Paralleles: Censures: Observations: aperteyning to the first Section.

The place of Daniel mentioned in the beginning of this Section is: Dan. 3.16. O Ne­buchadnezzar wee are not careful to answere thee in this matter: 17. Behold our God whome wee serve is able to deliver vs frō the hote fiery fornace, & he will deliver vs out of thyne hand o King, 18. But if not, be it knowne to thee o King, that we wil not serve thy Gods, nor worship the golden jmage which thou hast set vp.

This place of Scripture Mr. Ber [...]a [...] handled oft tymes in several places, in so much as every man conceaved that he would have been a ring leader to reformation: For the circumstances being considered, that this Scripture was handled when the King vrged Subscription & conformity throughout the whole land, & when divers of the forwar­dest preachers were silenced, & himself then endaungered to leese his vic [...]ridg: that then he should thus p each was enough to have brought him within the compasse of petty-rebellion, in stirring vp the myndes of the people against the Kings proceedings: besides the shew of the text might aford that he compared the King to Nebuchadnezzar: Sub­scription, to the Kings commaundement of worshipping the golden jmage: Refusal of Subscription, to the Refusal of worshipping the golden jmage: the parts of Subscription to the golden jmage: the Ministers refusing Subscription to the three persons that refused to worship the golden image: their Resolution & courage to the Resolution of those three: The Prelates that vrged Subscription & conformity, to the accusers of the Iewes: I would therfor know of Mr. Bernard whither his mynd be now altered from that he held when he Preached these Sermons vppon this text, if yea: then I demaund whither [Page 4]feare of affliction & love of his living & reputation with the world, have not caused that in him: & whither a man should beleeve him rather now he is a formalist, then be­fore when he was a reformist.

The place of Naaman the Assirian is this: 2 King. 5.18.

When I bow in the howse of Rimmon to worship, the Lord be mercifull vnto thy Servant in this point.

By this place Mr. Bern. intended to sinne against his conscience for he did acknowledg this truth wee now professe divers tymes, & was vppon the point of Seperation with some of his people with him: yet loving the world & prefermēt as Naaman is thought to doe he chose rather to stay stil in his vicaridge against his conscience, then to leese it & to follow Christ with a good conscience: do you not remember Mr. Bern. what you said to mee & Mr. Rob. Southw. comming together from w: that speaking of the daunger of walking in this truth of Christ we now professe you said you could easely die vppon the tre for the truth, but you could not withour great horror think of being burned as the Martyrs were in Q. Maryes dayes? & that all the jorney you were casting how to dis­patch your estate & to get away with safety: I speake this to prove vnto you & the world, that you were as forward to the truth of Christ with vs then, as you were before to the cause of the Reformists: & yet as then so now you have wholly & I feare finally apostated from it: the L. be merciful vnto you in these your sinnes: wherevppon this fol­loweth that if ever you come to the truth of Christ wee professe, you can not be ad­mitted into the office of Elder in the Church, but therein you must beare your iniquity, bicause you have apostated fearfully from the truths you did acknouwledg, therein gi­ving Suspition of your constancy & faythfulnes for the tyme to come: & whither you be a worthy Minister of your owne Church, lett the Reformists judg who have betrayed their cause into the Prelates handes so shamefully as you have done: wherfor be it knowne vnto you, first, that wee reject you, Seconbly, that the Reformists have just cause to reject you whither then wil you goe, but to your LI. the Prelates to whome you have sworne your Can. obediēce, & vnto whome you have now at the last fuly returned as it were a dog to the vomit, & a swine to wallow in the myre.

But your covenant Mr. Bern. is beyond all the endevors of al the reformists of the land that you should cull out an hundreth persons of so many paris hes so far distant to enter covenant together not to heare the dumb Ministers, to watch one over another, to ad­monish one another, &c. And therevppon to receave the Lords Supper: What? was not the covenant the Church of England large enough, but you must enlarge it thus? Did not your conscience tel you then that the dumb ministery was vnlawful? that you sinned in not admonishing your brethren & therfor went to seek out an hundreth bre­thren where your proctor or agent could find them? That al your parish were not your brethrē, being not of your covenant, though of the covenant of the Church of Englād? or that you had two sorts of brethren, one of a general nature, viz: all the people of the parish? another of a Spiritual nature, viz: Those hundreth persons of your covenant? & yet that you admitted both those sorts of your brethren to all the holy things among you, excepting the particular covenant? I pray you with your logick, or divinity, justifie vnto vs these things. But now all this is forgotten & the Prelate of york hath so bewit­ched you with his flatterie, eloquence, & aungels, that your covenant is profaned & cast [Page 5]in the dust, men of your covenant must shift for themselves, you have deceaved them like the staffe of reed, & you justifie your wonted speeches, you love the world, & ease with all your hart: & therfor I say vnto you with the Apostle: The love of the Father is not in you: I do therfor Proclame you vnto the whole land to be one of the most fearful Apostates of the whole nation that excepting, VVhyte, & Claphā, you have no Superior nor equal that I know or remember, who have thus often confessed & witnessed much truth, & now not only have fallē from it, but have so childishly & yet most slaunderously written against the cause of the Lord, to blaspheme the name of the Lord, his Tabernacle & them that dwell in Heaven, as if, bicause your sinnes werē not known Sufficiently to the world, your would with inck & paper publish them to al men & ages to come, that they might remain in record agaist you vppon the file at the day when the Lord shal re­compense every man according to his worke.

But Mr Bernard ther is yet one other thing that I must discover to the world: namely that you have written a book against the Prelates, wherein you have proved by divers arguments that their authority is Antichristian: this book some of your Frends have seē & read & though you durst not print it your self, yet you would have been content a Frend should have caused it to be published vnder the vizard of an vnknowne Author: is not this so Mr. Bern? then tel mee with what face, or conscience you can Subscribe to the Prelacy, you can plead for the Prelacy: is not this to build that which you have de­stroyed? Surely all these things compared together do plainly convince, your deep Hy­pocrisy: & yet in your pulpit & among the simple sort you would seem a brother to the Sonnes of Thunder: but I desire the Lord to open the eyes of his people that they be no longer deceaved by such Pharisaical Hypocrits as your deedes manifest you to be even in the indifferent censure of those that love you best.

Now therfor to conclude this Parallele of your Famous or rather infamous acts: com­pare your resolurion against Subscription & conformity, with your Subscription to the Prelate of york: your acknowledgment of the truth with Naamans presumptiō to sinne: your covenant, with your confirmity: your book against the Prelates, & your book against the Seperation & therevppon it will follow, that you are as chandgable as the Moone, as mutable as Proteus, as variable as the Chamaeleon. And whereas you object aganst me pag. 37. & 73. that before I came to the truth I wrote against it & was distrac­ted to & fro before I saw it cleered to my judgmēt & conscience, I must needes acknowledg it so to be, which was my greater sinne, & the weaknes of my vnderstanding, but therein the L. hath shewed mercy vnto me, which mercy I desire also for you: but what is this to excuse your slaundering, rayling, scoffing, inconstancy, Apostacy, conformity, subscription, blasphemy, & the rest which you have plentifully discovered to al the world: Shew me, how & when after the acknowledgment of the truth, I fell back as you have done many tymes? that I ever yeelded to the Prelates, conformity, or Subscription, after I once withstood it? & amōg the rest of your follyes ther is one vntruth that I did kneele downe & praise God for Satisfaction after doubting, Not so: I remayned doubting al­wayes till I saw the truth after I once doubted, but during the tyme of my doubting which was 9. Months at the least I did many actions arguing doubting, but that I ever sel back from any truth I saw I praise God, I can with a good conscience deny it, & you are never able to prove that against me: but the L. wil cut out the tong that speaketh lyes.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the Second Section.

I desire heer to advertise the reader, that these 16. points which Mr. Bern. accounteth error are againe in his book intituled the Seperatifts Schisme rehearsed, refined, augmēted changed, as it pleaseth the forger into another order, shape & nomber which it shal not be impertinent heer to propound for evidence sake, that the Reader comparing these 16. points with those 22. (For so they are in nomber) may discerne the agreement & dif­ference, & so more fully be informed of the whole cause.

The particulars are these following, as they are expressed in divers pages of his booke as. pag. 78 the title of them is this.

The Errors of the Seperatists, & the matter of their Schisme.

• 1. They hold that the constitution of our Church is a false constitution, pag. 78.
• 2. They hold our constitution a real Idol, & so vs idolaters, pag. 79.
• 3. That such as are not of a particular constituted Church (to wit such a one as theirs is) are no subjects of Ch. Kingdom. pag. 80.81.
• 4. That all not in their way are without; & do apply against vs, 1. Cor. 5.12. Eph. 2.12. pag. 82.
• 5. That only Saynts, (that is) a people forsaking al knowne sinne of which they may be convinced, doing al the knowne wil of God in creasing & abiding ever therein, are the only matter of a visible Church, pag 83.
• 6. That the powre of Christ, that is, authority to preach, to administer the Sacramēts & to exercise the censures of the Church belongeth to the whole Church, yea to every one of them, & not to the principal members thereof. pag. 48.
• 7. That the sinne of one man publiquely & obstinately stood in being not reformed, not the offender cast out, doth so pollute the whole congregation, that none may cōmu­nicate with the same in any of the holy things of God (though it be a Church rightly constituted) til the partie be excommunicated, pag. 102.103.
• 8. That every of our assemblies are false Churches, pag. 109.
• 9. Al our Ministers say they, are false Ministers, pag. 128.
• 10. Our worship say they is a false worship, pag. 146.

