This his tautology, I have before answered; and cleared myself both of error and contradiction. For that Antichrist should destroy God's temple and church, I proved by the example of the Babylonians burning the City & Temple of God, and captiving his people: and by the measuring of the new building, Rev. 11. That this being done, Antichrist should have an other Temple and church of his own frame, which he should call Gods and Christ's; I showed by the Beast arising from the sea, and from the earth, with horns like the Lamb (Christ) Rev. 13. which beast is a kingdom spiritual or ecclesiastical polity, a great whore, Rev. 17. by Antichrist adified, adorned, maintained: which still he pretendeth to be the ancient catholic church, and temple of God.  
Now further for jeroboam that drew Israel into sin, he 
“ Chr. plea pag. 161.  confesseth that he was a type of Antichrist: though he showeth not wherein. But jeroboam's sin was in making a new House (or Temple) and a new altar to sacrifice in unto God, and new priests, with new signs, as Calves to worship God by: 1 King. 12. In these things than he must be a type of Antichrist: who accordingly (if he answereth to his figure) must erect a new Temple, altar, priesthood and signs, differing from Christ's, as in deed he hath doen. And that idolatrous house erected for the worship of the true God, not only the Israelites, but the Prophet Amos, calleth the house (that is the Temple) of their god, Am. 2. 8. as Paul calleth the house wherein Antichrist sitteth, the temple of God, 2 Thes. 2. yet this man blameth me for comparing that Temple with jeroboam's idol temples, which Israel builded when he forgot his Maker, Host 8. 14. how justly, let men of judgement consider.  
2. His 2. exception is about Babylon, and the Beast, that I make them one with the Church of Rome, and distinguish not Babylon from Zion. This I have before cleared: showing that the church of Rome is the whore of Babylon, Rev. 17. and I distinguish it from Zion, which he confoundeth with Babylon, being himself in that blame which he would impute unto me. And to teach that God calleth us out of any civil state or government, I have formerly proed to be erroneous and seditious, contrary to the Apostles, Rom. 13. 1 Pet. 2.  
3. That Antichrists Apostasy and the church of Rome with him, is much worse than jeroboam's and Israel's with him; I constantly affirm: and let the sins of them both be compared, and it will soon appear. Did jeroboam pray unto creatures, as the church of Rome doth to innumerable, even all Saints and Angels, and some mere fictions? Did jeroboam hold any of those manifold blasphemous heresies now holden in the church of Rome? Nay let the very Babylonians of old be taken: and I will undertake to prove that the church of Rome is not behind them, but in respect of the light of the Gospel revealed by Christ, much worse.  
4. I grant that in Paul's time the church of Rome was set in the way of God, and soon after fell into apostasy: but where he chargeth me to say, that the ordinances of God still retained in that church are stolen; he wrongeth me. For I acknowledge not this church now, to be that which was in Paul's time, but a counterfeit, arisen since: a thief, partner with Antichrist, in robbing the church, (as the 
† 2 King. 2●  Babylonians rob the Temple,) and abusing the ordinances thereof to their perdition. But then he objecteth.  
If the church of Rome should repent etc. they should not reteyn the baptism and other ordinances of God which she hath, but must part with them seeing they are stolen goods. And here he insulteth, ask the Anabaptists, how they can ever be thankful enough to me, for thus pleading their cause etc.  
Answ. If the Babylonians should have repent, and joined to the church of God at jerusalem: they there might have had an holy and lawful use of God's vessels, altars &c, which before they had stolen, and abused: so may these spiritual Babylonians have at this day, if God give them grace to repent, & join unto Zion. Here then the Anabaptists will con mine opposite but little thank for his gratulation.  
5. He calleth it my like error and iniquity, to match baptism and the other ordinances of God in the church of Rome, with the feasts worship and sacrifices of the heathen, who were 
* Eph. 2. 1● 12.  without Christ and without God etc. These assertions he saith are miserable and Anabaptistical.  
Answ. But why then doth he not refute them by the word of truth? I could as easily call his assertions miserable and Papistical: but he would take that for no sound conviction. And had he but related mine own words (in that 85. page of my book,) the reader might have seen how little cause he had to exclaim▪ ●. I spoke not generally of the heathens feasts, worship and sacrifices, as he would intimate to his reader: but distinctly of those which had been ordained of God, differing from other of their own devisings. 2. I said, the heathens kept Gods ordinance, as well as Rome with their sacrifice of the Mass. He telleth his reader, I match the baptism &c in Rome, with the worship and sacrifices of the heathen. Is this good dealing so to change my words? But sundry such injuries I must bear. And why may we think, doth he in stead of the Lords supper, (now turned into a Romish mass) put baptism? But because he thinketh that he hath colour to plead for one sacrament more than for an other. In handling that point of their baptism, 
† Animadv. ●g. 73. 74.  I instanced this other seal, our Lord's supper; and an other ordinance of God, Excommunication: both which he passeth over: yea every where when it cometh in his way, he shuneth it throughout his book, as in this place. He knew well, it was as a red hot iron that would burn his fingers. But of it, we shall speak more, when we come to handle their baptism. 3. To his reason, I answer: the heathens were in deed without Christ and without God, Eph. 2. and so are these Romish Antichristians, or else the Apostle hath not given us a true rule to discern Antichrist by, that he denyeth both the Father and the Son: 1 Joh. 2. 22. The hethens retained the knowledge of the true God in some measure, as their writings manifest; and worshipped ignorantly the true God whom th'Apostles preached, Act. 17. 23. so the Antichristians ignorantly worship the true God whom we preach and believe; and as ignorantly (by stocks and stones, and prayers in an unknowen tongue like Parrots) as did the heathens of old. The hethens retained a knowledge of Christ the Redeemer, figured in the sacrifices ordained of God: so, the Antichristians reteyn a knowledge of Christ in name, and signified in the sacraments; but as impiously do they abuse them by holding they confer grace ex opere operato, by the work done, and other iniquities mixed with them, as did the heathens; and by believing and worshipping a Christ made of bread, they surpass the heathens in ignorance and idolatry.  
Finally, had mine opposite read Mr. Bezaes' larger annotations on Eph. 2. as he read him on 2 Thes. 2. he might have seen the Antichristians very little inferior to the heathens without God, even in Mr. Bezaes' judgement; which yet I suppose he would not have called miserable and anabaptistical, as he doth in me.  
Touching the state of Israel, in my discourse (as he calleth it) he 
* Chr. plea ●g. 174.  confesseth I have many truths which he also holdeth: yet some sleights, errors &c also mixed: which he instanceth. Seing he yieldeth the rest for truths▪ I refer the reader to the things 
* Animad pag. 87. &  there written; which being observed, he may the better judge of our controversy. As first, that we both agree, The covenant between God & man, was always conditional: by the Law, if they 
† Rom. 10.  did his commandments they should live by them; if they 
“ Gal. 3. 1●  continued not in all things written in the Law to do them, they were cursed. By the Gospel, 
* joh. 3. 3●  he that believeth in the Son of God hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the Son, shall not see life. And all the figurative covenants that Jsrael had, were also conditional, 
† Levit. 2● Deut. 28.  blessings promised to the obedient, and curses to the transgressors. 2. That man's breaking of the covenant, is always 
“ Leu. 26. 1▪  by sin; and so God never breaketh covenant. But by punishing and putting from him the rebellious; we may say 
* Zach. 1 10. Psal. 8▪ 39  God breaketh or disannulleth the covenant. Whensoever a people by sin forsake God, and refuse his word calling 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, 
† 1 joh. 3. ●  he sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Be it 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 etc. the Lord will not be merciful unto them. Deut. 29. 18. 19 20. These things being plain by the scriptures, and by him yielded; with many other things, which I will not here repeat: he though he could not contradict, yet intimateth notable heresy against me, Whether I do not in some things, speak so about the covenant, as may establish the righteousness of works, in some respect. Always remembering that the covenant of God, whereof we speak is this, to Abraham, I willbe a God to thee and to thy seed after thee; and I willbe your God, and ye shallbe my people, Gen. 17. 7. & 22. 18. Host 2. 23. Zach. 13. 9 with Act. 2. 39 & 3. 25. Rom. 9 25. 26.  
Answ. As I from my heart abhor that heresy of righteousness by the works of the Law, as that which maketh Christ's death in vain, and abolisheth grace, Gal. 2. 21. Rom. 11. 6. so I trust no equal reader will gather any such doctrine from my writings; though this man (without all proof) insinuateth it more than once against me. 2. In repeating the covenant, he useth not plainness, I might say, sincerity. For those words in Gen. 17. 7. are but one part of the covenant, to weet, on God's behalf: he should have expressed the stipulation foregoing, in vers. 1. 2. walk before me, and be thou perfect, and I will make my covenant between me and thee: and after in vers. 9 Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore etc. So the other scripture● by him cited, do not so fully express the covenant on both parts, as doth Heb. 8. 10. 11. 12. Where both forgiveness of sins, to justification, and writing of the Law in our hearts to sanctification and obedience, are showed to be the covenant of God's grace with men.  
He 
* Chr. plea ●ag. 175.  taxeth me as for error and contradiction, in seeking to persuade, that God broke the covenant on his part with Jsrael, when all the tribes were together (Animadvers. p. 88) and yet after (in the same page,) say, that whiles Jsrael was one, they continued God's church.  
Answ. Herein he wrongeth me, (as he too often useth,) and keepeth not my words or meaning, neither taketh away the reasons from the scripture which I there set down. I spoke not of The covenant in general, as he would give his reader to understand; but of a covenant, and a condition of the covenant. And what I said, I proved, from Exod. 6. 4. 5.— 8. I have established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan etc. Then God brought them to the borders of the counttie, and said, Lo the land is before you, go up and possess it, Deut. 1. 20. 21. but they 
† v. 28. 26. ●2.  were afraid, and would not go up, through their unbeleef. Then the Lord was presently 
* v. 34. 35.  wroth, and swore that not one of those transgressors should see that good land: neither did they, but died in the wilderness, Deut. 2. 1. etc. Heb. 3. 17— 19 Again I instanced a condition of the 
“ Exod. 34. ●0. 11.  covenant on God's part, that he would cast out the Canaanites &c, and on Israel's part, that 
* v. 12. etc.  they should make no compact with the inhabitants. But when they broke covenant, and agreed with them 
† judg. 1. ●7.- 33.  for tribute; the Lord also presently broke with them, saying, I said, I will never break my covenant with you &c. but you have not obeyed my voice, wherefore I say also, I will not cast them out before you etc. judg. 2. 1. 2. 3. 20. 21▪ Now what saith mine opposite to these things: are they not so? He neither yieldeth to the truth, neither could stand before it: but shunning to meddle with my reasons, turneth upon me who showed them; as the reader hath seen: and in stead of a covenant, and a condition of the covenant, setteth down the covenant, meaning the covenant of grace and salvation: whereas notwithstanding the breaking of these covenants & conditions and other the like, the people by repentance, held fast through faith the covenant of grace. For Moses 
† Num. 20. ●2. Deut. 32. ●0. 51. 54.  and Aaron and many other, who for their sins could not come into the land of Canaan, yet are in heaven through the covenant of grace. And so though some conditions of the covenant were broken, both on their part and on Gods, yet they being brought to repentance continued his church. That herein I neither wrote error, nor contradicted myself, as he would persuade against me. And these things that fell out in Israel on both parts, touching these figurative promises: do teach us the like touching the spiritual promises of eternal life, if men break concerning them; as in repentance, faith and holiness, without which men perish, and shall never see God; Luke 13. 3. Act. 2. 38. Mar. 16. 16. Heb. 12. 14.  
He next findeth fault, 
† Chr. pl● pag. 175.  That I shuffle together the estates of Jsrael, when they were one body, and when they were rend in two. Also whilst Israel was in the land and presence of the Lord, and when they were cast out of his house and presence. Animadv. p. 88 89. 90. 91.  
Answ. The first is a wrong imputation, as the reader may see in the place of my book by him cited. I there blame him for not distinguishing their estate, when they were one, and when they were rend asunder. And though I pass from one to an other, as I was led by answering him, yet confound I them not. But here he dealeth as in the former point: answereth not my reasons whereby I convinced him of misapplying his divers respects, contrary to the words and meaning of the scriptures; and to avoid if he could his deserved blame, checketh me, but disproveth not what I wrote. Let the reader compare what we both have said.  
For the second, I confess I did not so distinctly handle the state of Israel whiles they were in the land, and after when they were put out, as I should and would have done, had I fore-seen his pressing of every leight thing against me. The reason hereof was, that it skilleth not for the point in controversy, (to weet their Circumcision) whether we respect them before they were cast out or after, for they were not circumcised the second time in either estate. And this mine opposite himself showeth even in this his last book, where he dealeth against the Anabaptists. For in his Chr. plea p. 27. 28. he saith, Circumcision once received in the apostasy of Israel, was not repeated again at their returning to the Lord, and leaving of their idolatrous ways &c: and quoteth among other scriptures, 2 Chron. 30 ch. and Ezr. 6. 19 20. 21. Of which, the one speaketh of them that returned in Ezekiahs' days, whiles the Israelites were in the land: the other of them that had been dispersed among the heathens, and returned. So I, where I 
* Animadv. ●ag. 70.  treat of Baptism, handle those estates indistinctly: which is made a great matter against me, by him that doth the same thing himself against others. But now, I will speak of them a part.  
The Israelites that rend themselves from judah, I take to be a false church; and so continued whiles they dwelled in the land. After they were dispersed, and were no church.  
The first, I show thus. The twelve tribes by God's institution were all one church, both in Moses time when they had the Tabernacle among them, and encamped all round about it, in the order set of God, Num. 2. and after in the land of Canaan, whiles the Tabernacle stood, & when the Temple was built by Solomon: both which were signs of God's presence and dwelling with his church. And to keep them in this unity, he commanded all the men of Israel to come jointly together from all parts of the land, three times every year, to worship him and keep their solemn feasts, in that one place which he should choose: and at all other times to offer their sacrifices there, and in no other place; and thither only to bring their first fruits, their commanded and their voluntary oblations; Exod. 23. 14.— 17. 19 Deut. 12. 5. 6. 7. Who so did otherweise, blood was imputed unto that man, and he should be cut off from among his people; to keep the people from offering their sacrifices unto Divils', Levit. 17. 3. 4. 7.  
Now when the ten tribes revolted and made jeroboam king, than Israel forgot his maker and builded Temples, Host 8. 14. For jeroboam took counsel and made two calves of gold, and said unto them; It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem; Behold thy gods o Jsrael, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt; and he set the one in Bethel, and the other he put in Dan: and this thing became a sin. And he made an house of hie places, and made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the sons of Levi. And he offered on the Altar, which he had made in Bethel. 1 King. 12. 28.— 33. And having cast off the Lords Priests & Levites, jeroboam ordained him priests for the high places, and for the devils and for the calves which he had made: but such of all the tribes of Israel, as set their hearts to seek the Lord God of Jsrael, went to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the Lord God of their fathers: 2 Chron. 11. 14. 15. 16. Thus of one 
* Psal. 9 14.  daughter of Zion, (one church) there became 
† Ezek. 23. 2.  two women, or daughters: the one, to weet Jerusalem (the tribe of judah) the Lord named 
“ vers. 4.  Aholibah, that is, My Tabernacle in her; the other, Samaria (the ten tribes) he named Aholah, that is her own tabernacle. So Israel was without the true God, and without a teaching Priest, and without Law, 2 Chron. 15. 3. and the Lord was not with Jsrael: 2 Chron. 25. 7. but at their first falling away, he threatened by his Prophets, that because jeroboam had made himself other gods, and molten images, and cast the Lord behind his back, jeroboam's house should be cut off, and taken away a● dung; and the Lord would smite Israel, and root them up out of that good land which he gave to their fathers, and would starter them beyond the river: 1 King. 14. 9— 15. Yet for to show his patience towards his people, (whom he had chosen for his, above all peoples of the earth,) and for to save his elect among them, and to make the rest the more inexcusable, he forbore them many years: and by all the Prophets, and all the Seers said unto them, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments & my statutes: yet they would not hear, but hardened their necks, and believed not in the Lord their God; but rejected his statutes and his Covenant that he made with their fathers; and followed vanity, and became vain, and went after the heathen that were round about them; and left all the commandments of the Lord their God: therefore the Lord was very angry with Jsrael, and removed them out of his sight. 2 King. 17. 13.— 18.  
From these and other the like testimonies against this people, I gather, that from the time they departed from the Lord, from his Temple, altars and holy signs of his presence with his people in Christ; from his Priests and the lawful sacrifices at jerusalem, which were figures of Christ, and from the communion of their brethren the jews (which 
* Host 11. 12.  remained the church of Christ;) and made a new Temple, altar, priesthood and church of humane and sinful institution: that this their church, Temple, priesthood and worship were false. For that is truth which agreeth with the will and 
† joh. 17. 〈◊〉▪  word of God: all humane devices in religion are lies and vanities.  
If it be ●ayd, the Lord himself rend the kingdom from Solomon's son, and gave it to jeroboam, 1 King. 11. 29. 31. and therefore this second church, was also of divine institution. I answer; though God divided the kingdom, yet he divided not the church: there might have been twelve kings over the twelve tribes, (as there were of old twelve princes, Numb. 1. 5.— 16.) and▪ yet they should have been one Church. The kingdom or Civil state, is an ordinance immediately under God, Rom. 13. the church or ecclesiastical state is an ordinance immediately under Christ the mediator, and he is the head of the body the church, Colos. 1. 18. The civil state is above the ecclesiastical, as 
* 1 Cor. 21. 3.  God is the head of Christ: therefore the Church is to be subject to the Magistrate, the higher power, the minister of God, though he be an heathen, Rom. 13. 1. etc. 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14. for the civil state is not taken away by difference of religion, error, heresy or any apostasy from Christ: but the ecclesiastical state is by such things dissolved, the Candlestick (the church) may be removed, and of a Church of Christ, become a Synagogue of Satan: 1 Joh. 2. 18. 19 Rev. 2. 5. 9 In their civil state, the Israelites were to be subject unto Nebuchadnezar an heathen, when he conquered them, jer. 27. 6. 8. 12. but for their ecclesiastical estate they might never submit to Nebuchadnezars' church, or priests, nor offer to God upon any of his altars. So to jeroboam as king they might be subject, without dissolving their communion in the mysteries of Christ, set in the Temple, altars, priests &c at jerusalem. Thus this new church and ministry arising from jeroboam's sin, was not of God; and therefore could not possibly be a true church, which always is a divine ordinance in Christ the head of the same.  
Touching their second estate, after that God had called them back unto him 
† 2. King. 17 3. 14.  by all his Prophets, but they would not hear; and chastised them 
* Leu. 26. 8. 24. 28.  seven times, and seven (that is many) times for their sins; he 
“ v. 32. 33.  brought the land into desolation, and scattered them among the heathen; so 
† Leu. 18. 8.  the land did spew them out, as it spewed out the heathens that were before them: the Lord did put her away, and gave her a bill of divorce, Jer 3. 8. and they were Lo-ammi, not God's people, neither was he their God, Host 1. 9 they were not his wife, neither was he their husband, Host 2. 2. In which estate, they abiding 
* Host 3. 4.  without King, Prince, sacrifice, image, ephod, or Teraphim, were as 
“ jer. 50. 17  scattered sheep, devoured by the King of Assyria: and therefore no Church, nor Common wealth, but so broken, that they were not a people. Esai. 7. 8.  
The next error he chargeth me with is; 
† Chr. plea pag. 175.  that I say, If they cannot prove Babylon in Chaldea to be God's Church, when the jews were there captived, they shall never prove the Temple of God spoken of in 2. Thes. 2. 4. to be Gods true Church, etc.  
Answ. He hath falsified my words, and not answered my reason. Thus I wrote; 
* Animadv. 91. 92.  Their applying of these things to our times, is not in all points aright. For though in this, Antichrists synagogue and Israel's do agree, that neither be Gods true Church: yet the perfect type of Rome, as God describeth it, is Babylon, Rev 17. 18. and we should not be wiser than God. And if they cannot prove Babylon then to be Gods true Church, which was not more deep in sin then 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 prophecies and threatenings of assured destruction; Numb. 24. 24. Rev. 14. 9 10. & 18. 8 21. & 19 20. 21. 2. Thess. 2. 8. 12.  
Thus men may see what manner of replies he hath made unto me; and when he hath no other thing to say, he flieth to his wont refuge The Temple of God, and saith our question and reasoning was about it; as if it were not about the Church of Rome, but about a phrase, that we contended. But hereof I have spoken at large.  
For the word Church taken sometime largely, sometime strictly, he 
† Chr. plea pag. 176.  taxeth me for omitting this.  
Answ. Why should I not omit that whereabout is no controversy. That which Keckerman (whom he citeth) saith of the Church largely taken, to comprehend both the elect and hypocrites, and strictly taken, to comprehend the elect only, I acknowledge for truth. But it is nothing to our controversy.  
For his double regard of apostate Churches, and so of Israel, I yielded to him that which was truth, and showed wherein he miss: whereto as he replieth not, 
* Chr. plea pag. 177.  but referreth it to the reader's judgement: so do I  
I showed 
† Animadv pag. 93.  how the jews at this day professing the God of Israel, and praying to him, and reading his Law in their synagogues, may be called God's people in comparison of Pagans that know not God or his scriptures at all, but worship the Sun and Moon, and some the Devil by open profession: yet the jews now are not actually in the covenant of grace. And the the Turks that profess one 
* Alcoran Azoar. 2. 3. 67. 31.  immutable living, true, most wise and high God; and Christ to be sent of God with his Gospel and that he is the Breath or Spirit of God; may in comparison of Julian the Apostata, and Atheists, be called the people of God and Christians, though indeed they be far from being either. So the church of Rome, in comparison with Turks and Paynims may be called Christians, but are indeed false Christians, etc. To that of the Jews, he answereth nothing. For the Turks, he 
† Chr. plea pag. 178.  maketh it nothing to the purpose, seeing they profess not Christ to be the Son of God, made Man, that died for our sins, as the Church of Rome professeth, etc.  
Answ. It is to the purpose, that in diverse respects, and in comparison with Atheists, and people that profess not God, or Christ at all: they that are not indeed God's people, or true Christians, may be called God's people and Christians: so his double respects help him nothing. And for the Church of Rome, I showed them to be in comparison with Turks, nearer Christ; and so the doctrine there, nearer to salvation then the Mahometans: and I doubt not but God by it saveth some chosen therein: which yet justifieth not their estate to be a true Christian Church; as the reprobates in the true Church, condemn not the estate thereof.  
I 
* Animadv. pag. 94.  showed by many instances, the Church of Rome to be in some things more gross idolaters than either jews or Turks, or heathens. This he being not able to deny, opposeth, 
† Chr. plea pag. 178.  how Jerusalem justified Samaria and Sodom, Ezek. 16. Jer. 3. That Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom, shall have easier judgement than Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum. Mat. 11. yet these cities were the Churches and people of God.  
Answ. For jerusalem, the Prophets speak of it sometime as generally wicked; when yet there were many godly, that partaked not with her sins, Ezek. 9 4. Such as were more openly wicked than Samaria and Sodom, I deny them to be actually then in the covenant of grace to man's judgement; for the Lord appointed them to destruction, Ezek. 9 The cities of Israel in Christ's time, were a part of the true Church of the jews: yet for refusing Christ, they should have heavier judgement than the heathens: so shall hypocrites in every true Church, have greater punishment than many heathens. But comparison should be made of Church with Church, not of some in the true Church, with the estate of a false church. And that the general state of the Church of Rome is Antichristian, and so denieth indeed 
* 1. joh. 2. 22  both the Father and the Son; is before proved. And they generally these many years, have been more gross idolaters than either jews or Turks: therefore their profession of Christ in name, will not prove them to be in the covenant of grace. God testifieth to the Churches of Galatia, Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the Law; ye are fallen from grace, Gal. 5. 4. If they that would be justified by the Law of God, and works of the same, fell from grace: much more they that will be justified by the law of Antichrist, and wicked works, are fallen from grace, and have no benefit by Christ. But such is the general faith of the Church of Rome, believing to be justified by the idolatrous works, which they walk in as they are taught by the Man of Sin, that sitteth as God, in the Temple of God, carrying them to destruction.  
Whereas to prove the Temple of God 2. Thes. 2. which he expoundeth the Church of Rome, to be the true Church, he alleged Zach. 6. 12. 13. Eph. 2. 11. etc. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Rev. 11. 19 I 
† Animadv pag. 94.  showed how he misapplied the Scriptures: he repeateth his former answers, which I have formerly resuted. And now he addeth; But to put him from his shifts, let him tell us plainly, when Paul saith, The Temple of God hath not agreement with Idols, 2. Cor. 6. 16. if yet there be idols set in the Temple of God, as was in the time of Manasseh and Antiochus, whether now it ceased to be the Temple of God or not. The Scripture showeth it is the Temple of God notwithstanding. 2. King. 21. 7. jer. 50. 28. Ezek. 8. 5. 10. 16. Dan. 11. 31. 38.  
Answ. I tell them plainly, that that Temple of God which the prophets speak of, had no agreement with idols; though the wicked set up idols in it by force. But the Church of Rome (which these call the Temple of God) hath agreement with idols, if images of silver and gold, wood and stone, a wheaten god in the Mass, and the man of sin which sitteth as God, be idols. For these idols the Church of Rome worshippeth and serveth most sinfully: but the Temple of God which the Prophets speak of, never worshipped the Idols set up in it, nor had accord with them. But this is a shift of shifts, and a notorious sophism in mine opposite, to reason from the material Temple of God then, which only suffered that abuse; to the spiritual Temple, the Church or people now, which are voluntary agents, & worshippers of Idols. By which false argumentation he might even as well conclude, that if the Papists should turn flat Pagans of Antiochus religion, and serve his idols, and be of his faith: yet they should continue the true Church and people of God notwithstanding: because the Temple then, continued Gods true Temple, notwithstanding all that Antiochus did thereto.  
The 
* Chr. plea pag. 179.  next point, touching their baptism, I will anon treat of in particular.  
For his 
† Ibid. p. 18  objection of salvation now had in the Church of Rome, etc. it was his 
* pag. 121.  second main argument for that Church, which I have before answered: he after his manner repeateth again and again the same things, so lengthening his work. I refer the reader to that answer I gave 
† 〈◊〉. 6. 7. etc.  before.  
Other things whereby I 
* Animadv. 〈◊〉. 96.  convinced his doctrine, to beat the path for all licentiousness, contrary to the plain Scriptures, which show, that he that committeth sin is of the Devil; and we know that whosoever is born of God, sinneth not, etc. 1. joh. 3. 8. & 5. 18. whereas (if that he plead for be true) men may be as profane as Esau, filthy in life as Sodom, idolatrous and sinful as the Egyptians and Babylonians, and yet if they will call themselves Christians, and be outwardly baptised, etc. they shallbe justified as God's true Church, they and their seed in his covenant of grace, etc. which is to strengthen the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wickedness, by promising him life. Ezek 13. 22. These and other like things, he passeth over, without word of answer. It is enough for him to cry, the Temple of God, the Temple of God; and to insist upon phrases which may diversely be understood. Whereas the sound plea should be from the doctrines of faith and sanctification of life according; by which the Apostles teach us to discern true Christians from false. And who, that seeketh after the truth, would not rather insist upon these main grounds taught by our Saviour and his Apostles? Verily, I judge this pleading for Rome, to be an exceeding great sin; because it by consequence overthroweth both faith and holiness: seeing misbelievers and most sinful idolaters as ever were on earth, are justified to be Gods true Church notwithstanding, and in his covenant of grace, contrary to the whole Testament of Christ. It is to make a wide gate and broad way into heaven, and will make men secure in all sin: if they that serve the Man of sin himself, worship his idols, believe in his heresies, and walk in his wicked works, which hope to merit salvation by them in heaven: may be said to be true Christians, and in the state of grace.   

