A REPLY TO A PRETENDED CHRISTIAN PLEA FOR THE ANTICHISTIAN CHVRCH OF ROME published by Mr. Francis Iohnson ao. 1617. Wherin the weakness of the sayd Plea is manifested and arguments alleaged for the Church of Rome and Baptisme therein are refuted By Henry Ainsworth Anno 1618. We would have healed Babylon but she is not healed forsake her and let us goe every one into his owne countrie for her judgment reacheth unto heaven and is lifted up even to the skies Ier. 51. 9. Printed in the yere 1620. The Preface TWo things good Reader have been heretofore controverted between Mr. Iohnson and mee the one concerning the Power of the Christian church which he would have installed in the Ministerie thereof the other concerning the Antichristian church of Rome with the ministerie and baptisme thereof which he hath pleaded to be true though corrupted I have proved to be false and deceytfull These things have passed publikly through mine Opposites occasion in Mr Richard Cliftons Advertisement and my Animadversion therto The former of these two points Mr. Iohnson hath left vnanswered so the prudent may judge of the strife by that which we both have sayd the latter he hath sought to mainteyne by a colourable Plea for the Romane church cheifly 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 refell in this treatise folowing His order of handling them I have altered beginning with the Church of Rome then with the Baptisme of that church for so I judge the trueth of the controversie wil soonest appeare His often longsome repetitions I seek to abridge as being fruitlesse wearisome to the Readers his bold and bitter taunts I passe 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 judgment 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 owne grounds Onely wheras in his preface he intimateth sundry manifest untruthes published in the Animadversion but nameth none I signifie in a good conscience that to my knowledge â— published not any one untrueth but rather spared him then pressed things in extremitie That which I suppose he aimeth at I set downe from the report of honest faithfull witnesses of whome some are now at rest in the Lord who would not as I am perswaded willingly have related any thing but the trueth Finally as in all other my labours so in these controversies following I indevour to find out manifest the way and wil of God by the light of his word to the glorie of his name and comfort of those that love the trueth in sinceritie A REPLY TO A PRETENDED Christian Plea for the Antichristian Church of Rome WEe are taught of God that they which forsake the Law praise the wicked but such as keep the Law will contend with them Wherfore though my desire hath been to leave off contention with all men to labour to build up Sion in peace yet being provoked by name my writings against the Man of syn that Son of perdition being publickly traduced I held it my dutie to mainteyne the warre which I began to wage against the Beast whom The Lord will consume with the spirit of his mouth and will abolish with the brightnes of his coming The state of this controversie 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 Baptisme to be esteemed the true signes 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. Wherin 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 omitt the just reproofs which might through Gods mercie have been a benefit unto him and will address my self to remove the stumbling blocks out of others way and to cleare the trueth which is darkned with the cloud of error The Lord which hath taken this counsel against Babylon that the least of the flock shal draw them out and that he will surely make their habitation desolate with them inable me with his grace to â—ight the good fight of â—aith and to declare in Sion the vengeance of the LORD our God the vengeance of his Temple Of the church of â—ome BEcause the true Church is that people to whom perteyneth the adoption of sonns and the glorie and the covenants the giving of the Law and the service of God and the promises it is requisite that we first haÌ„dle the state of Antichrists church so shall we the better discerne of the ministerie seales of the covenant and other ordinances of God which the man of syn abuseth whether they be true or false unto them in that their synfull abuse In my former answer I layd downe these grounds The Antichristian synagogue is by the Holy Ghost called a Beast Rev. 13. 11. which signifieth a Kingdome Dan. 7. 23. it is named also a great Citie Rev. 11. 8. which noteth the largenes of tha tpolitie kingdome It cometh up out of the earth Rev. 13. 11. as being of this world which Christs kingdome that cometh downe from heaveÌ„ Rev. 21. 2. is not and therefore is called a man of syn 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 Saincts Rev. 17. 14. 6. and 13. 7. blasphemeth Gods name and Tabernacle and them that dwel in heaven Rev. 13. 6. that is the true church whose conversation is heavenly Phil. 3. 20. Yet doe they all this mischief under shew of Christian religion and therefore this Beast hath hornes like the Lamb Christ Rev. 13. 11. this whore is arayed with purple scarlet guilded with gold precious stones and pearles Rev. 17. 4. as if she were the Queen and spouse of Christ Psal. 45. 9. 13. Ezek. 16. â—0 13. Song 7. 5. she hath Peace-offrings and Vowes Prov. 7. 14. as if she were devout in Gods service Psal. 66. 13. bread and waters Prov. 9. 16. 17. as ready