Divers other opinions they hold which I will also set downe: & they be these, pag. 150.151.

• 1. That our congregations as they stand are all & every of them vncapable before God to chose them Ministers, though they desire the meanes of salvtion. pag. 151.
• 2. That God in our best assemblies is worshipped after a false manner, pag. 151.
• 3. That baptisme is not administred into the faith of Ch. simply. but into the sayth of Bishops or Church of England, pag. 152.
• [Page 8]4. That our saith & repentance is a false faith & false repentance, pag. 152.
• 5. That our Ministers converting men to God heere, do it not as Pastors, but as Tea­chers, pag, 152.
• 6. That our Church standoth in an adulterous estate, pag. 152.
• 7. That they cannot say certaynly by any warrāt off Gods worde that any of vs hath eyther fayth, or seare god. pag. 152.
• 8. That none off our Ministers may be heard, pag. 152.
• 9. That it is not lawful to joyne in prayer with any off vs, pag. 155.
• 10. That Ministers may not celebrate marriage, nor bury the dead, pag. 156.
• 11. That Ministers should only live off voluntary contribution, & not eyther off sett stipends or tithes, pag. 156.
• 12. That our Churches ought to be raced downe, & not to be imployed to the true worship of God, pag. 156.

And thus much off this & al other their Brownistical opinions, pag. 157.

This is the Recapitulation of our Brownisticall opiniōs, as Mr. Bern. of his blasphemous vncharitablenes giveth them their denomination: Remember herein that every cōpany of men whome god raised vp in this latter age to testifie for the truth against the man of sinne, hath been intitled with like names, as Lutherans, Calvinists, Zwinglians, &c. As in the act: Christiās are caled the Sect of the Nazarits. whēce I for my part should rather ga­ther encouragemeht in the truth we hold then any discouragemēt, seing no other thing befalleth vs herein then befell al the witnesses of the L. truth in al ages: but let Mr. Bern & his conforts vnderstand that we chardg them with Antichristianis me, which they can not deny, but which the best & most sincere professors of the truths which he calleth Brownistical, we justifie frō the holy Scriptures, wherein let Mr. Bern. consider whither he doe not wound the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Apostles, Christ Iesus himself, & the Holy Spirit, the author off the Holy Scriptures, & that through our sides. For if these opinious as wee hold them be the truth of God, then is he a blasphe­mer in a very high degree & I would know whither he that heretofore oft tymes con­fessed them for truths can nowwithout horrible impiety apostacy & blasphemy, pro­clayme them Brownistical opinions: see also whither his conscience can be cleer in this

Now Further I desire the reader to compare these 22. particulars, with the 16. points which I in this lettre have answered, & therby he shal observe two things. First that Mr. Bern her in chardgeth vs with no thing truly which is not already answered in this let­tre, & therfor he needed not againe to have objected these things publiquely except he had first published the lettre & answered the particulars therof, but herin it seemeth he thought to bleare the eyes of the world, & to beare mē in hand that he had somthing to say which was vnanswerable, which notwithstanding was already answered as may be perceaved. Secondly, that this book of Mr. Ber. is most properly & directly aymed at my lettre, wherin I am most especialy interessed to yeeld answer, & though it be once an­swered by another: & happily may receave a third answer, yet I cannot overpasse it least I seme to betray the truth who am by name singled out to the cōbat? finaly seing Mr. Bern. hath published against vs without answer to this lettre, let vs also herin cōsider his fraud & decept, in perverting, misconstruing, adding, detracting, falsely chardging vs follo­wing therein the dealing off his Father the Devill, with Christ, & our first parents: [Page 9]For all these evil courses I wil discover evidently to the reader, that Mr, Bern. in the par­ticular Sections of this lettre hath vsed with mee: & so let these be added to his former sinnes mentioned in the First Section, & it wil appeare that he is now manifested by the L. to be one that hath fulfilled the measure of his iniquity.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the third Section.

I published a litle Methode not long since intituled, Principles & inferences concerning the visible Church: in the tenth page of the book I write thus: visible Churches constitu­ted according to the devise of men are Real Idols.

Mr. Bern. in the beginning of his third Section chargeth vs to hold,

That an erroneous constitution of a Church is a real Idol. & in his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme pag. 79, hath these wordes: They hould our constitution a real Idol, & so vs idolaters: & pag. 152. of the same book he writeth thus: that our Church (viz: the Church of England) standeth in an adultrous estate: accounting this as an error that wee defend.

Mr. Ainsw. in the answer to Mr. Bern. pag. 172. faith, that a false constitution of a church set vp in stead of a true, what is it better then a very Idol?

Heer let vs consider the difference & agrement betwixt Mr. Ains. & me: he saith a very Idol, I say a real Idol: I cal a false constitution a real Idol, For that in existence & being it is an Idol: Mr. Ainsw. calleth a falsely constituted Church a very Idol, bicause it is indeed & truly an Idol: heer is litle difference except it be in wordes: but for the further clee­ring of my position viz: that a falsely constituted Church is a real Idol: two things must be discovered: 1. what an Idol is: 2. what Real is.

For the first vnderstand that most properly an Idol is contrary to an ordinance apoin­red by God in matter of Religion: So the Apostle willeth the brethren to keep them­selves from jmages or Idols, 1. Ioh. 5.21. & the Lord himself in the Second Commaunde­ment forbiddeth, vnder the phrases of making & worshipping jmages, al inventions of men in matter of Religion, Exod. 20.4.5, Now matter of religion especially subsisteth, in Religious worship, or religious government, For the Saynts are made Kings & Preists vnto God: & as Kings they excercise a regiment, as Preists they performe their Sacrifices Revel. 1.6, 1. Co. 6.1-9.1. Pet. 2.5. & therein they performe homage to the Lord, & submit their consciences to be wrought vppon. & seing the conscience must bow only to the Lord, & not to man otherwise then in the Lord, therfor in matter of Religion the conscience is not to yeeld to any thing devised by man: but must alwayes have the Lord for the leader & Governor therein: hence then it foloweth that whosoever substituteth any devise of man, any thing taught by the precept of man: Mat. 15.9. Esay 29.13. any will worship, or any ordinance of the world in matter of Religion, setteth vp that which is contrary to the Lords ordinance, contrary to the Lords wil, contrary to the Lords wis­dome, & I would fayne learne whither this be not an Idol or jmage: So that Idols are of two sorts: 1. A false God, 2, A false meanes to honor or submit, or doe homage to the true God in or by: as a false or devised tyme, place, person, instrumēt, action, & if the [...]be any thing of the like consideration: therfor a false or devised tyme may be caled an Idol day as 1, King. 12.33. the month which Ieroboam appointed for the worship of his Calves is called the month which he had forged of his owne hart, that is an Idol moneth & so by consequent the 15 days of that moneth an Idol day. So in the old Testament the place where God was to be worshipped was the Tabernacle or Temple. Deut. 12.5-8. & therfor the high places in iudah also Dā & Bethel in Israel were Idol places bicause they were places forged out of the harts of them that first appointed them: such were al the places dedicated by the hethen to worship their Gods in, which therfor were commaunded to [...]he rased downe: Deu, 12.2.3. so likewise a shepheard or minister framed according to the [Page 12]devise of man is called a foolish or Idol Shepheard: Zach. 11.17. Such were Ieroboams Preistst 1. King. 12.31. & the false Apostles, 2. Cor: 11.13-15. who are therefor called the ministers of Sathan: In like maner Gideons Ephod: judg. 8.27. Michaes Ephod, Teraphin [...] & molten jmage, Iudg. 17.4.5. The brasen Serpent 2. King. [...]8.4. being instruments of ido­latry might justly have been called Idol instruments & so forth for actions. Thus we see the first point what an Idol is, & by consequent that Idols are infinite in nomber, & that they are not only 47. as Mr. Bern. fayth Marlorat reckeneth them: & againe that Mr. Bern. question is answered which he maketh pag. 152. What Idol worship wee Saith Mr. Bern? I answer that Mr. Bern. doth both worship an Idol, & worshippeth in or by Idols: The Idol which he worshippeth is a false Christ, who is neither a King to him, seing he submitreth not to his kingdome & ordinances thereof, nor a Preist, seing he yeeldeth not to his true Ministerie, nor a Prophet, seing he receaveth not the Holy doctryne which he teacheth: but yeeldeth to a Kingdom, Preishood & Prophecy erected & established ac­cording the doctryne & commaundements of men: as shalbe sufficiently cleered heare after & hath been o [...]t tymes already done: The Idols wherein & wherby he worship­peth, is, 1. his owne false Church, 2. his owne false standing as a meber of the false church 3. his owne false Ministery, 4. his owne false parish Church, or Idol Temple, 5. his service book, 6. his Lords the Prelates, their courts, & ministers wherin & wherto he submit­teth. Generally: look how many Prelates, Preists, Deacons, Parishes, Temples, Service books, Surplices, Crosses, Holy dayes, Courts Ecclesiastical, Officers in these Courts ther are in the Land: So many Idols there are: that wee may say as Esay said in his tyme of Iudah, Esay, 2.8. their land is ful of Idols. & so this question of yours Mr. Bern. is answered: Now the second point to be manifested is. VVhat is Real: I opposed Real to mentall as may be seen Princip Inferenc. pag. 9. & 10. Mental or intellictual is that which hath his being in the mynd or vnderstanding: as the frame of the English Churches conceaved in the mynd, I called a mental Idol: Real is that which hath an existence & being out of the mynd & conceipt: as the Parish Church of worksop, whereof Mr Bern. is vicar, is a real Idol, having existence, & being not only in the mynd & conceipt, but also in deed & truth. Now Real is eyther Natural, or Moral, or Artificial, or Political. Natural as a man, Moral as vertue, Artificial as a howse, Political as a Cittie or common wealth, & whereas I called a falsely constituted Church a real Idol, I intended it a real Politique Idol: For so a Church is a politie, Cittie, or common wealth. Revel. 11.2, & 18.2. VVherefore as the true Church is the Holy Cittie the new Ierusalem that commeth downe from God out of heaven: Revel. 21.2. Even that true Politie & common wealth of Israel, Eph. 2.12. So the false Church is Babylon, Egipt, Sodom, that Cittie, Politie, common wealth, or Sina­gogue of Sathan: & so a Political Real Idol: & therfor the English assemblies being pro­ved to be false Churches, are real Idols. Let vs in the next place consider what Mr. Bern. saith to these things: First he saith the Scripture never taketh an Idol in this sense: I have both in this Section of my lettre, also in this Parallele shewed him already that an Idol is so taken in the Scripture, but for further evidence I use this argument.

