to proceed with them in the faith and order of Christ and to ‡ Gal. 5.12 1 Cor. 5.7.11.13 cut off and cast out such troublesome leauen from among them Now this being duelie weighed it is nothing for but altogeather against the having of communion with the Assēblies of this Land which are not set in the way and order of Iesus Christ as were those Churches of Galatia but in the Apostasie and confusion of Antichrist as hath ben at large declared before in the defence of the former Reasons where also that of Maister Cranmer Ridley c. is answered H. IACOB his 2. Reply to the 3. Reason TO this your Defence of your Third Reason I answer First it is too impudent a cavillation “ That you charge me to giue the H. Ghost the lye in denying your Assumption I meant not your Assumption but that which I had made briefer conteining the effect of yours This was the Assumption denyed by me But a Galatian is a false Christian. As he that hath but halfe an eye may see Secondly to cease needles strife I deny therefore your Proposition Though a Galatian ‡ that is so holding it as the worst did or els this is a sophisticall aequiuocatiō holding Circumcision cannot be a true Christian yet an English Christian holding the Hierarchye c. may The Reason of this denyall I gave you then but that you would not see it Namelie because such Galatians held Iustification by the workes and ceremonies of the Law Gal. 5.3.4.5 Rom. 10.3.4 Act. 15.1 Like the Papists who by their ceremoniall and morall workes doe hold the same and so doe erre Fundamentally But our Churches and state hold not the Hierarchye so but onely as an indifferent thing in it self This blasphemous opinion of Circumcision maketh it infinitelie worse though once it was ordeined of God then our indifferent opinion of the Hierarchye though in deed it were never but nought Thirdlie and lastlie you have no where cleared Maister Cranmer Ridley Latimer and the rest of those holy Martyrs from being abolished frō Christ if the Hyerarchie be simply worse then Circumcision so held as those Galatians did hold Gal. 5.2.3.4.5 Fr. Iohnson his Answer to Mr Iacobs 2. Reply to the 3. Reason IS it of simplicity or of impudency or of both Mr Iacob that thus you do write Your simplicity is more then Dunsicall to say you denyed not my Assumption but one of your owne For with whom I pray you do you dispute With your self or with me Your impudency is to shamefull not onely to give the holy Ghost the lye but when it is shewed you yet not to acknowledge it Therefore to hide it if possibly you could you say when you denyed the Assumption you meant not myne but one of your owne made briefer c. Yet even thus appeareth that you can not say otherwise but to deny my Assumption which I proved by Scripture were to give the holy Ghost the lye Now that you did it before your owne words here againe will testify against you For you say Your Assumption made briefer conteyneth the effect of myne Then in denying your owne it must needs be that you denyed myne in deed and effect and so now by your owne confession it is true as I said that you gave the lye to the holy Ghost who by Paul affirmeth it Gal. 5.2.4 Simple Sir Priest Had you no more wit nor better defence then to aunswer thus as he that hath but halfe an eye may see you do nothing els but impudently cavill Is this the Christian and conscionable disputing you speak of Or is it the deep and Cler klike skill in argumentation which every where you will beare vs in hand is lockt vp in the chest of your brest Content your self Mr Iacob to keep hereafter within your line and strive no longer against the truth but for it Secondly you say to cease needles strife you deny the Proposition But if your former denyall of the Assumption was good why do you not stand to it If it were evill why do you not confesse it If your mynd be in deed to cease needles strife then shew it in deed not in word onely The Proposition which now vpon better advisement you chuse to deny I have proved before Against it you except Pag. 90. that although a Galatian holding Circumcision cannot be a true Christian yet an English Christian holding the Hierarchy c. may But you should say thus Mr Iacob if you aunswer me He that submitteth to a false Ministery worship and gouernemēt of the Church devised by Antichrist the man of sinne c. is a true Christian in that estate For these were the words I vsed in my Argument and proof thereof But you delight to aunswer your owne words and Arguments not myne Yet why prove you not then from the Scripture that which you say towching Antichrists Hierarchy c. Will you have vs beleev it on your bare word Mynd also that now you confesse the whole doctrine as it is publikly professed and practised by Law in England is not sufficient to make a Galatian a true Christian that should with all submit to Circumcision which once was Gods owne ordinance Had I not cause then think you to deny the Assumption of your mayne Argument Yea and to put you in mynd of the defects and lamenes both of your Proposition and Assumption And where you say the Galatians could not be true Christians because they held Iustification by the works and ceremonies of the Law like the Papists who by their ceremoniall and morall works do hold the same and so do erre Fundamentally Whereas your Churches and State you say hold not the Hierarchy so but onely as an indifferent thing in it self 1. First what say you to the †Damianus a Goes de fide Religione et moribus Aethiopion Pag. 63. c. Ethiopian Churches which togeather with the Gospell hold and vse at this day the ceremonies of the Law Circumcision c. onely as things indifferent and therefore condemne not the Churches which vse them not at all Are they in this constitution by the word of God now to be judged true Christians and true Churches Or may not any separate from people so walking to keep the faith of Iesus without such commixtion By your marginall note it seemeth you are so mynded Let vs have your reasons and proof in your next Reply 2. Or how will you prove for your Churches that it is as you say viz that you hold as a thing indifferent your Hierarchy c. Do you not see that such as hold and walke otherwise are imprisonned banished cōdemned killed among you Is this to hold things as indifferent What then I pray you may be your holding of the other poynts of Religion among you which you count not indifferent 3. And what say you to your forbidding of Meats and Mariage at certayne tymes which the Apostle calleth Doctrines of