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 captaines c. a type of the Papacie Now it is confessed of all that Antiochus and his companie were Pagans in religion so by the like reason the Pope with his captaines and souldjers must be Pagans also 6. The 6 reason alleaged for them is that it should be syn for Papists and Apostate Christians to marie with Pagans to neglect baptisme not to sanctifie the Lords day as it was in Iudah and Israel to marie with the heathen to neglect circumcision to profane the Lords day c. 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. Hos. 5. 7. 7. 8. 8. 12. Amos 8. 5. with 2 Cor. 6 14. c. 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 perteyn 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 wayes faultie 1. Of Pagans he sayth they are not in their estate bound c but Papists and apostate Israelites he would have them bound yet mentioneth not their estate wheras if he speak not of them also in their estate his argument is false and fraudulent 2. The scriptures alleaged Psal. 147. Deut. 7. are by him abused whiles he restreyneth them to these and the like ordinances namely mariage circumcision baptisme 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 Gods Words Statutes or Ordinances and Judgments Psal. 147. 19. 20. which three doe comprehend the moral Law called the Ten Words the Ordinances of worship and service and the Iudicials for punishment of malefactors all these the Prophet sayth were shewed unto Jsrael and God dealt not so with any nation Now to conclude from these words therfore the nations were not bound to observe the ordinances because God had not shewed them unto them as he had doen unto Israel namely by his written Law given at Mount Sinai hath no more weight then this Therfore the nations were not bound to the moral Law or to the Iudicials and so synned not in committing idolatrie murder whordome or the like But this is impious to say and a false conclusion therfore 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 coÌ„mandements and instituted from the beginning of the world Gen. 2. If then the nations were free from syn 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 syn in not keeping the other commanments So for the Lords day now he maketh the church of Christ onely and so the Papists and other like whom he accounteth true churches synners if they keep it not all others he freeth from syn as not bound to keep it Wherupon this paradox followeth that the further men fall away from Christ the more free they are from syn For the church of Rome being fallen to Antichrist the Pope they are synners 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 synners in his account though they observe not the Lords day and why Onely because they are fallen so farr as they are no church of God nor in his covenant of grace Thus the further from Christ the freer from syn if this doctrine be true But I suppose the contrary to be true and that all peoples how farr soever fallen from Christ are now bound to keep the Lords day and other ordinances of Christ and it is their great syn that they doe 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 worlds end Mat. 28. 19 20. And they went into all the world preaching and admonishing all men every where to repent and beleeve 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 guiltie before God and shal be condemned because they beleeve not in Christ and keep not his commandements Mark 16. 15. 16. If it be sayd that a Turk or Pagan in that their estate of unbeleef may not lawfully be baptised or admitted to the Lords supper til they repent this is true yet can we not therfore say they are not bound to be baptised or are free from synin neglecting baptisme for they are bound to all the doctrines and ordinances of the gospel in order first to repent and beleeve then to be baptised then to receive the Lords supper and so all the rest If further it be sayd that the Papists in their estate of misbeleef and idolatrie may without repentance and without returning to the true faith be partakers of baptisme and the Lords supper c it is denyed For if the Iewes which were the true church though corrupted might not be received to baptisme without repentance as the scriptures shew Mat. 3. 6. 7. 10. Luk 7. 29. 30. Act. 2. 38. then the Antichristians the members of that church which by Mr. â—ohnsons owne acknowledgment is fallen into most synfull and deep defection and apostasie and is a notorious harlot and idolatresse may much less be baptised or admitted to the Lords supper unless they repent And wheras mine opposite pleadeth for their right in the sacraments other ordinances which they should syn to neglect it would be knowen where they are bound to receive them whether in their own church or in some Christian reformed church If in their owne then they are bound to heare Mass and syn if they be not partakers of it for that is their idolatrous supper then doe not the Magistrates well to forbidd them their Masses and other ecclesiastical exercises which they are bound by God to frequent and should syn 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 sayth wee being many are one bread and one bodie for we are all partakers of that one bread 1 Cor. 10. 17.