That which is contrary to a true Church is an Idol.

A falsely constituted Church is contrary to a truly constituted Church.

Ergo: A falsely constituted Church is an Idol.

The Major is true by natural reason as also by the consideration of the nature of contraries: For as light is contrary to darknes, vertue to vice: white to black: fire to water: So is true contrary to false, & a true Church, to a false Church.

The major is the Apostles owne argument, 2. Cor. 6.16. his wordes are: what agree­ment hath the Temple of God with Idols? whence I reason thus:

That which is contrary to the Temple of God, is an Idol.

That which is contrary to the true Church, is contrary to the Temple of God

For the true Church is the Temple of God.

Ergo: That which is contrary to the true Church is an Idol.

Herevppon it followeth that seing the Apostle opposeth an Idol to the temple of God as he opposeth light to darknes, Christ to Belial: & seing the Temple of God is the true Church, therfor an Idol in that place is a false Church: now Mr. Bern, with al your lear­ning avoyde this place, & I wil yeeld you this particular.

Further, A false Christ is an Idol.

A false Church is a false Christ.

Ergo, a false Church is an Idol.

The Major is vndeniable.

The Minor is proved two wayes: First by the contrary thus:

A true Church is true Christ as may be collected from these two places, 1. Cor. 12.12 Gal. 3, 16.

Therfor a false Church is a false Christ.

Secondly it may be proved by Christs owne wordes, Mat. 24.24. ther shal arise false Christs, & false Prophets, that is to say false churches, & false Ministers which professe & teach doctrynes of the Lord Iesus falsely, both of his person & offices as the Arrians, the Lutherane vbiquitists, the Papists, the Anabaptists, &c. Thus you see wee have pro­ved vnto you now this second tyme that a falsely constituted Church is a real Idol. But bicause you cannot soundly answer, therfor blasphemously you scoffe at the doctryne of the constitution of the true Church, wee doe constantly & bouldly defend that out of a Church truly constituted (when a man can & may joyne therto) no ordinance of God can be accepted, neyther preaching, nor praying, nor Sacraments, nor any other religious action. what the Lord accepteth in secreat that we dispute not: but what the word of God teacheth vnto vs to be acceptable that wee speak of.

And tel me Mr. Bernard, can ther be a true ministery, a true baptisme, a true faith, true prayer, true preaching, or administring the L. supper true excommunication in the church that is falsely constituted? did the L. accept of the Sacraments & Sacrifices of the Church of Israel constituted by Ieroboam that author of Idolatry? doth not the Lord say vnto that people in that false Church, Lo, Ammi, Lo, Ruhamah, No People, No Pitie, Hosea, 1.6.9. & is not the Lord as severe now against a Church falsely constituted in the New Te­stament, as he was against the false Church of the ten tribes in the old Testament? or do you think that the Lord accepteth of a false saith, ministery, baptisme, prayer, preaching, excommunication & the rest? make these things agree Mr. Bern. if you can: if you can­not, cease your scoffing, & give glory vnto God: I demaund of you: do you think that God accepteth the prayers & Religious exercises of the Papists, the Arrians, the Ana­baptists, [Page 14]the Familists, or any other heretiques or Antichristians, if not what is the true cause that God accepteth them not? is it not for that ther is not that true communiō of the Saynts there, the true Church, the true spouse of Christ, the Spiritual Temple where God hath provised his presence? So then it followeth invincibly that a tiue constitution of a church, that is a true communion of Saynts, is that only lawful religious, society, or communion of men, wherby God wilbe honoured, wherin he wilbe served, & wherto he hath promised his presence & acceptance: & as conventicles are vnlawful assemblies of men in civil states, so are al false churches vnlawful ecclesiastical assemblies & the actions therein performed vnlawful, & so abhominable in the sight of God, the summe of all [...] breefly thus much.

That communion of men wherto God hath given the covenant: the Holy things the promises, Christ for King, Preist, & Prophett, is only accepted, & their Ecclosiasticall actions only acceptable: But a true visible church, that is a com­munion of Saynts, joyned together in the true covenant, is that only communion of mē wherto God hath given his covenant, his promises, his holy things, Christ for King, Preist & Prophet.

Therfor a true visible church, that is a communion of Saynts, & their actions ecclesia­stical, as preaching & prayers, &c. are only accepted. & by consequent on the contrary [...] inserre thus.

That communion of men wherto God hath not given the covenant, the holy things the promises, Christ for King, Preist, & Prophet, is not accepted of God, neither their ac­tions ecclesiastical are acceptable.

A Church falsely constituted (as in the old Testament was the Apostate church of the ten tribes, & in the new Testament is the churches of Antichrist) is such a communion of men, wherto God hath not given the covenant, the holy things, the promises, Christ for King, Preist, & Prophet.

Therfor a church falsely constituted is not accepted of God, neither are their actions ecclesiastical, as prayer, preaching, &c. acceptable in the sight of God.

Herevppon I conclude not as Mr. Bern. blasphemously scoffeth that the Idol or God­desse constitution, but that the true constitution of a Church which is the Lords Holy ordināce is that which Sanctifieth al ecclesiastical actions: & that a false idolatrous, Anti­christian constitution of a church, corrupteth, polluteth, stayneth al the ecclesiastical ac­tions of that false church: So saith the Apostle, vnto the pure al things are pure: but vn­to them that are defiled & vnbeleeving is nothing pure. Tit. 1.15. & this is my welbeloved sonne (saith the Father from heaven) in whome I am wel pleased, Mat. 3.17. & God heareth not synners, but only the true worshippers: Ioh. 9.31.

Finally, I avouch that a falsely constituted church is a greater & more abhominable I­dol, then any Idol that possibly can be in a true church: For a false worship, Ministery & government may be indeed in a true Church through ignorance & the like occasions: But a true ministerie, worship & government cannot possiblie be in a false Church: For the true Ministerie, worship, & Government are the Holy things of God, which are not given to false Churches, but only to the true Churches of Christ, the true communion of Saynts: & a false Church being an Idol doth conveigh her idolatrous & false constitutiō as a poison through all her Ecclesiasticall actions or workes off communion: [Page 15]Breefly therefore to compare True & False: Idols & Ordinances together: Bonum qu [...] communius eo melius: Malum quo communius eo peius: They are two maximes true in nature & experience, &▪ so also in Religion: Truth & ordinances the more common & vniversal the better & more excellent: Falsehood & Idols, the more common & generall the worse & more pernitious, For example, a true Church better then a true worship, then a true Ministery, then a true government, &c. A false Church worse then a false worship, then a false Munistery, then a false government, &c. For a true Church is the first & most noble & vniversal in Religion, from whence al the rest issue as a streame from the Fountayne: & a false Church is the first, most ignoble & general qualifying al the ec­clesiastical actions of the Church with her owne falsehood & idolatry: Therfor I am bould to pronounce your false & idolatrous Church constitutiō to be worse then your false Ministerie, worse then your false worship, worse then your false government, &c. & on the contrary, our true constitution to be the most honorable & beautiful ornament of our Church; more glorious then our true Ministerie, worship, & government, sith these latter issue & do flow from the former as from the spring [...]r Fountayne. A true man may have a wooden legg, an eye of glasse: So a true Church may have a false mini­stery & worship, or government. A man carved out of wood, cannot possiblie have any truth of a man in him, but al his parts & limmes are wooden, evē as the image is of wood So a false Church can have nothing true in it, but al is false, idolatrous, vsurped, for what agreement hath Christ with Belial? These things are playne enough to them that will vnderstand.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the Fourth Section.