Of the state of the Heathen.  
WHereas I said, 
† Animadv. 〈◊〉. 97.  I held it presumption for any to limit God, by how small means or measure of faith and knowledge he will save a man. Who dares den▪ but God had many elect among the heathens, after he had separated Jsrael from them? Yea God expressly said, when he made Israel his peculiar people; that yet all the earth was his, Exod. 19 5. which are the words of the covenant 
* Ezek. 16  generally. Wherefore we leave Gods secret counsels to himself, as he willeth us. Deut. 29. 29. and do consider only the visible state of Churches, by the rules of God's law and promises.  
To this mine opposite saith, 
† Chr. plea pag. 181.  What is it that he meaneth hereby? If by the covenant he mean the covenant of grace for salvation, whereof we treat; and think that all people of the world, in all ages and places of the earth are under it: what differeth this from the opinion of the Anabaptists and Armintans touching general redemption? If he speak not of the covenant of grace which is for salvation; all may perceive he speaks not to the point in hand.  
Answ. My meaning is plain, that God had his elect among the heathens, as he bath in the Church of Rome: and he could not but see what I intended. By the covenant generally with all nations, I mean the same that himself alleged 
* Chr. plea pag. 178.  whileare from Ke●kerman, of the Church largely taken: which he explaineth, the company of all those which profess Christian religion or the name of Christ in what manner soever. And thus (saith he) are all heretics, schismatics, and Arians, Papists, Anabaptists, and such like, referred to the Christian Churches▪ So if he understood himself, he might understand me, when I spoke of the covenant generally. For such large Churches as he describeth, I hold all nations to be, when God made his special covenant with Israel. No was a Christian, and had the covenant of grace in Christ to him and to his seed, as absolutely as any Christian Church in the Apostles days: though the mystery of the Gospel was not then so clearly revealed * as it was afterward 
† Rom. 16. 25. 26.  by the Apostles. But for the substance of the covenant, namely Christ, and faith in him, with obedience; it was given to Adam and his seed; to No and his seed, Heb. 13. 8. & 11. 1. 2 3. 4. 7. etc. And this covenant of grace in Christ, confirmed by sacrifices, as to us now by the sacraments. Which sacrifices all nations kept the first thousand years after No, (which was till after Moses death,) as well as the large Christian or false-Christian churches kept the sacraments. Yea let any show, that any of the heathens (I except not the very Canaanites,) turned the sacrifices into such abominable idolatry, as the Church of Rome hath turned the sacraments. And for other sins, Antichristians are not behind them. How freely did Abraham, Isaac, and Jakob live and publicly worship God by altars and sacrifices, in the midst of the Caananites, Hittites, etc. Gen. 12. 7. & 26. 25. & 35. 6. ●. whereas if they had so done (according to the true worship of the Gospel) in the Church of Rome now these many hundred years; they had been burned for heretics, as innumerable of Abraham's faith have been. How religiously did the King of Gerar carry himself towards Abraham's wife, Gen. 20. in comparison of the outrageous adulteries and fornications by the chief of the Church of Rome, as all histories testify. Yea God himself appeared unto that King, and appointed Abraham to pray for him, Gen. 20. 3.— 7. How honourably did the Hittites entreat Abraham, acknowledging him a Prince of God, and offered him all kindness, Gen. 23. 5. 6. etc. yet other nations were better than they, Gen. 24. 3. 4. & 27. 46. Look upon Balaam the soothsayer of Mesopotamia, even in Moses time: and see how he consulted with Jehovah his God, by altars and sacrifices of Burnt-offrings, such as were used in Israel, Num. 22. 8. 9 18. & 23. 1. 2. 3. etc. and it will plainly appear, the heathens had not more degenerated from the religion & worship learned from No, than the Church of Rome, hath from that which Paul taught there. Yea there was a better Church in the land of Us (in all likelihood,) then the Church of Israel was in Egypt, when they polluted themselves with the idols thereof, Ezek. 20. 6. 7. 8. For in Us land, job was 
† job. 29. 7. ●. 25.  governor, a most godly man as was upon the earth, and a Priest unto the most high God, job. 1. 1. 5. 8. & 42. 8. 9 holding firm the faith of Christ his redeemer, and of the resurrection to life, job. 19 25. 26. 27. and free from idolatry, job. 31. 26. 27. 28. And what knowledge and religion was then among the Temanites, Shuhites, Naamathites, and Buzites; the friends of job that came to visit him, do show; job. 2. 11. etc. and 32. 2. etc. and notwithstanding their error in their disputation, they obtained pardon of God in Christ, job. 42. 7.— 9 And who can tell when the golden Candlesticks of Christian churches were removed from those other peoples. Though soon, even too soon, there was a general apostasy among the nations after No, as among the nations after the Apostles times. But among which of them was there a such a Man of Synon reigning at any time, as hath now reigned in the Church of Rome, these many hundred years? Wherefore they measure not things by the 
* Rev. 21. 15  golden reed, which cast off those Churches of the nations, as wholly profane and fallen from grace; and yet justify this notorious harlot the church of Rome, to be still in the covenant of grace; whose impieties are not inferior to any of those nations in Moses time, but rather above them; for her sins have reached up to heaven, Rev. 18. 5. And whereas those nations had not the word of God written, but as they learned it by voice of men, which might more easily be corrupted and forgotten: the church of Rome having the written word, hath despised it; not suffered their children to read or hear it, lest (forsooth) it should make them heretics: that for a man to have God's book, it was as much as his life was worth: so the miserable people, for contempt of God's holy Law, have been justly given over into Egyptian darkness, and into most abominable idolatries and heresies, which have drowned men in perdition.  
Now that which mine opposite objecteth of the opinion of the Anabaptists, etc. as I reject it for a great error; so his supposition whereby he would feoff it upon me, is injurious: If I think that all people of the world in all ages and places of the earth, are under the covenant of grace, etc. whereas I spoke but of the nations in Moses time, which were not so far fallen from God, as they were afterward, and now much more. Again, himself pleadeth for the church of Rome at this day, to be in the covenant of grace: yet I hope he would not say, that all in that church are redeemed; otherwise then many reprobates are redeemed, except he should think there are no reprobates. And if the Man of Sin (which himself expoundeth the Pope and his Hierarchy) be redeemed; which are the chief members of that Church: we must needs acknowledge a very general redemption.  
So where he 
† Chr. plea pag. 181.  chargeth me with abuse of Ezek. 16. 8. thou becamest mine: and asketh me, Is this now the case and estate of all the earth with the Lord? I answer, no: it was not then, much less is it now. For I said, that then God made Israel his peculiar people, Exod. 19 5. though generally he said all the earth was his. But because the earth corrupted their ways before him, as they did before the ●loud, Gen. 6. 11. 12. therefore God separated to himself a peculiar people to be his inheritance. And so I think mine opposite himself would confess, though all that profess Christianity be God's Churches in his account, yet the Christian reformed churches, are Christ's peculiar Churches, though all Christendom be his in a large sense.  
Yet he ceaseth not to object, that the heavens are the Lords, Deut. 10. 14. and every beast of the forest is his, etc. Psa. 50. 10. 11. 12. shall we therefore think (saith he;) that the beasts are the wife and Church of God▪ ●s Ezekiel speaketh of the Jews? etc.  
Answ. None but beasts would so think. The comparison in Exod. 19 5. is not between men and beasts, but between men and men. And such men as had all within less than a thousand years been God's wife, and church, and in his covenant of grace. But most of them on their parts fallen from it to idolatry, as Israel also had Ezek. 20. 7. 8. and as the church of Rome, and other churches within a thousand years after the Apostles, have doen. The heathens than were not more fallen from God, than the church of Rome is: mine opposite pleadeth for Rome, because they were a church 15 hundred years before, and Antichrist still sitteth in the Temple of God. I answer him, the heathens in Moses time were all the church nine or ten hundred years before, and are still called Gods people, Exod. 19 5. He replieth, with the instance of Wildbeasts, etc. If I should so have turned my back upon an argument, what out-cries would he have made after me?  
When David exhorteth all the earth to sing unto the Lord, Psal. 66. 1. & 100 1. speaketh he to the beasts? When Moses saith, All the earth was of one language, Gen 11. 1. doth not he mean it of the men of the earth only, and not of beasts? So in Exod. 19 5. ye (Israelites) shallbe a peculiar treasure unto me, above all people's: for all the earth (that is all peoples of the earth) are mine. Where God calleth all people's his, not only by creation, as the beasts were his; but by covenant made with them in noah's time, when he smelled the sweet savour of his sacrifice, and promised no more to drown the world; and blessed both No and his sons, and established his covenanis with them and with their seed after them; and gave them a sight of his covenant, his bow in the cloud, Gen 8. 20. 21. & 9 1. 9 12. 13. which covenant, though the natural benefit of it, extended to the beasts, (as the beasts also had natural refreshing by that water out of the Rock, which to the Israelites was a sacrament of Christ, Numb. 20 8 1 (or. 10. 4.) yet unto men, (and to men only,) it was a spiritual covenant of grace by Christ, as appeareth by Esa. 54. 8. 9 10. Rev. 4. 3. and 10 1. 1 Pet. 3. 20. 21. Now the covenant of grace, thus established with No, his sons, and their seed after them; was respected of God in Exod 19 5. when for the Apostasy of noah's seed, he of his love made Israel his peculiar, above all other people's: though some of the Nations were (as in charity I judge from jobs history,) Gods true churches still; and in the worst of the nations (as the cursed Canaanites) he had many of his elect, (as he hath now in the church of Rome;) which the examples of Rahab the harlot, the Gibeonites or Nethinims, Vriah the Hittite, Araunath the jebusite; and many other throughout the scriptures, do confirm. All men (as th'Apostle teacheth from the heathens confession) are God's offspring (or generation,) Act. 17. 28. 29. The Gentile (as the parable shewerh in Luke 15) was brother to the jew; and God is the God not of the jews only, but also of the Gentiles, Rom. 3. 29. and if the uncircumcised Gentile kept the righteousness of the Law, his uncircumcision was counted for circumcision, for there is no respect of persons with God, Rom. 2. 10. 11. 26. Act. 10. 34. 35. And as Paul reasoneth, Hath God cast away his people (Israel)? Far be it: for I also am an Israelite &c God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew: Rom. 11. 1. 2. So I reason; Did God cast away his peoples of the seed of noah's sons? Far be it. For Rahab was a Canaanite, Araunah a jebusite, Vriah an Hittite; Ebedmelech an Ethiopian, jether an Ismaelite; and thousands of these and the other nations, which were God's people whom he foreknew, and saved of his grace in Christ. They which can not answer these things but by instancing beasts; do want the wisdom which men of God should have.  
With like success (in another 
* Chr. plea pag. 94 95.  place of his book) he answereth touching the Gentiles. For whereas I 
† Animadv. pag. 70.  wrote, The ordinanoes of God which they (the Apostate Israelites) in show retained, could not be unto them the figs and seals of the 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 * Altars, Sacrifices, Priests, tithes, first fruits, incense, meat-offrings, drink-offrings, feasts, baptisms or washing▪ ●●byntings, excommunications, prayers, vows, and many the like, whereof all histories do record, that the Gentiles did reteyn them▪ (* Numb. 23. 1. Pompon. Laetus de Sacerd. T●bull. l. 1. eleg. 10. & l. 2. eleg. 1. 2. Homer. Odyss. 3. & Jliad. 1. Virgil Aen. 2. Caesar bell. Gall. l. 6.  
He replieth, All is to no purpose. For if it be to show that the Gentiles had Altars, sacrifices, priests &c none doth deny it. But if it be to show that these were the Lords ordinances, given by him to these nations, as circumcision was to Jsrael, for confirmation of his covenant unto them; or that circumcision in Israel, was no more a sign and seal of God's covenant, and consequently of forgiveness of sins and life eternal, than those were among the heathens &c▪ than all may see, that this scripture is also perverted, and that neither it nor all the writers in the world, prove any such matter. etc.  
Answ. It is easy to say, the scripture is perverted; and show no reason how. I have before proved from the history of No, & God: covenant of grace with his seed after him; and from the history of job: that all nations had not only Altars, sacrifices, Priests &c, but had them also as the Lords ordinances given them for confirmation of his covenant, of forgiveness of sins in Christ to come. Whence did Cain and Abel, No, Abram, jakob and job; learn to offer first fruits, and beasts, build altars, pay tithes, make vows &c: but from divine institution taught their fathers from God, and by the fathers to the children? Otherweise they could not have done them in faith, as of some of them th'Apostle testifieth they did, Heb. 11. which teacheth us so to judge of the rest. And if all other nations had kept the faith as did job; their sacrifices had been the seals of forgiveness of sins unto them, as they were 
† job. 1. 5. ● 42. 8. 9  unto job. When they lost their faith, their sacrifices were vain, and no seal of grace unto them. Now compare Israel in their Apostasy: they made new Temples, new Altars, new Priests, new feasts and signs, which were not only 
* 1. King. 12 ●.— 33.  none of God's ordinances, but expressly forbidden them by his written Law, Exod. 20. 4. 5. so that they were so far from having their sacrifices, seals of forgiveness of sins unto them, as they were reputed for blood unto them, and they were by the doom of his Law, to be cut off for offering them, Levit. 17. 4. Thus having no word of promise, they neither did nor could sacrifice of faith; but their sacrifices were abominable, as the sacrifices of the heathens: and they sacrificed to devil's, not to God, as Moses and the prophets testify, Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15.  
Now for Circumcision; first it was not commanded to the Gentiles, neither was it a seal of the covenant of grace to No and his seed; but was first commanded to Abraham and his seed, and household, Gen 17. and so to Israel, and such as would be of that Church, and partake of their passover, Levit. 12. Exod. 12. 44. 48. Wherefore it being not commanded to noah's sons, such of them as were scattered far off, and heard not of the precept to Abraham: were doubtless in the covenant of graceful, if they abode in noah's faith; and were saved without circumcision as well as we at this day. Who doubteth of the salvation of the Patriarches Sem and Heber, who both of them lived till after the ordinance of circumcision: yet is there no record that they were circumcised. Yea all the Israelites that were born for the space of 40. years in the wilderness, were uncircumcised till josuahs' reign, Jos. 5. 2.— 6. yet with them in that estate, Moses renewed the covenant, to be the Lords people, and that he would be their God, as he had sworn to their fathers, Deut. 29. 10.— 13. And whereas mine opposite boldly affirmeth, that all the writers in the world prove no such matter, viz. touching Gods ordinances given to the heathens the sons of No, for signs of salvation: it will appear otherweise, even by the greatest enemies of the heathens, the jews themselves. Who though they gloried in circumcision, and the Laws given by Moses; yet thus they write, It is lawful for an heathen to offer burnt offerings unto God in every place; and he himself may offer in an high place, which he hath builded. But it is not lawful (for an Jsraelite) to help him, etc. for behold, we are forbidden to offer without (the Sanctuary, Levit. 17. And it is lawful to teach them, and to learn them how they should offer to the name of the blessed (God.) Maimony in Misn. treat. of Offering sacrifices, chap. 19 s. 16. Thus by the Hebrews testimony, the Gentiles might lawfully use sacrificing in their own lands, on their altars, etc. and the jews might instruct them to do it aright, though they themselves might not do it with them, being restrained of God. And as for the state of grace, and salvation with God, they also say, Whosoever receiveth the seven commandments (given to the sons of No) [of which I have spoken 
† Annot. o● Gen. 9  elsewhere, and whereof circumcision was none;] and doth them; he is of the saints of the nations of the world; and he hath a portion in the world to come [that is, in eternal life] if he receive them and do them, because the holy blessed (God) hath commanded them, etc. Maimony in Misn. treat. of Kings. chapt. 8. s. 11. Thus mine opposite needed not to have made it so strange, what I wrote of the state of the Gentiles, nor have called it an idle flourish; had he duly weighed their estate, as God's word and humane writers bear witness of it.  
But this indeed is admirable (saith he) that he should account the heathens 
* Chr. ple● pag. 9●.  superstitions to be God's ordinances: and yet esteem the circumcision and other ordinances of God had in Israel, to be lying and deceitful signs, etc. Besides in all his bead-roule of Writers, there is no mention at all of circumcision, whereabout our question is, etc.  
Answ. 1. I called both the one and the other, the ordinances of God, in respect of their divine institution. The other nations that fell from God: and the Israelites that fell from God: I count them all abusers of God's ordinances; which were not in their use of them, true signs and seals of eternal life unto them: but false and deceitful. Thus I match them alike, without respect of persons, as I am taught by the Apostle, Rom. 2. 9 10. 11. 12. The heathens superstitions (if he mean things of their own devising,) I never esteemed God's ordinances at all; no nor Rome's superstitions at this day.  
2 That circumcision is not in the bead-roule as he calleth it: he need not marvel, seeing it was not commanded the heathens, as before I have showed. It seemeth he had a special fancy to circumcision above all other God's ordinances: otherwise, why might not he think that it might be profaned as much as any other. There was no more holiness in it, then in the sacrifices. And the Apostle saith, If thou be a breaker of the Law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision, Rom. 2. 25. what then will it avail, that Israel had circumcision, when they broke the Law, yea were without the true God, and without Law, 2. Chron. 15. 3. and sacrificed to Divils', Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15. Finally, here he seeketh for circumcision, where it was not to be found: but within three le●es after in my 
† Animadv. ●g. 75.  book, I instanced some among the nations circumcised, even by his own confession; and there he hath passed it over without answer, as if he had not seen it. Such entreaty and worse I bear at his hand with patience. Let me here add the testimony of a learned man. Mr. Calvin (in his Sermon against idolatry, upon Psal. 16. 4.) hath these words, There are divers which at this day use another starting hole: for confessing that it is a detestable thing to mingle themselves with the idolatries of the Paynims, they will not that this extend itself to the superstitions of the papacy: as though all the impieties of the Paynims had not been the corruptions of the true service of God. From whence I pray you drew the Paynims all their ceremonies, but from the holy Fathers? The mischief was, that they corrupted that which was well instituted of God. And yet all the abominations that were in the world, had this goodly cloak of the name of God, and of Religion: but this made them not therefore justifiable, neither might the faithful communicate with them.   

