seeing hee saith nothing throughout this in effect that hee hath not all ready saide in some one or other of his former bookes Fr. Ioh. pag. 8. The Ministery of Pastors and Teachers spoken of Eph. 4.11 The 2. Arg. is the ordinary and perpetuall Ministery giuen by Christ to his Church and such as the Princes of the Earth nether may nor ever shall bee able to abolishe seing Christ hath appoynted it to continue to the end of the worlde But the Prelacie Preesthood and Deaconrye of the Church of England is not the ordinarije and perpetuall Ministery giuen by Christ to his Church but such as the Princes of the Earth may and ought to abolish out of their Dominions Rev. 17 16 1. Tim. 2.2 Rom. 13 4. with 1. Kin. 23.3 deu 12.2 Psa 72.1 Therfore the Preesthood Prelacie and deaconrye of the Church of England is not the Ministery of Pastors and Teachers spoken of Eph. 4.11 Answere Idenye the Assumption Vnderstanding by Prelacie Preesthood and deaconrye The ordinary Ministery of our Church Assemblies against which hee propounds to himself to Dispute And aunswer That it is the ordinary and perpetuall Ministery giuen by Christ to his Church and such as the Princes of the Earth are bounde by Gods Lawes to maintaine and protect by their Authoritie And if their bee any corruption in and aboute the same which they ought to abolish that yet they are accidentiall and personall and not soe Essentiall as that they doe Distroy the Ministery The places of Scripture anexed to the Assumptiō for the proofe therof are all abused and profaned for not on of them doth any way soe much as colourablye proue either of the Clauses in the Assumption but only they proue in generall That the Idolatry and Idolatrious Ministery of Antechrist is to be abolished Soe that the man in his symplicitie takes it as graunted That our Ministerye is such an Idolatrious Ministery which is the maine matter in Controuersy and in effect the generall question of his whole booke Fr. Iohn pag 9. The Office of Pastors and Teachers ordayned by Christ in his Testament The. 3. Arg. are such as did or could stand with the offices of the Apostels Prophetes and Euangelists But the offices of the Prelates Priests or deacons of the Church of England are not such as did or could stand with or vnder the offices of Apostles Prophets and Euangelists which if any deny let him shew the Countrary by the Scriptures Light hath no fellowship with darknes nor Christ with Antichrist And suppose the Apostles were a liue in their Persons and were in England It were worth the knowing whether they and the ordinances giuen by them should giue place to the Prelates and their Canons and whether they should be suffred to preach c. without subscribing and conforming Their Canons vrge all vpon paine of Excommunication ipso facto Therfore they are not the Pastors and Teachers ordained by Christ in his nue Testament Answere 1. What a shamelesse man is this to affirme That our Ministery nether did nor could stand with the offices of the Apostles c. and for proofe therof bid vs If we deny it shew the contrary by Scriptures Doth not the burden of prouing by the very lawe of Common Reason ly vpon the accuser If I should in like manner reproch his Ministery say it is a Ministery that standeth vpon Sorcery witch croft and Coniuration and for proofe therof bid him If hee deny it shew the countrary by Scripture were I not worthy at least to bee laughed out of the Scholes This is a sufficient justification of our Ministery that such Malitions aduersaries therof whoe woulde seeme soe expert in the Scriptures are no better able by Scripture to proue their vnchristian accusation 2. It is true that light hath noe followship with darknes nor Christ with Antichrist Yet ther is no light in men in this life but it is mingled with some darknesse and the best Christians that are or euer haue bene since the Apostles times may be infected with some points of Antichristianisme Many of the late Martyrs since the revealing of Antichrist were worthy lights and renoumed Christians and yet the light of many of them was mingled with more darknesse and their Christianitie with more Antichristianisme then can be founde in our Ministery 3. Our Bishops haue as good reason to make the like supposition against him and as much worthy the inquirie that were if the Apostles c. were a liue now in their owne Persons where hee liueth and should professe the Church Assemblies in Englande to be true Churches and their Ministery in generall to be a lawfull Ministery and their worship for substaunce to bee a true worship whether M. Iohnson and his Church would suffer them to be soe much as priuate members of their Society much more to preach c. 4. Though our Bishops should herein be soe impious as to advance in such a manner their owne Authority and ordinances aboue the Apostles Yet what is that to proue that the Preesthoode and Deaconry of the Ministers of our Church Assemblies who many of them in theis pointes are meere patients and esteeme of theis things as burdens cannot stand with the offices of Apostles c. doth M. Iohnson think that none of our Ministers in England would suffer the Apostles to preach in their Cures without wearing a Surplice If they might haue their owne wils or should this any whit derogate from their Ministery that the Bishops therin would not suffer them to haue their will 5. It is besids the present question and a needlesse thing to spend time in justifying the Canons herein If the Bishops therin haue gonne too far it may seeme to bee the fault of the Parsons rather then of the Prelacie it selfe and therfore to make and vrge such Canons and Traditions as are a fore saide doth not proue but that for all that the Prelacie in of it selfe might stand well enough with the offices of the Apostles c. for those offices may of themselues If their bee noe other impediment stand well one with an other which in the actions therof doe not but by accident only one overthrowe or oppugne the other Fr. Iohn pag. 9.10 The offices of true Pastors The 4. Arg. and Teachers are by the ordinaunce of Christ set in the Church and imployd in the Ministery of the word Sacraments Church Gouerment soe as they may not with their Ecclesiasticall functions receaue Cyvill offices and callings nor take vpon them princely Titles and dignities Eph. 4.11 1. Pet. 5.1 Rom. 12.2.4 Luk. 12.14 and 22.25 1. Cor. 12.5.8 1. Tim. 4.13.15.16 2. Tim. 2.4 But the officies of Prelates Priests and Deacons of the Church of England are not soe but by their owne Constitution we set in the Church and imployd in the Ministery soe as they may also receaue Cyvill offices and Callings as to be Iustices of Peace c.