In this Section Mr, Bern. saith that it is error to hold: that those that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdome.

In his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme pag. 80. & 81. He affirmeth the same thing in these words: viz: That such as are not of a particular constituted Church (to wit, such a one as theirs is) are no subjects of Christs Kingdome.

Mr. Ainsworth answering Mr. Bernard, pag. 173. vseth these wordes:

Neither is this position set downe in our wordes (to my knowledg:) if therefor Mr. Bern. were not a caviller, he would not have reckoned this among our errors

Although Mr. Bern. oppugneth this truth, & Mr. Ainfw. forsaketh the defence therof, yet I stil defend it as the vndoubted truth of God. First, therfor I wil expound the true meaning thereof: then also answer Mr. Bern. cavils & cautions.

I say not therfor as, Mr. Bern. ignorantly & vaynly & captiously conce [...]veth, that whosoever is not actually a joyned member of a true visible Church not living in com­munion with that church, is no subject of Christs Kingdome, but I say thus: they that are not of a true constituted Church are no subjects of Christs Kingdom: now it is one thing to be in a true church as a member therof actual walking in presence & cōmuniō therewith, another thing to be of a true church. which one may be eyther as yet actually vnjoyned or being a joyned member actually & yet absent in regard of bodily presence, that one vnioyned actually may yet be of a true visible church, I declare by divers parti­culars▪ as first one that by violence is deteyned from a true constituted church yet may be of it in desire, wil, affection & purpose though actually vnioyned, the Lord accepting the wil for the deed when it cannot be performed. Againe when as yet ther is no true visible church established actually? a man may be of it, in that he would be joyned vnto it, if it [...]ad any real existence, So the Martyrs in Q. Maryes dayes may be said to be of a true visi­ble church, both for that they would have actualy joyned to the true cōstituted church if it had beē established, as also for that they in wil & purpose desired so to do, although violently they were deteyned by imprissonment: Further they that are of the true saith which is professed in the true Church may be said to be of that true church: which faith is not a thing invisible, but visible & sensible: as namely a man Seperated from all false churches, & professing the true visible faith of the church, holding it vnlawful in regard of some corruption which he seeth in the true church, to joyne therevnto may yet be said to be of the true church. Lastly, if some brethren though but two or three walk together in holy communion, they are a true Church: & although perhaps they have not solemnely entred covenant, yet ther communion in holy exercises is a declaration that they have contracted together, though weakely & corruptly yet truly So that these particulars being wel weighed may sulficiently informe you of my meaning but Mr. Bern you have in your book quoted this point otherwise then I have propounded & expounded it in my lettre, & that in two particulars, viz: 1. in saying, a particular constituted Church: 2. in adding these wordes: Such a one as theirs is: For ther is asmuch difference betwixt a true constituted Church, & a particular constituted Church, as ther is betwixt a man, & this man or that man: the one is species: theother individinum: & it is evident that a man may be of a true constituted Church, & yet not of a particular constistuted Church as may be perceaved by the 4. particulars before mentioned. Againe in adding these wordes, viz: such a one as theirs is: after a scoffing vprayding & disdainful manner he seeketh to draw into hatred & abhomination the true Church of Christ: but the tyme wil come when the Lord wil reward every man according to his workes.

In the second place let vs consider of Mr. Bern. cavils & cautions which are 4. in nom ber. pag. 81.

First, he saith the Scripture never setteth forth any of Gods people by this marke: say you so Mr. Bern? is not the Scripture plentiful in declaring vnto vs that the L. addeth dayly to the Church, such as should be saved: Act. 2.47. that they that gladly receaved the word were baptized & added to the Church, & continued therin: Act. 2.14.42 doth not the Apostle teach that ther is one faith, one body, one baptisme, one Lord, & but one? Eph. 4. And that they that are not of this faith, body, baptisme, Lord are without the faith, without the body, that is the Church, without the true baptisme, without [Page 18]this true Lord & King Iesus Christ? & so are none of Gods people visible, none of Christs Kingdome, none of Christs body, none of his faith, & baptisme? Are not true faith, prayer baptisme, the Lords Supper, the true church plaine & pregnant do monstrative proper adjuncts of Gods visible people? & how can you with any face of truth or a good consciēce of your judgment & knowledg say, that to be of a true visible church, is no note of Gods visible people? out you say further that he synneth which doth not live in a true cō stituted Church ordinarily, when he can & hath meanes offered: nay we say further then so: that he synneth that doth not seek meanes to live in a true constituted Church, & not only he that vseth not meanes offered so to doe: wherfor we say that which you say & more also: but I pray you, what meaneth your ordinarily living in a true constituted church: doe you hold that ther are two sorts of mēbers & conversers in the true church some ordinary & some occasional or extraordinary? & do you think that to be of a true chuch, & to live in a true church are one thing? we say that members of true churches are al ordinary & of one kind & consideration: & further we say, that it is one thing to be of a true church or a member of a true church another thing to live in the true church: & a man may be a member of a true church potentialy & actualy, as I have already declared in the 4. former particulars. but al this is nothing to that which I affirme, for I say thus: that he which is not of a true visible Church, is no subject of Chr. Kingdom, that is he is not vnder the visible dominion & Lordship of Chr. in his church which is his Kingdom: I do not say that he is invisiblie none of the L. people: for a man may be one of the L. peo­ple in election & grace invisiblie, & yet not in the true visible church which is Chr. visible Kingdom: againe take an instance to exemplifie the mater: al we that are of the seperated churches in these contryes are of the common wealth of England, & therfor subiects of the King of England our Soveraigne Lord on earth, though we are not actually vnder the execution of his lawes, courts, officers, by reason of banishment, & that we may submit to Chr. ordinance, &c. So a true seperated Christian is a subject of Chr. visible politie & Kingdom, which is his church, eyther actually or potentially, although by banishment that is by vndeserved communication, by imprissonmēt, by other occasions he be actualy absented & seperated from the presence therof. wherfor Mr. Bern. I doe in this section in­dite you before the L. & the world, as one that of purpose & so maliciousty perverteth my meaning & slaundereth this excellent truth of God: doth not your consciēce tel you may you not read it in the copy of my lettre that I distingnish betwixt Gods people, which are of two sortes, visible subjects of Ch. visible church which is his Kingd. & in­visible ones known only to the L. certaynly & particularly? further this doctryn of myne you say is contrary to 4, places of Scripture, pa. 81. the first place is Gal. 3.7.9. the Apostles wordes are these. They which are of saith are the children of Abrahā. vs. 7. & they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham which scripture proveth my doctryne or rather the L. truth. I say that faith heer is oposed to the works of the law, & that faith signifieth a visible faith. For the Apostle Iames saith, Iam. 3.21-24. Speaking of the same matter, viz: of Abrahams faith that it was made perfect by works: for if Abrahams faith had not been manifested by his workes, it had been invisible, & it would not have been discerned by mā: & therfor in the same place vs. 14. the Ap. speaketh directly of a visible faith this place of the Ap. therfor confirmeth my assertiō plainly, that they that are not of a true constituted Church, are no subjects of Chr. Kingd. bicause they do not by their workes shew their faith [...] [Page 19]but if they have faith they have it with God, & not with man, who can judg only by the fruites.

The second place is, 1. Ioh. 3.14 where the Apostle speaketh thus: VVee know we are trāslated from death to life, bicause we love the brethren? VVho are the brethren, are not they that cal God Father? who can cal God Father but they that have Christ for their Lord & Mr. for their Elder brother? To whome is Christ Lord & Mr. but to them that are subjects of his Kingdome? So that this place also maketh most evidently for the confirmation of this truth of God which I defend. But you Mr. Bern. dreame of am visible faith, of an invisible Kingdome, of an invisible brotherhood or consanguinity: whereas Christ saith directely, that they which doe the wil of God, are his brethren & of his Fraternity, Marc. 3.35. & what have we to do with things invisible, hidden, & secreat, Deut. 29.29. I avouch that you cannot prove to me by any rule of Gods word certaynly, that those that are not members of a true constituted Church, are subjects of Christs King­dome invisible as you I am sure intend it: Further, what is the love of the brethren wherof the Apostle speaketh? is it not a visible love testified in the performance of the visible [...]utyes of love: Christ faith Ioh. 14.25. if ye love me keep my commaundements: obe­dience is the true touchstone of the love of God, & 1. Ioh. 3.17. whosoever hath this worlds good, & seeth his brother need, & chutteth vp his compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? So the visible dutyes of brotherly love are the true touchstone of brotherly love: but the principal visible dutyes of brotherly love are the dutyes of admonition, consolation, supportation, patience. 1. Thes. 5.14. Exhortation, edi­fication, vs. 11. among thē admonition is most excellent. Mat. 18.15-17. compared with Levit. 19.17. they therfor that altogether omit these visible dutyes of admonition in the degrees thereof injoyned by Christ & the Apostles, how can they be said to love the brethren? but al they that live out of a true constituted Church wholy omit the visible dutyes of love to the brethren, seing they neyther know, nor have brethrē vppō whome they may exercise these dutyes: Therfor this place of the Apostle is pregnant & invin­cibly strong against you.