of 40. yeeres in the wildernes were uncircumcised till Iosuahs reigne Jos. 5. 2. 6. yet with them in that estate Moses renewed the covenant to bee the Lords people and that hee would bee 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 sonns of Noe for signes of salvation it will appeare otherweise even by the greatest enemies of the heatheÌ„s the Iewes themselves Who though they gloried in circumcision and the Lawes given by Moses yet thus they write Jt is lawful for an heathen to offer burnt offrings unto God in every place and he himselfe may offer in an high place which he hath builded But it is not lawful for an Jsraelite to help him c. for behold we are forbidden to offer without the Sanctuarie 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 Offring sacrifices chap. 19. s. 16. Thus by the Hebrewes testimony the Gentiles might lawfully use sacrificing in their own lands on their altars c. and the Iewes might instruct them to doe it aright though they themselves might not doe it with them being restreyned of God And as for the state of grace and salvation with God they also say Whosoever receiveth the seven commandements given to the sonns of Noe of which I have spoken elsewhere and whereof circumcision was none and doth them he is of the saincts of the nations of the world and he hath a portion in the world to come that is in eternall life if he receive them and doe them because the holy blessed God hath commanded them c. 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 Gods word and humane writers bear witnes of it But this indeed is admirable sayth he that he should account the heathens superstitions to bee Gods ordinances and yet esteem the circumcision and other ordinances of God had in Israel to be lying and deceitful signes c. Besides in all his bead-roule of Writers there is no mention at all of circumcision whereabout our question is c. 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 Gods ordinances which were not in their use of them true signes and seales of eternall life unto them but false and deceitfull 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 Gods ordinances at all no nor Romes superstitions at this day 2 That circumcision is not in the bead-roule as he calleth it hee need not marvell seeing it was not commanded the heathens as before I have shewed It seemeth hee had a speciall fansie to circumcision above all other Gods ordinances otherwise why might not he think that it might be prophaned as much as any other There was no more holines in it then in the sacrifices And the Apostle sayth Jf thou be a breaker of the Law thy circumcision is made uncircumcision Rom. 2. 25. what then will it availe 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 leâ—es after in my book I instanced some among the nations circumcised even by his owne confession and there he hath passed it over without answer as if he had not seen it Such intreatie and worse I bear at his hand with patience Let me here adde the testimony of a learned man Mr. Calvin in his Sermon against idolatrie upon Psal. 16. 4. hath these words There are diverse 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 wil not that this extend it self to the superstitions of the papacie 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 wel instituted of God And yet al the abominations that were in the world had this goodly cloke of the name of God and of Religion but this made them not therefore justifiable neither might the faithful communicate with them Of Mr. Iunius iudgement for the church of Rome IN my brief answer to the things which mine opposite alleged from Mr. Iunius whose treatise they have printed the second time he taxeth me for omitting many clauses in that work But I then and still doe hold it ynough to take away the mayn grounds which being doen the other of lesser moment will be also found insufficient I shewed by the scriptures the Church of Rome now to bee an other and not that church which was in Pauls time therefore no just proportion to be between them In sted of disproving that which I shewed he after his manner asketh a question Whether J think these the Man of syn with his worshipers 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 baptisme of God c. or whether there be no such there at all though corrupted and abused Answ. I have often told him and proved by Gods word that this present church of Rome is not Gods true Temple or people under his covenant having his baptisme but a false church arisen since vainly pretending the church covenant and baptisme of Christ. Seeing Gods word moveth them not let it be lawfull for me to oppose mans authority to mans D. Whitakers answering Bellarmine sayth This church succeedeth the Apostles indeed but as a den of theeves doth the house of God and as an harlot doth the faithful citie Jt reteineth the chests and coffers wherein of old the tresure was as Chrysostom elsewhere writeth but hath lost the treasure it selfe Jt is no more Bethel the house of God but Bethaven that is the house of vanitie or lies Yea Mr. Iunius himself hath thus well written of it The Church of Christ is sayd to fight against the Pseudo-christian or falsely called christian church over the which Antichrist ruleth Also when Bellarmine citeth Tertullian marveilously praising Rome Iunius