Of Mr. junius judgement for the church of Rome.  
IN my brief answer to the things which mine opposite alleged from Mr. junius (whose treatise they have printed the second time:) he 
† Chr. pl● p. 183. 1  taxeth me for omitting many clauses in that work. But I then and still do hold it enough to take away the main grounds; which being done, the other of lesser moment will be also found insufficient.  
I showed 
* Animal pag. 68  by the scriptures, the Church of Rome now, to be an other, and not that church which was in Paul's time: therefore no just proportion to be between them. In stead of disproving that which I showed, he (after his manner) 
† Chr. pl● pag. 188.  asketh a question, Whether I think these (the Man of sin with his worshippers come in the place of the ancient true Church) be the Temple of God, the people of God, under the covenant of God, having the baptism of God, etc. or whether there be no such there at all, though corrupted and abused?  
Answ. I have often told him, and proved by God's word, that this present church of Rome, is not God's true Temple or people, under his covenant, having his baptism: but a false church arisen since, vainly pretending the church covenant and baptism of Christ. Seeing God's word moveth them not, let it be lawful for me to oppose man's authority to man's. D. whitaker's answering Bellarmine, 
* Contr. 4. An papa Antichr. quast. 5. ●.  saith, This church succeedeth the Apostles indeed, but as a den of thiefs (doth) the house of God, and as an harlot (doth) the faithful city. It retaineth the chests and coffers wherein of old the treasure was (as Chrysostom elsewhere writeth) but hath lost the treasure itself. It is no more Bethel (the house of God) but Bethaven, that is, the house of vanity or lies. Yea Mr. junius himself hath thus well written of it, 
† jun. anno on Rev. 11.  The Church of Christ is said to fight against the Pseudo-christian (or falsely called christian) church, over the which Antichrist ruleth. Also, when Bellarmine citeth Tertullian, marveilously praising Rome: junius answereth, 
* Animad● add Append de sum pon● c. 6. not 7.  Not Rome, but the Church: and not this Church, but that which then was, nearer the Apostles times, which cleaved to the truth and simplicity of Christ. The disputer would deceive, ex elenchi ignoratione. Into the same fall acie doth mine opposite often run, in his dispute against me: and is therefore reproved by Mr. junius himself.  
To the objection of Gods calling in the Church of Rome; barely affirmed without proof: I showed from 2. Thes. 2. that the man of sin sitteth there, calling all to worship him, etc. and from Rev. 18. 4. that God calleth out of her, such as shall be saved And from Rev. 9 that their Bishops (the ordinary means of calling) are fallen from heaven, and have the key of the bottomless pit, etc. which Mr. junius himself hath applied to the popish hierarchy. Mine opposite replieth, 
† Chr. plea pag. 188.  that I had not what to answer, but boldly deny that God is there calling as in his Church, etc. In stead of disproving, he falleth to his wont questioning: how then there can be salvation to any in that church, etc. Answ. It is a weariness to answer his often demands. Salvation by sundry means cometh to Gods elect in all false churches, and in the world. How came Rahab to faith among the Canaanites? Heb. 11. 31. jam. 2. 25. and other Gods chosen among the heathens. It is one thing for God to call by extraordinary means; another thing for him to call as in his church, by his ordinary ministry, which is the thing that I deny in Rome, and they prove it not there.  
The distinction between the papacy and the church of Rome; that is, the pastors and the flock of that church; is of no weight to prove the difference pretended: unless they were of diverse faiths and religions. But when the priests teach lies, idolatries and heresies; and the people believe, worship and obey them, (as they do in Rome,) they both perish together, as the scriptures witness 2. Thess. 2. Rev. 14. 9 10. 11.  
Touching the order or rank of Apostates (to omit his trifling about his own translation of the word) he 
* Chr. plea pag. 190.  saith Mr. Junius speaks this not of the whole Church, but only of the papal hierarchy. Be it so: but what proof is brought for that he saith. It is known to all that have understanding of their estate, that the church and people of Rome are apostate from the faith and service of Christ, as are their priests and hierarchy. What shall I need to bring proofs? Mr. johnson himself here confesseth, and 
† Chr. plea pag. 120.  prayeth all to take knowledge of it, that the Church of Rome, is fallen into most sinful and deep defection and Apostasy; and so is a notorious harlot and idolatress. If Mr. junius say otherweise, and will have the Apostasy to be in the Hierarchy only, not in the church: let them first agree between themselves, before they trouble others with their contrary pleas. Or let a third be umpire beeween them: Mr. Cartwright, who (in his second Reply to D. Whitgift, pag. 245.) saith; I would gladly learn where the Lord hath willed us so to cast away the use of our judgement, that when men make open profession, that they are members of the Pope, which is Antichrist; yet we must account of them as of members of Christ. Or how this is to judge wisely, joh. 7. 14.  
Whereas Mr. junius made the papacy, or papal hierarchy to be an accident growing to the Church, apoyson in the church, a pestilence, a dropsy, a gangrene in the body. I showed these inconveniences upon their own grant, If the hierarchy be no part of the body, but an accident, a poison, a gangrene, etc. what shall we think of all the actions of that hierarchy, their ministration of sacraments, making of ministers, & whole church administration? They cannot possibly be the actions of the body, of the church, neither of Christ, etc. And now what is become of their true baptism, and ordination of ministers? And how doth God call in that Church, as before they reasoned? etc. Here mine opposite chargeth me 
* Chr. plea pag. 191.  with trifling and cavilling, etc. as if similitudes should hold in all things.  
Answ. A similitude must hold in some things, and in that for which it is alleged; else it is vain: to prove the hierarchy none of the Church, this instance is brought, the pestilence, dropsy, gangrene, is none of the body, but an accident. To disprove this, I show that such accidents can do no natural functions of the body: but the hierarchy do the natural functions of the body of the church of Rome, in teaching, ministering the sacraments, etc. therefore they are not accidents, but true members, yea the chief of that Church.  
Object. The Apostate Jew's are compared to brass and iron, Jer. 6. 28. Ezek. 22. 18. Shall we now conclude against judah, to make a nullity of all the actions, ministration, and Church's estate?  
Answ. It is a living body that doth actions, and not mettle: if a simile be given of a living body, and of a gangrene or scab that consumes the life of that body; all in reason will see, that the body doth actions, the scab or gangrene doth none. But in a similitude from metal, there is no reason to speak of actions. But thus, the whole company is compared to a lump of metal: the godly are as pure silver, Psal. 66. 10. the wicked are as dross. Psalm. 119. 119. the fire of God's word, and tribulation, trieth them, 1. Pet. 1, 6. 7. The Finer reserveth the pure metal, but consumeth or casteth away the dross: thus God threateneth to do with the jews, Ezek. 22. 18.— 22. Here to bring in actions of a living body, is quite from the purpose; but in the other simile not. Here I would say, of dross can be no vessel for the Finer: or, of brass, iron, and reprobate silver, the Lord maketh no choice for vessels in his sanctuary. Of like sort are his other wrested similitudes of trees, corn, seed, etc. all which must be fitted to their proper natures.  
But what answer giveth he to the point itself? First, he breaketh out into his charitable terms, saying, Could any Anabaptist write more Anabaptistically than thus, etc. And after sundry reproaches, he replieth in Mr. junius name, and to my question, Can a scab or gangrene perform any action of a natural body or member? he giveth no answer, but asketh again, Can a body that hath a scab or gangrene, perform no actions of a natural body? I answer; yes, it can. And what now will it help his cause? For though the body can do the natural actions of it: yet it is not possible for the scab or gangrene to do them. Either therefore the Pope and his hierarchy must be other than accidents, gangrenes, poison, dropsy, etc. in the church of Rome (as in deed they are the chief members of that Whore) or else they can perform no ecclesiastical action. As for his usual refuge (when all other fail) the baptism had in Rome, we shall speak of it in due place. Only let it here be observed, that this baptism is there administered by such as are not of the body or Church, (by their own grant,) but by ulcers, gangrenes, etc. And Mr. junius himself answering Bellarmine, so urgeth it; saying of the Man of Sin (the popish Hierarchy) 
* Animadv. ●n Bellar. de Antichr. l. 3. ●. 13. not. 3.  he is not properly of the Temple, for the ulcer (saith he) is not of the body, though it be in the body. So I strain not the similitude beyond the due proportion, if Mr. junius his own reasoning be good.  
Object. Of Himenaeus and Philetus it is said, their word did eat as a gangrene, 2. Tim. 2. 17. 18. would he then conclude, that the baptism ministered by them was not true baptism? etc.  
Answ. First, it is not said of the men, but of their doctrine, that their word fretted as a gangrene; but Mr. junius maketh the very men, ulcers and gangrenes, in the body, but not of it. If the officers or members of a church teach heresy, that doctrine is as a gangrene; but the persons teaching them are truly officers or members of that church, though sinful. But in Rome, the officers are ulcers, not of the body, in his account: so his example is not fit. Secondly, if they were by the Apostle delivered to Satan, as is probable by 1 Tim. 1. 20. then they and their followers were no true Christian church, but a synagogue of Satan, to be reckoned among the Antichrists, 1 Joh. 2. 18. 19 and so could not administer true Christian baptism, to their disciples.  
Obj. Where he again denyeth any calling to be in the church of Rome, and asketh, How God doth call in that church, let him ask it of such of his followers, as have heretofore been of the Priests and members of that church etc.  
Answ. He again wrongeth me (as too often,) saying that I deny any calling to be in that church: it never entered into my heart. I hold there is some calling in the churches of Turks and jews, much more, in false Christian churches. I denied that God is there calling as in his church, which they plead for: that is, God hath not there his ordinary true ministers, but Antichrists hierarchy doth call the people from God. How be it, by some whom God raiseth up of ministers or people, his witnesses whom that church murdereth, Rev. 11. 3. 7. and by reading the scriptures and other writings, God calleth his people out of that Babylon. Witness the late Archbishop Marcus Antonius de Dominis, who 
* In Consil. sue Profect.  testifieth, that without persuasion counsel or advise of any man of what sort so ever; he was, by reading the scriptures and Fathers, drawn to mislike and forsake that Roman church. And thus among Turks, jews, heathens, I doubt not but God calleth some from them by the light of his word and spirit. Yea not only in the church of Rome, but by it and the ministry of it, God calleth his elect: for as the Apostles doctrine in the true church, was to the reprobates the savour 
† 2 Cor. 2. 1●.  of death unto death, which yet is no condemnation of the true church or ministry thereof: so some grounds of Christianity, & doctrines in the false church, (by the false ministry, erected to destroy men's souls with heresies and idolatry;) God, of his wisdom and goodness, causeth them to turn unto the conversion and salvation of his chosen; which yet is no justification either of that church or ministry. Let this answer once suffice, to all his repetitions. And to Mr. junius (on whom he so relieth) I could oppose Mr. Calvin (man for man) who saith, We see the horrible confusion that is in Popery: but yet there is not any doctrine to pluck men back to God: nay rather the doctrine which is there, doth draw them quite and clean from him. And we see that the Devil hath gotten such sooting there, that all is full of trumpery and illusions, and the loving God is quite forsaken. Sermon 31. on Deut 5. 7.  
Obj. 
* Chr. plea p. 195.  What difference Mr. Junius observed between the ministry simply considered, and the hierarchy grown in that church upon it, himself could best have showed. This here is evident, that in one respect he acknowledgeth the hierarchy to be an order or estate of apostasy in the church, an accident etc. in an other respect, he esteemeth the ministry of God's holy things to be there, though exceedingly corrupted.  
Ans. By such differences and distinctions mine opposite would carry us from the truth, that I say not from common reason. For he granteth the church itself, the people, to be exceedingly corrupted, with most sinful and deep defection and apostasy▪ yet in another respect to be the temple, the people of God. Now we have the like for the Bishops and Priests, in one respect an order of apostasy, in an other, God's ministry. Wherefore then have we been led about with distinctions, of the ministry or hierarchy, from the church, the one to be the Man of sin, the son of perdition, the other to be the Temple of God? The plain way should have been thus, The Ministers and people of Rome, are in one respect an apostatical church, in an other a faithful church; in one respect the synagogue of Satan; in an other, the Temple of God. But either my judgement faileth me, or Mr. junius driveth at an other matter; let men of understanding mind his writing.  
Further I answer, by like distinction, we are to put difference between the Angels that sinned, or sinful men, simply considered as God's creatures, and the poison of sin which as an accident is grown upon them: and this is true. But shall that their being God's creatures, free them from damnation which that poison, that accident sin hath brought upon them? No man of knowledge will so say, Even so, the Man of sin, the Pope, hierarchy & people of the church of Rome, which are all in apostasy from the faith of Christ, and service of God; can not in that estate be judged heirs of salvation, (except God turn them again to Christ,) for the scripture hath given sentence of their damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 3. 10. 11. 12.  
Against their bare affirmations to prove Rome on God's behalf altogether a church, a company called of God with his calling by the spirit, and the holy Scripture, etc. And, that God calleth her with his calling, by his spirit and word, etc. I objected the Apostles testimony, God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe lies, 2. Thess. 2. 11. and this is verified by the manifold heresies, idolatries, wherewith the whole body of that Church is poisoned, And 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. Thess. 2. 8.  
Mine opposite replieth, 
† Chr. plea pag. 195.  Might he not also thus conclude against judah in Apostasy, that God did not call that Church, nor any in it, or by any of them in that estate, alleging jer. 5. 30. 31. & 6. 28. 29. 30. Ezek. 13. & 14. ch. And again, As if there were no difference to be put between the Temple of God, and that lawless one, 2. Thes. 2. 4. 8. nor between the people of God, and Babylon, Rev. 18. 4. 8. etc.  
Answ. I deny not all calling of God in her, as he accuseth me; to it I have before answered. His comparison I deny. In judah were the Lords prophets and priests: in Rome, none but the hierarchy, which they say is the Man of sin, no members but ulcers in the body. Let them show me a jeremy or Zephanie now in Rome, or a lawful ministry of God therein; as was in judah, till the captivity, reckoned by the holy Ghost, 1. Chron. 6. 3.— 15. Let them show me a company that abstaineth from, and crieth out against their abominations in Rome, as was in judah and jerusalem, Ezek. 9 4. or a basket of good figs, which God acknowledged for his people, jer. 24. 2. 5. 6. Finally, they still plead for Rome, by the name of jerusalem; when the holy Ghost calleth it Babylon; Rev. 17. & 18. chap. Such calling as was out of Babylon, I grant unto them. As for the Temple of God, I have before answered their plea from the same.  
They pleaded the public record of holy marriage, the scripture, and the ministry, etc. I answered, the scripture showeth no such marriage, but doth defy her as an harlot, Rev. 17. 1. Where is the record that Christ was ever married to the Beast that came up from the bottomless pit, Rev. 17. 8. If her having the book of holy scripture in an unknown tongue, wickedly abused to maintain her whoredoms and abominations, and subjected to the interpretation of her 
* So called, Extrav. 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 Prophets read and expounded in their mother tongue, have better records, etc.  
Mine opposite saith, The Scripture showeth record of the marriage of that church, Rom. 1. 7. 8. & 7. 4. & 16. 19  
Answ. It is denied: for this is not that church, but an other harlot arisen since, falsely boasting to be the same. 2. That church consisted of officers and people, all jointly married to Christ, Rom. 12. if this record will serve now for the people of Rome, it will serve also for the Bishop and ministry of Rome, (the hierarchy) which they confess to be the Man of sin, 2. Thes. 2. the great Antichrist▪ so than the Scripture showeth belike, that Christ and Antichrist have been married together. And seeing the marriage of Christ with his Church, is by faith, Host 2. ●0▪ and the Pope hath still the same faith that the people hath, his marriage standeth as well as theirs. 3. The Scripture showeth like marriage with the churches of Ephesus, Philippi, Thessalonica, and many other; which have revolted to Mahomet, as Rome hath to the Man of sin: so than we must account those Churches still married unto Christ, by the same record. But they will deny those churches to continue the marriage; so do I this. Besides, if he had considered the scripture, Rev. 19 7. 8. he might have seen a new marriage between Christ and his Church: which needed not have been, if the former marriage had continued undissolved, as he supposeth.  
Object. Neither is it any thing that he saith, God doth defy her as an harlot, Rev. 17. 1. For (besides that he putteth no difference between Babylon and the Church or Temple of God) what will he say to Jsrael, yea to Judah also and jerusalem: thinks he not that God defied them also as harlots? jer. 3. 8. 11. with Esai. 1. 21. etc. yet the scripture shows record of ●hew marriage with God, Exod. 19 4. 5. 6.. & Ezek. 16. 8. etc.  
Answ. What difference he would make between the Whore of Babylon, Rev. 17. and the Church of Rome whom himself proclaimeth to be 
† Chr. plea pag. 120.  a notorious harlot and idolatress, I cannot comprehend. Some that are dazzled, may think one thing to be two or three: I find in Rev. 17. but one notorious harlot Babylon; if they grant that she was never married to Christ, it is all that I desire. That Israel (the twelve tribes) was married to Christ, and after ten of them became an harlot, and 
* jer. 3. 8.  was divorced, I grant: and so her adulterous sister judah▪ afterward. The same I acknowledge for the churches of Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, etc. But since they were divorced from Christ, and married to Mahomet, and Antichrist; there remaineth no more record of their former marriage; ill they return again to the Lord, out of Babylon unto jerusalem the holy city, which is prepared as a Bride, adorned for her husband, Rev. 21. 2.  
Of my next words, mine opposite maketh a wonderment. But it exceedeth all (saith 
† Chr. plea pag. 196  he) that he blusheth not to ask, where is the record that Christ was ever married to the beast that came up from the bottomless pit? Rev. 17. 8. To the beast! That Christ was ever married to the Beast! Did Mr. Junius ever say so? Or thinks he that ever it entered into his thought? Did not Mr. Junius speak expressly of the Church? Will this man never learn to put difference between the Beast and the Church? between the Man of sin and the Temple of God? etc.  
Answ. It seemeth that his wonder made him to forget himself. Said he not even now, it was evident that Mr. junius in one respect acknowledged the Hierarchy to be an order or estate of apostasy in the Church; and in another respect he esteemed the ministry of God's holy things to be there? So then, though the Hierarchy only be the Beast (as mine opposite thinketh) and though in respect of the Apostasy it is not married to Christ, yet in respect as it is God's ministry, though corrupted, it is married to Christ. But behold how their doctrines are admirable to themselves. The ministers of the Church of Rome, are of the same religion, faith and holiness with the people: the people he will have to be still married to Christ; but the ministers in no weise; he cannot endure to hear of it; especially when it cometh under the scripture names of the Man of sin, or the Beast. And where he asketh if I will never learn to put difference between the Beast and the Church, etc. I do put difference, though not so great as he would have me: for the Beast, and the whore that rideth him, Rev. 17. though they differ, yet are they so nearly conjoined, that if one be married to Christ, the other is also. But why doth he not teach from the scriptures what the Beast signifieth? I have learned from the Prophet Daniel, that a Beast, meaneth a Kingdom, Dan. 7. 23. and a kingdom by light of reason consisteth of King and subjects, of governor's and people; and Mr. junius himself telleth us so, saying, 
* Animadv in Bellar. d● eccles militante, l. 3 c. 13. not 7.  A kingdom is a multitude of men gathered under one King. As the Christian kingdom therefore consisteth of Christ, his ministers, and people: so doth the Antichristian, of Antichrist, his ministers and people. This Beast hath seven heads and ten horns, Rev. 17. 3. the ten horns are said to be ten Kings, v. ●2. (as in Dan. 7. 24. the ten horns out of that kingdom, are ten kings:) these kings are none of the hierarchy: wherefore the whole body of this beast containeth more than the Pope and his hierarchy. The Lamb against whom the Beast with his horns fighteth, Rev. 17. 14. Mr. junius 
† Annot. on Rev. 17. 14.  expoundeth to be Christ and his Church: why may not we by like reason expound the Beast to be Antichrist and his Church? Finally, the Beast (saith 
† In. annot. on Rev. 11. 7 & 17. ●.  Mr. junius * himself) is the Roman Empire, made long ago of civil▪ Ecclesiastical, the chief head whereof he maketh the Pope to be●▪ And the Beast of Rome (saith 
† Annot. on Rev. 13. 12.  he) of a civil Empire, is made an ecclesiastical Hierarchy. The Whore he expoundeth 
“ In Annot. ●n Rev. 17. 4▪  to be the spiritual Babylon, which is Rome: so then, by mine opposites plea, neither did Mr. junius say, neither ever entered into his thought, that the ecclesiastical Roman Empire since the Pope was head of it, or the hierarchy, was ever married unto Christ. As for the Whore, the Church which rideth this Beast, he calleth it the 
* ●n Annot. ●n Rev. 11. 1  False-Christian Church over which Antichrist ruleth, and Antichrists Church: (which title mine opposite will not bear at my hand:) and that Antichristian Church which the Angel biddeth cast out, and measure it not, in Rev. 11. 12. Mr. junius explaineth thus, 
† Annot. ibidem.  As if he should say, it belongeth nothing to thee to judge those which are without, 1. Cor. 5. 12. which be innumerable; look unto those of the household only, or unto the house of the living God. Notwithstanding all this, Mr. johnson would needs measure it for the true Church, House, and Temple of God: so well do Mr. junius and he accord together.  
To a testimony which I alleged out of D. Fulk, concerning the miserable blindness of people in Popery, (of which mine opposite saith, he might have been better advised,) he to requi●e me, as he thinketh, 
* Chr. plea ●ag. 197.  allegeth a speech of Mr. Broughtons', who saith, Millions of millions of Rome's clients are saved: Brought. on Rev. 13. 18. p. 203.  
Answ. Would he be content that Mr. Broughton should decide our controversy touching the Church of Rome? Thus then saith that author in the same book; 
† Brough. on Rev. 8. p. 79.  The Pope's clients are the tail of the great Dragon. 
* Ibid. p. 96. 97.  Thence (from Rome) was the Rebellion to arise, Man of sin, Apollyon, etc. to set up, or depose states; and to have a people of his own frame; and to burn the true Temple of God. 
“ pag. 159.  The Pope's power, driveth the Church, not to be seen for certain hundreds of years. (The Pope 
† pag. 240. ) wresteth all that is spoken of the true Church, into protection for his synagogue of Satan. 
* pag. 254.  Rome passeth all the enemies of the Church, in cruelty and idolatry. Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezar were never so hardened. The profane Caesars did not so strictly hinder all use of Religion. Rome 
“ pag. 229.  hath far passed the old Babel in idolatry. The Pope 
† pag. 258.  followeth all heathen superstition, in name, staff, apparel of Caesar's, and Temples; setting but a face of Christianity upon them. 
* pag. 247.  All their doctrine is such, that their Temples, Mass, and daily profession in all things, is from the unclean spirit: 
“ pag. 308.  and their whole policy is a lie. 
† p. 3●. arg. on c. 11.  The Beast which is ascended out of Abyssos, that is, all his eorporations, millions of millions, alpapists, go from their Abyssos of black ignorance, unto Abyssos Luk. 8. whither the devils shall come in their time to be tormented for ever & ever. These & sundry the like commendations doth the author alleged give of the church of Rome, which mine opposite pleadeth for: and taking hold of a phrase, wresteth it for his purpose, from the man's meaning; who seemeth not to speak of the popish church, but of the ancient Christian; for these are 
* Pag. 203▪  there Mr. Broughtons' words. And for Julius the captain, who was so careful for S. Paul, that for his sake the li●e of the prisoners▪ were spared, Act. 27. God would not record this, but to save millions of millions of Rome's clients for S. Paul: but for the unthankeful to S. Paul, and forgers that Peter was at Rome, who never came near it; he still reserved Pilat's holiness, that Pope's selfe-murder should be the reward. Was not here a testimony well alleged? So in other places of his book, he quoteth Mr. Brightman, and others; whose writings directly cross that which he pleadeth for in many things; as they that read the authors may see; and anon I will set down their sayings. No marvel then if he wrest my words; as where next he saith, 
† Chr. plea pag. 197.  that that which the Apostle speaketh of the Man of sin, and of them that perish, because they receive not the love of the truth, etc. 2. Thess. 2. 9 I apply (for exclusion from pardon and certain condemnation) to the whole Church of Rome, and so to all the members thereof, and that for all ages that either have been, are, or shallbe, ever since the Man of sin was seated there.  
Answ. I said no more but thus. 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. I speak not here of those in Rome that have withstood her whoordoms, which have been many; nor of those, to whom at last God hath given repentance unto life, which I hope are more; nor of other his elect: but of the whore in general, whose damnation is showed in Rev. 17. and 18. yea th'Apostle speaketh more particularly, 
* 2. Thes. 2▪ 12.  That they all might be damned, who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. Behold how he saith, they all: which some evil minded man might urge against the Apostle, as mine opposite doth against me. But wise men know that the promises of life to the true Church pertain not to the reprobates that are in it: so the threatenings of death to the false Church, take not hold on Gods elect which are therein.  
Object. If this harlot the Church of Rome, was never Christ's spouse, otherwise then all the world was by our first parents Adam and No: how then hath she broken the covenant of wedlock if she never were in it? how can she be called a whore in respect of Christ, any more than the heathens, that never knew God in Christ? How can she be said to be in Apostasy? etc.  
Answ. Of the state of the Gentiles I have spoken before; and proved them to have been all in the covenant of grace in Christ: from Gen. 9 9 etc. But they generally fell from God to idolatry, (which is whoredom) and apostasy: and were in time rejected of God: who renewed his covenant with one small nation of the jews, and yet saved his elect among the Gentiles also. So the Christian Churches planted by the Apostles, soon fell from God, and in time were rejected of God; some given over to Mohometisme, some to popery. Yet God hath preserved his little Church, fled into the wilderness, Rev. 12. and saved his elect also in false Churches. I compare these not with the Gentiles at this day, but with the Gentiles before Christ's coming, whiles sacrificing was lawful; as I am taught of God, Rev. 11. and 17. and 18. with the old Babylonians & Egyptians. In those times Tyrus was an harlot, Esa. 23. 16. Niniveh was an harlot, Nahum. 3. 4. and so other nations then by like equity were harlots: and Rome likewise at this day. Who knoweth not, that a woman which is divorced from her husband, (as Israel was 
* jer. 3.  from God,) for whoredom, and followeth that trade still; may still be called a harlot? I deny not, but in a large kind of speech, Rome at this day, may be said to have been once married to Christ, in respect of the Christian church that once was there: but so all the Gentiles were in respect of the covenant with Noe. Neither doubt I to say, that the jews even now do go a whoring from their God; for 
† Deut. 32.  Moses and the prophets so speak of them, yet actually there is now no covenant between God and them. The out-cries which he maketh unto the Anabaptists to hearken, and to the Reformed Churches to hang down their heads, etc. I omit, as the gall of bitterness which ran too fast out of his pen.  
To prove them the same Church which was in Paul's time, he 
* Chr. plea ●●g. 198.  citeth Moses prophesies of Israel, Deut. 32. which were the same people & their seed: whereas he should rather have looked on, 2. King. 17. 24.— 34. and compared these with the men of Babylon, Cuthah, etc. that came and possessed the Lords land, and received some part of Israel's religion with their own old idolatry: for so I 
† Animal p. 102. 103  showed the present estate of this Popish church. And the example of other churches that were in Corinth, Ephesus &c. looked upon at this day, will confirm it.  
About my answer for the godly fathers of the jews, and wicked fathers of these Antichristians, which the holy Ghost maketh to be Gentiles, Sodomites Egyptians etc. Rev. 11. 2. 8. 18. he saith 
* Chr. plea pag. 199.  If I mean this of the city of Rome, I speak not to the point: if of the church of Rome; then he objecteth Ezek. 16. 3. thy father was an Amorite etc.  
Answ. His distinction between the city and church of Rome, serveth him in no stead. It was true in Paul's time, when the city was heathen, and a Christian church in it. But now the city is Christian Rome, the Empire is an ecclesiastical empire, as I showed before from Mr. junius own grant.  
The Amorites were not those fathers for whose sake the jews are loved: but Abraham Isaak and lakob, out of whose loins the jews naturally came. But this church of Rome now, is not the child of that primitive church, either in nature or in grace. In place she succeedeth them, and so the Mahometists in place succeed other Christian churches planted by th' Apostles. And in pretence she is the same Christian church; but as Satan in pretence is an Angel of light.  
But the strangers (saith he) that came to Jsrael, in times of sincerity or of apostasy, were of the church of Jsrael as well as the jews, though not of the same natural posterity. 2 Chron. 15. 9 & 30. 25. 5. 6. 7. Leu. 16. 29. Num. 9 14.  
Answ. But the strangers that wasted Israel, and dwelled by force in their land, though they were taught how they should fear the Lord, by a Priest, yet were not that church, of whom Moses wrote: 2 King. 17. 24. 27. 28. So the Goths, Vandals, Saracens, &c which overcame Italy Spain &c and dwelled there, though the priest of Rome taught them his religion, are not the ancient church, of whom Paul wrote. Besides, he hath strained things too far: for divers Christians are at this day apostate and become jews: can we say of them, as Paul doth of the natural jews, As touching the election, they are beloved for the Fathers, Rom. 11. 28. I understand that speech, of the jewish nation in general, not of particulars which perish through unbeleef; as also of the natural jews, (who refused the gospel for the time, and still do;) and not to concern their proselytes, which they beget to their apostasy. For there is a special regard to the jews, because they were natural branches, though now broken off; as th'Apostle showeth Rom. 11. 21 24.  
Obj. The many changes of the Roman state, and troubles by the Goths, Uandals, &c: these specially concern the Roman state touching the city & Empire &c: whereas our question is only of the church of Rome.  
Answ. As the state of the Empire is changed, yet in some respect is the same, for the Beast was, and is not, and yet is, Rev. 17. 18. so is the church, and ministry thereof; it was, and is not, and yet is. A man may speak to the Bishop of Rome now, as Ezekiel did to the heathen king of Tyre, Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God, etc. Ezek. 28. 13. to weet in his predecessor Huram, which had been a proselyte in the church of Israel, 2 Chron. 2. as the Hebrews R. D. Kimchi & Sol. jarchi upon Ezek. 28. and some Christian writers do expound it. So I may say to the Pope, Thou hast been a Christian Bishop, a star in Christ's right hand; because such was the Bishop of Rome in Paul's time. But mine opposite himself holdeth the Pope and his hierarchy now to be the Man of sin, the son of perdition, and thought it most strange in me, that I should ask when ever Christ was married to that Beast. Now it is as strange, that he pleadeth for the whore of Babylon, the Antichristian church. He would exclude the hierarchy or ministry, because of their apostasy; I also for the same do exclude the church; for the priests and people of Rome are of one faith and religion; if the one be cut off from Christ, so is the other. It can not be denied but they all have the mark of the Beast upon them; for to take Mr. junius own exposition, The mark of the beast (saith 
* Annot. on Rev. 13. 16.  he) is their Chrism, by which in their sacrament of Confirmation, they ●oke servile unto themselves, the persons and doings of men etc. and as for the sign left by Christ, (of which Chap. 7. 3.) and the holy sacrament of Baptism, they make void etc.  
Obj. He cannot show that ever the church of Rome, ceased to be, since it was first planted, but it hath continued still either in sincerity or apostasy even to this day. Nor can he show that the Lord hath yet put them out of his covenant, or given thm a bill of divorce, or that they have lest off to baptise in his name.  
Answ. Neither can he show that the Ministry ever ceased in that church, but hath still continued either in sincerity or apostasy: or that the Lord put the ministers out of his covenant, or that they have left off to baptise in Christ's name. Yet he now excludeth the ministers from being Christ's, he makes them Antichrist, the Beast, the Man of sin, the son of perdition, etc. and is offended that I should speak of their marriage with Christ. And Mr. junius maketh them accidents, ulcers, and no members of the body; as we have seen. 2. Neither can he show that the churches of the Gentiles ceased to be after their first planting, Gen. 9 but continued still either in sincerity or apostasy, even till the Apostles time; and sacrificed still unto God, and in his name. Let him show when old Babylon was divorced from God: and it will as soon appear that this new Babylon is divorced also.  
Object. The Papists plead that Rome standeth not where it did on the seven hills: and the Pope sits on the other side the river, on the hill Uatic●ne, etc. In like sort is the answer for the church of Rome, and the changes in religion and state, etc.  
Answ. Is this a fit comparison, the change of place, and the change of religion? If it be, then as a man going from England to India, is the same man still: so if he go from the religion in England, to the religion of the Indians, which is Paganism, he is of the same religion that he was still. Or, to keep nearer the point in hand, the Bishop of Rome at this day, notwithstanding all changes of his faith and state since the Apostles time, is a true Christian Bishop still: then he is not Antichrist, the Man of sin spoken of in 2. Thess. 2. as mine opposite saith he is.  
Object. Many of those people that made the invasions, became Christians themselves, and so the Church was increased. Not to speak how the very catalogue of the Bishops of the Church of Rome giveth evidence against him. Or will he say, that though there were Bishops of that Church, yet there was not a church whereof they were Bishops?  
Answ. So, many of the Babylonians, Cuthims, etc. that invaded Israel, were taught the manner of the God of Israel, and feared the Lord, and had Priests of Israel, which sacrificed for them, 2, King. 17. ●4. 25. 27. 32. 33. But what saith the Scripture? Every one that is joined (to Babylon) shall fall by the sword: their children also shall be dashed to pieces, etc. Esa. 13. 15. 16. And God will cut off from Babylon, name and remnant, son and nephew, Esa. 14. 22. The catalogue of Bishops (if it will do him any pleasure) serveth for the Pope, the Man of sin, the great Antichrist, to prove him a true Christian Bishop, successor of Peter, (whom they falsely put the first in their catalogue;) Now he will not have the Hierarchy to be the church, no● of the Church, but accidents, ulcers, gangrenes, and I know not how vile: but the people the church, that turned from paganism to the Pope, or fell with him from Christianity to popery, they are the Temple of God, the Church of Christ, in the covenant of grace. How great partiality is this in men, to magnify the people for their faith and religion, and to despise the Bishops and ministers, that are the chief teachers and maintainers of the same faith & religion, making them accidents, hangs-by, scabs, ulcers, gangrenes, and all that bad is. So his questions of the time when the Church ceased, are answered with the like, when the ministry ceased? Let the year be named when the true Christian ministry was abolished out of the church of Rome, and Antichrist the Man of sin come in the place: & I will answer, in the same year, the people that were fallen with him to the same idolatries, heresies, and to worship him as God in the Temple of God; ceased to be the true Christian Church, and became a synagogue of Antichrist.  
Object. His esteeming of the state of the church of Rome in apostasy▪ to be but as the state of the Is●●●elites, Edomites, and as Adonisedek with his Amorites and Jebusites in Jerusalem, is disproved and contradicted by himself, when he maketh them like Jsrael and judah in their apostasy, Animadv. p. 84.  
Answ. It is not contradicted by myself, neither can it be disproved by any. For myself, my words (in the place which he quoteth) are these. She (the Church of Rome) fell into apostasy soon after Paul's time, for then the 
† Thes. 2. 7▪  mystery of iniquity did work, & 
* joh. 2. 18▪  many Antichrists were gone out whiles the Apostles lived. For which their apostasy (like Jsraels') when they would not repent (as Christ 
“ Rev. 2. ●.  threatened some that were new fallen into such sins) the candlestick (the Church) was removed; the Church of Rome, as Paul 
† Rom. 11. 21. 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 Beast, Antichrist: even as Israel and Judah of old for their like sins, were delivered into the hands of the Assyrians and Babylonians.  
By which I show, that as the Christians that fell to Mahometisme, ceased to be Gods true Churches: so they likewise that fell to Antichristianisme. He could not deny the first, nor disprove the latter: for Paul saith of the Antichristians, God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; that they all might be damned, etc. ●. Thess. 2. 11. 12. For the Ismaelites and Edomites, they were Abraham's natural seed: so can no man prove the Church of Rome at this day, or any one in it, to be the natural seed of the Christians of Rome in Paul's time. The Ismaelites and Edomites were fallen from Abraham's faith: the Church of Rome at this day is much more fallen from the Apostles faith taught to the church of Rome by him. Whosoever will bring them both to the trial, it will soon appear; but this trial mine opposite every where shuneth. Melchisedek was king of jerusalem in Abraham's time, Gen. 14. and then none doubteth▪ but there was a true church. Adonisedek was king of jerusalem in josuahs' time, jos. 10. both kings, both of the same city; by name, the one King of justice, the other Lord of justice, as pretending to be the successor of Melchisedek; and not more departed from his faith, than the Pope is from Paul's.  
Obj. Mr. Junius knew that there dwell Jews in Rome, who are not of the Church; and that the natural posterity of the Saints, may become Jew's, Turks, Pagans; and saith, the church may at length cease to be a church, when God ceaseth to call it back, and takes away the evidence of their holy marriage, that is, the holy Scripture out of the hand of the adulteress.  
Answ. So Mr. junius knew that there dwelled Gentiles in Israel, who were not of the Church, Deut. 14. 2●. But it is well, that neither dwelling in the place, nor being of the natural posterity, is any sure proof that a people continueth a church. We must then have some other proof, namely continuance in the faith of Christ; which the church of Rome doth not, but is revolted to Antichrist and his infidelity. Where he maketh God's ceasing to call it back a sign of the churches ceasing: first, it is barely said, without proof. Secondly, it is obscure what calling back he meaneth. For take the thousand year after Christ, and see what calling back had Rome. Was it by her own ministry or hierarchy? They were the Man of sin, the ulcers of the church, they called her further from God, but not back from sin. Extraordinary prophets at that time, I think there will scarce be found any: but grant that there were; doth not God so call back the jews and Turks at this day? Do not some turn to Christianity, and persuade others to turn? Do not some suffer death among the Turks, for the truth? Do not some write books now to the jews in their own tongue, to call them back unto God? yet are not the jews therefore the church. God called back the Gentiles from their apostasy▪ by the Apostles preaching, Mark. 16. 15. and before, he sent jonah to the Ninivites, yea judah and Israel he scattered among the heathens, who called them back from idolatry, as Daniel did 
* Dan▪ 4. 27. ●▪ 5. 18.— 4.  Nebuchadnezar, and Belshazzar. And the Gentiles seated near Canaan, had always as much means to be called to the Lords 
† Deut. 33. ●.  mountain, by the Israelites trading with them, as the church of Rome hath at this day. Besides the prophets that God raised up among the very Gentiles to call them from Idols unto God: as Sibylla, whose prophecies were famous among the heathen Greeks and Romans. But for taking the Scriptures out of the adulteresses hand: if ever church had it, Rome hath had it. For the Scriptures were in a manner buried, kept in the closerts of the hierarchy, the people might not have them in their mother tongue, nor read them, on pain of death. Were the Scriptures ever so taken out of the jews hand? Nay they all have them, read and study them more than many Christians. And now that Bibles are printed, and so common: how is it possible the Scriptures should be taken out of any heretics hands, otherwise than they have been from Rome? When God gave Israel 
* jer. 3.  the bill of divorce, did he take the Scriptures out of her hand? If not, (as in deed he did not) then is not this a true rule, that an adulterous church is never divorced, nor ceaseth to be Christ's church, till the Scriptures be taken out of her hands. Mr. junius elsewhere hath written better, when speaking of some apostate churches of Christians, as Marcionists, Ualentinians, and others, of whom Hierom saith, They were not the Church of Christ, but the Synagogue of Antichrist: he readily 
† Animadv. Bellarm.  granteth it, because they denied the fundamental Articles of the doctrine of faith. The like he granteth to Irenaeus assertion, because (saith 
* Eccles. ●lit. l. 3. c. 4▪ ●● 9 Jbid. c. 5. ●● 10.  he) he spoke of heretics and schismatics which retained not the truth in the foundation thereof. Now let us compare this with the former. Did God cease to call back those heretics and schismatics? Were there not many learned Doctors that disputed and wrote against them: by whose means God still called them to repentance? Or did God take the Scriptures out of those heretics hands: when they from them and by them pleaded for their heresies? Thus the rule which Mr. junius hath given us for the church of Rome, agreeth not with himself. And if those heretical churches were not Christian, but Antichristian synagogues: then is the church of Rome much more, which worshippeth the greatest Antichrist, the man of sin, and denyeth the foundation of Christian religion, believing as the Pope believeth, who either denyeth the Father and the Son, or else he is not the Antichrist, 1. joh. 2. 22. And that the Apostle meaneth not only of open and direct denial, but of indirect and denying in deed when by word he professeth Christ, Mr. junius himself, D. whitaker's, Mr. Brightman and others (that have answered Bellarmine's 14. chap. de Rom. Pontif. l. 3.) do sound prove. Now as the Pope denyeth Christ, so doth the Whore of Babylon, the Romish church, holding the same heresies and idolatries: that if the Pope be Antichrist, then is the church of Rome an Antichristian synagogue, and not the true church of Christ.  
By this also mine opposites insultation 
† Chr. plea p. 202. 203.  against me, as if I wrote errors and contradictions unreconcilable touching apostate churches, is taken away. For as I never denied, but some apostate churches continued true churches, till the candlestick was removed for their impenitency; so neither could he, nor can any truly deny, but some apostate churches are mere synagogues of Satan: as those Antichrists mentioned 1. joh. 2. 19 & those heretical churches whom Mr. junius himself denieth to be true Christian churches, because they retained not the foundation. And such by necessary consequence, is the church of Rome at this day. But it it is a needless and wearisome labour to follow mine opposite in his tautologies and repetitions of the same things again and again, to enlarge his work, besides his manifold reproaches.  
I said 
* Animadv. pag. 103.  of this Roman church, It is not the woman fled into the wilderness▪ Rev. 12. 14. but another woman or city, reigning over the King's of the earth, Rev. 17. 1. 18. etc.  
What then, (saith 
† Chr. plea pag. 203▪  he) difference is to be put between the inward parts of the Temple, and the outward; the parts measured, and the parts unmeasured, between God's Temple, Altar, and worshippers therein, Rev. 11. 1. and the court of the Temple given to the Gentiles, and the holy city trod down by them 42. months, v. 2. If it be not one of these, shall it therefore be none of them? If it be not the inward part of the Temple, will it f●llow it is not the outward? etc.  
Answ. He should have said, though she be not the company of worshippers of God, whom he measureth▪ yet may she be the company of Gentiles that tread down God's courts and city, whom he casteth out as unmeasured. But he leaveth the comparison of persons, and runneth to things, Gods ordinances which she abuseth. Of that Scripture, Rev. 11. we have spoken 
* Page 52, etc.  before. Of these two women in Rev. 12. and 17. the Scriptures are so plain, that none of good understanding can mistake the one for the other; or (as this man doth) make the one a part of the other, as if both put together, should make one Temple, one woman, one Church. When the one persecuted, flieth from the Serpent or dragon, the other in the Dragon's throne persecuteth, reigneth, triumpheth; abusing and treading under foot God's ordinances which belong to the persecuted woman; as the Babylonians abused the vessels of God's sanctuary, 
† 2 King. 25. Psa 79. 1.  burned and trod down the holy city, the place of the woman's assembly.  
His question, When was the time that the woman fled into the wilderness? is nothing to the purpose. For whensoever she fled, seeing this other woman is not she; but the foolish waman which opposeth herself and her doctrines unto Wisdom, (as in Prov 9 13. 14. 15. 1. 2. etc.) men should know, that the dead are with her, and her 
* vers. 18.  guests are in the depths of hell.  
He again injurieth me, when he saith 
† Chr. plea pag. 205.  I here make the church of Rome (she that now is) to be also the court of God's Temple, and holy city. I make her to be the company of Gentiles (like the Babylonians of old) that tread down the holy city: and it is he that speaketh M. Sm. language, whiles he maketh the Jews (not the Babylonians) to be the types of these Antichristians, as we have formerly heard. And it is his continual fallacy in reasoning, when speech is of the persons, to fly to the things and ordinances typed by those holy places: as if jerusalem because it was always the holy city, even when it was ruined; could give holiness to the profane Gentiles, that burned and trod it down.  
I saved, The heathens in their Altars, Temples, Sacrifices, had the divine things of God among them, as well, if not better than hath the Man of Sin and his worshippers, in their sacrifice of the Mass, and other manifold id●luries.  
He replieth: Why saith he not, then hath the church of Rome in her baptism, and other divine things of God among them, though corrupted?  
Answ. Behold here again a plain tergiversation. I compare the sacrifices of the Gentiles with the sacrifice of the Antichristians: he shuneth this, and would have me speak of their baptism. As if the Lord's Supper were not as holy as Baptism. But he is a frayed once to meddle with the Lords supper in Rome, (as we have seen before,) and will have me write what he thinks good, when the reason which I bring is too hard for him. And yet he knoweth, that elsewhere I speak as much of their baptism. But thus he would here evade. So I speaking of the Man of sin (which in his own understanding is the hierarchy,) and of his worshippers, the popish multitude, he tells me Mr. Junius speaketh of the church of Rome, and distinguisheth between it, and the Man of sin with his hierarchy. As if I also did not speak of that church, when I mention the worshippers of the man of sin: which whiles he (by Mr. junius help,) would prove to be Christ's true church in his covenant of grace, contrary to th'Apostle who showeth them to be in the state of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. he is forced to give ground, answereth not my reason touching the Gentiles; but presently flieth to his wont shelter, of Judah and Jsrael Not regarding the instruction of the holy Ghost, who throughout the book of Revelation, mentioneth not the Israelites, but as the sealed of God, and kept from Antichrists abominations, Rev. 7. and for the Popish multitude, they are called Gentiles, Sodom, Egypt, Babylon. Rev. 11. & 17. with which when mine opposite is pressed, he flieth to judah and Israel for an answer; as we every where have seen.  
For the Church of Rome to be the Mother of Christians, feighned to be like the true Mother, sick, swollen with the dropsy etc. wherein he 
* Chr. plea pag. 206.  chargeth me not to answer or confute Mr. junius; I have done both: showing by evidence of the scripture, Rev. 17. with Rev. 12. that she is not the true mother, jerusalem; but the whore of Babylon, not sick only, but dead in her synns' Rev. 20. 5. with Ephes. 2. 1. And Mr. junius himself 
† In his annot. on Rev. 11.  calleth her, the Pseudo christian (or falsly-named Christian) church.  
Mine opposite, (after that he hath again according to his wont fled to judah and Israel,) 
“ Chr. plea pag. 207.  replieth to Rev. 20. And first, He referreth us to his answer unto the like spoken before of Israel.  
Answ. There he laboured to prove it not death in sin, but death civilly, by overthrow of their estate. But that (say I) though it were true of Israel, cannot be the meaning here: for this speaketh of their estate, whiles Antichrist the Beast and his kingdom liveth reigneth and triumpheth, killing the saints, Rev. 20. 4. 5. so that he and his church is not dead civilly, that is, his kingdom 〈◊〉, not overthrown all this while. Secondly God speaketh here of such a death, as is opposed to the first resurrection, vers. 5. but the first resurrection is from sin, Coloss. 2. 13. & 3. 1. and it is here said to be such, as they that have part therein, the second death hath no power on such, Rev. 20 6. but if it be but a rising from civil death, or destruction of an outward state, they should not by it be freed from the second death, which is due to such only as rise not from death of sin. So this his answer is impertinent. Besides, even Mr. junius himself 
* Annot. on Rev. 20. 5.  expoundeth it of them that lie dead in sin.  
2. If this death (saith he) be, as some think, the apostasy spoken of 2. Thes. 2. 3. we must then remember withal, that this apostasy is in the Temple of God, verse. 4. like as there was apostasy in judah and Jsrael heretofore: and that difference is to be put between God's Temple and the apostasy itself. etc.  
Answ. I have showed, that this death (Mr. junius also assenting) must needs here be understood of death in sin, or in Apostasy, if so he will have it named. Whereas after his manner he compareth it with th'Apostasy of judah and Israel, the holy Ghost (as we have heard) compareth it with Babylon, Rev. 17. But if he grant the apostasy in Israel, was death in sin, it will help him nothing: for what people soever is dead in sin, they are not actually Gods visible church, till they be 
† Rom. 8. 8.- 11.  raised in Christ. I grant him a difference between God's Temple and the Apostasy: for if by the Temple he mean the people of God free from apostasy, such in deed are not dead: but the people of Rome now are in apostasy, and have been long; and by the sentence of God, are dead in sin and apostasy▪ therefore they are not those 
“ 1 Pet. 2. 4. 5.  living stones, built up to a spiritual house (on Christ the living stone) an holy Priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifice: and 
* Ephes. 2. 21. 22.  for an habitation of God through the spirit: but they are dead stones built upon Antichrist.  
3. Moreover (saith he) the dead here spoken of, live again, and reig●● with Christ after the finishing of 1000 years, Rev. 20. 5. whereas he speaketh of the Church of Rome, as being long since damned and dead for ever: so this Scripture will be found to be against himself.  
Answ. The words of the Scripture are these, But the rest of the dead lived not again, until the thousand years were finished: this is the first resurrection, Rev. 20. 5. How maketh this against me? Doth it not show they were dead, the 1000 years of the Beasts reign? yet he would have them not dead, but sick and diseased. And how notoriously doth he wrong me, as if I made the church of Rome damned and dead for ever, that is, as if there could be no mercy showed to the papists, for repentance and turning to the Lord. They are only the reprobate multitude which are damned and dead for ever. Many of that church, yea even of the hierarchy, (whom my opposite holdeth to be the Man of sin, the son of perdition) being dead in their sins, God hath in mercy revived and raised with Christ, as he did in the churches of the Gentiles, Eph. 2, 1● Coloss. 2. 〈◊〉. But such as are not raised from the death of Antichrist, and quickened by Christ, they perish for ever. And we speak of that Church now remaining in her sinful death: unto which so continuing, no salvation is promised, but assured destruction threatened, 2. Thes. 2. Rev. 14. 9 10. 11. Thus we see how notwithstanding all his turning and winding, and backing his error with learned men's names, these 
† Rev. 11. ●  Gentiles the church of Antichrist, and worshippers of the Man of sin, are by the sentence of God dead in sins, as were the 
* Ephes. 2▪  Gentiles before Christ gave them life. That such of them as the Lord shall in mercy raise up out of the grave of popery▪ shall escape the second death: the rest, do remain under God's wrath, dead in sin, and shall die in torment.  
In the end, to that which I showed of that whore's death otherweise, and of her burning with fire, Rev. 18. 7. 8, and of the joy which the heavenly multitude shall have at her destruction, Rev. 18. 20. & 1●. 1. 2. 3. mine opposite seemeth to assent▪ referring it to the City, resembled (as he saith) by Babylon, and Babylon's destruction that was of old, Rev. 18. with jer. 50. & 51. Thus the truth hath wrung out at last an acknowledgement from him; as the fear and light of his conscience made him acknowledge at the first. For he began with the Church of Rome thus, 
† Chr. plea pag. 120  acknowledging it to be fallen into most sinful and deep defection and apostasy, and so to be a notorious harlot and idolaters. This notorious harlot the holy Ghost calleth Babylon the great, the mother of horlots, and abominations of the earth, Rev. 17. 5. which is meant of the City Rome, v. 18. but of an ecclesiastical state, such as is in that city at this day. And that Babylon or church it is, whole destruction is threatened in Rev. 18. and for which there shall be joy, and singing Alleluiah, for that God hath judged the great wh●re▪ which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and shed the blood of his servants, Rev. 1●. 1. 2. 3. etc. For the destruction of this great whore (which in deed is no other than the Church of Rome) mine opposite 
† Page. 208.  saith with me, they shallbe so far from mourning at her funeral, as they shall rejoice with the heavenly multitude, and sing Hallelujah, when the Lord hath given Sodoms' judgement on her, and they see her smoke rise up for evermore, Rev. 19 1. 2. 3. Of his own mouth now let him be judged; with what truth, equity, conscience, he hath pleaded for the church of Rome to be the Temple of God; the church of God, in his covenant of grace, and to have his baptism the seal of his covenant, even in that adulterous and most sinful estate wherein she standeth at this day under her Pastor Antichrist, whom she honoureth and worshippeth, believing his lies, serving his idols, and trusting to merit heaven by the wicked works which that Man of sin hath taught her. But (that God, for a reward of his popish error in advancing the Ministers above the church, and the pastor above his fellow ministers, gave him over to this second error) who would have thought that a man of understanding would so bitterly have inveighted against me, for denying her to be Christ's true Church; and that he would for defence of such a notorious harlot, have forsaken and written against his own former good testimony, which he witnessed against her? God's counsels are unsearchable▪ and let all that fear him, hear what the Spirit saith unto us; Harken unto me now therefore ôye children, and attend to the words of my mouth. Let not thine heart decline to her ways, go not astray in her paths. For she hath east down many wounded: yea many strong men have been slain by her. Her house is the way to hell; going down to the chambers of death. Prov. 7. 24— 27.   