The third place is 1. Cor. 1.1. Now what wordes Mr. Bern, intendeth in this place I can not conjecture except they be these: viz. in the second verse: with al those that cal vpon the name of the L. Iesus Christ in every place: whence it may seem he would gather that ther were some subjects of Christs Kingdome, & not of a constituted Church. I do vere­ly think that seing these persons that were absent frō the Church of Corinthus, did call Iesus Christ Lord they did therfor acknowledg him for their Lord & King, & therefor did apertayne to his Kingdome which is his visible Church: happily they might be some brethren which did not dwel in Corinth, but in some villages about Corinth: & that this is so the place afordeth evidently: For he wrote both to the Church that was in Corinth, & to the brethrē that were in other places which were no doubt of the church of Corinth, El [...] how did that Epistle in the contents of it concerne them, For seing the Apostle writeth this Epistle to them they had to doe with the matters wherof he taxeth the church, for he taxeth them al indifferently, seing he writeth indifferently vnto them al Herevppon it followeth that eyther these persons that were in other places were mē ­bers of the Church of Corinth: or els if they were no members off that church, the A­postle in vayne doth direct his Epistle to them taxing them off the corruptions off that [Page 20]Church: Except it be said that the Apostle doth hereby interest other churches to deale with the Church of Corinth, for their corruptiōs, & then Mr. Bern. gayneth nothing by it neither, seing therby he confesseth that these other brethren were members of other true constituted churches.

The third place therfor is nothing to the purpose.

The last place is 2. Thes. 3.15. & count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.

To passe by what some think of this place, I say vnto you Mr. Bern: that it hath not so much as a shew for your purpose: The Apostle speaketh in this verse negatively & affir­matively. For he teacheth that they ought not to recken of an excommunicate, as they account of an enemy, but they are to admonish an excommunicate as they doe admonish a brother: Therby teaching vs that an excōmunicate is in a midle condition neyther an enemy nor a brother, but one that is vnder the censure of the church, as a meanes ordey­ned by God for his reformation how wil this place prove that an excommunicate is a member of Christs invisible Kingdome? or if it should prove that some excommunicate are members of Christs invisible Kingdome, how can you prove that this or that excommunicate is so? do you know the Lords Elect certaynly, & particularly, that are out of the church? Or what doth this assertion of yours, & this place of Scripture against my assertion? who say, that such as are not of a true constituted church, are no subjects of Christs Kingdome: viz: Of the Kingdome which he shal give vp into the hands of his Father in the day of his final judgment,

In the third place Mr. Bern. asketh what may be said of wicklife, Hus, Luther, Bucer, Melanchthō, the Martyrs, Gods people in England, of Lot, Iob, the people in captivity in Mordecay his tyme: wherto I answer as I have already done: That Iob was a member of a true constituted church, & so a subject of Christs Kingdome, So was Lot, so were the people of the Iewes in captivity, though violently deteyned from the Holy land, Cittie & Temple: & therfor Mr. Bern. in these three demaundes gaineth nothing except the esti­mation of ignorance & folly be gaine: to that of the Martyrs, Hus, Luther, & Gods people in England, I say two things: eyther that in affection & desire they aperteyned to the true visible church being seperated from the false church: or that they were of the invisi­ble church, & of the invisible Kingdome which is vnknowne to man, & the members therof vnknowne: disprove you this if you can.

In the last place you demaund, whither Christs Kingdom be not Spiritual & invisible also? Ioh. 18.33. & 10.16.

The two places of Scripture quoted by you do not prove that Christ hath an invisi­ble Kingdome, & so invisible subjects knowne to vs, For Ioh. 18. Christ saith my Kingdom is not of this world, that is to say: it is not begunne, continued, & perfected by worldly meanes: So Christ expoundeth himself, afterward saying: my Kingdom is not from hēce: my subjects would fight for mee vs. 36. meaning that his Kingdom is neyther erected nor supported by worldly meanes as by sword, speare or shield: in respect whereof the Apostle saith Rom. 14.17. The Kingdome of God is not meate nor drinck, & 2. Cor. 10.3.4. Though we live in the flesh, yet we do not warre after the flesh for the weapens of our warfare are not carnal The second place is Ioh. 10. VVher Christ saith not as you dreame very ignorantly & childishly, that he hath an invisible Kingdome, but that he [Page 21]hath sheep of two sorts, some of the visible Church of the Old Testament, which is one fold, some of the visible Church of the New Testament, which is another sold o [...] the Iewes & Gentils: both which sorts of people shal in Christ Iesus, the partition wal being taken away, be joyned, & made one that so ther may be one sheepfold & one shepheard, but what is al this Mr. Bern. to disprove the truth of my position? Again to answer your demaund, I say that Chr. Kingdome is Spiritual & invisible aswel as outward & visible: For when we say that Christs Kingdome is visible & sensible, we do not deny that it is al­so invisible & Spiritual: neyther are these two contraryes to be oposed, as excluding one another: For as a man is not only the body which is visible & sensible, but cheefly & principally the soule which is invisible: & as the true Sacraments are not only the out­ward Elements, but the inward grace also, & that most especialy: So the visible Church which consisteth of men, is not only the outward communion, but especially & cheefly the inward & Spiritual fellowship which the Saynts have with Christ, & one with ano­ther: The Apostle therfor saith both that ther is one body & one Spirit: Eph. 4. & that al that are baptized are baptized into one body, & al that communicate are caused to drinck into one Spirit, 1. Cor. 12.13. And as the Saynts are members of Christs body, of his flesh, & of his bones, Eph. 5.30. So they that are joyned to the Lord are one Spiritt: 1. Cor. 6.17. we grant you therfor Mr. Bern. that Christs Kingdome is Spiritual & visible, but we deny that Christs Kingdome is only invisible, or only visible: he that doth plead to me that he is a member of Christs visible Kingdome, & yet cannot shew vnto me his fayth by his workes, I say vnto him as Iames saith: VVhat avayleth it him? o thou vaine man? shal thy sayth save the? thy sayth is dead: & he that shal plead with the Lord in the day of his judgment, that he hath prophesyed in Christs name, & by his name cast out Devils, & wrought many great workes, given his body to be burned in the fire, gi­ven al his goodes to the poore, hath spoken with the tongs of men & aungels, wanting true inward love & faith the Lord wil say vnto him depart thou worker of iniquity, I know the not: al this outward shew was hypocrisy: & thou art but as sounding brasse, & a tinckling Cymbal. Therfor as the Apostle saith: glorifie God with your body and Spirit, for they are Gods: 1. Cor. 6.20. he that is only an invisible member of Christs kingdome, is but half a subject of Christs Kingdome at the vtmost, though it be the better half: & he that is only a visible member of Christs Church, he is vnto vs truly & fully a subject of Christs Kingdome, though vnto the Lord he is but half, & so the worse half, & so as good as nothing: Let the Lord judg in secret what he pleaseth in mercy, but wee must judg in visible that which we see visiblie, & therfor to conclude this Parallele: I say he that pleadeth himself to be a true subject of Christs Kingdome by his invisible fayth, yet standing in confusion with the world in the false Church, worship, ministery & Go­vernment, let him be what he may be vnto the Lord, to me he is eyther an Antichristian or Famelist: & he that wanting true faith only in secreat knowne to the Lord, is yet a mē ber of a true Church, though I must needes say vnto him thou art holy, faithful, & Elect, yet the Lord wil cal him an Hypocrite, & a worker of iniquity in the day when he will bring vnto light every secreat thing whither good or evil: Therfor my position standeth firme notwithstanding al your cavils, that he that is not of a true constituted Church is no subject of Christs Kingdome.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the fifth Section.

In the beginning of this Section Mr. Bern. imputeth to vs to hold that such as are not of our way are to be accounted without after the Apostles meaning, 1. Cor. 5.12.

In the book called the Sep. Schisme, pag. 12. Mr. Bern. saith, This is one [...] ­ror of ours, that all not in our way are without. And that wee do apply against them. 1. Cor. 5.12. Eph. 2.12.

Mr. Ainsw. confutatio [...] of Mr. Bern. pag. 173. saith: we hold that al not in the way of Christ, are without.

In the midst of this fifth Section I expounding what wee hold, saying thus: All the members of true Churches wee account within: & all the members of false Chur­ches without: & al that are of Christs visible Church, which is his Sheepfold, King­dom, Family, Temple, Body, are within, & al that are not within this true visible Church, are without.

Hereby it appeareth that in this particular ther is no difference betwixt Mr. Ainsw. & me indeed & truth.