more the vphould the Ministery of iniquitie and intisse vnto their stolne waters and hid bread 4. That our Church assemblies are not true visible Churches of Christ vnseperated from the worlde not joyned together in Communion of the Gospell by voluntary Profession of the faith and submission to the Gouerment of Christ but standing in bondage vnto Antichrist The very rehearsall of which reasons is answer sufficient he being notable to proue any of theis assertions but either by the Assumption it selfe that they are brought to proue or one by another circularly Contrarily I affirme 1. That ther is no ordinary Ministeriall office that Christ hath giuen vnto his Church for the worke of his Ministery but our Ministers either haue or by our lawes ought to haue the same 2. That it is a Ministery as opposite for the substaunce therof to the Ministery of Popish Priests Deacons as light is opposit to darknesse 3. That the Pope left not such Priests and Deacons as ours are nor hath any such in his Kingdome But that our Priests and Deacons haue bene vnder God and the Prince the principall Persons that haue driuen the Pope and his Priests and Deacons out of the Realme That it is devilish for any to say that they are devilish except they can proue it by better reasons That they that haue the best gifts doe not intice any to stolne waters or hidden bread or to vphould any Mistery of iniquitie Except the Gospell of Iesus Christ and the true and onely meanes of salvation bee the Mistery of iniquitie 4. That our Church Assemblies being such as by the lawes of the land they ought to bee are so far forth seperated from the world joyned together in the communion of the Gospell by the voluntary profession of faith c. and freed from Antichrist as is sufficient to make them true visible Churches of Christ notwithstanding that many things may bee wanting to the full and desired perfection of them And I doubt not but wee shall bee far more able at any time by reason out of Gods worde to proue theis points then ever M. Iohnson will bee to proue the contrary And yet it were easie to proue any thing by such a jugling Method of Reasoning as M. Iohnson hath gotten For hee can proue you the 1. Reason by the 2 the 2. by the 1. The 3. by the 1. and 2 the 1. and 2. by the 3. The 4. by the 1.2 3. and every of them by the 4. and all 4. by that question which here they are brought to proue THE FIFT REASON EXAMINED Fr. Iohn NOne may heare or haue any Spirituall communion with those Ministers which Minister the holy things of God and worke vpon the Consciences of men by vertue of a fals Spirituall calling Such are the Ministers of the Church Assemblies of Englande Ergo None may heare or haue any Spirituall communion with them Answere This Argument which here hee brings against our Ministery is the very same with the 2. For by a fals Spirituall calling hee meanes a calling proceeding from the Apostasie of Antichrist The Preposition for brevitie sake hee proues by fiue and thirtie places of Scripture And yet who soeuer shall pleas to take the paines to examine them shall finde that nether severally nor joyntly they proue the same The Assumption wheron the whole weight of the controversie leaneth hee proueth onely by the first Argument wherby hee proued the Assumption of the 2. Reason viz. Because they doe it by vertue of their Ministery receaved of their Prelats from their Spirituall Authority which is vsurped and Antichristian And this is all this witnesse hath to say and all the answer it needeth Onely hee wandreth into certaine objections and queries grounded vpon some supposed defences of some of our Ministers Vnto which I will though I neede not giue a breif answer from point to point Obj. Some say they preach not by vertue of their Ministery taken from the Prelats but by vertue of some other calling and Authority Ans I knowe none hauing receaued ordination from the Prelats that neede deny that they preach partly by vertue of the Ministery which they haue taken from them Noe though they hould the calling of Prelates vnlawfull For what is the Ministery which they haue taken from them for the substance therof But after a triall of their gifts a libertie and leaue graunted vnto them to preach the worde of God and administer the Sacraments in such Congregations as they shall bee called vnto Obj. Why will such seeme to renounce that calling receaued of the Prelats and yet blame vs for doing the like Ans They may acknowledge a further calling then that of the Prelats and yet not therin renounce the calling receaved from the Prelates but rather ratifie the same For the Prelats being learned divines and having approued of their gifts and by words and letters Testimoniall giuen libertie to execute the Ministery of the Gospell they doe not therby thrust them into a Ministery but they leaue them to bee further called or chosen either by the people or those Patrons vnto whose fidelitie the people haue committed this charge And therfore this acknowledging of a further calling maketh nothing to the justification of the proude ignorant schism of this Persons Obj. If they preach by virtue of another calling how then stande they Ministers of that Church wher noe other is alowed and how impose they themselues vpon any of their Parishe Assemblies seing the lawes of the land allow onely the Prelacie Priesthood and Deaconry a foresaide Ans Though this should be graunted which hee in his ignorāt simplicitie doth suppose that some amongst vs hauing bene ordained by the Prelates did exercise our Ministery by virtue of another calling and though the law of the land alow noe other yet especially so long as they are permitted to execute their Ministery by those in Authority though it bee by virtue of another calling they are to bee reputed Ministers of that Church that hath vse of their Ministery Obj. How also herein can they avoide to bee both intruders and hipocrits intruders in taking vpon themselues a publique office in that Church against the publique lawes and constitutions therof hipocrits because they pretend in shew one thing to the Prince and State and yet performe another indeede Ans All theis inferences are vpon a fals supposition yet if there were any such Persons they could noe more therin bee said to bee intruders and hipocrits then they of the Seperation are For though the publique lawes should bee against any other calling yet so long as they take an office by a good calling they cannot bee said to intrude themselues Nether doe any such amongst vs if ther bee any such pretend in shew any more then they doe indeed performe for so far forth as any differ in iudgement from the publique lawes of the State they are ready to professe it being called thervnto and they practis