And for the other that Christ notwithstanding said to some of the Iewes Maâ— 15.9 they vvorshipped God in vaine teaching doctrines mens precepts Mat. 15.9 How say you Mr Iacob is the Scripture therefore contrarie to it self Or were Christs speaches contrarie the one to the other Pag. 83. 2 Besides are you so dull as you can not conceive no not when it is told you that the sinnes and corruptioÌ„s of the meÌ„bers of a true Church may fitlie be alledged against whole false Churches and yet neither condemne the true constitution of that Church wherein the one stand nor justifie the false constitution of the other 3 Yea know you not that a Church in true constitution jointlie considered may be said to be true vvorshippers of God c. and yet some yea manie of that Church be said also through their owne default in other respect to vvorship God in vaine or to be tainted with Idolatry or the like And yet no contradiction be implyed in so saying Seing you cannot vnderstand it in Christs words concerning the Ievves see if you can perceive it in Pauls to the Corinthians When he speaketh to the whole Church jointlie considered he commendeth them for keping his ordinaÌ„ces and acknowledgeth they call on the Name of the Lord Iesus 1 Cor. 1.2 11.2 But when he speaketh in respect of some that sate and eat of the sacrifices in the Idol-temples he biddeth them fly from Idolatry and telleth them they cannot be partakers of the Lords table and of the table of Divels 1 Cor. 10.14.21 8.10 Yet is he not contrarie to himself for all this Mynd withall what I aunswerd before concerning this point in the Second reason Pag 90. And so againe I leave it to the Reader to judge whether the contrariety you speak of be not in deed an harmony and that therefore you abuse both the Scripture and vs. Chap. 13. The seventh Reason against Mr Iacobs Assumption aforesaid Fr. Iohnson If the Spirit of God account them to be departers from the faith and consequentlie no true Christians who though they hold other truthes of the Gospell yet forbid to marry and commaund to absteine from meats vvhich God hath created to be received vvith thankesgiving Then such account must needs be made of the estate of the Church of England which not onelie both these things but withall forbiddeth the true Ministerie and worship of God and commaundeth a false Whose Ministers and people also do all of them partake therein For proof whereof besides their practise of these and persecution of the truth see their owne Canons Articles Statutes Iniunctions c. But the former is true 1 Tim. 4.1.2.3 Therefore c. H. Iacob his 1. Reply to the 7. Reason â—â— 1â— THis yout seaventh Reason is They are departed from the faith that forbid to marry and commaund to abstayne from lawfull meates Also this is worse then that viz. to forbid the true Ministery and to commaunde a false which we in England doe Ergo we are departers from the faith I deny this AntecedeÌ„t that is your AssumptioÌ„ with a distinctioÌ„ The Papists †See â—hâ—â—â— Testam in Mat. 15.18 Fr. Io. See D. Fulkeâ— answer therevnto forbidding of mariage meals if they had don no worse doth not make them departers froÌ„ the saith that is not “ or not fuÌ„damentally not simply vvhich vvordâ—s I think â—itter to bee here vsed as in my next Reply is further declard totally No more could their Hyerarchie and ceremonies simply Neither doe these things make vs the Protestants to be such The Papistes fall from Christ ‡ That is fundameÌ„tally simply see in the 2. Reply follovving wholy in other poincts namely 1. The Papall supremacy 2. The sacrifice of the Masse 3. Iustification by workes Which blessed bee God wee are farre from Therfore the Apostle in saying They departed from the faith meaneth in * vid. in abstayning froÌ„ Mariage and meetes these poincts they erred or departed from the faith but not absolutly and wholy 2. Furthermore touching your Proposition if you vnderstand Paul of Martion the Heretike and Tatianus who did absolutly condemne Mariage and certen meats they even therein might vvholy fall froÌ„ the faith I meane somwhat like to Balaam Iudas and those Apostate Israelites “ Pag. 105.112 lately spoken of namely for having their consciences convicted and seared with a whot iron And thus are they in no comparison with vs of EnglaÌ„d nor with the Papistes neither if they had erred in nothing else Fr. Iohnson his Aunswer to Mr Iacobs 1. Reply to the 7. Reason HEre being not able with any colour to deny the consequent of the Proposition neither to justify your present Ministery worship Canons Articles IniunctioÌ„s c. which you must do Mr Iacob and still we call for it if you will justify your present estate yet being desperate sure for els you would never have done it you feare not to gainsay the Assumption that is the very words and testimony of the Scripture it self 1. Tim. 4.1.2.3 The Apostle saith that they which forbidd Mariage and Meats are departed from the faith You say No. Now whether I pray you shall we beleev You or the Apostle But what colour have you for your deniall This forsooth That they which doe so do not depart from the faith totally and that the Apostles meaning is that in these poincts they depart from the faith but not absolutly and wholy So by your conceit none may be accounted departers from the faith that depart onelie in some poincts but they which doe it totally from all And thus may no heretikes or Antichrists that euer haue bene or shal be in the world be iudged departers froÌ„ the faith because they depart from it but in some poincts and not absolutly from all Thus have you justified at once the Arians Nestorians Sabellians Papists Familistes Anabaptistes and whom not because they depart but in some not wholy from all poincts of faith Is it not great pitie that Antichrist hath so long wanted such a stout Champion as can thus in one word justify his forbidding of meates and mariage yea and his most detestable Hierarchie and superstitions withall By your learning Mr Iacob all the Martyrs and writers heretofore which by evideÌ„ce of this Scripture convicted the Synagoges of Antichrist to have departed from the faith and therefore separated from them were vtterly deceived Yea and the Apostles themselves were wholy mistaken when they call Antichrists Church and Religion ♣ 2 Thes 2.7 a mysterie of iniquitie which ‡ 1 Tim. 4.2 speaketh lies through hypocrisy * 2 Pet. â— 1 prively bringing in daÌ„nable heresies and ‡ hauing a shew of godlines but denying the power thereof And Iohns eyes it seemeth were not matches 2 Tim. 3.4 when he saw in the whores forehead that is in Antichrists Church and Religion a name written A mystery great Babylon the mother of vvhoredomes and
* Act and Mon. edi◠5. p. 581. ◠He neither denied their popish transubstantion neither spake against the authority of the Church of Rome if it vvere vvell governed nor yet the 7. Sacraments and also sayd Masse himself and almost in all their popish opinions vvas a Papist vvith them Thus hath that book word for word What say you now vnto it What think you of these particulars and of that conclusion that not onely in these but almost in all their opinions He vvas a Papist vvith them Againe in the same book Hierom of Prage another Martyr speaking of Iohn Hus saith ‡ Ibid. pag. 584. b. he never maintained any doctrine against the Church of Rome but onely spake against their naughty life To which purpose may be minded also that the Hussites in Bohemia so called to this day for following Iohn Hus are for trausubstantiation and most of the popish errors and worship as grosse as the Papists themselves And to give an instance of our owne countreymen the same history speaking of Thomas Bilney who was burnt at Norwich hath thus * Ibid. pa. 921. b. As touching the Masse and Sacrament of the Altar as he never varyed frō himself so he never differed therein frō the most grossest Catholicks Mark these words he differed not therein from the most grossest How now will this and your speach agree who blush not to say that the book of Acts and Monuments affirmeth not that they held these errors in the largest and grossest sort Besides this bold vntruth of yours let the Reader mind how plainely you insinuate that if your Church had the Masse and the Popes supremacy so it were not in the largest and grossest sort you could defend their case aswell then as you do now by bearing the world in hand that these things might stand