Of other Writers.  
TO his citations of Polanus, Keckerman, etc. I answered, 
† Animadv. ●. 105.  That divers men were mistaken in judging of that rotten Church (of Rome) which would help these our opposites nothing, who have seen and acknowledged better, and now go back. And I instanced sundry others contrary minded, as Mr. Carwright, Mr. Perkins, D. Fulk, D. Willet. Mr. Bale, all our country men, who deny the church of Rome to be the true Church of Christ.  
Mine opposite replieth, 
* Chr. plea ●ag. 208.  that I say in particular of Polanus, that he was mistaken, and in this, for that he said that Antichrist must sit in the Temple of God, not Jewish or at Jerusalem, but Christian, etc. wherein, as his manner is, he drepraveth both my words and meaning. For I never dreamt that Antichrist should sit in the jewish Temple at jerusalem; but in the Christian Church falsely so called, as Mr. junius nameth it in Annot. on Rev. 11. But Polanus pleadeth otherwise for the church of Rome, as mine opposite hath set down his words, Chr. plea. p. 212. And in that, I judge he was mistaken, and not I only, but many more with me, men of greater learning, and before me; though mine opposite leaveth it with this reproach, 
† Chr. plea p. 209.  That all (in my judgement) are mistaken hereabout, but myself and my followers.  
And presently after, to that which I alleged from Mr. Cartwright, Perkins, etc. he wisheth they had written more advisedly, and more sound. And why? even for his former often refuted reasons, of the Temple of God, and Baptism in that church; wherein he doth but beg the question, and answereth not them. For I named to him Mr. Perkins reasons, that the Papists doctrine doth raze the very foundation of Religion; and his 4. arguments in a treatise for that purpose. Now to these he answereth not one word. But the Temple of God, the Temple of God, and Antichrist must sit in the Temple of God: and Martyrs out of the Church of Rome; and where else, had they their baptism? these are his common bucklers. To which I have answered before.  
And now, that the Reader may further see, how not I only, but many before me, even such as he nameth in his book for him, (as D. whitaker's, Mr. Broughton, Mr. Brightman, and others) are direct against him, I will set down their testimonies.  
What Mr. Bale, Mr. Cartwright, D. Fulk, M. Perkins, and D. Willet have written, I have showed heretofore: and them he regardeth not.  
Whereas Bellarmine would conclude from the protestants grant, that the church of Rome is Christ's true Church, because it is the Temple of God, 2. Thess. 2. D. whitaker's giveth sundry 
* Whitak. controv. 4. An papa Antichr. ●. c. 3.  answers, the two first are these. 1. It may be called the church wherein Antichrist sitteth, because it was the true church of Christ before, not because now it is; etc. So Esaias saith▪ the faithful city was become an harlot, Esa. 1. 21. where he calleth Jerusalem the faithful city, because it had been faithful before: so we say, the Temple of God is the seat of Antichrist, that is, that which of old was the Temple of God. 2. The Church of Rome taketh to itself the name & title of the true Church, and in the opinion of our adversartes it is the true Church. 〈◊〉 was a monstrous thing of old 〈◊〉 deny this neither was it denied but of a very few, who strait way when they were known, were killed: notwithstanding it was not the true Church, but the whore of Babylon etc. These answers when I gave, mine opposite could by no means endure at my hand.  
The same author saith 
† ●hitakeibid.  a little before. Now let us see whether the Bishop of Rome hath departed from Christ, and from the faith: so that the church of Rome now, retaineth not the form of the Apostles doctrine. Surely that is evident by all the heads of doctrine, which are in controversy between us and them. That Church succeedeth the Apostles in deed, but so as a den of thiefs do the house of God, and as an harlot doth the faithful city. etc. And after. 
* ●bidens.  But the Pope, saith Billarmine honoureth one true God, the Father, Son and holy Ghost. I answer, he honoureth him not, but blasphemeth him. He doth, I confess, as Atheists are wont to do, which will not openly deny God, but in heart and works they deny him: so the Pope figneth and preclaimeth that he honoureth the trinity, but in deed he car●h not for him. For he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father, of the holy Ghost: but the Pope honoureth not the Son, for he corrupteth his doctrine, etc. Again, touching that particular 
† Pag. 40. ●c.  before handled, whether by Babylon in Rev. 17. be meant the City or the Church of Rome, Mr. whitaker's saith, 
* Cont. 4. q. c. 2. l. 1.  Whereas the adversary affirmeth, that it is not the Church of Rome whlo●● is called Babylon, but the city, such as it was under the Emperors, it is false. For it is certain, that Rome is by john in the Revelation, called Babylon, because of that Church which should be at Rome. For mention is made there of the false Prophet, as also of the Whore, which by her allurements should bewitch the whole world. These things cannot be understood but of the Church, and are necessarily to be referred unto Antichrist.  
Mr. Brightman in his book of the Revelation, expoundeth the Gentiles in Rev. 11. 2. to be the christians that are so in name only. On Rev. 13. 8. he saith, The holy Ghost doth cry openly, that all they do wholly ●eopard and cast away their salvation, that are subject to the Pope of Rome, if so be that they depart out of this life without repentance. And again; This Beast is worshipped of all Reprobates, with whom while thou conspirest in thy worship, who shall separate thee from the state of reprobates? He doth not therefore break off unity, who departeth from the synagogue of Rome: but he purchaseth unavoidable destruction to himself, who cleaveth unto it, without repentance.  
These and the like things saith Mr. Brightman, one whose name mine opposite 
† Chr. plea ●ag. 213.  useth to grace his erroneous cause by. Mr. Broughtons' testimony we have heard before.  
Mr. Dudley Fenner in his Theology, writeth thus; 
* Lib, 9 c. 1●.  Antichrist is the head of the universal apostasy that should come, 1. joh. 2. 18. joh. 4. 2. 2. Thess. 2. 4. 5. 6. Whereupon his church is by a Synecdoche called Antichrist, 1. joh. 4. 3. & 2. 18. as the true Church (is called Christ) 1. Cor. 12. 12. The Antichristian church, compared to a Beast, is the apostatical church, but counterfeiting the vizard of the true, which representeth the lively image of the Roman monarchy formerly done away, and of the government, power, amplitude & seat thereof amongst all people's; 2 Thes. 2. 4. 5. 6. 8. Revel. 11. 7. 8. & 13. 3. 11. 12.— 18. Antichrist, or the False prophet is the head of the Antichristian church, the mediator between it and the Dragon; Rev. 16. 13. & 13. 4. 11. 12. This Antichrist is an Opposer, for to defend the foresaid departing away from the truth of Christ, (2 Thes. 2. 4. compared as touching the phrase with Dan. 8. 11.) and an Exalter of himself▪ first that he may lift up himself against all that is called God, or that is worshipped; that is, against all powers and majesties, both earthly & heavenly. 2. Thes. 2. 9 Dan. 8. 11. 36. Secondly, that placing his seat in the church in name called Gods, he may show himself as God, that is, arrogate to himself the divine power, and absolute dominion of Christ: Esai. 31. 1. 2. 2 Thes. 2. 4. Dan. 8. 25.  
Napier, (the Noble of Scotland) expounding the Revelation, saith. 
† Paraph. p● Revel. 11. 2.  But as for the outward and visible face of the pretended church, it must be rejected from God, and no care, measure nor account had by him thereof; because it must be given over to Antichristian and idolatrous people, who shall subdue his holy church and spiritual Jerusalem, and tread it under foot 1260. years. 
* Paraph. 〈◊〉 Rev. 12. 5.  God's true church and spouse, was chased away and remained invisible and soliturie, among certain private persons, predestinate & elect of God. 
† Paraph. 〈◊〉 Rev. 20. 5.  But the rest of the people that lay dead in Antichristian errors, arose not therfrom to embrace the word of life, ill etc. 
“ Ibid. hist  But the rest, I mean the whole outward visible church, lay wholly as dead and corrupt with Papistical errors.   