and without Law So mine opposite hath the Israelites own erroneous judgment to help him I have the Lords judgment his Prophets against both him and them He then referreth us to his former book where he shewed diverse respects how on their part they brake the covenant but the Lord brake it not on his part but called them to repentance c. To which book of his I gave answer and have in this also before shewed how he yieldeth me the mayn ground namely that the covenant of grace is conditional onely if men repent and beleeve Which seing the scripture witnesseth that Israel did not 2 King 17. 13. 14. 15. 16. they remayned still without the true God without teaching Priest and without Law til the Lord cast them out of the land and scattred them among the heathens which were without God and without Law before them And now what could their circumcision Passover sacrifices c availe them but seale up their further judgment who had rejected the true God but falsly reteyned and abused the signes of his favour to their condemnatió Touching Ier. 3. 8. GOD testifieth of adulterous Israel J put her away and gave her â— bill of divorce Ier. 3. 8. Then was she no longer his wife nor he her husband but the covenant of her spirituall mariage was disanulled even on Gods part also Yet the Israelites kept circumcision the signe and seale of his covenant but by usurpation not by right so it was in their abuse of it no true signe or sacrament unto them To this he answereth that the Prophet spâ—kâ— this in Josiahs dayes at which time Jsrael was caried captive into Assyria So this place is not to the point of the question of their state from Ieroboams 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 stil reteyned and were upon repentance received to the Passover without any new circumcising in the flesh Ezr. 6. 21. and he himself urgeth this very place of Ezr. 6. against the Anabaptists to prove they need not baptise againe the same by as good right doe 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 ynough to prove my cause namely that Circumcision and so baptisme usurped by false churches or by them that are no church as Israel now were no people need not be repeated Wheras he pleadeth if Rome be not the true church have not the true baptisme we are to be baptised againe Now that in Ezr. 6. was many yeres after Israels captivitie or divorce for it was after Iudahs captivitie and returne after 70. yeres When Gyrus to whom the Lord God of heaven had given all the kingdomes of the earth proclaimed the peoples returne throughout all his kingdome At what time as those that had been caried to Babylon returned Ezr. 2. to the number of 42. thowsand and moe so after in Darius dayes Ezr. 6. when the children of Israel which were come out of captivitie kept the Passover with joy for that the Lord had turned the hart of the King of Assyria unto them all such as had separated themselves unto them from the filthynes 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 dayes 2 Chron. 30. Which example being in the dayes of Ezra and other prophets written in the scriptures for our instruction is a sufficient ground for us now to doe the like whom the Lord hath brought out of the Antichristian Babylon and Assyria that we may eat the Lords supper and injoy other his ordinances without any new baptising with water The bill of divorce he expoundeth to be the putting of them out of the land of Canaan as out of the Lords house or presence from Hos. 9. 3. 15. 17. 2 King 13. 23. A woman divorced is termed hee sayth one that is cast out or thrust forth out of her husbands house Ezek. 44. 22. Thus some think excommunicats to have a bill of divorce c. and then also they are not to be esteemed as put out of the covenant of the Lord but from his house and family til they repent So as upon their repentance they ought to be received againe into the Lords house without any new baptising of them againe which yet should be if they had been put out of the covenant of the Lord. For baptisme is the signe of our entrance thereinto c. 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 onely Which if it be so then the mariage of Israel was no taking into the covenant but into the land of Canaan And this agreeth well with the Anabaptists who hold that Israels covenant was not the covenant of grace but a carnal covenant promise of the land of Canaan It is knowen that the bill of divorce disannulleth the covenant of mariage as appeareth in the Law in Deut. 24. First by the name Câ—rithuth that is Cutting-off secondly by the libâ—â—ty thereupon following that she may marry another man thirdly by the just cause therof which is whordome Math. 19. 9. fourthly by the consequent therof that a man having so put away his wife for whordome he also may without danger of adulterie marie an other woman which cannot be unless the covenant of mariage be disanulled Mat. 19. 5. 9. Fiftly it is confirmed by the copie of the bill of divorse used in the common wealth of Israel as appeareth by their ancient records in these words Jn such a day of the week c J N. the son of N. have voluntarily c dismissed left and put away thee even thee N. the daughter of N. c. which hast been my wife heretofore but now J dismiss thee and leave thee and put thee away that thou mayst be free and have power over thyne own soule to goe away to be maried to any man whom thou wilt c. Sixtly it is testified by the Apostle writing to the Israelites the strangers scattred 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 obteyned mercie but now have obteyned mercie 1 Pet. 2. 10. Wherby it is evidently proved that their divorce was from the Lord and from being his people or partakers of his mercie in