onely that which they iudge lawfull being as ready as any of the seperatiō to suffer rather then practis approue or assent vnto any thing which they judge vnlawfull and vnwarrantable Obj. But suppose they had some other lawfull calling yet they also retaining this vnlawfull calling of the Prelats this were but to halt betweene two opinions and to set their threshould by Gods threshoulds and their posts by Gods posts Ans How can such bee said to retaine the vnlawfull calling of the Prelats which protest against the same professe that they preach not by that but by another calling But if ther bee any such that exercise their Ministery by another calling besids that of the Prelats they therin refuse obeidience and conformitie to what soever in the Prelats calling they judge vnlawfull and so doe not joyne an vnlawfull and a lawfull calling together but reject the corruptions retaine the good and supplie the defect with another calling and this is the worste that can bee made of it But this is not to joyne mans Treshoulds to Gods c. but clean contrary to seperate them as much as may bee And how can they bee saide to halt betweene two opinions when so far onely as the truth in their iudgement and opinion is established by publique lawes they imbrace it acknowledging their subjection to the same lawes and contrarily wher they judge that the law swerves from the truth they take another course But still hee begs this which is the maine controversie that our Ministers haue receaued an vnlawfull calling from the Prelates In the next place hee labors to proue by reasons that howsoever some pretend another calling yet it is evident that the execute all the duties of their Ministeries by virtue of their calling taken from their Prelats But what of that This will stand him in noe steed vnlesse it bee given him of almes That every Ministery executed by virtue of a calling taken from the Prelats is an vnlawfull and an Antichristian Ministerie For proue it hee cannot And if wee should except this also bee given him That our Ministery is executed ONLY by virtue of a calling taken from the Prelats and not by any other power or virtue besids taken either from God or man But let vs see his reasons 1. They cannot stand publique Ministers except they receaue of the Prelats the Priesthood and Deaconry a foresaid 2. They are excommunicated ipso facto if they affirme that they whoe are made Bishops Deacons and Priests are not lawfully made vntill thie haue some other calling 3. The people haue not the liberty of the Churches of Christ nor power in this their estate to chose and submit vnto the true and lawfull Ministery appointed by Christ 4. Without and against the peoples consent they are by the Prelats a lone silenced depriued and degraded from exercisiing any Ministery in those Assemblies Theis reasons doe not proue That they exercise their ministery ONLY by virtue of a calling receaved frō the Prelats and therfore whether true or fals are nothing to the purpose and vnworthy any further Answer After this hee fetcheth another Rode out and laboureth to proue that our Ministers ought not to suffer themselues to bee silenced and deposed from their publique Ministery no not by lawfull Magistrats which is not onely fals and seditious as shall appeare afterwarde but idle and impertinent to the present controversie for if it were true that Ministers ought not to doe in this case as ours doe yet this doth not argue any corruption in the calling of their Ministery but a weacknesse onely in the Persons that execute it in yealding further from their owne right then they neede to doe But let vs consider the perticulers that hee objecteth against our Ministers in this respect Obj. The Apostles being true Ministers of Christ would not at the commandement of lawfull Magistrats leaue to preach much lesse should true Ministers at the appointement of vsurping Prelats Nether did the Apostles make their imediate calling from God the ground of their refusall but this That they ought to obey God rather then man which is a duty required of all Ministers and Christians Ans 1. Wher hee distinguisheth between silencing depriving by Prelats and lawfull Magistrats it is in our case wher the Prelats doe it by Authority and commission from lawfull Magistrats a distinction without a difference 2. Though the Apostles did not assigne their imidiate calling from God as the ground of their refusall in so many letters and sillables yet that which they doe assigne is by implication and in effect the same with it for it is as much as if they had said God himselfe hath imposed this calling vpon vs and not man therfore except wee should rather obey man then God wee may not forbeare this office which hee hath imposed vpon vs. For opposing the obeidience of God to the obeidience of man hee therin pleads a calling from God and not from man otherwise if they had receaved a calling from man there had bene incongruitie in the answer considering that in common sence and reason they ought so far forth to obey men forbidding them to exercise a calling as they exercise the same by virtue of that calling els by this reason A Minister should not ceas to preach vpon the commandemēt of the Church that hath chosen him but should be bound to giue them also the same answer which they Apostles gaue which were absurd So that by this grosse conceit of M. Iohnsons their should bee no power in any sort of men whomsoever to depose a Minister from his Ministery but that notwithstāding any comandement of Church or State the Minister is to continue in his Ministery But for the further answer of this his ignorant conceit plainly tending to sedition wee are to know That though the Apostles Prophets and Euangelists preached publiquely where they were not hindred by open violence And did not nor might not leaue their Ministery vpon any humain Authoritie and commandement whatsoever because they did not enter into or exercise the same vpon the will and pleasure of any man whatsoever yet they never erected and planted publique Churches and Ministeries in the face of the Magistrate whether they would or noe or in dispite of them But such in respect of the eye of the Magistrat were as private and invisible as might bee Neither were some of the Apostles onely forbidden so as others should bee suffered to preach the same Ghospel in their places but the vtter abolishing of Christian Religion was manifestly intended in the silencing of them But our Churches wherof wee are Ministers are noe private secreat Assemblies such as hide themselues from the face of a persecuting Magistrat and State But are publique professing their worship doing their religion in the face of the Magistrate and State yea and by his contenance authoritie and protection And wee are set over those Churches not onely by a calling of
our people but also by the authoritie of the Magistrate who hath an armed power to hinder any such publique Action who is willing also to permitte and maintaine other true Ministers of the Gospel in those places where hee forbiddeth some If therfore after our publique calling to Minister to such a knowne and publique Church but by the Magistrat also The Magistrate shall haue matter against vs whether just or injust it skilleth not and shall in that regard forbid vs to Minister to our Church I see not by what warrant in Gods word wee should thinke our selues bounde not withstanding to exercise our Ministery still Except wee should thinke such a law of Ministery to ly vpon vs that wee should judge our selues bound to run vpon the sword point of the Magistrate or to oppose sword to sworde It being not the vse of the higher powers in such cases nakedly to forbid but to set a sword to the breast therby to force them which shall refuse And suppose the Magistrate should doe it injustly and against the will of the Church and should therin sinne yet doth not the Church in that regard ceas to bee a Church nor ought shee therin to resist the will of the Magistrate Nether doth shee stand bound in regard of her affection to her Minister how great and deserved soever to deprive her selfe of the protection of the Magistrat by leauing her publique standing to follow her Ministery in private and the darke refusing the benefit of all other publique Ministery which with the leaue and liking of the Magistrate shee may injoy Nether doe I knowe what warrant any ordinarie Minister hath by Gods worde in such a Case so to draw any such Church or people to his private Ministery that therby they should hazzard their outward state and quiet in the Common wealth wher they liue when in some competent Measure they may publiquely with the grace and fauours of the Magistrat inioy the ordinarie meanes of their Salvation by another and except hee haue a calling to Minister to some