vvith Christ crucified c. Let the Reader mind and remember it I say no more It remaineth that now I cleare M. Hus and the rest of the Martyrs from your rash censure You judge if any of them held any errors that be fundamentall they are no holy Martyrs but abolished from Christ This I denie And you to proue it should from the Scriptures have showed first what it is to be fundamētall or of the foundation then that whosoever holdeth such error is abolished from Christ But you have done neither I know that here and everie where you give vs your bare word and obtrude vnto vs your owne fancies But your words are no Oracles nor your fācies rules for any to follow Handle these things therefore more soundly in your next And what you speak speak it frō the word of God In the meane time for better clearing of the truth and Martyrs I will show you my mind being ready notwithstanding to heare any that can show better from the word of God And so I pray you take this and all my writings First the word foundation is vsed in the scripture and therefore is of vs to be considered divers waies One is in respect of God and his election Of the foundation and fundamental points or of his Church and people called and sanctified in Christ 2. Tim. 2.19 Psal 87. Pro. 10.25 Another is in respect of the onely ground of all true faith and Churches which is Iesus Christ or of the first principles and speciall heads of Christian religion Mat. 16.15.16.17.18 1 Cor. 3.11 Esa 26.16 1 Pet. 2.6 with Heb. 6.1.2 A third is in respect of the Apostles and Prophets doctrine concerning Christ or of our receiving it and building therevpon Ephes 2.20 Rev. 21.14 1 Cor. 3 10-15 1 Pet. 2.7.8 Luk. 6.48.49 Now which way soever you take it there is no question but the Martyrs although they erred through ignorance of that time in some waightie points of Christs Religion which you call fundamentall yet were notwithstanding holy Martyrs For touching the first of the exceptions aforesaid Gods foundation remained sure and sealed vnto them so as the Lord knew them to be his and they also were sanctified both to witnes vnto death the truth then called in question and to depart from the contrarie iniquitie Touching the second and third they both beleeved in Iesus Christ as it pleased God to reveale him in their age by the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles and they built firmely therevpon not stumbling at the word and disobeying it as is the manner of most now a daies but obeying and holding it forth vnto death So as when the stormes and floods of persecution beat vpon them they were not shaken from the truth they testified but remained constant to the end even when the politick Statutes of Princes the subtill arguments of the learned the earnest perswasion of their friends the great losse of their goods liberty estimation in the world finally the most cruell vsage and tirannie of the Adversaries as it were so many waves and tempests stronglie assailed to drive them a contrarie course Thus were they faithfull to God and loved not their lives vnto death as their Martyrdome proclaimeth to all the world howsoever you could be content it seemeth for any the more advantage to your selves to lay their honour in the dust Secondly in this question we are to discerne betweeen the errors them selves and between the persons that hold them The errours may in their nature be fundamentall as you speak and yet the persons erring therein of ignorance not striving against the light revealed but indevoring to walk faithfully in the truth they see may through Gods mercie in Christ be saved For example some of the Corinthians that denied * 1 Cor. 15.12 the resurrection of the body and some of the Galatians that erred about “ Gal. 4.9.10.21 5.2.3.10 and 6.12.13.15 Circumcision the Law although the errors were in their owne nature fundamentall as you will not deme yet might they that dyed in them before Paules epistles came to those Churches thereabout be saved of God As we * 1 Cor. 11.30.31.32 read that some were dead and chastised of God a-about their abuse of the Sacrament yet not condemned with the world Likewise of Abijah the sonne of Ieroboam that made Israell to sinne the ‡ 1 King 14.1.13 Scripture recordeth that God shewed him mercie because in him was found some goodnes toward the Lord God of Israell Where marke those words some goodnes By which appeareth that although he were as the rest in that generall apostasie of Israell which your self account fundamētal yet having some goodnes in him towards the Lord he found mercie at his hands Furthermore at this day concerning the errors of the Lutherans about cōsubstantiation and the person of Christ of the Anabaptists about Christs humanitie and denying Baptisme to the seed of the faithfull of the Papistes about trāsubstantiation the Popes supremacie c. I suppose that you will graunt both that these errors be fundamentall as touching the nature of the errors thēselves and that yet
the like I have mentioned before and you I suppose will aunswer them at leasure Now where you quote some Scriptures in the margent See also for this in the Preface Section 3. it is to generall for your purpose You must prove your assertion by them Which yet you do not When you goe about it say if there be not of the foundation not only the particulars in * 1 Cor. 15 2.3.4 Rom. 4.25 1 Cor. 3.10 11 12 13 14. these Scriptures expressed but many other also here comprised though not named in particular As for exāple 1. that there is a God and but one 2. that there are three persons the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost 3. that the Sonne not the Father or holy Ghost tooke vnto him our flesh 4. that the true God alone must be worshipped and that onely according to his word and no otherwise 5. that Christ as head and King of his Church hath given offices and ordinances for the work of the Ministerie which are to continew to the end of the world 6. that he is to be obeyed therein vpon paine of damnation and no other to be received 7. that we must not only professe in word but practise indeed the commaūdements of Christ whatsoever persecution follow thereon c. Tell vs I say whether these and the like which other places of the word lead vs vnto be not both of the foundation and comprised in the Scriptures quoted by your self How idly then and absurdly do you cite them here To give an instance doth not the Apostle from the death of Christ mentioned in these Scriptures deduce in other places the necessity of our dying from the ordinances of the world from the traditions of men from voluntarie religion finally from all dead works whatsoever which he reckneth vp as a fundamentall point in that place to the Hebrewes before alledged Yea doth †Col. 2.8.18.19.20 c. he not from hence prove that we cannot hold Christ the head and increase with the increasing of God if we will togeather with him retaine the traditions and precepts of men for the seruice of God And are then no outward Church-orders of the foundation at all We will look for your proof and aunswer hereof in your next In the second place I propounded two questions vpon comparing togeather Moses and Christ You aunswer not one worde to the latter And in the former you kepe not my words which is a thing to commō with you knowing belike that the weaknes of your aunswer would then the more readily have ben seen My question was vvhether the outvvard gouernement and ceremonies ordeined by Christ for his Church vnder the Gospell be not of the foundation as much as the outvvard governement and ceremonies appointed by Moses for the Church vnder the Lavv Your aunswer is Neither vvere the Ievves outvvard orders of the very foundation vvithout vvhich they could not be saved But speak out man were they of the foundation at all or not And when you have told vs this then know for your learning besides that alreadie spoken touching the foundation that the outvvard orders that is the outward ordinances ceremonies and gouernement which God prescribed to the Iewes were vnto them so of the foundation and necessarie to be observed as ‡ Deut. 27.26 curse and death was threatned to all that brake them Yea severe punishment even vnto death was executed vpon the transgressors of such things as seemed but small Levit. 