Mr. Bern. I do wonderfully mervayl at your boldnesse, that you dare so contrary to all truth, & contrary to my expresse wordes in this Section thus impute vnto vs: I say, and so al of vs say: That the members of the true Churches whatsoever, are within: & there­for not only our particular Churches that Seperate from the English assemblies, but all other true Churches that seperate from the false wayes of Antichrist, & walk in the true faith of Christ, are within: al false Churches & the members of them, are without: Ther is one only faith & truth, Eph. 4.5. as in the Old Testament so in the New the true church ministerie, worship, & government is but of one kind: al the Churches or assemblies of the Edomites, Ammonites, Moabites, Ishmaelites, Israelites, Samaritanes, & the rest were false churches, hada false ministery, false worship, & false government, & only the Iewes had the true Church, Ministerie, VVorship, & Government with them: So in the New Testament al Churches or assemblies of men whatsoever professing Christ (as Abbayes, Monasteries, Nunries, Colleges, Cathedrals, Seminaries, Rectories, Parishes, &c.) & not Seperated from the Antichristians & worldlings, are false Churches, & so without: on­ly the Seperated Churches are the true Churches, & are within: you should have ans­wered this Section of my lettre Mr. Bern. before you had printed your book, if you had dealt ingeniously & plainly but seing you cānot answer (for I take it so bicause you doe not answer, for your book declared that ther is no wil wanting) let vs see what you ob­ject, your objections are three.

First, the two places of Scripture, 1. Cor. 5.12. Eph. 2.12. you say are ment of such as never made so much as an outward profession of Christ Iesus at al: your argument is this: No Scriptures directed against pagans, can truly be applyed against Anti­christians.

These places are directed against pagans: vic: Eph. 2.12. 1. Cor. 5.12.

Ergo these places cannot be truly applyed against Antichristians.

I deny your Major Mr. Bern. & you have not proved it at al: Let the reader judg whi­ther your speeches be oracles that they must be believed, bicause you vtter them: but herin your fraud and evil conscience or palpable ignorance appeareth, that you leave out your Major, which you should have confirmed, & propound only your minor: For that these places are vnderstood of Pagans I deny not, but that they are only to be vnderstood [Page 24]of pag [...], & that they [...]nnot be vnderstood of Antichristians I deny [...]: & I prove the [...]ntrary evidently to your conscience, & the conscience of al men after this manner.

That which the L. hath taught vs to doe, we may lawfully doe. But the Lord hath taught vs to apply against Antichristians places of Scrip­ture directed against pagans,

Ergo: places of Scripture directed against pagās may by vs be applyed against Antichristians.

The Major is evident. The minor is proved by the consideration of these Scriptures, [...]evel. 11. [...]. & 18.2.7.21. where the holy ghost applyeth against the Antichristians, mat­ters & Scriptures spoken literally of Sodom, Egipt, & Babylon, which were all pagans.

Ag [...], If Antichristians be in condition eyther equal to or worse then pagans, thē by proportion, Scriptures directed against pagans, may be applyed against An­tichristians.

But Antichristians in the Lords account are in a condition equall, you worse then pagans:

For so Christ saith, Mat. 11.22, that it shalbe easier for Tyrus & Sidon, & the Sodomites then for Chorazin, Bethsaida & Capernaum, & Ezech. 16.44-52. Iudah, Sodom, & Sa­maria are sisters in sinne & punishment, & Iudah hath justified Sodom.

Therfor, Scriptures directed against pagans may be applyed by proportion eyther of equality or superiority against Antichristians.

Now for your further instruction in this point Mr. Bern. consider that in the new Te­stament the phrases, speeches titles, priviledges & benefites of the Church of the Iewes, considered as the true Church are ordinarily applyed to the visible Church of Christ in the new Testament: & contrariwise the phrases, speeches, titles, priviledges, & judgments pronounced agaist the Gentils in the old Testament are customabley applyed against the false Churches & Antichristians in the new Testament: Hence it is that the true visible Church of the new Testament is called the holy Cittie, Temple, Tabernacle, the new Ie­rusalem & the like, & the false Church is called the Gentils, Egipt, Sodom, Babylon, &c. the reason whereof is bicause that the Church of the Iewes was a type of the Churches of the new Tastament, so the assemblies of the Gentils were types of the false Churches of Antichrist: as you may see through the whole book of the revelation in divers par­ticulars: which point if you had eyther vnderstood or attended, you could not thus fri­volously have objected to vs this one particular, that speeches vnderstood of pagans may not be applyed against Antichristians: I pray you what vse do you make of the prophe­sies of the old Testament against Nineveh, Babylon, Elam, Madai, & the rest? VVhat vse can you make of the judgments threatned & inflicted vppon the Gētils if not this that Christ & the Apostles make, Mat. 11.22.24. & 12.41.42. 2. Pet. 2.5-7.15. Iude. 7.11. Heer I know you will say that you are not Antichristians, & so though these places may be ap­plyed against Antichristians, yet not against you: that particular wee will see afterward in his proper place: in the meane tyme thus much we have gayned that places af Scripture directed against pagans may as wel be applyed against Antichristians, as places of Scrip­true spoken to the true Church of the Iewes may be applyed to the true Church of the new Testament.

Secondly you object that wee cannot prove, laying aside the forge [...]s of our owne braynes, that this scripture phrase without, may be applied vnto you as to a people without. VVell wee wil lay aside our owne devices: & so let vs trye what wee can doe.

Arg. 1. Churches that are in condition equal or worse then assemblies of pagans are without. Revel. 11.2.

Antichristian Churches are in condition equal or worse then assemblies of pagans.

Ergo: Antichristian Churches are without.

Againe. 2. False Churches are without.

Antichristian Churches are false Churches.

Ergo: Antichristian Churches are without.

Againe. 3. Dogs, Enchanters, VVhoremongers, Murtherers, Idolaters & they that love or make lyes are without. Revel. 22.15.

Antichristian Churches are assemblies of such persons,

Ergo: Antichristian Churches are without.

Againe. 4. The habitation of Devils, the hould of al foule Spirits, cages of every vn­cleane & hateful byrd, are without.

Antichristian Churches or Babylon are such. Reuel. 18.2.

Ergo: Antichristian Churches are without.

Againe. 5. The vtter court which must not be measured by the goldē reed, but which is given to the Gentils that persecute the Holy Cittie, is without.

Antichristian Churches are that vtter court, Revel. 11.1.2.

Ergo: Antichristian Churches are without.

Againe. 6. The Serpent & his seed or aungels are without, Revel. 12.9.10. Gen. 3.15.

Antichristian Churches are the Serpent, his seed, & aungels.

Ergo: Antichristian Churches are without.

Now Mr. Bern. I have proved by playne Scripture, that Antichristian assemblies are without: & I know you wil not denye it: but you wil plead that your Churches are not Antichristian assemblies, & therfor you account that one of our errors pag. 109. viz: our 8. error as you summe thē: that position therfor: viz: your Churches are false Churches shalbe proved vnto you fully in the Paralleles, Censures, Observations aperteyning to the 10. section of this lettre, whither I referre the reader desiring him for his information & satisfaction in that particular to read that Section before he proceed any further in rea­ding, lest it should be thought that I deceave & shift of thys mayne point, which is in­deed the cheef & most principal of our cause & Seperation.

The third thing that you object is, that God Almightie hath witnessed that you are his people: by giving you his word, & Sacraments, by effectual conversion, by his strange & miraculous delivering you: these things Mr. Ainsworth hath answered most fully, & hath stopt your mouth for ever that you shal never be able to mutter any more in this matter: & therfor I wil spare my paynes.

Neverthelesse I advertise you of one thing that we do acknowledg that the Lord hath his pe [...]ple among you, whome he calleth to come out from among you & to be Sepe­rated, & to touch none of your vncleames, 2. Cor. 6.17. Saying vnto the faithfull that are among you. Goe out of Babylon my people, that ye be not partaker of her sinnes, [Page 26]& that ye receave not of her plagues, Revel. 18.4. & that they may be the better per­swaded to come out from you & to be Seperated the Lord threatneth a woe, a fearfull woe to them that worship the beast or his jmage, or that receave his mark in their fore­head or right hand. Revel. 14.9. & al this the Lord performeth by our testimony. Yet ne­verthelesse we say that your assemblies Ecclesiastical are false Churches that they are Ba­bylon, Epipt, Sodom, where Lot & the Lords people are kept captives: & by reason of the presence of Gods people with you, therfor it is that you have those many deliverāces which you have, even as the Lord gave Paul the lives of al that Sayled with him in the Ship: Act. 27.24, & whereas you plead you have the word, Sacraments & conversion, I say it is but as the theef hath the true mans purse, & as the false Church of Ieroboam had, & as the Samaritanes, the Edomitts, Moabites, Ammonites, & Ishmaelites had cir­cumcision & the Sacrifices by vsurpation: which by continuance of tyme were at the last worne out among them: even so you see Mr. Bern. that Gods people, the sincerest prea­ching by the forwardest among you, & the conscionable practise of the truth by the best professors, & the reformation which the reformists so long have sought is almost expired & out of date in the Land: The Prelates, Subscription, Conformity, Declining to Popery, & a Linsy wolsey Religion prevayleth in the Land: & you your selfe among the rest have lost or forsaken your sincerity, & are become a Tymeserver, a Newter, a Temporizer, & then what els but an Hypocrite? & except the Lord be mercifull vnto his people among you, it is likely to come to passe among you as among the Samaritanes, Edomites; Moa­bites, Ammonites, Ishmaelites, that the Holy things of God which by violence & vsur­pation you have invaded wilbe eyther overwhelmed with Egiptian darknes, or vtterly banished out of the nation: & I would fayne know whither even at this present, ther be not a thousand parishes in the Land, wher ther is no more true profession of Christ then among the Antichristian Papists.