other Church to bee content to live as a private member till it should please God to reconcile the Magistrate vnto him and so call him againe to his owne Church laboring in meane while privately vpon perticuler occasions offred to strengthen and cofirme in the wayes of God those people that are deprived of his publique labours and I take it to bee the dutie of the people in such a case if they will approue themselues faithfull Christians and good Subjects so to submit to the Ministery of another as that by prayer and all other good dutifull and loyall meanes they may doe their best indevour to obtaine him of whom against their will they haue bene deprived and still to affect and loue him as their Pastor Now if the people doe thus then is that Minister called to bee silent not onely by the Magistrate but by them also though with much greife Obj. It is the dutie of all Ministers and Christians as will as Apostles to obey God and not man when man forbiddeth that which God commandeth or commandeth that which God forbiddeth Ans True but God noe wher that I can find commaundeth either a Minister to Minister publiquely in a publique Church maintained by the Magistrate against the will and in despite of the Magistrate noe more then against the will and in despite of the Church it selfe Obj. Vriah at the commaundement of the King made an Alter after the fashion of that of Damascus but therin sinned though hee offred theron such burnt-offrings as God had appointed much lesse may the Ministery vnder the Gospell bee framed after any nue manner devised by man least of all after Antichrist though in that Ministery many doctrines of the Gospell bee taught and such Sacraments administred as God hath ordained Ans This Example of Vriah the Priest is altogether impertinent vnto that which goeth before It being one thing vpon the commaundement of the Magistrate to forbeare the publique exercise of a true Ministery another thing vpon his commaundement to frame a nue Ministery after a nue manner devized by man or Antichrist After this hee runs out of his way againe to satisfie an objection that hee had propounded and indevoured as far as his learning would giue him leaue to answer before And which doth nothing at all depend vpon any thing that goeth before in this Argument wherin hee resembles some wanton Curs that takes delight to turne round about to catch their owne tailes But let vs see what it is hee saith Obj. Here againe concerning such as plead that they teach the truth and many excellent points of Doctrine It is to bee observed that yet none may therfore heare their Ministery vnder Coler of learning the truth because in yealding to receaue and heare it from Antichrists Ministery They defile the Temple of God and become the Subjects of Antichrist pag. 75. Ans Wher hee againe taketh it as matter that must whether wee will or noe bee graunted vnto him That our Ministery is Antichrists Ministery which needs noe other answer then before yet thus much further 1. That noe Ministery whatsoever so far forth as it teacheth the truth of Christ especially a truth opposite to the doctrine of Antichrist is the Ministery of Antichrist And those which shall submit and subject themselues vnto any Ministery whatsoever onely so far forth as they Minister and teach such truth cannot therin bee said to defile the Temple of God or to bee Subjects of Antichrist but bee obedient to Iesus Christ 2. Our Ministery in divers Congregations of the land at the least Teach not onely many excellent points of doctrin But so much doctrine as is sufficient to the Salvation of him that beleeueth the same even all the maine fundamentall points of Salvation clearly set downe in Gods word yea and for ought any can proue to the countrary All other lesse necessary points so far forth as God hath revealed and convinced their consciences of the truth of them 3. Those amongst vs who make conscience of hearing our Ministery doe not heare them vnder a Colour of learning the truth but onely to this very end and purpose that they might learne the truth and therin the true way of serving and worshipping God according to his owne will Obj. And not to speake of the many errors falshoods which they also teach it is no nue thing that the Ministers of Antichrist should in diuers things teach and bring the truth with them for when Sathan cannot by falshood vtter his wares ordinaunces Ministery worship hee will bee glad to vtter the same by teaching the truth pag. 75.76 Ans 1. Our Errors whether for weight or member or qualitie are not such so great so many but they may be fall vnto true Christians whether Ministers or people yea as M. Iohnson well knoweth many of the Martyrs of Iesus Christ haue liued and died in more and greater Errors of the
therfore will stand him in noe steed whether it bee true or fals and therfore I leaue it to their maintenance from whom hee saith hee borroweth it THE FIFT REASON TAKEN OVT OF THE offer of Conference EXAMINED Fr. Iohn IF the Propositions propounded to bee maintained in the offer of Conference bee true To avoid tediousnes I forbeare to set them downe as M Iohnson hath done but thou shalt discern what they are afterward in the Answer then is it not lawfull to heare or haue any speciall Communion with the present Ministery of the Church Assemblies of Englande But those Propositions are true Ergo It is not lawfull to haue any Speciall Communion with the same Answere The Consequent is fals doth not follow from the said Propositions 1. Though it should be graunted That all matters meerely Ecclesiasticall lawfully imposed vpon any Church are such as may bee concluded necessarily from the written word of God Yet in a true constituted Church some matters meerely Ecclesiasticall may bee imposed through humaine frailty that cannot so bee concluded 2. Though all humaine ordinances vsed onely or specially in Gods worship whervnto they are not necessary of themselues were simply vnlawfull Yet is not every such humaine ordinance of that nature that it maketh the Church and Ministery wher it is vsed to bee a fals Church and Ministery much lesse those Churches and that Ministery wherin it is not vsed but injoined onely 3. Though it were generally graunted of all That every true visible Church of Christ is such a Spirituall body politick as is specially instituted by Christ or his Apostles in the new Testament Yet it will not thence follow That those Churches and Ministeries are not to bee communicated withall that haue any thing in or appertaining to the constitution therof not instituted by Christ or that such Churches are not true visible Churches 4. Though every true visible Church of Christ or ordinary Assemblie of the faithfull hath by Christs ordinance power in it selfe immedialy vnder Christ to elect and ordaine deprive and depose their Ministers and to execute all other Ecclesiasticall Censures Yet will it not follow from thence That all they are fals Churches and not to bee communicated with all That doe not or by the lawes of man are not suffred to vse that power Nether is it sure the meaning of them who offer the Conference To maintaine That they are no true visible Churches of Christ that cannot vse that power but are therein subject to others for one may by Christs ordinance haue a power to doe that which yet in regard of man he hath noe power to doe 5. Though the Pastor of a perticuler congregation should be yealded to bee the highest ordinary Ecclesiasticall officer in any true constituted visible Church of Christ Yet cā it not hence bee concluded That those Pastors are fals Pastors who are outwardly by mans lawes subjected to a Superior Ecclesiastical officer The Father ordinary is the highest officer in the family yet if the Magistrate subject the father in some