10.1.2 1 Sam. 6.19 and 2 Sam. 6.6.7 2 Chron. 26.16.19 Now these things are written for our instruction to admonish vs vpon whome the ends of the world are come If yet notwithstanding you and your Church will presume otherwise be it at your perill Our soules shall not enter into your secret The third question here was about Corah and his complices Wherein in you deale as with the former not keping mine owne words It may be you thought by this meanes to hide the vanity of your aūswer Howsoever al the aunswer you give to the severall branches of it is only this that they were separated from and damned not that the matter vvas fundamental but that the manner vvas rebellious vvith consciences a thousād times convicted and so done vvith an high hand against God himself But how prove you this which you say And why aunswer you not to the severall points of the question in order as they were propounded It may be you will do this in your next Then in the meane time know that even the matter wherein they sinned was fundamentall if we consider it thus Their sinne was that not being Priests they would offer incense to God Now the Priehstood and offering vp of incense led them as it were by the hand to the Priesthood and Intercession of Christ Either therefore you must denie Christs Priesthood and Intercession to be of the foundation or els you must graunt they sinned in a matter in this respect fundamentall that is being thus considered Yet it was you see touching the Priesthood and Minjsterie which concerne the outward orders and governement of the Church Thus al your defence falleth to the ground Touching the manner also Corah and his complices had pretence for them selves aswell as your Prelates and Priests now have Read and mind well what great reasons they pretend Numb 16. Num. 16.2.3 And see if you can shew any greater yea or any the like for your selves Then speak whether that considered it be not as hard for you to affirme them so convicted in conscience as for vs to affirme it of you in England And now that I mind it let me aske of you Mr. Iacob in this case as you †Pag. 36. erewhile did of me in your owne Did their whole assemblies sinne thus all and every of their assemblies of wilfulnes and of a convicted consciēce Are you sure of this Do you know every mans hart and conscience so vvel If you do then you say somevvhat indeed But you are then neere as vvise as God himselfe to knovv mens hearts so perfectly vvhose faces you never savv c. How like you now your owne manner of reasoning Is it not verie proper think you and to great purpose But perhaps you will say the Scripture speakes asmuch as you do concerning them If it do why shew you not the places Why prove you it not from thence Nay then what say you Mr. Iacob to the litle children which perished in that cōdemnation as the * Num. 16.27.32 Scripture there witnesseth Will you say that they in that action were so rebellious as you speake of with consciences a thousand times convicted Or will you now confesse your Reply to be of no waight at all save against your self To which end I wish both your self and the Reader to note for a conclusion that here you graunt even for outvvard orders of the Church when men see the truth in their consciences and yet stand
you for these things is such as damnatory sentence may be threatned against them take you heed Mr. Iacob that God being it not vpon your head for one if you proceed in those sinnes still as hitherto you have done And let your disciple D. B. that Apostate take heed of it for another and likewise all the rest whomsoever you meane to be of those some you speak of It is the word of God that doth and must judge both now and in the great day Ioh. 12.48 Psal 149.9 2 Chrō 19.6 1 Cor. 5.3.4.12.13 The judgement that is done according vnto it by whomsoever it be is not mans but the Lords Your hearts and consciences I leave them to the Lord. It is your constitution and practise I speake of and of the sundrie meanes of knowledge and conviction in these things vouchsafed to you which the Martyrs in former times had not This you knew I doubt not though you would not see it because you know not how to aunswer it And thus the two differences between you and the Martyrs excepted against do both of them stand firme against you But why say you nothing at all to the other differences which in the same places I noted aswell as these Can you not bring so much as colour of exception against them Why then do you not yeeld vnto them Or will you that we take your silence for a consent Also why aunswer you not that obiection when I said ‡ Pag. 67. you might thus justify the callings and estate of the Monks Fryers c. and the having of spirituall communion vvith them because divers such have ben Martyrs giving their lives for the truth they saw vvho never doubted of the lawfulnes of their callngs and estate Do you therefore hold their offices and functiōs to be lawfull Or will you deny that this hath ben the case of such If you do then I alledge for proof Eckhardus a Dominican fryer Thomas Rhedonensis a Carmelite frier Henry Voes Iohn Esch William Neel Doctor Cacalla Augustine friers Ioannes Mollius a gray frier Ierome Savonarola Dominicus Siluester c. All of them being Fryers and Monks yet Martyrs of Iesus faithfullie witnessing the truth which they saw even vnto death Act. Monum 5. edit Pag. 387. 613. 672. 799. 829. 850. 854. 4. For the fourth point it is so very playne and pregnant as you can say nothing against it but refer vs to that you have said before which I have shewed to be nothing at all to the purpose So it remaineth firme against you And so also do the reasons mentioned 2 Cor. 6.14 c. Against which you neither have said nor can say any thing to serve your turne Say but yourself and speak plainly whether that general clause Towch no vncleane thing include not both your and all other abominations of Antichrist breaking the second commandement One of your selves “ Triall of Subscriptiō Pag. 7. alledging this scripture but against the ceremonies reteined in your Church reasoneth thus from it and ānexeth that note in the Margent which I have here set downe withall †2 Cor. 6.14.15.16.17 This forbiddeth the vvhole corruptiō in religiō of heathen or Antichrist although principally their false doctrin What communion saith he hath the light of the word vvith the darknes of mans inventions What concord hath Christ our Saviour vvith Belial the Antichrist of Rome And vvhere greement hath the Temple of God vvhich is our selves vvith Idols of humane traditions Wherefore ♣ Rev. 18.2.3.4 come out of Babylon that is the confusion or confused vvorship and gouernment