Of the Baptism in the Church of Rome.  
ALthough the former things against the Church of Rome, be enough to disprove her baptism, which is ordained of God only for his Church, and those in his covenant, out of which Rome is gone: yet because mine opposite urgeth some special reasons against me, for the same; I will also briefly answer them.  
About this point, he hath nine reasons; in his Christian plea, pag. 27 ... 30.  
1. The first, which is against the repeating of Baptism again: I grant him: neither do I hold it needful or lawful to repeat again the baptism received in false churches.  
2. The second, being for the same purpose, I likewise grant. As also, that there is one baptism, as there was one circumcision: which plea of his, I would have noted, because of his contrary reasoning afterward. Likewise his example from Israel, whose circumcision was not repeated; I hold very fit. But let the Reader observe, how the Scriptures by him brought to prove it, are 2. Chron. 30. chap. & Ezr. 6. 19 20. 21. of which the first was before the captivity, the other after.  
3. The third, that the covenant of grace is everlasting, is also true: but should have this addition, taught of the holy Ghost, To such as keep his covenant, & that remember his commandments to do them: Psal. 103. 17. 18. For, if we deny him, he also will deny us, 2. Tim. 2. 12. That God hath regard to his covenant in Apostatical churches and estate, is also true: but barely by him set down, without showing how. That Moses teacheth us in Levit. 26. namely, that the Israelites for their apostasy and forsaking of God, 
† v. 16— 28.  should be chastised; and if they would not amend, they should at last be 
* v. 33.  scattered among the heathen, and 
“ v. 38.  perish among them: and they that are left, 
† v. 39 40.  if they confess their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fathers; and if their 
* v. 41.  uncircumcised hearts be humbled, etc. 
“ v. 42.  then God will remember his covenant with jakob, and 
† v. 44.  will not cast them away, nor abhor them, to destroy them utterly, to break his covenant with them; but 
* v. 45.  will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors.  
4. The fourth, of Christ's dying once, and our being once baptised: I also grant.  
5. The fifth, that the Church of Rome was espoused to Christ, and had his baptism in the Apostles days: is true. But where he addeth, that she hath ever since retained it, with other grounds of Christian religion; there he goeth too far. For many grounds of Christian religion she hath forsaken: as all that are not Papists will acknowledge. Wherefore he addeth a qualification, either for faith, or order, or both, in whole or in part. This is so large as will bring in, not only the heathens of old, but all the old condemned heretics in the Apostles days and after, yea even the very jews and Turks at this day. For in part they retain the grounds of Christian religion. It is a ground of Christian religion to believe that there is one God: and that the very Devil's (as the Apostle saith) do believe, jam. 2. 19 But not to go so far, as I grant him that the Papists in baptism retain Christ's ordinance in whole or in part; so he cannot deny, but also in the Lord's Supper (now turned to an abominable idolatrous Mass,) they reteyn Christ's ordinance in whole or in part; and so in other their abominations. The Pope himself, the great Antichrist, the son of perdition, retaineth Christian religion in part. The image of God wherein he made man at the first, Gen. 1. 26. remaineth in all men still in part, as the Scriptures testify, Gen. 9 6. jam. 3. 9 Wherefore if the retaining of things in part, holdeth men still in the state of grace and salvation: who then shall be damned? What a wide gate is here opened into the kingdom of heaven, that if men reteyn Christian religion, either for faith or order, or both; in whole or in part, they remain still in the church and covenant of grace: which is quite contrary to the doctrine of Christ, and of his Apostles, Math. 7. 13. 14. 22. 23. 1. Cor. 6. 9 10. Gal 5. 19 20. 21.  
6. His sixth reason, from the Jesuits profession made in their Rheims Testament &c, I have before answered; it being in his second argument made for the church of Rome. And that which he addeth of their baptising with water in the name of the Father &c: is of no more weight to justify their baptism; then the like elements of bread and wine, and the words of Christ's institution This is my body &c, are to justify the Popish Mass to be the true supper of our Lord. Of which Mass, (to omit that which many others have written of the abomination of it) Mr. Calvin 
* In his sermon against idolatry, on Psa. 16. 4.  saith thus, The Mass ●n itself is a ronouncing of the death of Jesus Christ, and a sacrilege forged by Satan, utterly to abolish the sacrament of the Supper.  
7. His seventh reason, that jews and Pagans are turned to the popish Christian ●aith; was also refured in answer to his second reason brought for the church of Rome. The conclusion, that there needeth no repeating of baptism, as there was none of circumcision: is granted, and by me never denied.  
8. Likeweise his eight reason▪ that God hath his people in the Romish Babylon, Rev. 18. 4. under his covenant of grace; is before answered. But he should have proved (if he could) that Babylon itself (which is the church of Rome) is under the covenant of grace: that I deny, the holy Ghost showing in Rev. 17. & 18. ch. that she is under wrath, and destruction. He saith, the children of that church should plead with their mother (as the Prophets taught and dealt with Jsrael of old, Hos 2. 2. & 3. 1. & 4. 1. 2. 12. &c) that she take away her fornications out of her sight etc. It is true, so they should: but why doth this man diminish from the word of God? For the Prophet's words are, Plead with your mother, plead; for she is not my wife, neither am I her husband; let her therefore ●ut away her whordomes &c, Host 2. 2. Thus do I plead against this mother church of Rome; but my opposite blameth me, and pleadeth for her, she is the wife of Christ, and not divorced▪ as before we have heard. Baptism (saith he) is not of her adulteries, but of Christ's ordinances. True, so is the Lords supper, so is excommunication, not of her adulteries; but of Christ's ordinances; and we reteyn them from Christ. But that whorish church hath corrupted and adulterated all these and other ordinances of Christ, & turned them to abominable idolatries and lies; for which we also plead against her: and her sinful abuse of these divine ordinances, shall nor justify, but the more condemn her.  
9 To his ninth and last reason, if baptism be renounced, then also the articles of ●aith, the Scriptures and translations: likewise marriages dissolved, etc. I answer. Farr be it, that we should renounce any good thing which the church of Rome abuseth▪ any more than Paul renounced the true God, whom the Athenians ignorantly worshipped: Ao●. 17. 23. Whatsoever is of divine▪ institution among Papists▪ Jews, Turks or heathens, we renounce it not; but their profanation and abuse of holy things, we do renounce. Neither can we justify their estate, or any holy thing in their sinful abuse of it ● though we put difference between the things▪ which in their ow●● nature are good, and the persons which are evil, Thus men, ma● see how weak and without edge his reasons are to justify the bap tisme in the church of Rome, to be in their use of it the true seal of God's covenant of grace in Christ unto them.  
Next this, he setteth himself to answer objections, 
† Chr. plea pag. 30.  The first whereof he maketh this. But 
* The An● baptists. ● H. A. An● madu. p. 68-72. 71-75.  the baptism had in the Church of Rome, i● not true baptism: but an idol, and lying sign; a detestable and cursed sacrament; a fiction and not true Christian baptism; 
“ Mr. Cl.  no better then when we wash our own face with water daily. etc.  
Answ. That it is not true baptism, I constantly affirm: so did Mr. johnson 
† Apol. pag▪ 110.  himself, whiles he stood in, and wrote for the truth. That the Papists have turned baptism into an idol: I have also formerly 
* Animad p. 68 69. 7●▪ 73.  proved; and will maintain, against his answers. That therefore it is detestable and cursed unto them, through their abuse of it, doth necessarily follow: for the sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Pro. 15. 8. That it should be no better than the daily washing of our face; is wrongfully imputed to us; and Mr. Cl. whom he citeth in his margin, professeth to hold no such thing. For our daily washing, is no religious action, nor sacrament at all; but baptism by heretics and apostates, is a religious action after their manner, and a false sacrament, therefore neither true, neither yet none at all; as our opposite with us once professed. Apolog. p. 110. Instead of proving it true baptism, he bringeth reasons to show, that if it were an idol and lying sign, it ought to be renounced, and an other received. This he knoweth the Anabaptists do practise: so it is no conviction of, them all. But he bendeth his force now against us, and leaveth them. Let us try what he saith.  
1. Because (saith he) idols and lying signs and fictions are not of God, but of the Devil, who is a liar, and father thereof, joh. 8. 44. Rom. 3. 4.  
Answ. I grant that which he saith: but he concludeth not the question. Idols so far as they are idols and lies; are wholly of the Devil, and so far forth to be renounced. But some idols and lies, are made of God's true ordinances, and of his good creatures; as Paul saith of the Gentiles, that they changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature, Rom. 1. 25. Here the Gentiles lie, is to be done away, and their idolatry renounced: but the truth of God is to be retained, and a holy use of the good creature may be had, which they abused. So we have renounced the popish idolatry and lies which they have brought upon God's sacraments; but the truth we retain.  
2. An idol, or such a baptism as is no more than a daily washing of our faces, cannot be the sign and seal of God's true and everlasting covenant, etc.  
Answ. I grant it: and from his own words conclude against him; Baptism in the Church of Rome is formerly proved to be an idol: because they give to the creature and work of man's hands, that honour which is due unto Christ only. Therefore it cannot be a sign and seal of God's everlasting covenant; by his own grant. As for us, we retain no idol, but God's truth only, as before I showed.  
3. The sign in a Sacrament is that which is outward and visible; which in baptism is washing with water in the name of the Lord. If this be a fiction and lying sign, in the churches aforesaid, then is it not the Lords: and they there baptised have not then the outward visible sign, which the Lord ordained to be had of his people, and therefore are bound to get it unto them, where it may be had, Rom. 4. 11. & 6. 3. 4. Act. 10. 47. 48. etc.  
Answ. 1. The first part of his reason is unperfectly set down: for washing with water is a sign of the washing away of sins, by and in God's institution only; by which institution it is to be ministered to none but the faithful and their seed, Act. 8. 36. 37. & 2. 38. 39 If it be not ministered according to this ordinance of God, it is not the sign of his grace in that abuse, though it be the thing which God in the right use hath apppointed for a sign. 2. He would deceive his reader, as if we held washing should be with any other creature than water, or in any other name then the Lords. These things we know are in themselves the true ordinances of Christ; but by Antichrist turned to a lie, whiles he falsely applieth them to his adulterous synagogue, which Christ hath given to his Church only; and whiles he idolatrously giveth that grace to the work of his sacrilegious priests, which is peculiar to Christ and his blood. It is the true sign of the covenant of Christ which is by Antichrist turned to a lie: and if we should devise to ourselves any other sign, we should be liars like him: who hath devised, cream, spittle, and other like elements, sinfully joined with his baptism.  
4. That also is to be done without delay, seeing the neglect of baptism is sin, and no unbaptised may eat of the Lords Supper, etc.  
Answ. It is true: and so we, if we had not been baptised with water, etc. would do it without delay. But he trifleth, insisting upon the outward element, which he knoweth we had: and leaveth the main thing, the relation to the covenant of grace, which we had not in that Antichristian synagogue.  
5. If any retain an idol baptism, etc. and presume to come to the Lords table, they eat judgement to themselves.  
Answ. We retain no idol baptism: but have put away the idol, and the lie: and retain the truth only, as before is showed. The same we answer to his sixth reason, which is but a repetition and enlargement of his former, as is his manner.  
7. Neither can it be thought that repentance (which still they speak of) should ever make a lie to be a truth, and idol to be God's ordinance, etc. For though repentance findeth mercy with God for a lie, yet a lie is a lie still, and an idol-vanity. Zach. 10. 2. jer. 10. 8. joh. 8. 44. & 14. 6. & 17. 17. with 2. Cor. 6. 14. 15. 16.  
Answ. It is true, of such idols and lies as the Scriptures which he citeth speaketh of; but there are other idols and lies, which by men are made of God himself, and of his word and ordinances, which by God's grace upon men's repentance and faith, are restored to the first truth. As, the Gentiles changed the truth of God into a lie, Rom. 1. 25. and changed the glory of the incorruptible God, into an image, Rom. 1. 23. and Israel changed God their glory, into the similitude of an Ox, Psal. 106. 20. When they repented of their changing the truth into a lie, they retained the truth still, and kept that God whom before they ignorantly worshipped, and of whom they had made an idol to themselves, Act. 17. 23. So for God's ordinances; as, if the Israelites had made idols of Jachin and Boaz (the two sacramental pillars in the Temple) 2. Chron. 3. 17. and had burnt incense to them, as they did to the brazen Serpent, 2. King. 18. 4. they should have repent of, and put away their idolatry, but have retained those pillars still, for such signs as God had ordained them. But such pillars and posts as Israel had invented of their own heads, and set them by the Lords posts, Ezek. 43. 8. no repentance could make them the Lords posts, but they must have been utterly taken away. So in Popish baptism, water is the Lords ordinance, by them abused and turned to an idol: salt, oil, etc. are Antichrists ordinances set up also for idols; these latter we utterly reject, because they were never God's ordinances in baptism; the water we retain, having put away only the abuse and lie of Antichrist annexed thereto. If this be not so, than the jews should not only have repent of and put away their lie, when they used those lying words, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, etc. jer. 7. 4. but they must have destroyed the Temple itself also. And whereas the Papists and other heretics make lies of the Scriptures, and of Christ's holy words This is my body, make their idol of Transubstantiation, and the like; they thould not only repent of their lies, and put away their idols; but also renounce Christ's words, and put away the holy Scriptures; if this doctrine of our opposites be true.  
8. Nor do they in deed repent, who still retain such baptism, as themselves think to be an idol, etc. for true repentance bindeth us to cast away all idols, etc.  
Answ. This is already answered: neither do we reteyn such a baptism as we think to be an idol; but that ordinance of God which was an idol by Antichrists abuse, and is through the grace of God restored unto his former truth, that only do we retain, repenting of our former abuse thereof amongst them. God himself (as I have showed) was made an idol by the Gentiles; their repentance bound them to cast away their idolatry, but to reteyn God still.  
Whereas they say, 
* Animadv. ●●g. 70.  We have gotten the Lords baptism by coming to the Lord in true faith and repentance, who 
† Mat. 3. 11 ● Cor. 12. ●. Pet. 3. 21.  baptiseth us with the holy 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 Isralites turning to the Lord, might eat the Passover without a new cutting or circumcising. 2. Chron. 30. 1. 5. 11. 18.— 25. Ezr. 6. 21.] And afterward say, 
† Page 72.  We have 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] etc. they do but shift and contradict themselves, and deceive others, and still run into errors, more and more.  
Answ. Great words as if he would bear down all before him. But let us hear his proofs.  
For first (saith he) speaking of the Lords baptism, they speak of that which is inward: whereas our question, is of that which is outward.  
Answ. A good beginning. The Apostle saith, there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism; Eph. 4. 5. Himself also a little before, 
* Chr. plea ●ag. 27.  said against the Anabaptists, There is one baptism, as there was one circumcision. Now against us, he would have two baptisms, one outward, an other inward. Whereas, though there be two actions, one outward, done by men, the other inward, done by God's spirit: yet both are but one baptism, one sacrament; as the outward body, and the inward soul, make not two men, but one man. A sacrament is a sacred order between the outward visible thing, and the spiritual invisible, which have a mutual proportion and likeness between them. The Apostle saith, That is not circumcision which is outward in the flesh, but that which is of the heart, in the spirit, Rom. 2. 28. 29. If they have in Rome but the outward washing, without the inward: then have they not true baptism, but a false deceitful sign. Secondly, it is not true, that I spoke but of the inward work only, for I spoke also of the outward; which being had in Rome, need not be repeated: as I showed by the example of the Israelites. Now which of us two shifteth, contradicteth, and deceiveth, I or he: let indifferent men say.  
2. They spoke (saith he) of abuses in the ministration, and opinions of the Ministers thereof: whereas our question is of the thing itself, not of the abuse.  
Answ. We speak of the thing itself (Baptism) abused by the ministers and receivers; neither of which are in God's covenant; and therefore can have no true sign or seal of his covenant unto them in that estate. Secondly, if it were not for abuses and opinions of men, God and his truth, and ordinances, could never be changed into lies and idols, as the Apostle teacheth us they were, Rom. 1. 23. 25. The Athenians were idolaters against the true God; whom Paul preached, and whom they ignorantly worshipped, Act. 17. 23. If one would take them in hand to excuse them, & say, Our question is of the thing itself (the true God) and not of the Athenians abuses and opinions, were it not a worthy plea? yet such we have, for Antichristians baptism.  
3. Their assertion (saith he) implieth that they had not the Lords baptism, till they got it themselves by coming to the Lord in true faith and repentance, which is plain Anabaptistry, and covert Popery and Arminianism: whereby they debase God's grace, and exalt man's works. For it must be understood either of the inward or outward baptism: if of the inward, besides that it toucheth not the question, it implieth Popery: if of the outward, it containeth Anabaptistry.  
Answ. Deliver my soul, o Lord, from lying lips, from the deceitful tongue: Psa. 120. 2. First he citeth as my words, till they had got it themselves by coming to the Lord: whereas the word themselves, is of his own addition. Secondly, he wresteth them to such a meaning, as in his conscience he knew I never intended; namely, to debase God's grace, and exalt man's work, as do the Papists and Arminians. As if I thought that we came or could come to the Lord of ourselves, without being 
† job. 6. 44.  drawn of the Father; or, as if our coming to him were a meritorious work: which errors I abhor. 3. Neither do my words imply such a meaning; any more than our Saviour's, when he said, Come unto me all ye that labour, etc. and I will give you rest: take my yoke upon you, etc. and ye shall find rest to your souls: Math. 11. 28. 29. To conclude of that speech, Therefore they could come of themselves; or their coming should be a meritorious work, or the like: were an openinjury to our Lords words. His two baptisms inward and outward, is before showed to be but'an evasion: we acknowledge but one baptism, Eph. 4. 5. Neither if it be understood of the outward, doth it (as he saith) contain Anabaptistry; for the Anabaptists do not hold that they have the outward baptism by faith and repentance, but do repeat the outward work, and baptise again; which I deny. So herein he hath done me double wrong.  
4. If they had died in infancy, they had not then had the Lords baptism, nor had been baptised with the Holy Ghost: nor any other infants there baptised.  
Answ. We and all, are by nature the children of wrath, Eph. 2. 3. and being born in Antichrists church, we had not the visible covenant of promise, which is given only to Christ's Church. Albeit God hath his elect in false Churches, as among the Gentiles of old, and in Israel after they were divorced from the Lord. Jer. 3. whom he can save without baptism, as he did without circumcision. The same is answered to his fifth objection, of the 
5  same persons come to years. And is further cleared in the* answer to his second argument for the Church of Rome; where he alleged the like things. And where he saith, Either we have no outward baptism at all, confirming the covenant of God: or else we had it before we came under the Lord's covenant, and in a church divorced from the Lord. I answer; We had the outward washing with water, as the Israelites had the outward cutting of the flesh, when they were divorced from the Lord, jer. 3. 8. which could not then confirm God's covenant to us or them in such sinful estate. But as after, when they repented, and turned to the Lord, they had their outward cutting sanctified unto them, for a sign of his covenant, and were admitted to eat of his Passover, Ezr. 6. 21. (which no uncircumcised might eat of, Exod. 12. 48.) so our washing hath been by like grace sanctified unto us, for a sign of his covenant; and we may lawfully eat of the Lords Supper.  
His 6. reason is of like na ure, touching the members of the 
6.  Antichristian church, that they have not the Lords baptism, being not come to the Lord in true faith and repentance, etc. This also is before spoken of in answering his reasons for that church. The Scripture showeth them to be departed from the faith of Christ, 2. Thes. 2. 1. Tim. 4. to bedead in sin, Rev. 20. to be under the wrath of God, Rev. 14. 9 10. 11. Our opposite himself saith of that church, She is a notorious harlot and idolatress: and of the Hierarchy (the ministers of that church, which have the same baptism with the people, and do administer baptism to that people) he saith, they are the Man of Sin, the son of perdition, 2. Thess. 2. the Beast. Rev. 13. concerning whom he could not endure that we should ask his proof that ever they were married unto Christ. And are such a people and Hierarchy, remaining in that estate, come to the Lord in true faith and repentance? If they have brought themselves by their idolatries, heresies, and innumerable sins, into a woeful estate: what are we, that we should justify those whom God condemneth. Let false prophets preach peace unto them, we must notwithstanding declare the judgements of the Lord, whose wrath is revealed from heaven, against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who deteyn the truth in unrighteousness, Rom. 1. 18.  
7. Finally (saith he) Whereas they say, the outward washing need not to be repeated, and yet say also, they have renounced the Romish Baptism as an impure idol in their abuse; they use shifts, and contradict themselves. For if the outward baptism be an Idol, why do they reteyn it? If not, why have they renounced it?  
Answ. I have formerly showed, the shift and contradiction to be in himself; who pleaded against the Anabaptists, that there is but one baptism, and now against us would have two. 2. I have also showed, that God's ordinance turned into an idol or lie; the lie, the idol, is to be renounced, the truth of the ordinance retained: so do we.  
That (saith he) which they speak of their abuse, is a shift. Difference is to be put between a thing abused, and th'abuse thereof. The scriptures are▪ the word of God, and not an impure idol to be renounced, though they be abused by the Papists and themselves etc.  
Answ. when he hath nought else to answer, he casteth reproaches, and calleth my reason a shift. Would he have me so impious, as to call Baptism, the Lords supper, or other divine ordinances, idols: unless for the sin and abuse of men, which turn them to idols, as the truth of God, was turned into a lie by the Gentiles, Rom. 1. 25. And do not I put that very difference which himself here putteth: how then is it a shift in me, more than in him. The scripture in itself is always pure: yet popish heresies falsely gathered from the scriptures, are most impure; these we reject, but hold fast the scripture. Water in popish baptism is Gods good creature, Antichrist hath turned it and the action with it, into an abominable idol, as if it gave grace, and washed away sin by the work done of a sacrilegious priest. This abomination we reject: the creature of God, is of his grace sanctified unto us, and we reteyn it.  
Now follow his 
* Chr. plea pag. 34.  other reasons to prove it no idol, but true baptism.  
1. Because an Idol, etc. is an invention of man in the worship of God. whereas Baptism in those churches, is of the holy things of God, a true sign of his covenant etc.  
Answ. The first is granted him: the latter is denied: and he but beggeth the question. For neither doth the church continue in Rome which th'Apostles planted: neither doth the true baptism there continue, any more than the true Supper of our Lord, (turned by them into an abominable Mass,) or any more than the true ministry, which is changed by his own grant into a man of sin, a Beast, and the great Antichrist. Or, any more than the true Censure of excommunication, which they profane against such as forsake their idolatrous church.  
2. Else those churches should not have a mixture of God's ordinances with their own inventions, &c but should be utterly deprived of all and every one of God's ordinances. But they have such a mixed estate: etc.  
Answ. He concludeth nothing: but should conclude, therefore it is no idol to them in their abuse, but Christ's true baptism. This I deny. And first I answer, that all the heathens had before Christ's coming a mixture of God's ordinances with their own inventions: yet were they not therefore in the covenant of grace, neither had they the true signs and seals thereof. 2. as men's inventions are idols, so God's ordinances may by men be turned into idols, as are the sacraments in Rome. For is not the wheaten God in their supper, an Idol? what mouth will deny it? Mine opposite pressed with it, passeth it over always, as if he could not see it. That thing alone, would have convinced this, and many other his reasons of like sort; if he durst have meddled with it.  
3. If their baptism were an idol, than it should be sin in them to reteyn that baptism still: etc.  
Ans. How often shall we have repetitions of the same thing? He hath been answered: the idol ought to be put away, the ordinance of God, aught to be retained? If the jews had made an Idol of jachin, 2 Chron. 3. 17. they should have repent of their idolatry, but let the pillar stand. And it is the great sin of the papists, that they keep their Mass, and their popish Christening, and do not put them away as they are idols, and restore them to their ancient truth, as they were Christ's ordinances.  
Obj. When Israel fell into defiction, the Prophets that blamed their idolatries, did then also reprove them for not observing religiously such of the ordinances of God as were still remaining among them. Amos. 8. 5. with 2. 8. 11. 12. & 5. 4. 5. jer. 17. 21.— 27. with 2. 20.— 28. & 7. c. Ezek. 20. 7. with v. 12. 13. So far were they from accounting Gods ordinances retained in apostasy, to be idols, and detestable things, etc.  
Answ. So we blame the papists, and all heretics, for not observing religiously Gods ordinances, whether retained among them, or omitted by them. Yet were not the prophets so far from counting Gods ordinances abused by them, detestable things, as he would pretend. Jncense was God's ordinance, yet in Esa. 1. 13. he saith, Incense is an abomination unto me. Sacrifices were Gods ordinances, yet in Esa. 66. 3. he saith, He that killeth an Ox, is as if he slew a man: he that sacrificeth a Lamb, as if he cut off a dogs neck: he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered Swine's blood: he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an Jdol. For these and the like reprehensions, the prophets were counted blasphemers, and persecuted and killed by the jews: yet were there not half so many corruptions in their sacrifices, as are in baptism and the Lords Supper now among the Antichristians: though mine opposite counteth me a blasphemer for speaking of them but as they are. And what would he say to the Passover, and all the sacrifices that apostate Israel offered; were they not detestable things through their abuse: When for offering them as they did, they were by God's law to be cut off as murderers, and sacrificers to Devils, Leu. 17. 3. 4.— 7. Deut. 32. 17. compared with 1. King. 12. 28— 33. 2. Chron. 11. 15. & 13. 9 & 15. 3. And was that Passover now a true sacrament and sign of Christ unto them, and seal of the forgiveness of their sins? If not, than neither was their circumcision: for God's people have not one sacrament true and another false unto them in the same sinful estate.  
4. Baptism (saith he) in the defection of Christian Churches, is as circumcision was in the Apostasy of Jsrael. But circumcision in that estate was not an idol or lying sign, etc. but the Lords ordinance, a true sign, had before their defection, and still continuedin their apostasy; as hath also come to pass in the Christian Church, concerning baptism, Gen. 17. 7.— 14. and Leu. 12. 2. 3. with 2. King. 13. 23. 2. Chron. 30. jer. 9 26. Ezek. 23. & 32. 24. 26. 29. 32. Also Mat. 28. 18. 19 Rom. 6. 3. 4. with 2. Thes. 2. 4. Rev. 11. 1. 2. 19  
Answ. As baptism is answerable to circumcision, so is the Lords Supper to the Passover: all of them God's ordinances in themselves but abused by the idolarrous Israelites, and by the Antichristians to their further judgement. Yet nothing so far abused in Israel, as in the church of Rome. Did ever the Israelites believe the paschal lamb to be the very natural body of Christ, and worship it for their maker? Or did they ever add so many abominations to circumcision, as Antichristians do to baptism? or did they believe that the circumcising by the work done, took away all their sins. If they had, than I would prove against all men, that they had turned God's sacraments into abominable idols. If they did not, than he hath made no equal comparison. But take them as they were, I deny their facraments to have been true signs of forgiveness of sins unto them in that their estate. And where is his proof for this? He citeth many Scriptures, but not one that confirmeth this point in hand. It is true they had the outward cutting of their foreskin: and so had the Canaanites of Sichem, Gen. 34. 24. but God instituted the sign of circumcision, to be the seal of the righteousness of faith, Rom. 4. 11. Now one of the Scriptures which he bringeth for proof, saith, All the house of Jsrael were uncircumcised in the heart, jer. 9 26. If they had true faith, their hearts had been thereby purified, Act. 15. 9 and consequently circumcised. But they were not circumcised in heart by faith in Christ; therefore their circumcision could not seal up to them the righteousness of faith; and so was to them a lying sign through their abuse of it. Paul saith, If thou be a transgressor of the Law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision, Rom. 2. 25. They transgressed, and continued in transgression, though God called them to repentance by all his prophets, yet they believed not in the Lord their God; but rejected his statutes and his covenant that he made with their fathers, and his testimonies which he testified against them; and followed vanity and became vain, etc. and left all the commandments of the Lord their God, and made them molten images, etc. that the Lord removed them out of his sight, 2. King. 17. 13.— 18. and he gave them a bill of divorce, Jer. 3. 8. and yet they continued circumcision: which could not be to them in their idolatrous and unrepentant estate, a seal of the righteousness of saith, or forgiveness of their sins, unless we will contradict all the Scriptures, Deut. 29. 18.— 21. Mat. 3. 7.— 10. 1. Cor. 6. 9 10. Gal. 5. 16.— 21. Rom. 8. 1— 8. Rev. 22. 15.  
5. The covenant of God (saith he) is an everlasting covenant, which God continueth and respecteth even in the times of apostasy, yea and when he chastiseth the transgression thereof, etc. Otherweise the ground and continuance of God's covenant and of the seal thereof, should depend on man's work and merit, and not frecly and wholly on God's grace and mercy.  
Answ. The first is ambiguous and deceitful: God's covenant is everlasting, and continued in times of apostasy; but unto whom? Not to the unrepentant or unbelieving that are hardened in their sins, as were the Israelites; but to them that repent, believe, and turn to the Lord; Levit. 26. 15.— 40. 41. 42.— 45. Deut. 29. 19 20. Prev. 1. 23.— 33. Ezek. 3. 18.— 21. & 18. 10.— 13. 21. 22. 23. 24. 26. 27. 28.  
The second is untrue; for though God damneth unrepentant and unbelieving sinner's (as in justice he needs must, because they are not in Christ,) yet doth not the covenant or seal depend on man's work or merit. For it is God's work & grace through Christ's merits only, that men do repent, believe, and return unto him, Act. 11. 18. Eph. 2. 4. 5.— 8. 9 And there is no covenant between God and man, but conditional: for without faith and holiness no man shall see the Lord, Mark. 16. 16. Heb. 12. 14. Rom. 11. 20. 21. 22. 23. Though these conditions even in men, are the work of God in them, Heb. 8. 10. 12. Whosoever is born of God, overcommeth the world, sinneth not; but keepeth himself, and the wicked one toucheth him not, 1. joh. 5. 4. 18. And they that teach otherweise, destroy the Gospel, and open a gap to all profaneness and licentiousness.  
If God (saith he) break the covenant on his part, when men break it on theirs, than should there still be a new entering into the covenant again between God and man: and a new baptism daily received again, as the sign and seal thereof.  
Answ. God always breaketh not the covenant on his part, when men break it on theirs: but calleth them often back unto repentance, Psa. 89. 31— 34. Exo. 32. & 33. chapters. But to some that are hardened, and will not repent, he breaketh his covenant visibly, casting them out of his church, cutting them off, Rom. 11. 20. 22. giving them a bill of divorce, Jer. 3. 8. removeth the candlestick, Rev. 2. 5. Otherweise if a man coming from judaism or paganism to the Christian faith and Church, do again revolt from Christ to judaism or paganism, and for obstinacy in his sin is cut off by the power of Christ from his Church: he must still be reputed in the covenant of God visibly on God's part: which is most untrue, seeing God on his part hath cut them off, and given them a bill of divorce. If any such return, the covenant must be renewed, Host 2. 7. 19 20. 2. Cor. 6. 17. 18. yet the seal of the covenant once given, is not to be repeated; as a Christian revolted to paganism, and cut off from the Church; is not when he returneth, baptised again. Because though he was visibly cut off even of God, for his sin: yet by his return, it appeareth that he still belonged to his election of grace which was to man invisible, whiles he continued cut off. Yea though he received the seal after a false manner, when it was not due unto him: yet when he turneth to the Lord it is not repeated. As the Israelites which were circumcised after they were divorced from God, jer. 3. 8. had no new circumcision in the flesh, when they turned unto God, Ezr. 6. 21.  
6. If such were the baptism of the Church in Rome, etc. then should it be likewise in the East Churches, and in all Churches of the world, when they fall into sin, breaking the covenant. etc.  
Answ. I deny the comparison. For Rome is revolted from Christ to Antichrist, and fallen from grace, (by the Apostles rule, Gal. 5. 4.) and is become dead in sin, Rev. 20. and is not the true Church of Christ, but a Man of sin, and whore of Babylon, 2. Thes. 2. Rev. 17. which things are before proved. Such is not the state of all Churches that sin and break the convenant: till for their hardness and contempt of God, they be also cut off, as Rome is: which when they be, then have they no true sacraments any longer among them.  
7. If there, baptism were indeed a lying sign and fiction, then would it follow that there should be no salvation for any members of those Churches, retaining the baptism there received. For the sign hath reference to the covenant and thing signified, and so a lying sign must have respect to a lying covenant. And by a lying covenant there is no salvation to any, etc.  
Answ. The covenant which the Church of Rome hath made with Antichrist, is a lying covenant; and hath lying signs to confirm it; and God hath sent them strong delusion to believe a lie, that they all might be damned, who believe not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness, 2. Thes. 2. 11. 12. Therefore by the covenant and seals of that Antichristian synagogue, we cannot say, that any one by the promise of God shall be saved. But by the covenant of grace which God communicateth with his elect in that and other false churches, many are saved: but that is not the covenant of the church. Of which point, I have spoken before, in answer to his 2. Argument for the church of Rome. His reasons are the same, again and again repeated. Here further note, how by his argument, the popish Mass may be justified, thus. If the Lords Supper or Mass in Rome, be an idol, a lying sign and fiction; then is there no salvation for the members of that Church, retaining the Mass. For a lying sign must have respect to a lying covenant, and by a lying covenant there is no salvation to any. But the church of Rome (by mine opposites plea) is in the covenant of salvation, which is the true covenant; therefore it also hath the true sign and seal of that covenant in their Mass or Babylonish Supper. For our Lord's Supper is the true sign and seal of the forgiveness of sins, and covenant of grace, Mat. 26. 26. 28. Luk. 22. 19 20. If he yield not this, than he must say, that they have two covenants, the one of life and salvation sealed to them by baptism, the other of death and damnation, sealed unto them by the Mass or Supper. So they shall go both to heaven and hell, by their double covenant.  
8. Finally (saith he) the baptism of those Churches is from heaven, and not of men: and is derived unto us from the Apostles of Christ, through the loins of the church of Rome, etc. Therefore is no idollor lying sign, but the true sacrament and ordinance of the Lord, Math. 21. 21. & 28. 18. 19 with Rom. 6. 3. 4. Heb. 7. 9 10. 2. Chron. 30. ch.  
Answ. I deny this his conclusion, it being but a begging of the question which he should have proved. It is not their baptism which is from heaven: they are fallen from heaven, and become a Beast (or kingdom Ecclesiastical) arisen out of the earth, Rev. 13. 11. they are gone out from the Apostolic Church, and become Antichrists, 1. Joh. 2. 18. 19 Mine opposite himself hath granted that the Pope and his Hierarchy are Antichrist, the Man of sin, the Beast; never married to Christ. Again he saith (in this his Chr. plea p. 3.) In baptism the action is wholly enjoined & laid upon the baptiser, and not upon the baptised. The baptizers in Rome, are the Priests, which be a part of the beast, and Man of sin: on them the whole action lieth, as he saith. Now is this baptism from heaven? Did God ever bid Antichrist baptise? The whole action then of popish baptism, lieth upon them that are confessed by him, to be Antichrist: & yet this baptism he will have to be from heaven. 2. They were not in the loins of the primitive Christian Church, either by nature or by grace; otherweise then all nations in Moses time, were in the loins of the primitive Church in noah's time. 3. We have not our baptism from them, but from God, who hath delivered us from Antichrist, & given us to his son Christ; and hath so sanctified to us that baptising with water in his name, which they idolatrously and sinfully abused; as we need no other outward washing, but to be baptised by his spirit; as his dealing with such as had been circumcised in Israel, (after they were become a false church, and were divorced from him) and returned again unto him, doth assure us; 2. Chron. 30. ch. Ezr. 6. 21. His reason may also as probably be framed thus. The Lord's Supper or Mass in the Church of Rome, is from heaven, not of men, Math. 26. Luk. 22. and is derived unto us from the Apostles of Christ, through the loins of that Church, which have from that time retained and continued it to this day. Therefore it is not an idol or lying sign; howsoever all protestants with one mouth call it justly, an idol, an horrible idol, an abomination, and the like. The Mininistery of the church of Rome, is from heaven, and not of men, Rom. 12. and is derived to us from the Apostles, through the loins of that church, which have from that time continued it to this day. Therefore it is not the Man of Sin, the Beast, the Antichrist, as all protestants say, and as Mr. johnson himself hath pleaded in his last book, but the true ministry and ordinance of the Lord. The like may be said for their Excommunications, and all other divine ordinances which that church hath sinfully profaned. Yea the very same plea, might all the heathens have made for their sactifices and divine ordinances, which from No and his sons, through the loins of their parents were derived unto them; as before I have manifested.  
Whereas I 
* Animad● p. 68 69.  described the abominable manner of baptising in the Church of Rome, how heathen-like they profane Christ's ordinance, mine opposite not being able to justify their impiety, yet pleadeth his best, thus;  

† Chr. plea p. 37.  But will it therefore follow, that the baptism there had is not God's ordinance, but an idol, a false and lying sign, etc.  
Answ. It followeth that they in their Antichristian estate and abuse, have changed God's ordinance into an idol and lying sign, as the Gentiles of old, changed the truth of God into a lie, Rom. 1. 25. And have added also many lies and lying signs of their own devising, as bad as did the heathens.  
Or will it follow, because of their errors and corruptions, that the baptism there had is to be renounced, and an other new one to be received?  
Answ. Their lies and lying signs, and changing of the truth into a lie, are all to be renounced: but the ordinance of God which he hath restored to the former truth unto those that repent and believe in him, is not to be renounced, and a new received; and such is the outward washing with water in his name, 2 Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. 21.  
Is every thing abused or misapplyed by men, strait way an idol?  
Answ. Every thing so abused as they do baptism and the Lords Supper, is strait way an idol: for divine honour is given to the creature, and work of a wicked man's hand, Exod. 20. Yea let him be a witness against himself: for afterward in pag. 246. he saith touching book-prayer; that it is an image and similitude of spiritual prayer, which yet it is not. And so these books and stinted prayers prescribed by man in the worship of God, come in deed to be idols, supplying the place of the word and spirit of God, which ought not to be. Here the abuse of the book by his own grant, maketh it in deed an idol: for the book may lawfully be used and read of men for instruction, as well as written Sermons, Homilies, etc.  
Do they that are baptised, bow down to it and worship it?  
Answ. Did the infants that were offered to Molech, (Levit. 20. ●.) bow down and worship it? Or they that made their belly their God, Phil. 3. 19 did they bow down to their belly and worship it? Or, do they that make the book an idol, as himself saith; bow down and worship the book? How strangely doth he plead: as if idols cannot be set up in, and worshipped with the heart. But they bow down & worship the bread in the Supper: will he grant that to be an idol?  
If that were done unto it (saith he) as was unto the Sun among the Jews; why might it not be still notwithstanding God's ordinance in itself: as the Sun was the true Sun, and God's creature, even unto them, and in that their estate, whiles they made it an idol to themselves.  
Answ. O fraud and guile in pleading for idolaters! Every creature of God is 
† Gen. 1. 31.  good, every ordinance of God is holy in itself: who doubteth of it? If this distinction helpeth the popish sacraments, it helpeth the heathens idols of silver and gold, which are Gods good creatures in themselves. But it is a mere fallacy to reason as he doth from the Sun to Baptism; from a creature which is an absolute substance, to a sacrament which is a relation of the covenant between God and men. No idolatry, unbeleef, or other wickedness can hinder the Sun from being God's creature unto men in that their sinful estate. If it be likeweise in the sacrament, than no idolatry, unbeleef, or other wickedness, can hinder baptism and the Lords supper from being true signs and seals of God's covenant of grace and forgiveness of sins, unto Turks or Pagans, in their sinful estate, if they baptise with water in the name of the Lord, and eat the bread and wine in the Supper of our Lord. But he should have known that common received rule of all truly religious, that Nothing is in deed a sacrament, without the use ordained of God: as we are taught of the Apostle, This is not to eat the Lords Supper: 1. Cor. 11. 20. The water that flowed out of the rock, was the same creature of God to men that drunk of it, and to the beasts that drunk of it, Numb. 20. 11. but it was a sacrament to men only, using it for a confirmation of their faith, by a divine institution, 1. Cor. 10. 4. Further, by his reason, it is undeniable that the Pope himself (whom he acknowledgeth to be Antichrist) and all that partake with him in his Mass, notwithstanding all their idolatry and heresy thereabout, do eat the true sacrament, sign and seal of the forgiveness of their sins. And why then should he deny the Pope to be as good a Christian as himself: seeing all they are blessed whose sins are forgiven them, Rom. 4. 6. 7.  
Let it be observed, that they baptise only in the name of the Lord: and with acknowledgement of the Articles of the Christian saith, as in their form of baptism may be seen.  
Answ. And let it also be observed, that they sacrifice their Mass (or celebrate their idolatrous supper) only in the name of the Lord; and with acknowledgement of the same Articles of Christian faith, even by the Pope himself. Why then hath he pleaded against the Pope and his Hierarchy, that they, they only are the Man of sin, the son of perdition, the Beast, the Antichrist; and why wondered he so at me, when I called for proof that Christ was married to that Beast; seeing he hath the same baptism, the same Lord's Supper, the same belief touching the Articles of faith, that the people of his church have. But their counterfeit profession of Christ is before discovered. And they that baptise (which are the Hierarchy) he confesseth to be the Man of sin, the Antichrist, they are none of the church (as we have heard) but ulcers, gangrenes, etc. what now have such to do with the name of the Lord, or administration of the seals of his covenant. And compare with this, that which himself saith in the 3. page of his book, that the action (of baptism) is wholly enjoined and laid upon the baptiser, and not upon the baptised. If this be so, where hath God laid the action of baptising upon Antichrist, the Man of sin: and if God hath not laid it upon him, how can he truly do it in God's name?  
How will they prove (saith he) that it is a lying sign unto them in their estate, seeing baptism (as the other sacraments in Israel and under the Gospel) hath this in it to be a sign by the ordinance of God, not at the pleasure of man. And God is the God of truth, and appointeth no lying signs, but true. Neither can man's iniquity make God's signs to be lying signs. sinful therefore and erroneous it is so to think, if not also blasphemous so to speak.  
Answ. And was it sinful and erroneous (thinketh he) in Paul, when he said, They changed the truth of God into a lie, Rom. 1. 25. For if man's iniquity cannot change Gods signs into lying signs: how should it change the truth of God into a lie? And how could jeremy have proved unto the jews (if mine opposite had then lived to plead for them) that those were lying words, when they said The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, etc. jer. 7. 4. for had they not in deed the Temple of the Lord, his true ordinance and sign, whereof they spoke? The word of God is truth, joh. 17. 17. How then should man's iniquity, make God's truth to be a lie unto themselves, though they pervert the word unto all manner false-doctrine, error and heresy▪ Idols are lies, Esa. 44. 20. jer. 16. 19 20. How can the Pope make an idol of the bread in the sacrament, though he fall down and worship it, and believe it is his maker: seeing as it is bread, it is a true thing, and Gods good creature; as it is sacramental bread, it is a true sign by the ordinance of God, who appointeth no lying signs. Is it not blasphemous now, and would he not rend his clothes as did 
† Math. 26. ●.  Caiaphas, if he should hear one call the Pope's sacrament of the altar, an idol, or a lying sign unto him in that estate? But to conclude, The sacraments are in deed signs by the ordinance of God, not at man's will: God's ordinance maketh them signs of grace to the faithful receivers only, 1. Cor. 11. 20. 29. Rom. 2. 25 Act. 8. 36. 37. If infidels and Antichrists falsely challenge and usurp Gods signs, and abuse them to open idolatry, and their own perdition; they change the truth of God's ordinance into a lie unto themselves; and whiles they vainly think to have forgiveness of sins by them, they add sin unto sin, and receive their own damnation.  
Whereas I had 
* Animadv. ag. 69.  set down two reasons to prove the Popish baptism false, and a lying sign unto them: mine opposite passeth them over, as too heavy for him; and cometh to 
† Chr. plea ag. 38.  set down differences between God's ordinances and men's corruptions; Gods signs, and men's errors: Marriage, meats and drinks, and the abuses of these; the scriptures, and the errors gathered from them; the Sun, Moon and Stars, as they are creatures, and as they are made idols and worshipped of men, etc. Wherein he laboureth to prove the thing which we hold; and doth most injuriously intimate against us, as if we thought the contrary. Should we be so wicked as to imagine the ordinances of God, or his creatures to be evil in themselves? Farr be it from us. Nay we say, that the papists for abusing the sacraments, and turning them to lies and idols, shall have the greater judgement: not for abusing bread and wine and water as they are creatures only, but for abusing them as they are sacramental signs ordained of Christ, which maketh their profanation more horrible, their damnation more just. But this is a practice of many, that plead for error; to leave the arguments which do convince them, and to propone new questions and reasons of their own: that they may seem to say something, by multitude of words.  
So when I showed 
† Anima p. 69.  the example of the idolatrous Israelites, that 
* 2. Chro. Ezr. 6. 21  repenting and forsaking their false Synagogues & lying signs in them usurped, they needed not a new outward cutting or circumcising, as is showed at large in our former writings. Discovery, p. 116.— 120. Apolog. p. 110.— 113. He passeth over the reasons manifested in those books, as if he had never seen them: when as the one was most of it penned by himself. And now he pleadeth:  