matters appertaining to the family to another Though therin it may bee hee may doe the father some wrong yet doth not the father therby become a fals father or the family a fals family Admitte then that this prerogatiue due to Pastors to haue noe Spirituall officers superior vnto them yet is it not so essential vnto him that without the Actuall vse and possession of it hee cannot bee a true Pastor And yet take a true visible Church in that sence which the officers of the conference doe viz. for a perticuler ordinary Assembly or Congregation And then in our owne Churches The Pastor is the higest ther being noe Ecclesiasticall Officer in any such Churches a boue him 6. Graunt this That it is the office of every true Pastor to teach and Governe Spiritually one Congregation immediately vnder Christ Can it from hence bee concluded That they are noe true Pastors which governe more congregations then one or which are subject in some outward things to some others besids Christ 7. Admit That the offices of Provinciall and diocesan Bishops were contrary to the word of God must it needs ther vpon follow That those Ministers and Churches which are vnder them by the lawes of man are fals such especially who obey them onely in things which they judge honest and lawfull and who vnder this subjection doe no more then they would doe if they were not subject at all vnto the Bishops A man must therfore bring a better head wit with him then M. Iohnsons That by the Propositions of the offer of Conference how harsh soeuer they may seeme to bee can conclude it vnlawfull to joine and communicate with our Church Assemblies For the profe of this consequent he bringeth nothing out of our owne writings but onely to giue his reader therby a vomit some of his owne Coleworts not twise but twise twenty times sodden To which wee giue him leaue to looke an Answer from some as idle headded as himselfe THE SIXT ARGVMENT TAKEN OVT OF DIvers Treatises Answered This Proposition being a whol leaf in his booke I forbeare any further anser downe there being in effect little difference in the matter from that which hee hath formerly brought Fr. Ihon. IF the is Assertious bee true That that Church calling for which the Scripture giue noe expresse warrant is meerely vsurped and vtterly vnlawfull That as it is not lawfull to bring in any strange doctrin so is it not lawful to teach the true doctrine vnder the name of any other function then is instituted by God c. But the aforesaid Assertions are true Therfore it is vnlawful to haue communiō with that Ministery Answere This Argument being a collection out of our writers doth not differ from the former as himselfe graunteth and therfore needs noe further Answer The Consequent is fals and hee proues it not by any of our owne writers as hee ought to doe but stil brings vs profes out of his owne musty Aumbry The Assumption therfore borrowed out of our owne writers will doe him noe pleasure THE SEAVENTH REASON TAKEN OVT OF THE twelue Arguments viz. the tenth EXAMINED Fr. Iohn IT is a sinne against Christ the sole head of the Church to haue spirituall communion with those Ministers which in their Administratiō of divine things do either by word or deed solemly professe and yeald a spirituall homage to an vsurped spirituall Authoritie in the Church But so do the Ministers of the Church Assemblies of England Ergo It is a sinne to haue communion with the same Answere The Proposition is fals And hath noe ground from that Proposition in the 12. Arguments vnto which hee would match and forth of which hee would draw it The Proposition there is this It is a sinne against Christ the sole head of the Church for any one of his Ministers especially in the administration of divine things either by words or signes
solemly to professe and acknowledge a spirituall homage to a vsurped Sperituall authoritie in the Church Can hee conclude his proposition from this doth it hence follow That because our Ministers in their Ministery if they conforme do in some measure in infirmitie or ignorance commit some such sinne That therfore it is a sinne to communicate with them in other divine things wherin they doe not commit the same sinne Hee tels vs That the Proposition may not bee gaine-said and why doth hee tell vs so because the Author of the 12. Arguments saith his Proposition may not bee denied As though there were just the same reason for the one as is for the other But why may not the Proposition Because all Spirituall power vsurped over the Churches of God is an Antichristian Authoritie to communicate with those Ministers which Professe Spirituall homage therunto is to communicate which such as professe Spirituall homage to Antichrist which must needs bee a sinne against Christ the head of the Church A deepe and learned Reason It can bee no sinne against Christ to communicate with them which in some action professe Spirituall homage to Antichrist except in their communion they also professe the same homage which like an ignorant disputant hee maketh noe question of As though to joine with one that doth evill in that which is good is alwaies to joine with him in the evill as though to joine with a glutton in eating necessary food were to joine with him in his gluttony or to joine with a blasphemer in the act of his blaspheming in rescuing an inocent out of the hands of Robbers were to communicate with him in his blasphemy But herein hee propounds onely to play the Ape imitating the Author of the twelue Arguments who saith his Proposition may not bee gaine said Because all Spirituall Power vsurped over the Churches of God is an Antichristian Authority and to professe spirituall homage thervnto is to professe spirituall homage vnto Antichrist which must needs bee a sinne But what is there no more Reason in this reason then in his If this bee a good Argument to proue that Proposition for which it is brought must his Argument needs bee as good to proue his proposition what because it is a sinne to professe Speciall homage vnto Antichrist must it needs also bee a sinne to communicate also with them who do professe some homage vnto Antichrist what to communicate with them in other matters The Assumption is as fals as the Proposition And hath noe ground for the twelue Arguments for though it were graunted That to vse the controverted ceremonies in manner and forme prescribed were even in the solemne worship of Christ by solemne signes to acknowledge a spirituall homage to a spirituall vsurped Authority of Arch Bishops and Bishops Yet doth it not ther-from follow That our Ministers in the administration of divine things doe the same for none of our Ministers do alwaies in the administration of divine things professe any such homage and some do never professe it And those who professe it when they doe professe it propound and intend noe such matter Hee proues the Assumption Thus They preach the word and administer the Sacraments by virtue of their calling receaved from the Arch-Bishops and Bishops c. The vanity wherof hath bene sufficiently shewed all-ready hee therin begging one of his stale reasons and not borrowing any thing from the twelue Arguments That which followeth wherby hee would proue That the Authority of L. Arch-Bishops and Bishops is vsurped which he makes the 2. parts of his Assumption is altogether idle and to noe purpose and donne onely of malice to the Author of the twelue Arguments for otherwise had hee intended herein the convincing of the said Author and of them which are of his minde which is the onely vse of the later sort of his reasons which can serve for noe other vse it had bene sufficient to haue produced his Assertion without his profes for that had bene enough to declare The Authors conceit Hee concludes crowing as if hee were some Cock