Finaly, to conclude this Parallele: whereas you object that wee like it that you call vs brethren, but we wil not so account you nor admonish you as brethren: I answer that we like it to be counted brethren by you, nor for that wee are so vnto you: but for that here by wee would judg you out of your owne mouths: that whereas you account vs Brow­nists, Schismaticks, Heretiques, Traytors, &c. you may hereby perceave your wicked slaunders, that thus intitle vs, & yet account vs your Brethren: For otherwise as we detest your Church, ministery, worship, & Government as Antichristian: So also wee have in abho­mination your brotherhood, which is Antichristian: also wee abjure to be brethren to your Lords the Prelates, to your vice Lords the Archdeacons, Chancellors, Comistaries, Officials of their Courts, to the damned crew so termed in the Land, to your Church Papists, to the adulterers, Th [...]eves, Murtherers, VVitches, Conjurers, Vsurers, Atheists, Swaggerers, Dronkards, Blasphemers, & infinite sorts of sinners impenitent in your Chur­ches, yea & take the forwardest preach [...]rs & professors of the nation wee vtterly dislike their brotherhood visiblie standing members of the assemblies, visiblie joyned in communion with the forenamed Antichristians & abhominable persons in one & the same bo­dy: nay wee goe further we reject the fraternity of those that deny themselves to be or­dinary members of your Churches, & ye [...] are so extraordinarily: that refuse communion with you continually & yet reserve liberty to heare & communicate occasionally: For seing they hereby are made one with [...] [...]ntichristian body & wicked members ther [Page 25] [...] [Page 26] [...] [Page 27]of, being vnseperated from them, we cannot acknowledg our selves th [...]r brethre [...], l [...] we joyne light & dar [...]es, Christ & Belial, the Temple of God & Idols together: wherefore neither are we your brethren, nor you our brethren visibly: neither do wee delight so to be called in these respects, but only as you have heard, that we may be wel reported of by them that are [...]ithout, & that we may heapē coales of fire vppon your head, whē you acknowledg vs brethren, & yet slaunder vs so shamefully & this shal suffice as con­c [...]ing this Section.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the sixth Section.

Mr. Bern. in his book intit [...]led the Seperatists Schisme, pa. 83. hath these wordes, viz: Their fifth error is, that only Saynts: that is a people forsaking al knowne sin, of which they may be convinced, doing al the knowne wil of God: increasing & abiding ever therin, are the only matter of a visible Church.

In this Section Mr. Bern. saith thus, It is an error to teach: That only Saynts as Mr. Smyth defineth them by 4▪ properties, are the only matter of a visible Church.

Mr. Ainswortht confutation of Mr. Bern. pag. 174. Saith that he denyeth this position & disclaymeth the errors which Mr. Bern. gathereth from them referring him to them that hold it: then Mr. Ainsworth sheweth what he holdeth; that Saynts by calling are the only matter of a true visible Church: yet that many be called, & few chosen.

Let the reader consider the exposition that I have given to this position in this section of my lettre & then let him give his verdict: the exposition is summarily thus much: viz that seing the visible Church consisteth of an ontward & inward communion, they that are only of the outward visible communion as hypocrites, are no true members of the visible Church, but only in reputation & account before men.

Now I demaund of Maister Bernard againe with what face or good conscience he durst thus [...]se the VVorld, to publish this position barely without my expo­ [...]ion, or not to answer that which I brought for the confirmation thereof, but na­ [...]dly to set it downe & then only to object against it: Herein you bewray to mee a mynd willing to hyde the truth, & to deceave the VVorld, & to draw the Lords truth into detestation: which whither it be not the quality of a false Prophett [...], I leave to the judgment of the Godly mynded: And whither hereby you doe not verefie Christs speech, that you come to rob, kill, & to destroy, & that therfor you are a theef & a robber, Ioh. 10.1.10.

But bicause you are so importunate with your objections & reasons, let vs heer what they are,

First, you say my description of Saynts, is a proper description of the invi­sible members of Christ Iesus, & that it excludeth Hypocrites from being true matter of the visible Church: I answer two things: namely, 1. that an Hypocrite may performe al these 4. properties mentioned in the description of Saynts for he may, 1, Forsake all knowne sinne, 2. doe al the knowne wil of God, 3. grow in knowledg & grace. 4. continue to the end: & yet be an Hypocrite to the Lord in sec [...]eat [...]: doe you think Mr. Ber­nard that all that die thus qualified in the estimation of men are indeed saved with the L? I confesse to mee they are vndoubtedly saved, but are they so to the Lord? make a [Page 29]direct answer to this particular, & you shal be compelled to see & confesse your [...] V [...] 2. I answer more properly thus: when I define Saynts I must define them not as they are in shew for the present, but as they are indeed & truth: Now truth is so eyther before men or before God: before men that is true somtyme which is false before God: & before God that is true somtyme which is false before men: That is true before men which is proved by two or three witnesses. Mat. 18.16. He therfor is a Saynt before men in truth, that continueth to the end in faith repentance & the fruites thereof: He is a Saynt be­fore men in [...]hew & appearance for the present, that for the present bringeth forth fruites worthy amendement of life. For a righteous man may forsake his righteousnes: Ezech. 18.14. I am not therefore to define a Saynt as he is in shew for the present, but as he is indeed for ever in the judgment of men: neither do I define a Saynt as he is in the Lords knowledg which is not revealed to men, but as he is revealed to be judged by the word of God: I wil declare this by instances for your further information & satisfactiō: Stephen: Damas: Tertullus: Stephen continued to the end: Demas embraced the world & fel back from the truth: Tertullus never came to the truth for ought that is revealed: I say, Stephen was a true member of the visible Church who continued to the end: Demas was no Saynt nor no true member of the visible Church indeed, but only in shew: Ter­tullus was no Saynt nor true member of the visible church so much as in shew or appea­rance what Tertullus was in secreat to the Lord I dispute not, nor regard not▪ what De­mas was, what Stephen was in the Lords counsel it doth not aperteyne vnto vs: we must judg according to that we see & know: I say still with the Apostle continuance is a true propertie of a Saynt & member of the visible Church indeed & truth, & of the ful & compleat communion thereof, 1. Ioh. 2.19.

Your second Objection & reason is that by this my definition of Saynts, or the mat­ter of the visible Church so determined, I exclude the members of the visible Church of the old Testament, as Hezechiah, David, Ichosaphat, Moses, &c. VVho committed & suf­fered knowne sinne: yea & the Corinthians, 2. Cor. 12.21. Also the Churches of Asia. Revel. 2, 20.21. VVho did not amend, & yet were Saynts & true matter of the visible Church.