of Rome and tovvch no vncleane thing These are his words Now tell me I pray you is this Scripture and reason strong against your ceremonies And is it not much more against your confusion Leiturgie Hierarchie c. which are meerly the inventions of man even of Antichrist that man of sinne Or will you be like the Papists also in this to limit the bounds of the Scripture that it may be applied no further nor othervvise but as pleaseth you That the place of Ezechiel is directly of the breach of the Second commaundement Ezec. 43.8 is as cleare as the Sunne at noone day Beside the reasons which I alledged before those so many clauses My thres holds theirs My posts and theirs Me and them Myne holy Name with their abominations these I say so many concurring in this one verse make it without all question that he speaketh directly of ioyning their inventions with Gods ordinances in the worship of the true God Which is the direct breach of the Second not of the First cōmandement The First is directlie towching Gods inward worship as to have love trust feare him onely as God c. The Secōd is directlie of outward worship For Images and bowing downe to them “ Exo. 20.4.5 there mentioned are outward things If this distinction be not observed the first and second cōmaundement will be confounded as the Papists whom you follow would have it But if it be observed it confoundeth both you and them M. Iacob and all your vayne pretences By this also it is evident that the Idolatrie of Ahas Manasses Amon c. whereof you speak was directlie against the Second cōmādement Ahaz to give an instance in one of the grossest is said to have * 2 Chrō 28 23. sacrificed to the Gods of Damascus because he †2 King 16 10-15 made an altar like the altar of Damascus though yet notwithstanding he offered thereon to the true God both such offerings and at such seasons as the Lord had appointed His sinne then was against the Second commandement directlie in that he made and vsed another altar then God had prescribed But your ignorance of the Scripture-phrase deceiveth you For when you read that Ahaz Manasses or others sacrificed to the Gods of the Nations you vnderstand that they worshipped some other then the true God against the First cōmandement whereas the Scripture meaneth they worshipped the true God after the … er as those nations served their Idols and so brake the Second cōmaundement You may see it in that example of Ahaz before and most plainly in Deut. 12.30.31.32 And likewise if Naaman worshipping God had bowed downe before the Idoll in Rimmons Temple but in heart honored the God of Israell he had broken the Secōd not the First cōmandement and might be said to have worshipped the Idoll Rimmon 2 King 5.17.18 The reason of all these is because God accounteth them to be served whose ordinances are observed and himself not to be had as God when his true vvorship is not had Now so must we esteeme things and so the Scripture speaketh not as men judge but as God esteemeth Minde this well Mr. Iacob for your worship of Antichrist But of these things more hereafter when wee come to speak of the third Scripture 2 King 17. in the sixt Reason following 2 King 17.
Either therefore you must approve your Church-constitution to be such as it reteineth not the erroneous doctrines worship Ministery and confusion of people brought in by Antichrist but the truth way of Christ prescribed to his Church or els you see by evidence of Scripture how like your case is to Ieroboams also in this respect Not that you do so esteem it any more then he did but that God doth so account of you and of all such Churches whose constitution is to worship him otherwise then himself hath ordeined howsoever your devices may resēble his ordinances Pag. 105. as * you confesse Ieroboams also did 1 King 12.32 33. Amos. 4.4.5 5.21.22 23. So you confesse ynough against your self Next you alledge the examples of Ahab Ahaziah the Iewes vnder Ahaz Manasses and Amon to whom the Israelites were like in Idolatry also the Ten tribes and finally the Samaritans themselves These examples and the Scriptures cited about them speak of Baall and like Idols and their Altars houses Priests c. Now I have proved ‡ before that in and by these Idols and their appurtenances Pag. 117. c. they intended the worship of the Lord God himself And yet further by these testimonyes of Scripture it is most plaine viz. Hos 2 16. Micah 6.6.7 1 King 21.28.29 and 22.12.24 Exod. 32.1.4.5 Iudg. 17.2.3.5.13 and 18.5.6.17.18.19.20 Amos. 5 21.22.23 Yea in the Scriptures which ‡ here your self alledge they are said to worship after the fashion of the Heathen though it was to the true God because they sacrificed in their hy places Pag. 110. or on the Altars and before the Idols eyther of the Heathen or their owne set vp for the representation and service of God Finally none of these Scriptures do shew that the Samaritans did so worship the Idols of the Heathen as accounting them to be in deed Gods aswell as the God of Israell Which is your assertion So it is your self Mr Iacob that are cleane gone Your perventing of my words I omit But now what will you say if the case of the very Pagans Idolatry be not so cleare as you take it for the worshipping of the Idols themselves and esteeming them to be so many severall Gods Augustine saith the Pagan Doctors defend their many Gods to be but * August de Civit. Dei lib. 4. cap. 11. one and the same Iupiter that is one God of whom the ♣ Poet sayth He is throughout all the earth the sea and the heaven Virgil. 4. Geo Againe he testifyes that they themselves did thus aunswer him ‡ Aug. Ibid. cap. 24. What Should we beleev that our forefathers were so exceding foolish as to think Bacchus Ceres Pan and the like were Gods Nay they beleeved onely one God whose name because they knew not therefore did they honour his gifts functios vnder divers names c. Plato a Pagan himself in one of his Epistles saith thus Hereby you shall know whether I write in good earnest Plato Epist. 13. ad Dion or not If in earnest I begin my letters with the onely one God If otherwise with many Yea Phocylides an heathen Poet could say Phocylides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is but onely one God wise powerfull and very happy And Epictetus a Stoick thus It is before all things to be learned that there is but one God that he ruleth all things Epictetus apud Arriā that he provideth for all that whatsoever we do speak or think nothing can be hid from him that we should worship him as our Creator and Father and the onely authour of our felicity And that if vve call vpon God aright vvee shal be advertised of the best things by his Angels at his cōmaundement Calvin also saith the prophane men thought not to dravv the onely God frō his heavenly throne vvhen they feyned to themselves many Gods Calv. in Hos 2.17 but reserving a supreme Godhead over all they vvould have Patrones vvhom to vse for obteyning grace and favour of the most high God And by Plato himself it appeareth they took the Angels for such whom he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato in Epinom e◠in Cratylo Spirits and therefore thought they were to be honoured 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being the meanes of “ or prayse-worthy prosperous intercession or proceding Whom therefore they vsed as helps for better accesse vnto God as now do the Papists their many intercessors who yet hold there is but one God Thus they thought of God and of his gifts works Angels c. Then for the Pagans vse of their Idols or Images Calvin writing against such men as in excuse of their Idolatry pretend Calv. Inst. lib 1. ca. 11. se 9. 