of the game that had picked out the eyes and broken the necks of al that haue bene set against him And thus saith hee the cause is yealded by themselues And is it not thinke wee finely yealded is it not a feild stoutly wonne Is it any mervaille that hee makes such out cries against the wholl Christian world that will not follow such a leader But I leaue him to his vaine conceits of his owne cause Trusting that any sober and judicious Christian will bee able to discerne therin his fond and ignorant vanity And wher as in the Answer of his Reasons I haue omitted to answer to many perticuler passages All things considered I shall not neede to aske him pardon I should rather haue cause to expect thanks if I had to deale with a reasonable and good natured adversary REASONS OR ARGVMENTS TENDING TO PROVE THAT IT IS A sinne to seperate from the publique Ministery of the Church Assemblies of Englande DIRECTLY CONTRARY TO Mr. IONHSONS OWNE Reasons AND VSVALLY IN THAT REgard made in the same moode and figure The first Argument It is a sinne to seperate from that Ministery which is set by Christ in his Church for the worke of his Ministerie But such is the Ministery of the Church Assemblies of England Therfore it is a sinne to seperate from it The profes which he bringeth to confirme the maine Proposition of his first Reason will serue to proue this The Assumption may bee proued thus The Ministery of true Pastors and Teachers is the Ministery which is set by Christ in his Church The Ministery aforesaid is the Ministery of true Pastors and Teachers Therfore it is a Ministery set by Christ in his Church The Proposition is his owne The Assumption I proue thus The Ministery which hath in it all things essentiall to the office calling of true Pastors Teachers is the Ministery of true Pastors and Teachers But such is our Ministery Therfore it is the Ministery of true Pastors and Teachers I think he is not so simple as to deny the Proposition The Assumption is proued thus To haue such gifts as Christ ascended to heauen to giue for the worke of his Ministery To bee outwardly called to that worke by such a Church as professeth the fondamentall points of the Gospell To instruct the people committed to their Charge in the doctrine of the law and Gospell To administer vnto them the holy Sacraments of Christ And to bee their month in prayer vnto God Are all things essentially appertaining to the office of true Pastors and Teachers Such is the Ministery of our Assemblies Therfore it is the true Ministery of Pastors and Teachers If hee deny the Proposition hee must shew what other matters do essentially appartaine vnto their calling which yet hee hath not donne For confirmation of the Assumption it shall bee sufficient that wee can set forth vnto
Therfore they are not true Pastors and Teachers Answere Ther are 4. Termes in this Syllogisme The grosse Sophisterye wherof may appeare by the Explanation therof in others wordes True Pastors Teachers may not viz. by Gods lawe take vpon them Cyvill offices The Ministers of England may viz. by Mans lawe take vpon them Cyvill offices Therfore they are not true Pastors and Teachers This is the effect of his Argument who is so blind but hee may see the fallacie therof And it is as though we should reason in the like manner against their owne Ministery thus True Pastors Teachers may not bee Drunckards Anabaptists Familists The Ministers of the Seperation at Amsterdam may be Drunckards Anabaptists Familists Therfore they are not true Pastors and Teachers This Assumption is as true as the former for the same kinde of Authoritie that permits our Ministers to bee Cyvill Magistrats doth permit them to bee Drunckards c. The goverment vnder which they liue permitteth the one to more then our state doeth the other But I answer more particulerly 1. That by the same lawe that our Ministers may take vpon them Cyvill Magistracie Any true Pastors and Teachers may take vpon them the same Authority and by the same lawe that true Pastors and Teachers may not take Cyvill Authoritye vpon them our Ministers may not take the same vpon them 2. All our Ministers may not noe by the lawes of our State take vpon them Cyvill Authority But such only as are called specially therto by the fauours grace of the Cyvill Magistrate not as they are Prelats Priests or Deacons or by vertue of those functions but in respect of other qualifications Nether are the forced by any law to adjoyne any such Authoritie to their Ministery but permitted only But what if by the lawes of men Ministers might be Murtherers Adulterers Theeus c. should theis lawes chaunge the nature of their Ministery what of their Ministery that denye vnto themselues that lycence would it not rather the more justify their Ministery when in Conscience of Gods law they shall for beare that which flesh and blood and humaine laws would permit vnto them 3. Suppose not onely that it is vnlawfull for any true Pastors and Teachers to bee Cyvill Magistrats but that also by our lawes all our Ministers were forced therunto and that by vertue of their Ministery will it thence follow that for this cause they are not true Pastors and Teachers May not true Pastors and Teachers in their weacknesse ignorance and infirmities the laws of the State requiring the same admitt of some kind of office or Authoritie for bidden them but they must needs ther vpon cease to bee true Pastors Teachers doth the admitting of every vnlawfull thing chaunge the nature of the Ministery and make it either noe Ministery or a Ministery of an other kinde Fr. Iohn The Ministery of Christian Pastors and Teachers The. 5. Arg. standeth by the word and ordinance of Christ so as all Churches vnder Heaven are bound to receaue and submit thervnto But the Prelacie Preesthood and Deaconry of the Ghurch of England staundeth only by the Authoritie and Law of man soe as other Churches els wher nether are nor neede to bee subjecte thervnto which euen themselues of all sorts haue acknowledged for which see Whitgifts defence in the Preface The Answer to the Abstraucte pag. 58. The Admonition to the Parlement The defence of the Godly Ministers the demonstration Therfore it is not the Ministery of Christian Pastors and Teachers Answere I deny the Assumption The Ministery of our Church Assemblies of England whether of Prelates Priests or Deacons or by what other names soeuer they be called for the substance therof standeth by the word and ordinance of Christ and not onely by the Authority and law of man And all other true Churches are and ought to be subject to the same kinde of Ministery and to noe other that shall in any Essentiall point of Ministery differ from ours If any Perticuler Parsons amongst vs haue bene soe vnaduised to graunt the Assumption let them answer for themselues Hee hath noe more reason to binde vs to their opinions then wee to binde him vnto whatsoeuer his predecessours Browne Barrowe and Greenwood haue held before him Concerning some of the particulers Doctor Whitgifts words are theis The substance and nature of Gouerment must indeed by taken out of the word of God and consisteth in theis parts That the word be truely taught the Sacraments rightly administred virtue furthered vice repressed and the Church kept in quietnesse and order The offices of the Church wherby this Gouerment is wrought bee not namely and particulerly expressed in the Scripture but in some points left to the discretion and libertie of the Church to be disposed according to the State of times Places and persons The Author of the Answer to the Abstract in the place aledged saith That it cannot be proued that any set and exacte particuler forme of discipline is recomended vnto vs in the word of God Now are either of theis to affirme That the Ministery of our Church