† Chr. p●e p. 39  Whereas they say, that circumcision was also a lying sign, and false sacrament to Jsrael in their defection, how do they prove it? where doth the Scripture teach it? will they have us take it on their bare word, and believe that their saying are Oracles? etc.  
Answ. He might have seen reasons in the books before cited, besides those that I have set down. But thus in seeking to wound us, he hath smitten through his own sides, as if himself when he wrote those things in our Apology, would have had men believe his bare word, and that his sayings were Oracles. Whereas, if ever he wrote sound in his life, he did it in that Apology, as all men of good judgement may perceive. Further now to answer him, I say, that I spoke of their lying signs, which employed their Passover and sacrifices, as well as their circumcision. And those being so profaned, as for them they were by God's Law to be cut off as murderers, Levit. 17. as sacrificers to Divils', not to God, Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15. & 15. 3. were they then true signs unto them of God's grace and favour, and forgiveness of their sins in Christ? The Scripture teacheth, they could not be partakers of the Lords table, and of the table of Divils', 1. Cor. 10 21. In particular, for their circumcision, I proved it thus, 
† Animal p. 68  True circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of saith, Rom. 4. 11. Jsrael in their apostasy were fallen from the faith Host 11. 12. they were without the true God, without Priest to teach, & without Law, 2. Chron. 15. 3. and how then could they have the true circumcision the seal of the righteousness of saith, and forgiveness of their sins in that sinful estate. Thus I showed God's words (not mine own) for oracles.  
He asketh, if we will be wiser, and more righteous than God himself, who accounted them still to be his people, under his covenant, and himself to be their God, and upon this ground called them to repentance, etc.  
Answ. All this notwithstanding, whiles they continued unrepent and unbelieving, and 
* 2. King. 17 3. 14 15. 6.  hardened their necks against the Lord their God; etc. their circumcisim (by Paul's doctrine) was made uncircumcision, Rom. 2. 25. their sacrifices were an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 15. 8. And he might have seen in the Scriptures, that though Israel were divorced from the Lord, jer. 3. 8. and not his people; or wife, nor he her husband, Host 1. 9 & 2. 2. yet they are in respect of their former state, their continual profession, and the future mercy towards them, called God's people still, even till Christ's time, Esai. 11. 11. 16. Amos. 9 14. That he should not urge a phrase (as his manner is,) against the plain doctrines of the Scripture.  
Obj. What will they say to the circumcision of Judah in their apostasy, etc. was it also among them none of God's ordinance, but an idol? etc.  
Answ. It was God's ordinance, though abused by the unworthy receivers, as before is showed. But he from a false church, and Babylon, flieth to Zion the true Church corrupted; which is his perpetual fallacy. If judah, or any Church in the world had done with the sacraments as Rome hath done, they had changed them into idols, contrary to the 2. commandment. But judah never did so with circumcision and the Passover; he showeth no word of God to prove it.  
Obj. Have the gates of hell more prevailed against the Christian Church since Christ's coming, than they did or could against the Church of the jews before his coming in the flesh? Mat. 16. 18.  
Answ. This old popish reason, hath been often answered by many Writers against the Antichristians: and is of no more force for Rome turned to Antichrist, then for Ephesus, Corinth, and other churches turned to Mahomet. For what privilege (besides a popish dream) had Rome above Ephesus? Should it, (because it crucified Christ, and is therefore cursed above all cities,) have prerogative above Ephesus, wherein was a church (in Paul's time) which was the ground and pillar of truth. 1. Tim. 1. 3. & 3. 15. yet is that church long since cut off: but Rome's church must continue, for her good service to Divils' and idols, Rev. 9 20. and for worshipping the Beast, Rev. 13. He might have seen in Rev. 12. that the woman the Church perisheth not, though she be fled into the wilderness, from the presence of the Serpent, and synagogue of Antichrist. His other repetitions again and again; are before answered.  
Obj. The ordinances of God may in any churches become unprofitable to men by their own sins, circumcision may be made uncircumcision to such as break the Law, etc. Rom. 2. 25. 26. so baptism now. But shall we therefore say, that they are not in such churches, to such persons, the Lords ordinances, nor his true signs and sacraments, but idols and lying signs, etc. Was the Lord's table in the Church of Corinth, a table of Divils'; or the Lord's Supper an idol or lying sign, etc. to such as eat it unworthily? Was it not the Lords ordinance, and true sacrament, though sinfully abused by them? etc.  
Ans. The Lord's ordinances abide always the same, and holy in themselves, howsoever abused by Christians, by Antichristians, by jews, Turks or Pagans, to their perdition. Neither is there a like degree of abuse in all; neither doth every abuse make a thing an idol: but when the honour due to God alone, is given to a creature, than it is made an idol: and so I have proved is done in the church of Rome; to which proofs he answereth not. I instanced 
† Animadv▪ p. 73. 74.  the Lords Supper in Rome, whereof they have made an abominable idol, worshipping a piece of bread as their maker. Mine opposite will never mention or meddle with this, but shuneth it as convinced in conscience. And from Antichrists church, runneth to the Christian Church in Corinth; and asketh if the Lord's table there, were a table of Divils'? I answer, No; not then in Corinth, but now in Rome, they have made it by their idolatrous Mass, a table of Divils': and as Moses said of Israel, they sacrificed to Divils', not to God. Deut. 32. 17. so say I of these Antichristians, their sacrifice of the altar is a sacrifice to Divils', not to God. This he should have disproved, if he could have done it; and not to leave the persons and things whereof we dispute, and run to others. So the Lords baptism, they have turned into an idol▪ ascribing the gift of grace (which only is Gods) to water, words and works of men: that as the Gentiles turned the truth of God into a lie, Rom. 1. these 
* Rev. 11. 2.  Gentiles also have turned the truth of God, and of his sacraments into lies. And as the Lords incense and sacrifices were an abomination to him, from the hands of wicked sinners. Esai. 1. 13. Prov. 15. 8. so the Lords sacraments are an abomination to him, from the hands of Antichristians. And as he doth, so ought all his people to esteem of them; and not to regard 
† jer. 7. 4. 8. 9 10.  lying words of such as cry nothing but the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the sacraments and ordinances of the Lord; to deceive God's people, and to harden the sinner's in their wicked works.  
Whereas I distinctly 
* Animadv. p. 72. etc.  showed the idolatry committed in Antichrists baptising of his subjects, partly by perverting the holy signs, as the Israelites did the brazen serpent, ●. King. 1●. 4. partly by inventing signs of his own, as crosses, exorcisms, etc. Mine opposite first † censureth the things I wrote to be notable shifts, errors, 
* Chr. plea pag. 42.  contradictions, abuse of scriptures, vain distinctions, and odious assertions. Such grace hath flowed from his tongue and pen.  
1. Observe (saith he) a needless distinction of idols, nothing helping for the question in hand.  
Answ. The distinction is true and needful to discern the truth of the question, against his clamorous reproaches, as if I called God's ordinance in itself considered, an idol.  
2. If they mean (saith he) that baptism there had is an idol of both sorts, they do the more increase their error.  
Answ. I do so mean: yet is there no increase of error: I hear his bold words, but no proof.  
3. They speak of crosses, exorcisms, etc. whereas we speak of the baptism itself.  
Ans. So do I: but of popish baptism, mixed with Christ's ordinances and Antichrists together. All parts of a thing put together, make the whole: and it is deceitful dealing to dazzle men's eyes with the whores golden cup, and to pass by the abominable ingredients, the fornications that are in it, when both are joined together, Rev. 17. 4.  
4. They speak of the abuse, our question is of the thing itself, notwithstanding their sinful abuse.  
Ans. Our question is of popish baptism, which cannot be rightly handled without looking to their abuses: for how should we judge of the heathens worship and sacrifices, if we look not upon their abuses, as Paul doth in Rom. 1. The same I answer to his 5. exception, of their opinions and errors. Take away the errors of actions, and what fault can we find with any?  
6. If the Romish baptism be a lie in the right hand of all that receive it: then of infants; then also in their own right hand that were baptised there. Not to speak of the Martyrs, etc.  
Ans. There is no respect of persons with God. Bee they old or young, better or worse: sin is sin in all. Though God's grace in Christ, purgeth sin from his elect, which remaineth in the reprobates.  
His 7. 8. and 9 exceptions, are vain; and repetitions of former things, without conviction. If Bellarmine or any speak truth, we may speak it with them: so Paul speaketh with the heathen Poets, Tet. 1. 12. 13. Act. 17. 28.  
10. If they mean the true sacraments in Christ's Church, seal not up to God's people, forgiveness of sins, it is an error: if they mean that they do not themselves take away sins, and confer grace, they use shifts, and keep not to the point of the relation here spoken of, and as it is apppointed to be by the Lord himself.  
Answ. The first I grant him; and he knew well it was not my meaning. The latter I have proved, that they being under God's wrath, 2. Thess. 2. have no seal from God of forgiveness of sins in that estate. And their doctrine of conferring grace by the work done, is heretical and idolatrous: which he not being able to gainsay, puts it away (as his manner is) with a shift.  
11. From God's sentence of condemnation touching Antichrist and his adherents, they reason to God's baptism never condemned by the Lord, but still continued in the Church and Temple of God, where Antichrist sitteth.  
Ans. Of his own mouth let him be judged. We reason only of Antichrist and his adherents, the Whore of Babylon, or adulterous church, which he saith are condemned of God. How then doth God give them the sign and seal of grace & forgiveness of sins? God's baptism we condemn not, neither our Lords Supper: but Antichrists Christening and Mass, we deny to be Christ's baptism and supper. He still beggeth the question which he should prove. And let him take away Antichrist and his adherents; and the church of Rome, whereof we reason, will be vanished as smoke, and come to nothing: as take away Christ and his adherents, so there will be no Christian Church, nor sacraments to be found.  
12. From the brazen serpent, which was but a temporary and extraordinary sign, the use whereof was ceased when it was thus perverted, etc. they reason to baptism, which is an ordinary sign, whose use still continueth, and may never be taken away or destroyed, to the end of the world.  
Ans. We reason not from the one to the other: but by the abuse of the one, we show the abuse of the other. And what is this in him but a shift, to plead the temporarinesse of that sign? For if they had burnt incense to it in the wilderness; or if they had burnt incense to the 
† 2. Chro. 3. 10. 17. & 4. 3. 4.  Cherubims, or brazen Bulls, or pillars which were continued signs, they had made idols of them nevertheless. Otherweise the wheaten god in the Popish supper is no idol: seeing the use of the Lords Supper continueth to the world's end, as well as baptism. And hitherto of the shifts as he calleth them; wherein how he hath shifted in stead of answering by the word of truth, the wise reader may see. Like these are his 
* Chr. plea pag. 44.  catalogue of Errors.  
1. That the baptism had in the church of Rome is an idol, etc.  
Ans. 1. This is proved by the 2. commandment, Exod. 20. while they ascribe divine honour to the creature. 2. It is proved also by his own assertion, that books of prayer, read for prayer, are idols; as before I showed from his words in his last book. 3. He showeth not one word to prove it an error in me: but saith, Of which more hereafter. Thus vain tantologies are his arguments to oppose the truth which he calleth Error.  
2. That whereas idols are of two sorts, both the kinds are in Popish baptism. If it be as the brazen serpent, that from an holy sign was perverted to an idol, it should presently be destroyed, as 2. King. 18. 4.  
Answ. I deny his inference. If they had burnt incense to the Temple, should it have been destroyed. The brazen serpent was named but for an instance, to show that holy signs may be made idols by wicked men. This doctrine he being not able to convince; leaveth it, and would evade by the destroying of it. As if all idols must be destroyed. The heathens made idols of the Sun, Moon, Starrs, Beasts, Fishes, Mountains, Lakes, etc. Must all these therefore be destroyed? If men make an idol of their King, as did the Babylonians, Dan. 6. 7. must the King presently be destroyed? whoever heard of such divinity? That which he addeth of the Pope's cross, exorcisms, etc. is before answered: for he saith, Our question is of the baptism itself; as if those were not a part of Popish baptism. He would have wicked men's actions separated from all their sins, errors and wickedness in doing them. So in deed I could justify all idolatry in the world: for take away the error and sin of an action, and that which remaineth must needs be good.  
3. They say not they have renounced the abuses and kept the baptism it self, etc. but say they have renounced that Romish baptism, as an impure idol in their abuse. If they have in deed so done, than here again is notable error and Anabaptistry. And now than what outward baptism have they remaining to themselves?  
Ans. Neither doth Solomon say, the abuse of the wickeds sacrifice is an abomination, and except the sacrifice as holy: but he saith expressly, The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 15. 8. He was answered before to his two baptisms outward and inward, that the Apostle (and elsewhere himself) maketh but one baptism, Eph. 4. 5. And the outward part thereof we retain as now sanctified to us of God; as the outward cutting of the idolatrous Israelites was to them that repented, 2. Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. 21. which again he putteth off till afterwards.  
4. Note also that the brazen Serpent was not in deed an idol: but an holy ordinance of God, which in time came to be idolatrously abused, etc.  
Ans. He saith all things, but proves nothing. It was in deed an idol, and an holy ordinance idolatrously abused also. These things stand well together. The Sun was in deed an idol to them that worshipped it: and yet it was a good creature of God also idolatrously abused. The bread in the sacrament is in deed an idol to Papists that worship it as their maker: yet is it also in itself, God's ordinance idolatrously abused: so is popish baptism. He might even as well say, that Reubens' fact in lying with his father's concubine, was not in deed adultery; but an abuse of God's ordinance of marriage, or a defiling of his father's bed, Gen. 35. 22. & 49. 4.  
5. Moreover, the brazen Serpent was but a temporary ordinance, etc.  
Ans. This was the twelft of his shifts before: now he repeateth and multiplieth it among his Errors. I refer the reader to my former answer.  
6 That the Romish baptism is 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, etc. which it doth not. But the baptism in the church of Rome is God's ordinance, had and planted there by the Apostles, etc. These are the errors and abuses of men about it, not the nature of the baptism itself. Otherweise all that have received it, aught to renounce it utterly, and to get an other outward baptism, etc.  
Answ. This also was before objected and answered: and it is a world to see how he wearieth his reader with repeating worthless reasons. Sacrificing among the heathens I have before proved was God's ordinance. So was the Lord's supper in the church of Rome in the Apostles time: so was excommunication; so was the Ministry of Bishops, etc. These have been continued in Rome with their baptism: may we not say therefore the Mass is an idol, or that the Bishop the Pope of Rome now is an idol and Antichrist? Of our getting an other baptism (which is the usual foot and base of his arguments) we have before spoken that which he could not take away.  
Obj. Will these men say, that we can without sin retain any thing, and not utterly reject it, that standeth up in the place of Christ's precious blood? etc.  
Ans. We cannot indeed without sin retain it, while so it standeth: neither do we so reteyn it; far be it from us. Neither might the Gentiles reteyn the lie, which they had made of the truth of God, Rom. 1. 25. But when the lie was done away, and God restored to them his former truth, that they were to reteyn. The idolatrous Israelites, if they had set up their own blood of circumcision in place of Christ's blood; might not without sin have retained it whiles so it stood. Yet repenting of their idolatry, they might keep the outward sign without repeating it: even so we in this case.  
Obj. Errors and abuses of men may hurt themselves: but cannot change the nature of God's ordinance in itself.  
Answ. Not in itself I grant, considered without their abuse: but together with their abuse, God's ordinance of sacrifice, incense, etc. is an abomination to him, Prov. 15. 8. Esa. 1. 13. So baptism and the Supper now in Rome, are abominations to the Lord.  
Obj. Man's unbelief cannot make the faith of God of none effect. God is true, though every man be a liar, Rom. 3. 3. 4.  
Ans. What may we think would he conclude from this Scripture? To cite a place, and leave it doubtful what he inferreth, is to deceive the reader. If he intent (according to the question in hand) that the sacraments are seals of grace and of salvation unto men, whether they believe or do not believe: it is a notable error overthrowing the Gospel; and establishing the popish heresy of grace ex opere operato, by the work doen. The Scriptures teach, touching God's word and promise, that it profiteth not them that hear it, if it be not mixed with faith in them, Heb. 4. 2. if men believe not, they shall not be established, Esai. 7. 9 but shall be damned, Mark. 16. 16. they shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on them, joh. 3. 36. Neither is the faith of God, by men's unbeleef, made without effect. For his truth and faithfulness is confirmed as well in damning unrepentant & unbelieving sinner's, as in saving those that repent and believe. When the righteous turneth from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity; he shall dye in his iniquity; and yet the way of the Lord is equal; as saith the prophet; Ezek. 18. 24. 25. 26. Again, as all men naturally are liars, and do fail and break covenant on their part, by sin; which God never doth: so if they continue in sin, and turn not to the Lord by repentance and faith, they all perish, Luk. 13. 3. 5. Rom. 8. 6.— 10. 1. Cor. 6. 9 10. Judas v. 5. But let men repent, and turn from their transgressions, so iniquity shall not be their ruin, Ezek. 18. 30. Otherweise it would follow, that after men are entered into covenant with God, & are baptised: though they fall from Christ to Antichrist (as the church of Rome hath done) though they fall to Mahomet (as many East churches have done;) though they turn to be jews or pagans, and so dye, yet they shall be saved; for their unbeleef cannot make the faith of God of none effect. But so to expound this Scripture Rom. 3. were to turn judgement into wormwood, unto the destruction of men's souls. And if mine opposite would not gather some such thing from it; what will it help his plea for the baptism of the church of Rome, which is the whore of Babylon, whom God hath devoted unto destruction, except they repent. Rev. 17. & 18. chap.  
Obj. The Jews in Christ's time and before, holding justification by circumcision, & works of the Law; set these up in the place of Christ & his precious blood, etc. Should we therefore say, that circumcision was then an impure idol in their abuse? etc. Or should we not rather learn to put difference between God's ordinance in itself, and between man's abuse thereof, etc.  
Ans. Whensoever jew or Gentile, held justification by circumcision, sacrifice, or works of the Law: they made their sacraments, sacrifices, and works idols, impure idols to themselves in their abuse. And it is admirable, that men teaching religion, should be ignorant, that whatsoever creature or work of man is put in the place of God and Christ; it is thereby made an idol: though God's ordinances, and the works of his Law in themselves are always good; but turned to idols, are always evil, and an abomination to the Lord, as is before proved. What mouth can deny, but the Papists are idolaters in praying to Saints and Angels? If idolaters, than they serve idols: if they serve idols in so praying; then the Saints and Angels are idols to them in their sinful abuse. Yet who knoweth not that the Saints and Angels in heaven, are blessed and holy, and not Idols in themselves. But this is mine opposites continual fallacy whereby he would deceive his reader; that because Baptism and the Lords supper, are Gods holy ordinances in themselves; therefore the Papists that worship them as Gods, have not made them idols to themselves. And under this shelter of falsehood he shrowdeth himself when he hath nought else to answer: repeating it I know not how often.  
7. That the Romish baptism is a lie" in the right hand of all that so 
●sa. 44. 20.  receive it. Where the Prophet speaketh of idols, that by nature are no Gods etc. If the Romish baptism were in the nature of it no baptism &c, then should it without question be renounced as a very idol in deed. etc.  
Answ. Belike then, he would have us take it for no lie, but for a truth, that popish baptism giveth grace, and washeth away sin by the work doen. Neither is it a lie, but truth, that bread in their Mass is very Christ really & properly, as he died on the cross. To apply Esa. 44. 20. against these things, is to hold an error. Well, let my error continue with me: for I trust I shall always hold that they are lies in the right hand of all that so receive them. And as the prophet speaketh of them that by nature were no Gods: so do I. For neither is water in Baptism, not wine in the Mass, Christ's blood naturally: neither can they do that which only Christ's blood effecteth. And how ever there is difference between the idols of false Gods, and the idols of the true God; yet the scripture calleth them all devils, Deut. 32. 17. 2 Chron. 11. 15. 1 Cor. 10. 20. so I call them all lies. And where he saith, if it were in the nature of it no baptism; he might have known, that God's true ordinance of baptism, turned into a lie, maketh it a lying baptism, and yet some baptism it is, though not the true. Whereof the lie being put away, and the truth restored of God unto us; there need no other renunciation, as before I have proved. His other repetitions and questions of the same thing; need no further answer.  
Obj. How will he show, that baptism is so received as standing in the place of Christ etc. seeing they are infants usually that receive it there etc.  
Answ. Even as he will show against the Anabaptists, that baptism is truly and rightly received in Christian churches: where they are infants usually that receive it. For as the covenant of Christ is to parents and their seed: so the covenant of Antichrist is to parents and their seed; even the covenant of destruction; that their babes be dashed against the Rock, Psal. 137. 9 Esa. 13. 16. The infants of jews, are jews; the infants of Turks are Turks; the infants of Christians are Christians: so the infants of Antichristians are Antichristians.  
Obj. Considering also their profession of Christ, and baptising with water in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost; and that this alone is in deed the baptism of that church; the other things being but erroneous opinions, and sinful additions etc.  
Answ. We have before considered that the profession of that church, is all one with the profession of the Pope, who either is not Antichrist, or else he denyeth both the Father and the Son, (as the Apostle saith, 1 Joh. 3. 22.) how ever in word he confesseth both. 2. As they baptise with water in the name of the Father &c: so they consecreate their Supper or Mass with bread and wine, and the words of Christ's institution, Mat. 26. why doth he not also affirm, that their Mass is no idol, no lie, in the hands and mouths of them that receive it as their maker, and eat their God, more profanely than the heathens. 3. It is untrue that that alone (which he mentioneth) is in deed the baptism of that church: in deed it ought to be, but so it is not. He might as well say, their prayers to God, are the only prayers of that church; for by divine institution so it should be; but it is known they pray also to innumerable creatures. 4. I grant the other things, are but erroneous opinions, and sinful additions: and he also must grant, that all the idolatry of the heathens, condemned in Rom. 1. were but erroneous opinions and sinful additions; contrary to the covenant which God had made with them in noah's days, Gen. 9 9 10. 11. etc. Were it not for erroneous opinions, and sinful additions; all men now should be in that perfect estate wherein at first we were created. Eccles. 7. 29.  
8. That the Romish baptism is such, as the saying of the Apostle is verified in it, an idol is nothing in the world, 1 Cor. 8. 4. etc. If so, than the baptism of that church, hath no relation to God, nor any divine institution, representation, or signification in it, etc. Then it ought of necessity to be rejected etc.  
Answ. If th'Apostles doctrine be true of idols, that they are nothing, 1 Cor. 8. 4. he ought not to kick against it, or me for alleging it. To his inference I answer, it hath no true relation unto God's covenant (which is not with that Antichristian church,) but a false pretended relation it hath: as their other sacrament of the Mass or supper; where also there is a lying relation to Christ's sacrifice, which they blasphemously renew, crucifying daily the Lord of glory. To his conclusion, he hath oft been answered: we reject the idol wholly; and reteyn only the truth, so far as God by his word hath sanctified it unto us: without either gross Anabaptistry, or notorious blasphemy, which with open mouth he chargeth us, & would fray the simple with.  
9 That water (the material thing) in popish baptism, is as the gold and silver (that is the matter) of the idols spoken of, Psal. 115. 4. where as the use of water in baptism is appointed by the Lord and still to be retained, joh. 1. 33. etc. but the use of gold for idols, is forbidden, and utterly to be abandoned, Exod. 20. 23. Deut. 7. 25. 26. etc.  
Answ. He corrupteth my words. I 
† Animadv. pag. 72.  said, An idol for the matter and workmanship is something (Psal. 115. 4.) but for the relation unto God, it is nothing. So Popish baptism as touching the material thing is somewhat, the salt, water, oil, are God's 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 Jsrael. etc. This he maketh an error in me▪ which all that have knowledge, will easily see to be truth. But the use of water in baptism, (saith he) is appointed by the Lord. True, unto the Christian church it is so: but the use of water in popish idol baptism, or of bread and wine in the Popish mass, was never appointed by the Lord: this was the point he should have proved. As God said to the jews, bring no more vain oblations, incense is an abomination unto me, Esa. 1. 13. so saith he to the Antichristians, make no more vain baptisings, the Mass is an abomination to me. Mine opposite saith, the use of gold and silver for idols is forbidden: very well; and is not the use of water, bread and wine for idols forbidden also? The use of gold to make the images of Cherubims was commanded, Exod. 25. 18. but if the Gentiles had made themselves golden Cherubims, they had been idols and sin to them, for God commanded them not. So water, bread and wine, are commanded the Christian church, in her sacraments: but to the Antichristian church God commandeth not these, till they repent & turn to Christ; then and not before may they use them for holy signs. Psalm. 50. 16. 17. Prov. 21. 27. & 9 13. 17. 18. In this, his tenth error or exception is also answered; which is about the very same thing: but that he delighteth in multiplication.  
11 Touching the relation, (which is the main thing in a sacrament) that it should seal up unto them the forgiveness of sins, and (as they blasphemously say) quite take away sins, and confer grace; so it is a vain idol, and nothing. But the Sacraments in their relation are not only seals but signs also: Gen. 17. 11. Rom. 4. 11. etc. Now (by their assertion) the baptism aforesaid showeth nothing at all to the mind, and so is a vain idol and nothing: and that which it showeth to the eye, is but as the gold and silver of the heathens idols: which if it were true, then in deed there should be nothing of God's ordinance▪ nothing of a true sacrament, etc. And can they then blame the Anabaptists? etc.  
Answ. That there is no true relation in the popish baptism, is sufficiently proved; the persons being Antichristians, out of the covenant, and without promise in that estate. That they have the true material things, of washing with water in the name of the Father &c, I have always granted; though these materials are abused by them to idolatry, as the jews abused their sheep and bullocks to abominable sacrifices. That of the gentiles silver and gold, is true also touching the matter, which is God's good creature: further comparison I made not, though he corrupted my words.  
Object. Whether think they that the baptism received in the truest Churches, do seal up to hypocrites the forgiveness of their sins? If they think not, whether they will say, that the baptism of those churches hath not the relation which is the main thing in a Sacrament. It is generally held that 
† Act. 8. 13.  Simon Magus who was baptised by Philip, was an hypocrite, and that his baptism did not seal up unto him the forgiveness of his sins: will they therefore say, that the baptism ministered by the Evangelists, had not the relation & c? Besides that thus the relation of the sacraments should depend wholly upon man, and not upon the Lord or his ordinance at all.  
Answ. To pass over his form of writing, how he asketh questions, when he should prove or convince: I answer, his question is from the matter in hand, and so is deceitful. We speak of the outward visible church of Christ and ordinances belonging thereto; also of the visible Antichristian church and ordinances there abused. He leaveth this, and runneth to hypocrites, which men can not discern; and whom therefore we must leave unto God, among other secrets, Deut. 29. 29. To reason from the one of th●se to the other, would bring all confusion; for hypocrites are lawfully admitted into the Church; as was judas, Simon Magus and many other: if upon this ground, open Antichristians, idolaters, unbelievers, may be admitted also: then the church and the world, shall be one confused Babel. To his question I answer; baptism in true Churches administered as th' Apostles and Evangelists did: deals up to all, the forgiveness of their sins; unto the judgement of man; and they should greatly sin, and profane God's ordinance, to baptise any other. Simon Magus when he was baptised, it is testified that he believed, Act. 8. 13. so by the ordinance of Christ, he was to be baptised, Mat. 28. 19 neither knew they him to be an hypocrite when he was baptised, till afterward. Thus are we bound by the rule of love, to believe that all rightly baptised in the Christian church, have the seal of forgiveness of sins, and are buried with Christ by baptism, and that by one spirit, we are all baptised into one body, Rom. 6. 3. 4. 1 Cor. 12. 13. And so mine opposite believing the church of Rome to be Christ's true church, and to have his true baptism, was bound also to believe them all to be of one body and one spirit with himself, till they manifest to him the contrary: which seeing they have not done by all their idolatries, heresies & impieties; it is not to be thought that ever people which will call themselves Christians, could do it. As for us, we know the covenant of Christ is not with Antichrist, or his whoreish church; though therein God hath many elect: but we know that his covenant is with the true Christian church, and all the members of it, although therein be many hypocrites and reprobates; both which are manifested in time by their fruits. We walk by the rules reveiled to us of God: secret things are not for us to judge of, until they be manifested.  
Where he concludeth, that thus the relation of the sacraments should depend wholly upon man, and not upon the Lord at all: it is a calumniation without all colour of proof. The relation is by mutual consent, the Lord offering his son Christ for salvation to all repentant believing sinner's: we by grace having obtained faith, do thereby apprehend Christ for our saviour, as in the word, so in the sacraments.  
His next demand about ourselves and our baptism had in Rome; is a thing again and again answered, without running into Anabaptistry, whither he would so say drive us.  
12. These men, err not a little, when they say that (popish) baptism hath not the relation of a sacrament to them, but is a vain idol and nothing, because they say of it, that it quite taketh away sins. Shall men's erroneous sayings and opinions make a nullity of God's ordinances, signs and seals? Can not God be true, though they be liars? etc.  
Answ. Here is an other repetition of that which he forealleged in his 6. reason or error; which I there refuted. men's erroneous sayings, opinions, and doings, do disannul to themselves all God's promises, signs and seals: which are only conditional, if men repent, believe and obey; which grace God giveth to all that are Christ's. And if men believe not nor obey, and so be damned: their damnation impeacheth not God's truth at all, but confirmeth it; for he hath said of such, that they shallbe damned. Mar. 16. 16. Joh. 3. 36.  
Obj. Besides the relation in a sacrament, there is also to be regarded the commandment of God, who hath appointed it to be observed in the church. As Christ who was without sin &c, yet in obedience to the Law, was circumcised and baptised. etc. Therefore it should be sin in the church of Rome, if they should reject baptism and not keep it. Which doth plainly evince, that it is not a vain idol and nothing, (for then it were not sin but their duty to cast it away; and not to keep it at all) but that it is the Lords ordinance etc.  
Answ. The first is true, for without the word and commandment of God, it could be no seal of his covenant, or have any relation at all thereto. The second is a deceitful reason, concluding from the holy commandment of God, to the unholy keeping of it in Rome. It should be sin in them to reject baptism & the Lords supper professedly: it is sin in them, to keep them as they do profanely. It were better for a man never to be baptised or eat the Lords supper all his life, then to communicate with the church of Rome in either of these, as they profane them: for we may not do evil that good may come thereof, Rom. 3. 8. So his plain eviction that it is not a vain idol in their abuse of it, is but a plain fallacy: let him apply it to the other Sacrament, and it will appear. Antichrist hath transformed the Lord's supper, into an abominable massing sacrifice, and therein worshippeth a wafer cake for his maker and redeemer: this he durst not deny to be a notorious idol. But his reason (if it be good) will prove it no idol: thus. It should be sin in the church of Rome if they should reject the Lords supper and not keep it. Which doth plainly evince that the Lords supper in Rome (though changed by them into a wicked Mass) is not an idol, for than it were not sin, but their duty to reject it. The refutation hereof is this; Rome and all nations sin, that do not believe aright in Christ, and keep all his ordinances. The more that they openly renounce Christ or any of his ordinances, the more they shall add unto their sin. Yet in that they keep them not aright▪ but have changed the truth of God 
* ●m. 1. 25. ●es. 2. 11.  into a lie, and his holy ordinances into idols; they are also great sinner's, for which if God give them not repentance, they are under wrath and damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Of this point, I have spoken 
† 16. etc.  before, in answer to his 6. reason for the church of Rome.  
His 13. and last error, is but a repetition of former matters, about the brazen serpent, God's ordinances and creatures considered in themselves &c, to which I have before answered; showing that it helpeth the Papists no more to clear them of idolatry herein, than the heathens of old, who made idols of creatures and ordinances, which in their own nature and first institution, were good and holy. And hitherto of his errors wrongfully imputed unto us.  
To these, by his figure of repetition and multiplication, he hath added from the former grounds, Contradictions, Abuse of scriptures, Vain distinctions and Anabaptistical assertions: all which being but the same things turned and repeated, and by me before cleared; I count it needless labour to make the same answers again, to his empty calumniations.   