1◠they account not the Images to be Gods sheweth that neither did the Ievves think their Calfe to be God nor the Heathen their Images but that as the Papists novv so the Heathen and Ievves then vvere persvvaded they vvorshipped God in and by those Images Thus writeth Calvin Then which what can be more full and pregnant against you And Plutarch recordeth that Numa Pompilius a Pagan forbad the Romanes to think that Gods Image had eyther the likenes of Man or the forme of any creature Plutar. in vita Numae Neither vvas there before vvith them saith he any Image or representation of God eyther painted or fayned but in the first hundred and seventy yeares they built in deed Temples and erected holy Chappels but consecrated no Image at all Even as if it vvere detestable to resemble better things to vvorse and because God can not othervvise be perceived but in the mynd and vnderstāding And yet further Plutarch also in an other place hath to this effect that the Sunne Plutar. de Isid et Osyrid the Moone the Heaven c. are not to be vvorshipped that they in deed are but looking glasses vvherein may be seen the vvorkmanship of God that adorneth the vvhole vvorld And that the vvorld is no other thing but his Temple Yea moreover towching both these points now treated of that the severall nations have not their severall Gods so as vve should think the Grecians have theirs the Barbarians theirs the Northerne people theirs the Southerne theirs But like as the Sunne the Moone the Heaven the Earth the Sea are common to all yet are called by severall names of severall people so likevvise that one divine Spirit which framed this whole world vvhose providence is over it all yet hath severall honours and severall names attributed vnto him according to the lawes of several natiōs c. Behold then what the Pagans themselves do testify Albeit I neither doubt nor deny but some among them speciallie in later tymes were far more grosse then others even as now we may see in the Papists a great difference among themselves both for their judgement and practise in their Idolatry Yet notwithstanding by the testimonies aforsaid you
abhominations of the earth Rev. 17.5 For now I would know of you who are so deep a Clerke how Antichrists Church and Religion should iustly be accounted a mystery of iniquitie and truely be said to speak Lies in hypocrisy also prively to bring in Damnable heresies and to haue a Shevv of godlines if they did absolutly and vvholy departe from the faith and not onelie frō some points thereof But over and above all it seemeth by this reason that not onelie the Apostles were mistaken in giuing vs markes how to know false teachers and false religions But also Christ himselfe when he said †Mat. 7.15 Bevvare of false Prophetes vvhich come to you in sheepes clothing but invvardly are ravening vvolves And againe †Mat. 24.23.24 If any shall say vnto you Loe here is Christ or there beleeve it not For there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets and shall shevv great signes and vvonders so that if it vvere possible they should deceive the very elect Now if they should totally depart frō the faith what sheepes clothing I pray you should they have to come in Or how should either themselves be said to come in the name of Christ affirming their Religion to be Christs and shewing signes and wonders to draw men therevnto Or the elect be in such vnspeakable danger to be deceived by them This might suffice to shew the falsehood and impietie of your answer But yet I will note a few things mo therein First it being graunted that the popish forbidding of Mariage and meats so they were no worse doth not make them depaxters frō the faith totally yet tell vs if holding never so manie truthes besides and yet forbidding these they could by the word of God truely be said in that estate to hold the faith of Christ and to be true Christians 1 Tim. 4.1.3 If they could not as the Apostle * testifieth then is your answer in this respect also nothing to the purpose but against your self both for the popish forbidding of meats and mariage and for the English Hierarchy and other abominations among you received from the Papistes which vnder colour of this answer you would defend Next see in Bales Votaries and in the Acts and monuments c. what abominable filthines the forbidding of mariage and what fowle superstition the forbidding of meats hath wrought in the kingdome of Antichrist And tell me then what man fearing God durst once open his mouth for such divelish doctrines and estate Againe where you say The Papists fall from Christ in other poincts besides the aforsaid Namely 1. The Papall supremacie 2. The sacrifice of the Masse 3. Iustification by vvorkes vvhich England novv is far from Tell vs first whether in this sence the Papists can for these be said to depart from the faith totally If they can not what weight is there in this for defēce of your estate that the Papists could not alledge for themselves viz that in these poincts they depart from the faith but not absolutly and wholy Secondly tell vs whether there are no other poincts but these three in the Papists Religion which make them in their estate to be departers from the faith and consequentlie false Christians and false Churches If there be as you can not deny of what weight then is your answer to defend the present constitution of your people and assemblies seeing there are divers other things besides these that do and may cause that you can not be deemed true Christians or true Churches in that estate Many “ Servetus Sabellius Arius the Anabaptistes c. heretikes heretofore have and at this day do reject these three aforsaid Are they therefore in their estate to be accounted true Chrestians or true Churches Thirdly your manner of reasoning heer for your defence is as if the Adulterers to justify their course of life should alledge thus We are 1 no Blasphemers 2 no Persecutors 3 no Murtherers as such and such are therefore we depart not from the way of life but our estate and course of life is good and such as may be continued in Yet the Scripture sayth * Iam. 2.10.11 whosoever shall keep the vvhole Lavv and yet faileth in one poinct is guiltie of all For he that sayed Thou shalt not commit adulterie saied also Thou shalt not kill Novv though thou doest no adultery yet if thou killest thou art a transgressour of the Lavv and contrariwise So that whatsoever sinnes the Adulterer be far from yet as Salomon saith cōmitting adultery vvith a vvoman he fayleth in heart and destroyeth his owne soule Prov. 6.32 The same is the case of all spirituall Adulterers who whatsoever sinnes they be farre from yet in the worship of God runne a vvhoring after their owne inventions embracing the bosomes of strange vvomen and drinking on their cup of fornications Num. 15.39 vvith Prov. 5.20 and Rev. 17.4 Ier. 4.18 Fourthly shew vs sufficient warrant from the Scriptures why setting these three aside the Hierarchy and other popish abominations received among you can not be judged to make you in such estate departers from the faith and therefore false Christians and false Churches whatsoever truthes you hold besides Num. 16.1.2 c. Corah Dathan Abiram and their partakers were far from the Abominations of the Heathen they held also the