Assemblies staundeth only by the lawes and Authoritie of Man Hath M. Iohnson any shame left in his face that thus shamefully abuseth the names of learned and reuerent men soe directly contrary to their words and meaning Is ther not cause to suspect that the other Authors are in like manner abused and that for the better hideing of his fraude hee forbeareth to quote any particuler places Being therfore convinced of depravation in the places particularly quoted wee may presume that if the other places had bene more pertinent hee would haue giuen vs some particuler directions also for the finding of them And the rather for that hee cannot be ignorant that those whom specially hee fighteth against in theis Argumēts doe rely vpon the judgement of the Authours following more then of the former Fr. Iohn The offices of Pastors The 6. Arg. and Teachers which Christ hath appointed are such as they which haue them must bee members of a true visible Church and bound to one perticuler Congregation for the Ministery and Gouerment therof But the Offices of the Prelats Priests and Deacons of the Church of Englande are such as they which haue them need not bee neither in their State can bee members of a true visible Church but of a fals neither are bound to one perticuler Congregation for the Ministery and Gouerment therof but the Prelates are our whoele Prouinces and Diocesses other inferior Priests may haue in that State pluralitie of benefices and Ecclesiall Cures c. which none can deny Therfore they are not the Pastors Teachers that Christ hath appointed Answere Though some parts of the Proposition bee disputable Yet because other besids the Seperation doe hould the whol for truth I will leaue it in medio The Assumption is falce especially if it bee vnderstoode as it ought to bee of the
offices of such Prelats Priests and Deacons as are Ministers of our Church Assemblies For most of those which haue such offices are and are bound to be members of true visible Churches And cannot in their Estate they being in all points answerable to the lawes be members of a falce Church They are all such excepted as haue speciall dispensations bound to one particuler Congregation and may not by law haue more Cures then one but admitting of a seconde the first is voyd Yea the Prelats thēselues though in regard of their Prelaticall office they are Gouernors of whole Prouinces diocesses yet it is possible for them not withstanding to be members in their Estate of a true visible Church and bee bound as are the Prelats of Scotland to one particuler congregation for the speciall Ministery and Gouerment therof And though the other Ministers may haue in that estate pluralitie of benefices and Cures yet it doth not follow that therfore they are such as in their estate cannot be members of a true visible Church excepte they haue thē indeede yea though they should be pluralists indeede yet for ought hee hath proued to the contrary they may bee membres of true visible Churches and may each bee bound to one particuler Congregation for the Ministery and Gouerment therof But what man except hee were halfe frantick wold reason thus Our Ministers may bee Pluralists therfore they neither are nor can be true Pastors and Teachers Is not this rather one of the honors then blemishes of our Ministers That they may be pluralists and yet are not If by our lawes their owne Assemblies were established If by the same lawes their Pastors and Teachers might bee non residents or pluralists or worse would they think hemselus euer the worse for this would they not rather thinke themselus the better that they are not soe bad as by mans lawe they might bee Fr. Iohn The Offices Condition and Gouerment of Pastors and Teachers The 7. Arg. are such as noe way impaire the Authority and Supremacy of the Syvill Magistrate But the offices Condition and Gouerment of Prelates Priests Deacons are such as doe many waies impaire the Authoritie Supremacie and dignity of Kings and all other Magistrats both in Civill and Ecclesiasticall Causes For the Prelates will haue their presence voice and Authority to be at Parlaments for enacting of lawes and Statuts for the Common wealth They are Rulers of whol Prouinces and diocesses in the Ecclesiasticall causes therof In Civill State and dignity some of them are aboue all and all of them aboue some of the Nobles Iustices and other Magistrats of the Lande Themselues their Courts and officers handle and determine sundry Civill Causes and affaires appertaining to the Magistracie They inflict Civill Mults and punishments In their forbidden times they giue licence to Mary The beneficed Priests sweare Canonicall obeidience to the Prelats All the Priests and Deacons are exempt from the Magistrats Iurisdiction in diuers things appertaining vnto them and answerable onely or cheifly to the Prelats and their officers Therfore they are not the onely Pastors and Teachers spoken of Eph. 4.11 Answere The Assumption is falce nether doe the instances proue the same 1. The Prelats claime their voices in Parlament not as diuine ordinaunces appartaining to their Prelateship but as an honor annexed to the same by the Civill Magistrate 2. Their Authority in Causes Ecclesiasticall ouer Prouinces c. is either such as the Civill Magistrate himselfe may execute and administer in his owne person if hee please or such as is not for them as they are Magistrats to execute The first sort they administer only by vertue of the Magistrats owne Commission and therin they cannot impair either his dignity or Supremacie much lesse in the other part of their Authoritie which belongeth not to the Magistrats themselues to execute especially when they vse it not nether without their consent lycence and approbation 3. That all are aboue some and some aboue all of the Nobles and Iustices c. is a free and voluntary honour graunted vnto them by the Civill Magistrate and held in tenure from him and not claimed as I thinke as belonging to their Episcopall function by diuine right 4. Their Courts determine noe other Civill causes then the Civill Magistrate and his lawes do permit or if they doe the falt is in the Parsons and not in the Prelatship further they inflict Civill punishments giue lycences exacte Oathes c. by Authority from the Magistrat whose subsistutes therin they are And therfore the Prelates neither in theis nor in any of the former instances can bee saide to impaire the dignity Authoritie or Supremacie of the Civill Magistrate when herein they doe all things in and by the protection of his Authoritie much lesse can other inferior Ministers who haue noe dealing in the aforesaid matters Lastly if all our Ministers be exempt from the Magistrats Iurisdiction in some things appertaining vnto them but wherin I knowe not this very exemptiō it selfe is an act of the Magistrats Iurisdiction depends onely vpon his pleasure how can it thē any waies impair the same hytherto hee hath dealt by Syllogismes such as they are now for a conclusion of this first Argument hee shoots at rouers as followeth Fr. Iohn To this end diuers other reasons might be aledged for example If they say that Arch Bishops haue the Pastors then they haue but two If Lord Bishops then but 26. and what office then haue the Arch Bishops amongst them If the other Priestes then what office haue the Arch Bishops and Bishops seing God hath or dayned noe higher ordinary Ecclesiasticall office as some of them-selus acknowledg If they say the deacons haue the Pastors office the same absurdity followeth as in the former besids that the works of the deacons office are opposed to the worke of the Ministery Act. 6.2 with Eph. 4.11 Rom. 12.8 If they should say they haue the Teachers office it would be known which of their officiers haue it amongst them and to whom they are adioyned for the worke of Ministery as Teachers are to Pastors and what office the rest haue whom the accompt not to haue the Teachers office whether the Teacher spoken of Eph. 4.11 must first bee deacons and then Priestes and permit obeydeince to the Prelates and that also is to their ordinaires and be sylenced and deposed at thtir pleasure Answere Here hee thinkes hee hath knitt such Gardian knotts as cannot be vntide without a sword or a bill but the Simplicitie of the man here in is to bee laughed at for 1. though some should say that either our Arch Bishops or Bishops haue the Pastors office yet ther in they doe not exclude the other Ministers from that which is the substance and effect of that office though they should from the name No nor frō the name neither but should therin onely make degres of pastours viz. of Arch