Of Circumcision in Israel.  
THe reason why we repeat not the outward work of baptising with water again, such as have been baptised in false churches; is the example of the Israelites: who after their falling from God and from the Church, and after the Lord had given them the 
“ Jer. 3.  bill of divorce, when they repented and turned to the Lord, were admitted to the Passover, without any new cutting or circumcising in the flesh: 2 Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. And because I denied them in such estate to have true circumcision (which is the sign and seal of the righteousness of faith, Rom. 4. 11.) mine opposite as his manner is, chargeth me with very erroneous and ungodly assertions, and maketh a longsome discourse of the state of Israel, and of words and phrases used concerning them. And unto ten lines of mine, (in Animadv. pag. 70.) he giveth an answer of above 30. pages (in his Christian plea▪ pag. 65. to pag. 96.) to blind his reader with many words. I will briefly show the insufficiency of his answers.  
And first, that Israel after they departed from the Lord, his Temple, altars, sacrificers, and church; and made new Temples, altars, sacrificers, signs and a new church of their own divising; that Israel I say, from that time was not a true church, I have before 
* p. 71. ●  showed my reasons in handling the state of the church of Rome.  
Mine opposites 
† Chr. ● pag. 58.  first colourable reason, is from such scriptures as still name them the Lords people, and the Lord to be their God, and to remember the covenant of their father's Abraham &c, 2 King. 9 6. etc. and 13. 22. 23.  
Answ. I have heretofore 
“ Anim● p. 81.  answered, that this Argument, They are called the Lords people, therefore they are his true church; is not to be granted. For 1. Things are named in scripture sometimes, as they have been before, though they be not so still: as Abigail is called the wife of Nabal, though he were then dead, and she married to David, 1 Sam. 30. 5. Solomon was begotten of Uriahs' wife, whereas she was then david's, Mat. 1. 6. Jesus was in the house of Simon the Leper, Mat. 26. 6. so named, because he had been a Leper etc. 2. They were so called in respect of their profession, that they would be so esteemed and named: though in deed they were without the true God, 2 Chron. 15. 3. as, O thou that art named the house of Jakob etc. Mic. 2. 7. 8. Thirdly, in respect of their calling unto him, and his covenant afterward, though for the present they were none of his: as, In that day, I will marry thee (Jsrael) unto me for ever etc. Host 2. 18. 19 20. 23. Thus the Gentiles were called Christ's sheep, because they should after be brought into his fold, joh. 10. 16. and God had much people in Corinth an heathenish city, Act. 18. 10. 1 Cor. 12. 2. And the Jews to this day are God's people, and 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 Esa. 59 20. 21. Ezek. 34. 23.— 30. Host 3. 5. Fourthly, 
* Animad pag. 93.  in comparison with the Philistines and other heathens, they were called the people of the Lord; because they never renounced their God in name and professedly, but pretended the contrary. Fiftly, 
† Animad pag. 89.  that God did not presently cast them off, in respect of calling them to repentance, and of their dwelling in the land, or as the scripture saith (in 2 King. 14. 27.) of putting out the name of Israel from under heaven. For his covenant was to punish them by degrees (Levit. 26. 16. 18. 21. 24. 28. 33.) and at last if they repented not, to scatter them among the heathens, till their 
“ Leu. 2● v. 41. 39 4●  uncircumcised hearts should be humbled▪ and they rued their former sin▪ and then he would 〈…〉 his first covenant, and so receive them again to grace in Christ. Unto which I now add this sixth, that God called himself the God of Jsrael, and them his people, because of many among them that were in deed his; both such as yielded not to jeroboam's idolatry, but went to jerusalem to sacrifice, 2 Chron. 11. 16. and seven thousand in Jsrael, which bowed not the knee to Baal, 1 King. 19 18. and such also, as erring at first in simplicity, were by the Prophets brought to repentance: though the general state of the land never repent, but went on in their sin, till the Lord cast them out of his sight, as is testified in 2 King. 17.  
His 
* Chr. plea ●g. 60.  next chief ground is the comparison of judah, who likeweise forsook the Lord, and sometime became more corrupt than Israel: so that if Israel were not in truth God's people and church, than judah was not.  
Answ. I have showed how Israel might be called God's people still: and why I judge them not to be Gods true Church. For judah, they changed not the constitution wherein they were set of God, made no new face of a Church, no new Temples, priests &c as did Israel. Therefore they did wickedly in the true Church, as often times greater impiety is committed in 
† 1 Cor. 5. 1.  the Church, then among the heathens: yet the state of the church & of the heathens may not be compared; though the punishment of such as transgress in the Church, and repent not, shall be worse than the heathens, Mat. 11. 20.— 24. Secondly, the defection of judah was not general like Israel's, (though sometime the scriptures speak generally, when many are corrupted,) but even then when for their sins they were carried into Babylon, there was a godly company, compared to a basket of good figs, jer. 24. 2. 5. 6. 7. which had cried out for all the abominations, & were marked and reserved of God, Ezek. 9 4. &c▪ Thirdly, the state of judah was often times reform by many good Kings, as josiah, Ezekiah, jehosaphat and others; the people brought to repentance, and the covenant renewed: but never so in Israel, by any king that there reigned, from their first apostasy, to the captivity. 2 King. 17. Fourthly, for the wicked troops in judah, that refused admonition, persecuted their brethren, killed the Prophets, maintained idolatry; for which the godly left their sinful communion; I hold them not Gods true Church, or in his covenant of grace. Because the covenant was always conditional, (if men repent and believe) as I have before proved, and mine opposite himself hath granted. This may suffice, to his often repeated reasons, which are deduced and varied from the grounds aforesaid.   

Touching 2 Chron. 15. 3.  
IShewed from the Prophet Azariahs' speech to Asa and all judah; that Israel was without the true God, without teaching Priest, and without Law, 2 Chron. 15. 1. 2. 3. and therefore could not in that estate be judged to be in the covenant of grace.  
Mine opposite 
† Chr. pl● pag. 65.  laboureth to bring judah itself also within this estate: but that hath no colour with it. The distinction of names, judah and Israel; the state of judah under Solomon, Roboam, Abijah, and Asa, (though corruptions were come in,) plainly showeth it otherweise; and I leave it to the reader's judgement. 2. he granteth, it may well be understood of the 10. tribes, and showeth good reasons for it: how then doth he take away the weight of the reason, that Israel being without the true God, without a teaching Priest, (Gods true ministry) and without Law, could not in that estate be Gods true church, in his covenant of grace▪ or have the true seals thereof unto them? He fayrly denyeth the conclusion, It will not prove (saith he) that circumcision or the other ordinances of God had in Jsrael or in Judah, were false and deceitful signs etc. If it would, than it might be urged against judah also; and where then was circumcision? etc. I answer; If there were no circumcision but among them that were without the true God, without his ministry, and without his Law: then was there no true circumcision in the world. For if we consider the first institution of circumcision, Gen. 17. and the Apostles doctrine of it, in Rom. 2. 25. 28. 29. & 4. 11. and the doctrine of Christian baptism now, answerable to circumcision of old: it is impossible that that people should have the true seal of righteousness and salvation from God in Christ, that are without God, and without Christ. No colourable excuses or distinctions will here availe● except men can prove an absolute promise of salvation whether men repent & believe or no: whether they be in God and Christ or no: Which is contrary to all the scriptures. Wherefore this one testimony is enough to overthrow all his long plea for Israel; as if they in this sinful stare, unrepentant, continued still actually in the covenant of grace and state of salvation. And what colour maketh he, against this plain scripture? He first speaketh of forsaking God, what it meaneth, and how it is spoken of the jews in the Prophets: namely of forsaking his Law, Temple, Worship, and service: and not simply of so dealing with the Lord himself, as the bare words and letter itself. might seem to imply.▪ For even in the defection of Israel, when jeroboam set up the calves, yet still they intended to worship the Lord that brought them out of the land of Egypt etc. 1 King. 12. 28.  
Answ. First observe, how here he would not have the bare words and letter▪ of the scripture to be insisted upon: yet is it his continual practice, and only colourable reasons. For the Temple of God, 2. Thes. 2. and the people of God, are his main grounds for the church of Rome, and of apostate Israel. 2. He omitteth the words which I cited, that Israel was without the true God &c: and speaketh of an other phrase, of their forsaking the Lord; to ease his burden, which he found too heavy. 3. It is granted him, that by forsaking the Lord, is meant the forsaking of his Law, Temple, Worship and service: and not that they did professedly renounce God, but still pretended and intended to serve the true God: what would he infer hereupon? This maketh the more against his plea for them. The scripture saith, they were without the true God, without teaching Priest, without Law: this was true, either in their own account, or in Gods; not in their own account, for they thought they still retained the true God, (even as the heathens of old, heretics, Antichristians and jews at this day, persuade themselves that they serve the true God;) therefore they were such in God's account. Now God's judgement is always according to truth, when man's judgement erreth, and deceiveth himself. Thus then, though Israel thought themselves the true church, and to have the true God (as mine opposite also thinketh and pleadeth for them;) yet in the Lords account, which is truth, they were without the true God, and without Law. So mine opposite hath the Israelites own erroneous judgement to help him; I have the Lords judgement & his Prophets, against both him and them.  
He than referreth us to his former book, where he showed divers respects, how on their part they broke the covenant, but the Lord broke it not on his part, but called them to repentance etc. To which book of his I gave answer, and have in this also before showed, how he yieldeth me the main ground; namely that the covenant of grace is conditional only, if men repent and believe▪ Which seeing the scripture witnesseth that Israel did not, 2 King. 17. 13. 14. 15. 16. &c. they remained still without the true God, without teaching Priest, and without Law; till the Lord cast them out of the land, and scattered them among the heathens, which were without God and without Law, before them. And now what could their circumcision, Passover, sacrifices &c avail them; but seal up their further judgement, who had rejected the true God, but falsely retained and abused the signs of his favour, to their condemnatió.   

Touching jer. 3. 8.  
GOD testifieth of adulterous Israel, I put her away, and gave her ● bill of divorce, jer. 3. 8. Then was she no longer his wife, nor he her husband: but the covenant of her spiritual marriage was disannulled even on God's part also. Yet the Israelites kept circumcision the sign and seal of his covenant, but by usurpation, not by right: so it was in their abuse of it, no true sign or sacrament unto them.  
To this he 
† Chr. plea pag. 68  answereth, that the Prophet sp●k● this in Josiahs' days, at which time Jsrael was carried captive into Assyria. So this place is not to the point of the question, of their state from jeroboam's time, all the while they abode in the land.  
Answ. First he takes it for granted, that by the bill of divorce is meant their putting out of the land: which though I should grant him (as I will not deny it, but leave it to further consideration,) yet it is to the question in hand touching their circumcision which they still retained, and were upon repentance received to the Passover, without any new circumcising in the flesh, Ezr. 6. 21. and he himself 
* Chr. plea p. 27. 28.  urgeth this very place of Ezr. 6. against the Anabaptists, to prove they need not baptise again: the same by as good right, do I urge against him. Yea and suppose that I erred in judging of their estate while they were in the land: yet this their estate after, is enough to prove my cause; namely that Circumcision, and so baptism usurped by false churches, or by them that are no church (as Israel now were 
† Esai. 7. 8.  no people,) need not be repeated. Whereas he pleadeth if Rome be not the true church, & have not the true baptism, we are to be baptised again. Now that in Ezr. 6. was many years after Israel's captivity, or divorce; for it was after judah's captivity, and return after 70. years. When 
* Ezr. 1. 1. 2. etc.  Gyrus, to whom the Lord God of heaven had given all the kingdoms of the earth, proclaimed the people's return throughout all his kingdom. At what time, as those that had been carried to Babylon, returned, Ezr. 2. to the number of 42. thousand and more: so after in Darius' days Ezr. 6. when the children of Israel which were come out of captivity, kept the Passover with joy, for that the Lord had turned the heart of the 
† 〈◊〉. 6. v. 22.  King of Assyria unto them, all such as had separated themselves unto them, from the filthiness of the heathen of the land, to seek the Lord God of Israel, did eat with them: Ezr. 6. 21. So they of Israel that had been captived in Assyria, and returned to the Lord, were received without any new circumcising, as they were also before in Ezekias days, 2 Chron. 30. Which example being in the days of Ezra and 
* Ezr. 5. 1.  other prophets, & written in the scriptures for 
† Rom. 15. 4.  our instruction: is a sufficient ground for us now to do the like, whom the Lord hath brought out of the Antichristian Babylon and Assyria, that we may eat the Lords supper, and enjoy other his ordinances, without any new baptising with water.  
The bill of divorce, he 
* Chr. plea ●ag. 69.  expoundeth to be the putting of them out of the land of Canaan, as out of the Lords house or presence; from Host 9 3. 15. 17. 2 King. 13. 23. A woman divorced, is termed (he saith) one that is cast out, or thrust forth out of her husband's house, Ezek. 44. 22. Thus some think excommunicats to have a bill of divorce etc. and then also, they are not to be esteemed as put out of the covenant of the Lord, but from his house and family, till they repent. So as upon their repentance, they ought to be received again into the Lord's house, without any new baptising of them again, which yet should be, if they had been put out of the covenant of the Lord. For baptism is the sign of our entrance thereinto: etc.  
Answ. By this it appeareth, he takes the bill of divorce, for no putting out of the covenant; but out of the house, out of the land of Canaan only. Which if it be so, than the marriage of Israel, was no taking into the covenant but into the land of Canaan. And this agreeth well with the Anabaptists, who hold that Israel's covenant, was not the covenant of grace, but a carnal covenant & promise of the land of Canaan. It is known, that the bill of divorce, disannulleth the covenant of marriage, as appeareth in the Law in Deut. 24. First by the name C●rithuth that is Cutting-off, secondly by the liberty thereupon following, that she may marry another man; thirdly by the just cause thereof which is whoredom, Math. 19 9 fourthly, by the consequent thereof, that a man having so put away his wife for whoredom, he also may without danger of adultery marry an other woman; which cannot be unless the covenant of marriage be disannulled; Mat. 19 5.— 9 Fiftly it is confirmed by the copy of the bill of divorce used in the common wealth of Israel, as appeareth by their ancient records, in these words; 
* Thalmu● in Gittin ch. 9  In such a day of the week &c, I▪ N. the son of N. have voluntarily &c, dismissed & left and put away thee, even thee N. the daughter of N. etc. which hast been my wife heretofore, but now I dismiss thee, and leave thee, and put thee away, that thou mayst be free, and have power over thine own soul, to go away, to be married to any man whom thou wilt &c. Sixtly, it is testified by the Apostle writing to the Israelites, the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia &c, 1 Pet. 1. 1. and saying to them. Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy, 1 Pet. 2. 10. Whereby it is evidently proved, that their divorce was from the Lord, and from being his people, or partakers of his mercy in Christ.  
Now whereas he gathereth from Ezek. 44. 22. that a divorced woman is called Gerusha, that is Cast out, or thrust forth, which he expoundeth from her husband's house: he might have seen better in the Law of Moses, (to which the Prophet there hath reference) where the like commandment is given, in Levit. 21. 14. which a little before, in vers. 7. is explained by God himself, Gerusha meishshah, that is, cast out or put away from her husband; according to which Law, and phrase, Israel was divorced and cast out, not only from the Lords house and land, but from the Lord himself. Moreover he might have seen, in Deut. 24. 1. the bill of divorce in the woman's hand, and her sending out of her husband's house, to be distinct things, one following upon an other. Again, a woman may of herself go out of her husband's house, & play the whore in an other man's house, yet is she not thereby divorced: as for example Michal David's wife, was by her father Saul, adulterously given to Phalti, 1 Sam. 25. 44. so she was out of David's house, and had an other husband in whose house she remained: yet David that had not given her a divorce, required her as his wife, and she was taken by Abner from her second husband, 2 Sam. 3. 14. 15. 16. Wherefore the bill of divorce or of cutting off is not from the house only, but disannulleth quite the covenant of marriage; so as they cannot without a new marriage be reunited. And the Lord, (as if he purposely would prevent all such vain pleas for Israel) useth in jer. 3. 8. both the word put how away, and the word divorce, and this also in the form plural, thus, and I gave unto her, the bill of her divorces (or, of her cuttings-off:) as if he would teach us, that whatsoever divorce or cutting off belonged to such an adulterous wife, he had given unto her; and so not from the land but from the Lord also she was divorced. As yet further appeareth by Host 2. 2. plead with your Mother, plead; for she is not my wife, neither am I her husband; but if he had only put her out of the land, he was her husband still, contrary to that which the Prophet teacheth. And contrary to the Apostle, who writing to the dispersed of Israel, which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy, 1 Pet. 2. 10. hath reference to that Prophet, who promised, I will have mercy on her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, thou art my God: Host 2. 23.  
His applying this divorce to excommunication, is as strange. Excommunicates he will have to be as put out of the house and church, but not out of the covenant. Whereas excommunicates are (by our Saviour's doctrine) as heathens and publicans, Mat. 18. 17. and heathens are not in the covenant. Again by Paul's doctrine, excommunication is the delivering to Satan, 1 Cor. 5. 5. 1 Tim. 1. 20. what that meaneth, we may learn by the contrary, in Act. 26. 17. 18. I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins etc. Where the power of the Gospel is showed, in turning men from Satan to God, whereupon they repenting and believing, receive forgiveness of sins: so on the contrary, when men sin, and join obstinacy with it, and will not repent; they are by the power of Christ delivered from God unto Satan again, that is, are of the world where Satan is prince; and in that estate, deprived of the promise of the forgiveness of their sins, till they turn again unto the Lord.  
Where he saith, upon their repentance they may and aught to be received, it is true, so ought the Turks and heathens: for God as he never made absolute covenant but conditional; so he never gave absolute bill of divorce, but conditional; for who so repenteth and believeth in Christ shallbe saved. And whereas he saith, if they had been put out of the covenant of the Lord, they should be baptised again: it is marvel how he could not see himself herein, to be a very Anabaptist, or that which is worse. For if a man be baptised in the true church, as was Simon Magus, and fall from the faith of Christ, to become a jew, or a Turk, or a paynim; and for his obstinacle & blasphemy be justly excommunicated: this man he thinketh, doth continue still in the covenant of grace; for he is but cast out of the church or house, not out of the covenant. Who ever heard such doctrine, that the covenant of grace should be continued to most wicked sinner's, excommunicated for turning to judaism or Paganism? Much lesser sin it were to err with the Anabaptists and baptise again, then to hold such an heresy. If he hold it not, but would grant that such are out of the covenant: then he saith, they should be baptised again, when they return; and so he that hath so busily set a snare to catch us in Anabaptistry, is fallen himself into it, or into a worse.  
Now to deliver our souls from both these extremities, we are to observe the difference between the revealed covenant made with every particular visible church, and the unreveiled estate which is in God's secret counsel touching all the members of the catholic church the company of those that are predestinated unto life: for many are out of the covenant reveiled, which yet are Gods elect. As the Ephesians whiles they were heathens, dead in sins, were to all men's judgement, without Christ, without God in the world, and strangers from the covenants of promise, Eph. 2. 1. 12. who after they were called to repentance and faith, were no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the Saints, and of the household of God, Ephes. 2. 13.— 19 in which estate they were in God's counsel before, being chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, Ephes. 1. 4. On the contrary many reprobates enter into the covenant of the church visible, and as Simon Magus, do believe and are baptised, Act. 8. 13. they believe for a while, and in time of tentation, fall away, Luke 8. 13. Hereupon it cometh to pass, that the church not knowing certainly who are elect, and who not, but judging every tree by the fruits that appear; receiveth into the covenant and baptiseth all that profess to repent and believe in Christ unfeynedly: yet afterward seeing them to break the covenat and forsake Christ and will not be reclaimed, casteth them out, and delivereth them to Satan: in which estate, they cannot be said to continue in the covenant, or in the state of salvation; though the election of some of them standeth sure with God. Who when he of his grace giveth them repentance, they are restored again to the church; and than it appeareth that they fell for a time, but are raised again of God. And because when they were first baptised, they were not baptised into that particular church only, but are counted baptised into the catholic church, and into Christ, his death and burial, Rom. 6. 3. 4. therefore though they renew the covenant, yet their baptism is not renewed; for than it is manifested to the judgement of man, that the seed of God (though for the time it was not seen) remained in them, and therefore their sin was not unto death, 1 Joh. 3. 9 And this the Apostle teacheth us from God, saying. This is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the Gospel, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers. For the gifts and calling of God, are without repentance, Rom. 11. 27. 28. 29. Where we see, that while men's sins are not (by promise of God) taken away, they are not in his covenant, (as is confirmed also by Heb. 8. 10. 12.) And in that God's gifts and calling (concerning his elect) are without repentance; they are to be restored into the covenant, when they turn unto the Lord, without any repeating of their outward baptism.  
Where he addeth this reason, For baptism is the sign of our entrance into (the covenant) and the Lords seal of his so receiving and admitting of us: as circumcision was unto the jews; Though it may in some sense be admitted which he saith: yet not as he intendeth and urgeth it. For first, Abraham was in the covenant of grace, and justified by faith in Christ, before he received circumcision, Gen. 15. 6. Rom. 4. 3. And after that, he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised, Genes. 17. Rom. 4. 10. 11. Secondly the children of Abraham were borne in the covenant, and holy, 1 Cor. 7. 14. Ezr. 9 2. and borne unto the Lord, Ezek. 16. 20. but were not circumcised till the eight day, Levit. 12. and such infants as died before the eight day, died not out of the covenant: not to speak of the women in Israel, which were in the covenant without circumcision in the flesh. Thirdly, Moses said to men women and children, ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God, etc. that thou shouldst enter (or pass) into covenant with the Lord thy God; Dent. 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. Yet all which had been borne within 40. years before, were uncircumcised, and so continued till Moses was dead, jos. 5. 2.— 7. By all which it appeareth that men may otherweise enter into the Lord's covenant, then by Circumcision, or by baptism now come in stead thereof. How much more then, if they have been baptised before, and fallen from the covenant; may they enter into it again, without a new baptising with water? His other tautologies, I omit: being before answered.  
But he thinks to have help from Jer. 3. 12. 13. 14. where God calleth Israel to return unto him, and he will not cause his anger to fall upon them; and saith, Turn o backsliding children, for I am married unto you; and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family and will bring you to Zion. Where amongst many observations, these are the chief, 1. That God dealt otherweise herein then a man doth with his wife whom he putteth away, and she become another man's; as he showed in Jer. 3. 1. 2 That these words The Lord thy God, are words of the covenant, Genes. 17. 7. 3ly. That he saith, I am married unto you; which the best 
* Pseator Calvin & ●  writers expound to be the covenant of grace. 4. That he would take them one of a city, and two of a family, teaching that they should not stay one for an other; & though the body of the people should remain obstinate, yet if a few returned he would receive them: which showeth the stability and eternity of his covenant, as Gen. 17. 7. which he performeth, if but a few be made partakers of that grace, as Rom. 11. 1.— 5.  
Answ. He erreth himself, and causeth to err, in not observing the scope of this scripture; nor the conditions propounded: and in not distinguishing the times, past, present, and to come; nor the covenant of the Law, and the covenant of grace.  
The scope of this scripture Jer. 3. 6. etc. is to show 1. the transgressions of Israel and judah; under the covenant of the Law: 2. the punishments inflicted for the same; 3. and a promise of another covenant of grace which God would make with them in Christ. Israel played the harlot, jer. 3. v. 6. God called her to repent, but she repented not, v. 7. then God put her away, and gave her a bill of divorces, v. 8. yet judah her sister, feared not but played the harlot also, and dissembled, so that Israel justified herself more than judah, v. 8. 9 10. 11. Then God seeing them both to be covenant breakers, promiseth of his grace, a new covenant to be made with them in Christ; which he proclaimeth first to Israel, if they repent, acknowledge their sins, and turn unto him, v. 12. 13. and so speaketh of his marriage with them, to weet with the remnant of them, one of a city and two of a family, whom he would bring to Zion, v. 14. unto whom he would give faithful pastors. v. 15. not as under the Law, and rudiments thereof, for the most excellent signs thereof, even the Ark of the covenant of the Lord, should not be remembered or visited any more, v. 16. But jerusalem, the Lords throne (the Christian 
† Hebr. 12. 2. Rev. 4 2. etc.  Church) should be for the Gentiles of all nations, v. 17. and for the jews, and for the Israelites walking together, v. 18. Then showeth he the signs and fruits of his grace in them, manifested by their calling upon God, as their Father in Christ, v. 19 their weeping and supplication for their former sins, v. 20. 21. the Lords promise of mercy to them that return, and their acceptation of his mercy offered, v. 22. showed by their humble confession of their sins, and just punishments, v. 23. 24. 25.  
The same argument is in Jer. 31. both touching Israel & judah, where after many promises, he speaketh of a 
“ v. 31. 32.  new Covenant with Israel and judah, not like the covenant made with their fathers, when he brought them out of Egypt, which they broke, though the Lord was an husband unto them: but a covenant, that he would 
* v. 33. 34.  write his Law in their hearts, and forgive their iniquity; which Paul expoundeth to be the new Covenant or Testament now confirmed by Christ, Heb. 8. 8. etc.  
Now to apply these promises which concerned future times & graces in Christ, to that present time when they were in their sins, unrepentant, unbelieving, unforgiven; under the bill of divorce, and put away from the Lord: is quite to miss of the mark which the prophet aimeth at. For though he speaketh to Israel as a body or corporation which continueth through many ages: yet not those persons then living, but their posterity are meant▪ for they perished in their sins (save some few that turned to the Lord) but their after generations found mercy. Neither can we deny (if we rightly observe th'Apostles doctrine in Rom. 11.) but those and the like promises made by the prophets, do belong to the jews even at this day (though for the present they are without the covenant in their own persons:) for when the 
† Rom. 11. v. 25. 26. 27. 28  fullness of the Gentiles is come in, all Israel shallbe saved (saith he) as it is written▪ There shall come out of Zion, the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from jakob. And this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the Gospel, they are enemies for your sakes, but as touching the election, beloved for the fathers.  
The conditions propounded he observeth not, namely, 
* jer. 3. 12.  Return thou backsliding Israel, and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: 
† vers. 13.  Only acknowledge thine iniquity etc. But pleadeth as if they in that rebellious estate, were still in their persons, in the covenant of grace visibly; though God, because they returned not, 
“ vers. 7. 8.  had given them the bill of divorce. Contrary to the gospel, which saith, If we say that we have fellowship with (God), and walk in darkness; we lie, and do not the truth. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us etc. If we say, that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1. joh. 1. 6. 9 10. Now this was Israel's state, they walked in darkness, and sins; and 
* ● King. 17. 16.  left all the Commandments of the Lord their God, they would not turn from their evil ways, nor 
* v. 13. 14.  hear the Lords prophets, nor believe in the Lord their God; but 
v. 22. 23▪  walked in all the sins of jeroboam, they departed not from them, until the Lord removed Israel out of his sight. And if any of them after their dispersion, returned to the Lord, they were then received: so also were the Gentiles that turned to him, and so the jews at this day, that come unto Christ.  
He distinguisheth not the times. For their marriage with the Lord, which he saith the 
† P●s●ator▪ Calvin.  best writers expound of the covenant of grace: if he refer it to the future time of Christ; is true; but than it will nothing help those unrepentant sinner's divorced from the Lord: for by the bill of divorce, the marriage is dissolved, as before is proved. If he refer it to former times, it agreeth not with the scope of the prophecy, as I showed: but if that be granted him, than his best writers will hardly prove it to mean the covenant of grace; for better than they, do show it to be the covenant of the Law, even jeremy himself and Paul his expositor. For jeremy in chap. 31. v. 32. useth the same word Baalti, I was married to them: when he speaketh of the old covenant made when they came out of Egypt, which was the covenant of works, not of grace; though they were then also in the covenant of grace, as they were in the faith of Christ. And Paul expoundeth that word Baalti, (according to the Greek version) I regarded them not, Heb. 8. 9 which is quite contrary to mine opposites purpose. But it is usual in the Prophets, to speak of things to come, as already done; as Esaias prophesying of Christ saith, Unto us a child is borne, Esai. 9 6. who was not borne till many years after. And so here the Greek version (so much approved in the new Testament) expoundeth this word 
* jer. 3. 14.  Baalti, I am (or was) married; futurely thus; For I will rule over you; and will take you one of a city and two of a family, and bring you into Zion: so it is a prophecy of a future marriage with Christ: and acordeth to the Apostles writing unto that people, saying, ye are an holy nation, a peculiar people, &c: which in time pass●, were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. 1 Pet. 2. 9 10. When was the time that Israel were no people, nor obtained mercy; unless when Lo-ammi, and Loruhamah were borne, Host 1. 6. 9 and Ephraim was so broken, that it was not a people, Esai. 7. 8. Thus Peter testifying they were no people, (by which name Moses calleth the Gentiles when they were estranged from God, Deut. 32. 21.) and Paul saying that God regarded them not, or cared not for them, because of their breach of covenant, Heb. 8. 9 do overthrow all my opposites plea for them, in their most sinful and unrepentant estate.  
That which he saith from Jer. 3. 1. that God dealt otherweise herein, than a man doth with his wife whom he putteth away &c: helpeth him not. First, he should say, than a man might do with his wife, for it was sin for such a man to return to his wife, it polluted the land, Jer. 3. 1. the reason whereof was, the man by unjust divorce, had caused his wife to be defiled, as the law closely teacheth, Deut. 24. 1.— 4▪ which fault cannot be imputed to the Lord. Secondly, the Lord dealeth likeweise with the Gentiles, when they turn from their adulteries, he receiveth them according to his former covenant and spiritual marriage with No and his seed, Genes. 9 9— 16. Esai. 54. 1. 4. 5. 9 10. So the promise being conditional, benefited not them that would not return unto him.  
The last point, of the stableness of God's promise, though but a few are made partakers of it, Rom. 11. 1.— 5. is true: and concerneth as well the Gentiles as the jews; for in all ages, God brought some of the Gentiles into his grace, as the whole history of the scripture showeth. Wherefore it is marvel how he could so 
* Chr. plea pag. 72.  insist upon the promise made to the jews, & to their children in Act. 2. 39 whereas the promise of grace in Christ pertained also to the Gentiles as is testified by all the Prophets: Deut. 32. 43. Psal. 117. Esa. 19 24. 2●. & 49. 1. 6. Ezek. 4●. 22  
And whereas next 
† Chr. plea pag. 73.  he digresseth to speak of judah, and from Esa. 54. 4. compared with jer. 51. 5. would show how in one respect they were forsaken, and bore the reproach of widowhood, (to weet by their captivity in Babylon) and in an other respect, they were not forsaken as a widow of the Lord, who yet remembered his covenant to show them mercy; he followeth his own wisdom in expounding the scriptures, & regardeth not the wisdom of God who elsewhere hath opened that prophecy, after a heavenly manner. The prophet Esaias in chapt. 53. foretold of Christ and of his sufferings; and in chap. 54. he prophesieth of the Christian church: and beginneth, 
* vers. 1.  Sing joyfully o barren (woman) thou that didst not bear &c. for more are the children of the desolate, than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord. This argument he goeth on to enlarge, showing the former 
† vers. 4.  shame and reproach, which this barren desolate woman had, for her widowhood; & the contrary comforts that she should receive from her 
“ vers. 5.  maker her husband the Lord of hosts. Here are two women intimated, one that hath an husband and children, an other barren, desolate and in widowhood: whose estates God would change, as Anna prophesied, The barren hath borne seven, and she that had many children is waxed feebl●▪ 1 Sam. 2. 5. This barren woman, Paul interpreteth to be, Jerusalem which is above, the mother of all us Christians; For it is written (saith he) Rejoice thou barren etc. Gal. 4. 26. 27. the fruitful woman was the earthly Jerusalem, the church under the Law, (answerable to Agar the bondwoman,) in bondage with her children, verse 25. For the jews church was (in their legal policy) under the Law, as an husband: till being made dead to the Law, by the body of Christ, they were married to an other, that they might bring forth fruit unto God, as the same Apostle teacheth, Rom. 7. 1.- 4. Now this heavenly jerusalem consisteth as well of 
* Ephes. 2▪ Gal. 3. 28.  Gentiles as of jews; and this woman bringeth forth children conceived by the immortal seed of the word, the gospel: whereas before the church under the Law, brought forth many Ismaels', children of Agar, servants, not free borne, to be cast out with their mother, Gal. 4. 30. Whether now is it safer to take this man's exposition of the earthly jerusalem, the mother of the jews; or to follow the Apostle, expounding it of the high jerusalem, the mother of us all? But it would require a volume, to go through his many allegations out of the Prophets: where he worketh upon advantage of words and phrases, neglecting yea contrarying the main doctrines of the gospel, whiles he pleadeth for open obstinate and unrepentant idolaters, yea and such as were divorced from the Lord, that they continued notwithstanding in the covenant of grace in that estate.   