poincts of faith that Moses and Aaron held differing onelie from them and departing onely from the faith in a matter concerning the Priesthood whereof notwithstanding they * vers 3. shewed their reasons why they were so perswaded Yet will you not deny I trow but they departed from the faith and were in this estate neither to be accounted true Israelits nor their assemblies true Churches with which communion might be kept If you should the Scripture is witnesse against you Num. 16.26 Now compare case with case and tyme with tyme and you shall find the estate of your people and Assemblies to be far more grievous As hath ben shewed alreadie in the Second Exception before and in other Treatises to which we have yet received no answer viz The ansvver to Maister A.H. The 9. Reasons concerning not hearing the Ministers of these assemblies of England To conclude this poinct if your Abominations in England were farre fewer then they are yet so long as you reteine that poisonfull leaven of your Hierarchy and vvorship we must tell you as the Scripture saith and experience teacheth That †2. King 4.39.40 a little poison bringeth death vnto the whole pot of potage A 1 Cor. 5.6 litle leaven leaveneth the vvhole lump And Eccl. 10.1 a fevv dead flyes cause the oynctemēt of the Apothecarie to stinke and putrifie Although indeed your abominations are not a few but swarme in abundance among you Some whereof see before Pag. 63. c. In the next place fearing belike that the evidence of “ 1 Tim. 4.1.2.3 this Scripture could not by these shiftes of yours be avoided
Devills Doth your Church hold them as things indifferent Or will not this prove a blasphemous opinion even in your owne judgement 4. Mynd withall how the Dispensations given by your Prelates for eating of flesh in tymes forbidden runne stil among you as they did and do among the Papists with this clause fana conscientia that is with a safe conscience and your Excommunications with this clause Ad salutem anioâ—e that is for the salvation of the soule Doth not this shew that your Churches hold not these things as you pretend but agree with the Papists therein Or hold you matters of conscience and salvation for things indifferent 5. Likewise for your Ministery and book of common prayer c. hold you them as matters indifferent or as necessarie for the service of God and salvation of your soules 6. And what say you to the blasphemy magik errors lyes in the Apocrypha books retained among you for the service of God Count you them also for indifferent things 6. Finally towching the Popish opinion of works whereof you speak know you not how they hold that their works merit not for the work sake but for Christs being dyed with his blood Yet notwithstanding this colour the point being well considered it doth highly dishonour Christ and derogate from his office of sole Mediation In like maner the Hierarchy c. that is the governement worship confusion and Ministery of Antichrist retained among you whatsoever you pretend for them yet being duly weighed do as towching your Church constitutioÌ„ abolish the governement and MediatioÌ„ of Christ except you could prove him to be Mediatour of another Testament then his owne Behold what your Indifferent opinioÌ„ will prove when it comes to be throughly scanned As you like it you may hold it still To end this point let the Reader note and not forget it how your self do here in playne termes confesse that your Hierarchy that is your Churches governement Ministery c. was never but nought This suites yll with the title of your book and gives small encouragement for any to serve God by such Ministery worship c. For Mr Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. Pag. 40.41 I have cleared them before froÌ„ your hasty censure Now onely let the Reader observed how this is alway the foot of your song Mr Cranmer Ridley Latimer c. As if their errors were better warrant for you then Gods word for vs. CHAP. 10. The fourth Reason against M. Iacobs AssumptioÌ„ aforesaid Fr. Iohnson THe doctrines of faith conteined in that Book alledged would not make him a true Christian who holding them should also still execute or joyne vnto the Ministery of Mahomet that open Antichrist and enemie of Iesus Christ 2 Cor. 6.14 c. Therefore neither can they make him a true Christian that holding them yet doth still execute or joine vnto the Ministery and worship of the man of sinne the covert Antichrist and enemie of Iesus Christ H. Iacob his 1. Reply to the 4. Reason THis your 4. ReasoÌ„ is Mahomets Ministery and Antichrists Ministery are both bad alike But the good doctrines of our booke of Articles cannot save a man that ioineth also to Mahomets Ministery Ergo the good doctrines of that booke cannot save a man that ioineth also to Antichrists Ministery which thing we in England doe I deny neither the Proposition nor Assumption And yet the Argument is too bad It is a fallacie of Equivocation as we call it Wee must therefore distinguish Mahomets Ministerie and Antichrists Ministerie have a doubtfull meaning If you meane the whole function and exercise of publique worship performed in Mahomets or Antichrists assemblies that is in the Turkish or Popish Churches Then I graunt your whole Argument is * Both are nought alike as touching abolâ—shing vs from Christ. true But that wee doe so in England which comes in the CoÌ„clusioÌ„ Or that any ChristiaÌ„ amongst vs thinketh so That I vtterly deny And thus indeed that Scripture alleadged 2 Cor. 6.14 is rightly vnderstood But if you meane by Ministerie the outward manner of calling to the Ministerie and some outward ceremonies vsed by Mahomet or the Pope Then I flatly and absolutly deny your Assumption and your Scripture is answered before in the First Reason For I affirme and it is manifest That such errors being ioined with the good doctrines of that our Book doe not destroy faith and true Christianitie as before was shewed in the Second Exception Fr. Iohnson his Answer to Mr Iacobs 1. Reply to the 4. Reason Here Mr Iacob the light of the trueth doeth so dazell your eyes as you freely confesse you cannot deny any whit of the Reason And yet forsooth the Argument is too bad But why so There is you say an Equivocation in it and therefore you will distinguish I answer There is no equivocation at all in the words they are all plaine to him that hath a single eye and will vnderstand the trueth Therefore your distinction here is idle and frivolous Yet let vs see between what things you do distinguish It is between the whole function and exercise of publique worship performed in the Turkish or Popish Assemblies and between the outward maner of calling to their Ministery and the outward ceremonies vsed amongest them An absurd distinction towching the matter in hand For first who knoweth not that these latter are of the very same nature with the former Are not their outward callings and ceremonies false Antichristian and accursed before God aswell as the rest of their woship and service Or hath God in his worde giuen any commaundement more for these then for the other Secondly who seeth not that the Argument here is not of whatsoever thing vsed among the Turkes and Papists but of the Ministerie and worship which they have devised and executed As in particular of the publique offices of Ministery reteined among them of their maner of calling and entrance into them of their administration of them of their stinted imposed Liturgie their ecclesiasticall governement Canons proceedings c. All which in the Church of England are taken out of * Rev. 17.4.5 2 Thes 2.3.4.7.8.9.10.11.12 that golden cup of abominations wherewith Antichrist that man of sinne hath made the Nations of the earth to be drunken As may appeare by comparing their Pontificals Canons and constitutions togeather If you will needes be otherwise minded then prove the particulars aforesaide by the Testament of Christ And marke here that you graunt the doctrine of faith conteined in your booke of Articles cannot make him a true Christian who holding them doth withall receive and ioyne vnto the publike worship performed in the Turkish or Popish Assemblies This you say you graunt as most true WherevpoÌ„ it followeth even by your owne confession 1. That such things may be ioined with the doctrines of faith receiued among you as in such estate you cannot be deemed true Christians or true Churches Neither the truths which you