Apostasie Because it is a Ministery that was not set by Christ in his Church This doth hee most grosly runne round in a circle as if I should proue that his Ministery is vnlawfull because hee is a Schismatick and that hee is a Schismatick because his Ministery is vnlawful The 2. Reason wherby he proues his Proposition followeth Fr. Iohn 2. If the Prelates of the Church of England haue such offices and Gouerment as be speciall parts of Antichrists Apostasie then the Ministery ordained by them thervnto must needs bee the Ministery of that Apostasie But the Prelats of the Church of England haue such offices and gouerment as bee speciall parts of Antichrists Apostasy Therfore the Ministery ordained by them is the Ministery of Antichrists Apostasie The consequent is manifest because the fruit must needs bee as the tree is Mat. 7.16 and who can bring a clean thing out of filthinesse Iob 14.4 The Assumption is proued 1. Whosoever besids Christ haue such offices and Gouerment wherby the claime to bee spirituall Lords the haue the offices and Gouerment which are speciall parts of Antichrists Apostasy and are indeed very Antichrists themselues But such are the Prelats of the Church of Englande Therfore the haue such offices and Gouerments as are speciall purts of Antichrists Apostasy The Proposition is proued by those places of Scripture which teach that there is but one spirituall Lord the Lord Iesus The Assumption is proued by the lawes and Statutes of the land wherin they are called Lords Spirituall and in their Canons they take vpon them to prescribe their owne ordinaunces to the Ghurch for the worship of God and binde the spiret and couscience to the acknowledgement and approbation therof and to giue the holy Ghost 2. The offices and Gouerment of such Bishops as are ouer Diocesan and Prouinciall Churches and exercise Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction ouer all the Ministers and people therin are speciall parts of Antichrists Apostasie But such are the Prelates of the Church of Englande Ergo They haue such offices and gouerment as bee specially parts of Antichrists Apostasie Answere 1. I deny the cōsequent of the Proposition of the 1. Sillogisme The officers gouernors of Antichrists Apostasy may haue ordained some things that are Christian Nether doth the saying of Christ or Iob proue the consequent for though it should be graunted vnto him that the gouernors of Antichrists Apostasy haue ordained this Ministery yet doth it not follow that it is therfore a propre meere fruit of Antichrist but may be an dentall effect as are many other things which hee ordaineth agreable to Christs owne ordinaunces so that hee must proue that our Ministery ordained by the Pope or Bishops doth as properly flowe from the nature of their office and gouerment as figs from a fig tree or grapes from a vine or filthy water from a foule fountaine The contrary wherof is in this case most euident For leaue the bare names and tytles and consider our Ministery in all the essentiall parts and offices therof and it is a possible either for a Presbythery or for any perticuler Church such in constitution as their owne to ordaine the like Ministery in all points and respects with all the defects and faults therof 2. Concerning the first profe of the Assumption The Proposition may bee denied It being one thing to bee and another to make claine to bee for euery one is not that which hee claimeth to bee The Instances alledged to proue the Assumption either are fals or proue it not The lawes may giue their titles to men which they doe not claime Neither doe either their Canons or practis shew that they prescribe their owne ordinances for worship or propound to binde mens consciences to the acknowledgement of any such matter The professe the contrary and vrge their owne ordinaunces onely vnder the name of things indifferent Though therfore in error of iudgement they may and happily doe commande such ordinances of their owne as are diuine worship and in such a manner as it bindeth conscience which M. Iohnsons owne Church in many cases may doe except they think themselues priviledged from error yet they protesting against any such power and authority they cannot be saide therin to arrogate the office of Spirituall Lords in that sence at least in which Christ is said to bee the only Spirituall Lord. And though in their ordination of Ministers they vse as a ceremoniall speech to say Receaue the holy Ghost and therin peraduenture offer some force vnto the Scripture vnto which the allude yet they disclaime al actuall power and authority of giuing the person or gifts of the holy Ghost vnto men It shall bee needlesse in this controversie to spend time in the defence of the calling of Bishops any further then the necessity of the argument requires Onely for the further clearing of the truth in the differences of them of the Seperation not only from the Bishops but from the other sort of Ministers also which doe not approue of their callings I offer theis pointes vnto them to consider of advisedly 1. Whether the Supreame Magistrate haue not power to ouer see and Gouerne all the severall Churches with in his dominions yea whether hee bee not bound so to doe 2. Whether for his further helpe and assistance herein hee may not make choise of graue learned and reuerent men to assist him in the same gouerment 3. Whether by vertue of his power theis persons thus called to assist the Supreame Magistrate may not lawfully try the gifts of all the severall Ministers with in his dominions and giue publique approbation of the worthy inhibit those which they finde vnworthy frō the execution of their Ministery whether they may not visit the severall Ministers and Churches conuent them before them examine them how they haue behaued themselues in their places and punish the blame worthy 4. Whether for the more easy and orderly Gouerment of the said Churches so far forth as appertaineth to him hee may not devide his kingdom as ours is into Provinces assigning over each of them vnder himself some speciall Magistrat for learning and experience to oversee and gouerne all the perticuler Churches there and whether hee may not subdevide those Provinces into Diocesses assigning also to them other more inferior officers vnder him and his provinciall officers to over see the severall Churches with in such and such a precincte 5. Whether it doe destroy the nature of a Ministeriall or a perticular true visible Church that many of them should appertaine vnto one Provinciall or Diocesame gouerment though in that respect they should bee held and reputed but for one Provinciall or Diocesame Church 6. Whether Antichrist hauing vsurped the Kings Supremacy and taken into his hands this authority and corrupted the same hath made it now vnlawfull for the Magistrate to execute the same in manner and forme a fore saide or whether the Iurisdiction a fore saide doe not