Touching Host 2. 2.  
Whereas the Lord testifieth of Israel, that she was not his wife, nor he her husband: and willeth her therefore to put away her whordomes, left he stripped her naked etc. Host 2. 2. 3. Mine opposite laboureth by comparing the prophecies before, in ch. 1. and after in ch. 3. &c, to prove that this was not meant till Israel was put out of the land. And yet that putting out of the land, he maketh to be the stripping of her naked; which was an effect and reward of her former estate. And mixing the several prophecies together, (whereas in the 23. verse of the 2. chapter, the Lord speaketh of the days under the Gospel,) he giveth this conclusion, 
* Chr. plea ag. 78.  Thus now she is a wife, and not a wife: she is a wife, but a wife of whordoms, Host 1. 2. she is not a wife, that doth demean herself loyally as she should, but hath her adulteries between her breasts: Host 2. 2. And after a longer discourse, he inferreth, 
† pag. 84.  But what is this to the point of the question in hand, which is not touching the condition afterward, but concerning their circumcision and estate, from the time of jeroboam's apostasy, whiles they were yet in the land. etc.  
Answ. He keepeth his wont, to pretend the question otherweise then it is. The point was indefinite about the circumcision of Israel in their Apostasy. These were his own words, 
“ Advertis. pag. 54.  The baptism of the church of Rome, is true baptism, as the circumcision in Israel's apostasy was true circumcision, and not to be repeated again. And if it be not a true baptism, it is a false baptism etc. He referred us not by any scripture, to their apostasy before or after they were put out of the land. I answered him in a few lines, and 
* Animadv. pag. 69.  showed him from 2 Chron. 30. & Ezr. 6. 21. that there was no repeating of circumcision, therefore not of baptism. Those two scriptures he himself 
† Chr. plea pag. 28.  also now urgeth against the Anabaptists: the latter whereof speaketh of a time long after their captivity. Then I briefly referred him to 2 Chron. 15. 3. jer. 3. 8. Host 2. 2. & 13. 1. to show their sinful estate to be such, as that 
“ Animad. p. 70.  the ordinances of God which they in show retained, could not be unto them the signs and seals of forgiveness, and of life eternal; and therefore wire in their use of them false and deceitful. Thus neither he nor I, put any difference of their estate; though now he pleads it for advantage. But it is sufficient for to end our controversy, if the things I speak of, be after their captivity: for then returning with repentance, they were not recircumcised: so we, if we be baptised in false churches, need not be rebaptised. So he hath written many leaves to plead for the whore Israel; but where shall we find this sound concluded, which I denied, that when they were not the Lord's wife, nor he their husband; then in that estate (were it before or after their captivity, let him take his choice,) their circumcision sealed unto them forgiveness of sins, and life eternal. This not being proved, he hath led his reader into a wood, where it would weary any man to follow him in his windings: and yet in the end, he shall not find that which his soul thirsteth after, touching their circumcision, when they were no longer the Lord wife. Now to his distinction, she is a wife, and she is not a wife: take it at the best, she is a wife of whordoms, a wife threatened to be stripped naked etc. Where is the promise of forgiveness of her sins, unless she repented? And where is the testimony of her repentance? No where, (till Christ made the remnants of their posterity his wife, and his people, after they had been no people, 1 Pet. 2. 9 10.) but whiles they were in the land, they grew more hard, unbelieving and unrepentant, 2 King. 17. 13. 14. 15. etc. But when she had the bill of divorce, jer. 3. and was indeed not his wife, nor he her husband, but he had stripped her naked, and sent her among the heathens her companions: where now was the seal of the forgiveness of her sins, she abiding unrepentant? This is the thing that should be showed, which is not to be seen in all his large discourse.  
And what help findeth he at the hands of the Chaldee paraphrase which he 
* Chr. plea pag. 86.  citeth thus, Rebuke the congregation of Israel, and say unto her, that she submitteth not herself to my worship, therefore neither doth my 
† Christ.  Word accept of her prayers: until she shall remove her evil works etc. Will this prove true circumcision among them? First it appeareth that the Paraphrast understood this of them whiles they were in the land, otherweise than he, which referreth it to their after state. Secondly, in that sinful estate whiles they worshipped or served not the Lord, but Idols (as after the Chaldee speaketh,) the Word of God, that is Christ (as himself expoundeth it) accepted not their prayers. And could they then offer any true sacrifice or administer true sacrament, when God testified that Christ was not their mediator, to accept their prayers? Seing it is certain, that no man cometh to the Father but by him, Joh. 14. 6. Thus men may be overseen sometimes, to cite authors on their side, which either say nothing, or look quite an other way.   

Touching Host 13. 1.  
THe last placé which here I cited was Host 13. 1. where Ephraim offended (or sinned) in Baal, and died: whence I judged their estate to be dead in sin.  
To this mine opposite 
* Chr. plea pag. 88  saith, the same term and phrase is used by Christ, of the church of Sardis. Thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead, Rev. 3. 1. Should we now infer hereupon, that therefore baptism and the other ordinances of God, in the church of Sardis, were but in show retained therein, and could not be unto them the signs & seals of the forgiveness of sins and of life eternal: and therefore were in their use of them false and deceyefull, a● were the ordinances of God, retained among the Gentiles? Would any man of heart and understanding, endure such blasphemy? Saith not the Scripture, that the church of Sardis, was one of the seven golden candlesticks? etc.  
Answ. A man of understanding, will discern things that differ, and be carried by judgement, not by affection. The sin of Sardis, was secret hypocrisy, the sin of Ephraim was open idolatry: the death of Sardis was discerned of Christ, (who searcheth 
† Rev. 2. 23.  the heart & reins:) the death of Ephraim, was discerned of men, who can judge but by the works. Sardis had a name among the churches, to be alive: when for the most part they were dead before God; though some things remained which are but ready to dye, vers. 2. and a few among them, were worthy ones, and undefiled, vers. 4. Ephraim was openly known to be fallen from God to Baal, by the Prophets, and by the church of judah. Hypocrites in all true churches, are dead before God, though alive before men. So Simon Magus was alive in the judgement of the Apostolic church, and baptised therein, Act. 8. when before God he was dead. His baptism was true baptism so far as men could judge: though to himself before God, he received 
* 1 Cor. 11. 9  judgement thereby, not being a worthy partaker. But had he been an open worshipper of Baal, and baptised or circumcised among the Baalists; it could not by men have been judged a true sign and seal of the forgiveness of his sins, he remaining unrepentant. They that should so affirm, should themselves not be far from blasphemy, before men of understanding, that know upon what conditions the covenant of grace is made between God and men. They in Sardis that were dead, that is without true faith, (for by 
† Rom. 1. 17.  saith, the just doth live,) could not by the sacraments or by any ordinance in the church be partakers of Christ, of his death or resurrection before God: so their baptism was to them 
* Rom. 2.  no baptism. And had they been so discerned of men, their baptism should so have been judged by men. As the Canaanites in Sichem, 
† Gen. 3.  their circumcision was uncircumcision, before men; and not the sign and seal of the 
“ Rom. 4.  righteousness of faith, when they had no faith: for the unbeliever remaineth in the state of damnation, Mar. 16. 16. and the baptism that saveth, is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God, as th'Apostle sueth; 1 Pet. 3. 21.  
That which he further annexeth, that I say their reasons from Israel, might well serve for the times wherein John lived, when the 
* Rev. 2. 3. ch.  true churches were many of them apostate: whereupon he noteth, my contradicting of myself &c. was a mistaking, that I distinguished not the state of judah, which was a true church corrupted, from Israel a false church: and so the true church's apostate in th'Apostles time, Revel. 2. & 3. from the false churches also in those times, 1. joh. 2. 19 Into which oversight I fell, by their citing undistinctly, Jer. 3. and Esai 50. the one speaking of Israel, the other of judah; as is to be seen in their Advertisement pag. 107. whereto I gave answer, in Animadvers. p. 103.  
Secondly, he pleadeth, if Hose. 13. 1. be understood of death in sin, yet let it be well considered, wh●ther it will therefore follow, that Circumcision now in Israel was not the Lord's sign and seal of his forgiveness of sin, but a false and deceitful sign in their use thereof, and no better than the ordinances of the heathen. For Christ said, Let the dead bury their dead etc. Luke 9 60. was circumcision then among the jews, a false and deceitful sign in their life thereof etc.  
Answ. He runneth into his former error: the jewish church in Christ's time was a true church, and Christ communicated in their Temple and sacrifices: Israel when they served Baal, was a false church: and no man might awfully communicate with their Temple and sacrifices. Christ speaketh not of the Church generally, but of such as he knew to be hypocrites and dead, though seeming alive: we speak of Ephraim generally, open offenders, serving Baal, and dead in the judgement of the Saints. The same I answer to his next instance of the church of Ephesus, which then when Paul wrote, was not the house of Baal, but of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth, 1 Tim. 3. 15. Moreover he citeth not my words sincerely▪ I spoke of the seal of forgiveness of synns' 〈◊〉 them: neither did I say, no better than the ordinances of the heathen, which the reader may understand, the ordinances devised by the heathens themselves; but I said, in their use of them false and deceitful; 〈◊〉 were also the ordinances of God, retained in other nations; as altars, sacrifices &c. touching whose estate I have spoken of before.  
Thirdly he excepteth, that Baal's worship was first instituted by Achab, about 60. years after jeroboam, and great difference was between jeroboam's calves, and Baal's idolatry etc.  
Answ. It is not material to our question, who spoke of Israel's circumcision in their apostasy in general, before and after they were out of the land; as before I have manifested. 2. I acknowledge Achabs' sin was greater than jeroboam's, and false churches may grow worse and worse: yet jeroboam's calves, were also Divils', as the holy Ghost calleth them, 2. Chron. 11. 15.  
Fourthly he instanceth, the 7000 in Israel, that bowed not the knee to Baal: 1. King. 19 18. ask, what we shall say to these? were they not circumcised? or had they not the circumcision that was then in Jsrael? or was it not to them the Lords seal of forgiveness of sins? etc.  
Answ. The instance is good, to clear the controversy, by the help of other scriptures. In Rom. 11. Paul speaking of the rejection of the jews, saith, Hath God cast away his people? Farr be it: For I also am an Israelite etc. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Then speaking of Elias prayer against Israel▪ and Gods answer, I have reserved to myself 7000. men, who have not bowed the knee to (the image of) Baal. Even so then (saith 
† vers. 5.  he) at this present time also there is a remnant, according to the election of grace: etc. By this we are taught, 1. That if a few, or any one of a people be reserved of God, though the multitude be cast away; yet it cannot be said absolutely, that God hath cast away his people. And this may lead us to understand, why God called Israel his people in their apostasy; because some he kept from falling into it, some he brought out of it by repentance. 2. That those are in deed God's people, whom he foreknew: the rest are cast off. Now those which are foreknown of God, are described thus, that he also did predestinate them to be conformed to the image of his sont▪ them he also called; them he also justified▪ them he also glorified▪ Rom. 8. 2●▪ 〈◊〉▪ Thus are we led to judge who are God's people, when we see their calling▪ justifying▪ and glorifying▪ that is their sanctification▪ ●▪ Cor. 3●▪ ●8. by which i● charity we are to judge of their predestination, and estate in grace. 3. That as the remnant of the jews, which embraced the gospel, were the election of grace, that is the people whom in charity we should judge to be elected of God according to his grace; and the others are blinded, hardened, cast off, till God give them repentance: so in Israel, they that kept themselves from the common idolatry of Baal, inwardly and outwardly, and retained the true service of God, were his election of grace, and to be judged his true people; the others that sinned in Baal, were dead; till God gave them repentance unto life. Thus the Apostles exposition and application of those 7000. in Israel; may help us to judge of their estate aright. And not because circumcision was unto them the seal of grace and of forgiveness of sins; to conclude, that therefore it was likeweise to them that served Baal: for so we should prostitute God's grace and the seals thereof, to such as God condemneth and rejecteth.  
Fiftly he instanceth the worship of Baal by judah, jer. 7. Judg. 2. etc. Whereto I answer (as before) that judah in her constitution remained a true church, though corrupted: Israel being a false church, as hath been manifested. Neither was the defection universal and open as in Israel. As for such in judah as so fell from God, and would not be brought to repentance, the Prophet telleth them they trusted in lying words, when they said, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord etc. jer. 7. 4. 8. the Lord threateneth to cast them out of his sight, and forbade his Prophet to pray for them, Jer. 7. 15. 16. So their circumcision became unto them uncircumcision, Rom. 2. 25.  
To this he objecteth, Though man's idolatry &c may make God's sacraments improfitable to himself; yet can they not make them lying and deceitful signs, but that in the Lord's ordinance they are unto all and therefore also unto them, his true signs and faithful seals (on his part) of forgiveness of sins and life eternal. For, shall the infidelity of man, turn the truth of God into a lie? God forbid.  
Answ. I have before answered, that all God's ordinances are in themselves, and on his part, holy faithful and true. They are true seals of forgiveness of sins, but to such as are worthy partakers of them, in faith; otherweise they seal judgement unto men: 1 Cor. 11. 27. 28 29. And it is not his ordinance, that open and obstinate idolaters and wicked men, should administer or receive them, Ezek. 44. 9 Numb. 15. 30. 31. Levit. 7. 20. Psalm. 〈◊〉. 1●. 17. That men may turn the truth of God into a lie. the Apostle plainly teacheth, Rom. 1. 25. so may they the truth of his ordinances, into lies. But the truth of God, as it is in himself, or his faithfulness, is unchangeable: & if men believe not, or sanctify him not, they perish by the judgement of God, which is according to truth; and his faithfulness suffreth him not to save such, unless he make them first new creatures and believers; Joh. 3. 36. 1. Joh. 5. 10. 12.  
Sixtly, he expoundeth Israel's death in Host 13. 1. to be (by the exposition of sundry writers) not death in sin, but slain for their sins; or their estate overthrown, or near utter destruction. etc.  
Answ. Both may be true; that first they were dead in sin, and after destroyed civilly for their sin. God's judgements are according to men's deserts; he destroyed not the Amorites, Egyptians, and other nations, till their iniquity was full. Gen. 15. 16. Wherefore to condemn the exposition which I gave, because an other consequent followed upon it, as the ruin of Achabs' house, or the like; is no fitme argument. And to his many expositors whom he citeth, I oppose one greater than all, even th'Apostle in Rom. 11. before spoken of: who showeth the election of grace to be in the 7000 that worshipped not Baal: and not in the multitude of the Baalists. And if they were not of the election of grace, than were they dead in sin, though he and many say the contrary.  
Finally he allegeth the sayings of the Prophet before and after, The Lord found jakob in Bethel, and there he spoke with us, &c, Therefore turn thou to thy God etc. Host 12. 4. 5. 6. 9 And, yet am I the Lord thy God, from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no God but me. I did know thee in the wilderness etc. Hose. 13. 4. 5.  
Answ. I have before showed, that the prophets speak to Israel, as a corporation or body, which after a sort continueth one and the same through many generations; when yet, as touching their particular persons or generations, they are different & contrary; as godly fathers in the state of grace and life, may beget wicked children without grace, and in state of death. Ezek. 18. 9 10. 13. 14. 17. 18. etc. So the King of Tyre had been in Eden the garden of God, (a proselyte in the Church) Ezek. 28. 13. not that heathen king then living, but his predecessor Huram, long before. 1. King. 5. So Paul speaketh of the jews cast away of God, as the same people, till their last calling, Rom. 11. And I doubt not, but a man preaching to convert them at this day, might apply unto them the like sayings, I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt, thou shalt know no God but me: I led thee in the wilderness etc. But always in such general phrases, the promises of grace belong only to such as believe and turn to the Lord: the others that remain hardened, shall perish.  
And hitherto of his exceptions against the scriptures which I cited: although (as I showed) if they had continued Gods true church in the land; yet when they were for obstinacy in their sins cast out of it, had the bill of divorce, were not the people or wife of the Lord: their circumcision could be no seal from God unto them of forgiveness of sins, & eternal life, in that estate.  
That which after he prosecuteth touching the heathens state, I have answered before. And as for his other exceptions or repetitions touching Israel; they are such as are before answered; and it is not a thing so necessary to be insisted upon, touching their estate before they were cast out of the land; seeing their circumcision in the ages following, (when th'Apostle testifieth they were not a people, or partakers of God's mercy, 1. Pet. 2. and when all do acknowledge they had the bill of divorce, jer. 3.) was not repeated when they came again to the Lord, Ezr. 6. 21. Here therefore I will end; and leave the things that have been controverted, to the discreet censure of the judicious reader.   

THat it may appear how it is no new thing that we teach touching the Sacraments, and the falsehood of them in the church of Rome: I will here annex a few things, out of the Theses of Zach. Ursinus Doctor of Theology in Heidelberg: which are added at the end of his Catechism set forth by D. Pareus; among the Miscellanea Catechetica.  

Of the Sacraments, Theses publicly disputed at Heidelberg, the 23. of August, anno 1567.  
1. God from the beginning, hath adjoined signs or rites unto the promise of grace: which in the Church, are usually named Sacraments.  
2. And Sacraments are signs of the eternal covenant between God and believers; that is to say, they are rites commanded of God unto the church, and added unto the promise of grace, that by them as by visible and sure testimonies, God may signify and testify, that unto them that use these symbols in true faith, he communicateth Christ and all his benefits, according to the promise of the gospel; and so may confirm in them, the confidence of the promise; and that the church may by these visible notes, be discerned from all other sects etc. Gen. 17. 11. Exod. 20. 10. & 31. 14. Ezek. 20. 12. Deut. 30▪ 6. Col. 2. 2. 11▪ 1 Cor. 5. 7. joh. ●. 19 Heb. 8. 9 10. Mar. 16. 16. etc.  
3. Rites which are not commanded of God, or not instituted to this end, for to be signs of the promises; are no Sacraments.  
8. The lawful use of the sacraments is, when they that are converted (to the Lord) do keep those rites which God commanded, to those ends for which they were instituted sacraments of God. Proof. That only is the lawful use, which agreeth with the divine institution. And the institution comprehendeth these circumstances of persons, rites, and ends. If these therefore be violated, the signs are abused, Esai. 1. Jer. 7. Psal. 50.  
9 In this use, the things signified, are always received together with the signs: Mark. 16. 16.  
10. But out of the use instituted of God, which is not without conversion (unto him); the ceremonies have no respect of a sacrament, neither are God's benefits (signified by them,) received with the signs. Proof. The signs of the covenant, confirm nothing to them which keep not the covenant, or which substitute other things in their place; or which refer them to another end. But Sacraments are signs of the covenant, whereby God bindeth himself to give us forgiveness of sins and life eternal freely for Christ's sake: and bindeth us to show forth faith & new obedience. Therefore they confirm not God's grace to those which use them without faith and repentance, or that use other rites, or to an other end than God hath instituted. Moreover it is superstitious and idolatrous, to attribute the testimony of God's grace, either to the outward work without the promise, or to a work divised of men. Therefore this abuse of the Sacraments, hath not▪ Gods grace joined with it, neither confirmeth it to any▪ as it is said, in Rom. 2. 25. Circumcision profiteth if thou keep the Law: but if thou be a transgressor of the Law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.  
11. The godly, do receive the signs unto salvation; the wicked, unto condemnation: but the things signified, can only the godly receive unto salvation. 1 Pet. 3. 21. 1 Cor. 10. 16. Esa. 66. 3. 1 Cor. 11. 17.  
12. Yet in the elect, though they have received the sacrament unworthily, the fruit followeth at length after they are converted. Proof. The promise, and the signs of the promise which hath the condition of faith added to it, are confirmed, whensoever the condition is performed. And such is the promise, which is signified and confirmed by the sacraments. Therefore whether faith (which believeth the promise and signs) cometh either in the use, or after the use; the promise and things signified are received. Ezek. 16. 69.   

Objections against the Theses of the Sacraments and the solutions of them, by D. Zach. Vrsinus: in public disputation Anno. 1567.  
Object. 4. against part of the tenth position. The papists sacraments are done without regeneration. And yet they are Sacraments. Therefore they may be without (mens) conversion (to God.)  
Answ. The second proposition may be denied, touching them that are not converted. For to such, the sacraments are no sacraments, that is, signs of grace; especially seeing they turn them into mere idols. But they are made sacraments unto them, that is, signs of grace, when (the Papists) are converted. And if they never be converted, they never become sacraments unto them.  
Instance to an absurdity. They that deprave the words and the form of the institution, they overthrew the substance of baptism. The Papists do the first, therefore also the latter. Whereupon their baptism is no baptism; and we which were baptised in the papacy, must be baptised again.  
Answ. For the first, they do overthrow the substance of baptism, namely to themselves, and to those which 〈◊〉 unto 〈◊〉 and are not converted but not unto those, which acknowledging their errors are converted, and do join themselves unto the Church of Christ.  
Object. 6. against the twelft position. That which brings condemnation▪ brings no fruit▪ The unworthy▪ usurpation of the sacrament brings condemnation▪ by the 11▪ position. Therefore it brings no fruit.  
Answ. I grant all, before conversion: but after it, the unworthy usurpation, becometh worthy.  
Jnstance. Condemnation followeth not conversion. The fruit of the sacrament received unworthily, is condemnation, by position 11. Therefore the fruit followeth not those that are converted.  
Answ. We grant it, touching condemnation. But we speak here of the fruit of the sacrament unworthily received, which before conversion was condemnation, because of the unworthy receiving: but after conversion, it is changed into a good and saving fruit.  
Hitherto Ursinus. Whereunto I will add this saying of Mr. Calvin, in his 111. Sermon upon Deuteronomie, (on Deut. 18. 22.) And what (saith he) is to be said of their sacraments? It is evident that they be mere witcheries in the Popedom, so as Jesus Christ is driven a great way off by them: and men make idols of the visible signs and liveless creatures, and Sa●a● hath so imbrued the wretched world with his illusions, that men▪ are become stark beasts.    
FINIS.   

In pag. 125. line 25. for of t●em all read, of them at all.