erected visible Idols 1 Kin. 12.28 and very filthy ones even calves and brute beasts The same you might alledge of the Israelites with Aaron Exod. 32.4 whose sinne notwithstanding was directlie against the Second commandement as you confesse yours also is Besides Mr Iacob have not you and your Church too your visible Idols What els I pray you are your Service book your books of Canons and Homilies your Book of ordering Priests and Prelates taken out of the Popes pontificall your Idoll-shepheards Zach. 11.17 even the Prelates and Priests themselves such as to whom for any sound knowledge they have in themselves or good instruction they give or receive of others may fitly be applied that saying of the Prophet concerning Idols They have a mouth and speak not they have eyes and see not Psal 115.5.6 they have eares and heare not c. Where in the next place to lessen your sinne in respect of Ieroboās you say you professe your Ecclesiasticall orders to be but indifferent things for order and comelines onely how absurd againe and shameles is your pretence Do you in deed professe that your Book of common prayer with the other aforsaid are but indifferēt things for order and comelines only If so then are they not the true worship and service of God commāded in his word to be observed of his Church For that is not an indifferent thing but straitlie enjoined to be kept without spot or chaunge vntill the appearing of our Lord Iesus Exod. 20.4.5.6 1 Tim. 6.13.14 Col. 2.8.22.23 Rev. 22.18.19 Againe do you professe the confusion of all maner people in the body of your Church to be an indifferent thing for order and comelines onely If so then you might aswell tell vs you professe darkenes to be light disorder and confusion to be order and comelines c. Or do you professe that your Archbishops and other Prelates and Priests with their offices and callings taken out of the cup of Babylon your forbidding of meats and mariage called by the Apostle doctrines of Divels your retaining the Apocrypha Books in your publik worship Pag 63. c which have many lyes and great blasphemy in them Do you I say professe that these with the rest of your abominations ‡ before rehearsed are but indifferent things onely for order and comelines And is this in deed the profession of your generall State as ‡ here you note in the margent Then sure you are not far behind Ieroboam Pag. 110. if not far worse in some respects And by this it is evident to note it by the way that your generall State is conuinced of great impietie inasmuch as howsoever it stood for the controversy otherwise yet none can be so grosse as to deny but thus far you are convinced that these are not indifferent things c. You had need also look well about you what to aunswer for speaking in such maner of your generall State Now for Ieroboam what will you say if he also held this as the chief and mayne thing ♣ that the true God who is infinite and every where present be worshipped but whether at Ierusalem or at Dan Ioseph Antiq Iud. lib. 8. cap. 3. whether in Salomons Temple or at the Calves which he had now made whether by the Levites or by others consecrated to that service c. that these and the like he accounted and vsed as indifferent things as might seem best to serve for the opportunity of their dwelling for that estate c. See Iosephus Antiquityes if he do not testify thus much concerning him affirming further that by these meanes he deceyved the people and drew them from the true worship of God which in the end was the cause of their vtter ruine Lo here the fruit and yssue of such pretences Further you alledge 2 Chron. 11.15 Where Ieroboam is said to appoint Priests for the high places and for Divels and for the Calves he had made So have you also appointed Priests such as God never ordeined and that for your high places and Calves that is for your Idols Temples and Service the places and maner of your publik worship to this day Of which three points viz your Priesthood Idoll-temples A treatise of the Ministery of the Church of England and false worship I have written in another treatise to which I refer you Where it is said Ieroboā appointed Priests for Divels you are to know if already you do not that this is spoken mystically in respect of Gods account and as it was in deed not that Ieroboam and the people did so think and esteem it themselves And that you may have lesse preiudice of this which I say heare it of Peter Martyr who writeth thus of it Ieroboam and his complices said they worshipped not the Calves but Iehovah in that figure visible signe but the Scripture in the Chronicles witnesseth their imagination to be frustrate because in deed they did that service not to Iehovah but to Divels P. M. Lo. com p. 1130. Epist ad Eccles peregrin Lond. I will also help you to vnderstand this point by a like example to which I suppose you will yeeld The Papists in Gods account are worshippers of Divels Rev. 9.20 Yet in their owne judgement they do not so but pretend to worship God himself Even so it was with Ieroboam Further for the more clearing of this matter see what it is in deed thus to worship Divels And heare it of Mr Iunius whose judgement I know in this case you will judge lesse partiall He in his notes vpon Lev. 17.7 saith thus Men sacrifice to Divels if they sacrifice eyther in other place or after other rite and maner then the Lord hath prescribed See Deut. 32.17 1 Cor. 10.20 And this he sheweth was the sinne of the Iewes both in Egypt and in the wildernes first by Exod. 32. chapter then by ‡ Lev. 17.7 this verse where the word hereafter or no more is vsed and lastly by Stephens testimony Act. 7.42 Ieroboam then worshipped Divels not in his owne purpose and judgement but in Gods account because his worship of God was in other place and after other maner then the Lord had apppointed Now seing you graunt this here to be true of Ieroboam how will you denie it either for the Papists from whom you have borrowed your worship or for your selves the children of their fornications And that you may see it is a thing needfull to be mynded in your Church-constitution note for your selves that * 1 Tim. 4.1.3 the erroneous doctrines of Antichrist are by the Lord accounted and in the Scripture called doctrines of Divels †Rev. 9.20 the worship of Antichrist the worship of Divels ♣ Rev. 16.13.14 the Ministers of Antichrist the spirits of Divels ‡ Rev. 18.2 the confusion of all prophane people and abomination in the body of Antichrists Church and religion the habitation of Divels c.