I answer: First to that of the old Testament objected by you, I say your bewray there­in great ignorance of the true nature & constitution of the Church of the Old Testa­ment, as also of the ministery, worship, & government thereof, which were al typical & ceremonial: Know you therfor Mr. Bern that ther is as much difference betwixt the Old Test [...]ment with the ordinances thereof, & the new Testament with the ordinances therof, as ther is betwixt the signe & the thing signified: betwixt the ceremony & the sub­st [...]nc [...]: the type & the t [...]uth: the shadow & the body: L [...]eral & Spiritual: the lettre & the Spirit. For in these & the like Phrases doth it please the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures t [...] discover vnto vs the differences of these two Testaments, & the ordinances thereoff: you cannot plead, bicause in the Old Testament there were Sacrificing Preists, therfor t [...]e [...] m [...]st b [...] such in the New Testament, neyther can you plead, for that they had one high P [...]e [...]t in the Old Testament, therfor ther must be one Pope or Patriarch over the [...]hu [...]ch [...]n the N [...]w Testament: To reason thus were to bring in Iudaisme; & to disanull the blood of Christ: Therfor if you wil reason aright as you ought to doe, you must [...]rame your reason from the Type to the Truth after this manner. This was a Type figure [Page 30] [...]hadow, ceremony, signe, literal ordinance in the old Testament, therefor we must not have that type; figure, shadow, ceremony, signe, literal ordinance in the new Testa­ment, but we must have the thing typed, figured, shadowed out, signified thereby: as for example: In the old Testament they had a visible Tabernacle, Temple, Cittie, wee must have a visible Church, which is indeed the true Tabernacle, Heb. 8.2, & 3.2-6 The true Temple, 2 Corinth. 6.15. the Holy Cittie, Revel. 21.2.3. In the Old Testa­ment the materiall Temple was made of material stones: in the New Testament the visi­ble Church is made of living & Spiritual stones, 1. Pet. 2.5. in the old Testament the peo­ple that offered sacrifice were a holy people literally, Deut. 14.2.3. in the new Testament the people that worship God must be holy indeed & spiritualy, 1. Pet. 2.5.9. the same may be said or the sacrifices, sacrificers or Preists & of al other ordinances of the old testamēt: hence it foloweth by a necessary consequence that the constitution of the church of the old testament was a ceremonial constitution: the worship of the old testament a ceremonial worship: the ministery a typical ministery: the government a typical government: the people a typical people: the land or country a ceremonial country. & so forth of the rest by proportion This being propounded & confirmed thus as the vndoubted truth of God discovereth the vanity of your reason: I say vnto you that David, Iehosaphat, & the rest of the Godly in the old testament though they did suffer known sin in the land, yet were the true matter of the typical Church being typicaly or ceremonialy cleane: For to the constitution of the typical Church ther was not required true holynes, but ceremo­nial cleanenes: & although it was signified vnto them of the old testament, & necessarily required of them for their aceptation befor God that they should be truly, holy, & sanc­tified: (for never was any accepted before God without true inward holines) yet it was not necessarily required of them to the constitution of their Church, for to make them true matter or members of that typical Church, or to fit them to that typical cōmunion which was the proper cōmunion of that typical Church, & of that typical service. Hence it is that as in the old testament a Saint was a typical Saint, so an hipocrite was a typicall hipocrite: & a wicked man was a typical wicked man, & therfor excommunication was typical: Nomb. 5.2-4. & 12.14. Hence also it foloweth that lawfully they might have ty­pical communion in typical worship that were typicaly cleane or saynts typicaly though they were wicked indeed: For their real wickednes did not polute their ceremonial or typical Church, worship, & communion, although it did polute their owne consciences & workes Their ceremonial vncleanes did polute their ceremonial communion: Their moral vncleanes did not so: If their communion had been moral & Spiritual, then their moral vncleanes had defiled their cōmuniō: but their cōmunion being only ceremonial & typical, their polution was only of that kind: therfor you shal never find that in the old testament the L. chardgeth thē for cōmunion in their typical service with wicked men, howsoever the wicked men thēselves are sharpely reproved for their wickednes. Besides the nature of their worship being wel weighed doth instruct vs thus much: For their worship was reconciliation & repentance to acceptation: but our worship is of another nature, viz: Sacrifices of praise & thanksgiving after repentance, reconciliation, & accep­tation. For they did worship to repentance, we do worship from repentance: therfor they might & did worship therby to reconcile thēselves to God: we being reconciled to God & accepted in Christ do proceed to offer vnto the L. the calves of our lips, the best grace [Page 31]we have: with vs men first declare their repentance, & then we receave them into our communion to worship with vs: with them first men were receaved into typicall com­munion, & then they were trayned vp to repentance & faith in Christ by the typical sa­crifices of that typical communion: Their worship began outwardly in the lettre, & pro­ceded inwardly to the Spirit, so did their cōstitution, ministery & al: our worship begin­neth inwardly in the Spirit, & proceedeth outwardly to the lettre: Therfor our constitu­tion, ministery, worship, & government, is contrary to theirs: & therfor Mr. Bern. if you had knowne or observed this, you would not have objected these things of the old Te­stament for the joyning with & suffering of open knowne sinne in the new Testament, & the communion thereof: For how can these things agree, except you wil make the New Testament, the Old Testament: & abolish Christ, & set vp Iudaisme againe.

But I would fayne know how you can prove that these holy mē did suffer opē known sinne, or suffering it were not defiled therby? defiled I say not in their communion which was typical, but in their consent which was Spiritual. But this point I must thus leave wayting for your answer: For I avouch that either the sinnes which they suffered were not knowne: or if they were knowne they were defiled by them: & so not repenting of them, al their worship was defiled to themselves, but yet being ceremonially cleane their communion in ceremonial worship was not vncleane vnto others. & if you doe object vnto me that their Spiritual communion was polluted vnto others: I answer that their moral or Spiritual communion was invisible, & so could not pollute others: & ther visible communion was typical & ceremonial, & that only polluted others: For such as was ther communion, such was ther pollution: Ther communion visible being typical did only polute typicaly our communion visible being moral or Spiritual doth pollute vs moraly & Spiritually. Now I doe confesse vnto you, that by ther typical Church, ministery, worship, & government, Spiritual things were signified both for them & for vs: For them the morality or Spiritual signification was double, viz: 1. that the Lord required that they should be that indeed which was typed vnto them, els they could not be accepted. 2. That in them they ought to see as in a glasse the glorious condition of the Church, mi­nisterie, worship, & government of the new Testament, which were shadowed out by those ceremonies: For vs the moral or Spiritual signification is, that except we be corre­spondent, in our constitution, ministerie, worship, & Government, to those types of the old Testament, our constitution, ministerie, worship & government, is either jewish, or paganish, & therfor Antichristian: Herevppon thus may I reason against you most soundly & therin you Mr. Bern. shal have your mouth so stopped as that you shal never be able to reply, or once to mutter against the truth any more except you have a cauterized con­science, viz.

If in the Old Testament ther visible typical communion was typically polluted by typical & ceremonial vncleannes vncleansed: Then in the New Testament our Spiritual visible communion is really poluted by moral vncleanenes vncleansed, that is, sinne vnre­pented of.

But in the old Testament, ther visible typical cōmunion was typicaly poluted by the typical & ceremonial vncleanes vncleansed.

Therfor in the new testament our visible Spiritual cōmunion is realy poluted by mo­ral vncleanes vncleansed, that is sinne vnrepented of.

The major cannot be denyed for it is a just analogie & proportion from the type to the truth, from the shadow to the substance.

The minor is evidently confirmed by these places of Scripture, compared together. Nomb. 19.13.20. Hag. 2.14. Act. 21.28.29.

Againe: If in the old Testament the persons ceremonialy vncleane during the tyme of their vncleanes, we excluded from the tabernacle or the host of Israel: then in the new Testament persons morally vncleane by impenitency, during the tyme of ther impe­nitency, must be excluded from the communion and fellowship of the true visible Church.

But in the old Testament persons ceremonialy vncleane during the tyme of their vn­cleanes were excluded from the tabernacle or host of Israel, as may be seen: Nomb. 5.2-4 & 12.14.15. 2. Chron. 26.21.

Terfor in the New Testament persons morally vncleane by impenitency, during the tyme of ther impenitency, must be excluded from the communion of the true visible Church.

But I shal have better occasion hereafter, namely in the 8. Section, to manifest this par­ticular, whither I referre the reader.

Breeflie I answer concerning David his suffering of loabs murther: The Kings of Iudah suffering the brasen Serpent to be worshipped, & the high places: Moses giving the bill of divoice: that eyther they knew them not to be sinne, or if they knew thē that they were polluted therwith by consent: but yet ther typical communion was not defiled ther by if they were ceremonialy cleane: they therfor being typicaly Saynts were true matter of the typical Church, & for the Church of Corinth, & the Churches of Asia, I answere that they were not impenitent in sinne, & so were Saynts: For know you that not sinne but impenitency in sinne maketh mē a false matter of a church: making saynts no saynts Now how can you prove that either the Corinthians or the Churches of Asia were im­penitent after once & twise admonition? I think it passeth your skil to prove that, & therfor I think this second objection of yours to be idle & of no value.

Your third objection & reason is that the places of Scripture which we bring declare what men ought to be not what men are: & you say we cannot conclude from the pla­ces of Scripture we bring, that bicause men are commaunded so to be, therfor if they be not so they are none of Gods people.

To this objection & reason I answer: that hereby you confesse, that the L. requireth that al the members of the visible Church should be Saynts: whence I also conclude that seing they ought so to be, therfor if they be not so they are otherwise then they ought to be, & so by consequent, if the Church be framed of those that are not Saynts, it is fra­med of another matter then the Scripture appointeth: & I would know if that be not a false matter. Moreover I avouch flatly contradictory vnto you that if men be not as God commaundeth, they are none of his people: but you are to know that true repen­tance is the true tryal of a Saynt, or of one of Gods people: & impenitency is an evident declaration that the partie therwith affected is none of Gods people: Therfor you must observe the difference betwixt the commaundements Legal, & Evangelical: The com­maundements [Page 33]legal require absolute obedience in the highest degres therof: The gospell requireth true & vnfeyned repentance in the best degre we can aford: I would not have you think that wee imagine men should beframed in obedience absolutely according to the exactnes of the low, For wee are not vnder the law: no: wee only hold that men must in vnfeyned desire & endevour yeld obedience to the law, & repent of al that wherin they are defective: & this is the obedience of the gospel which is acceptable, for wee are vnder grace: wherfor Mr. Bern. if you doe conceave that we intend the most perfect obedience of the law as a proper adjunct or formall difference of a Saynt, you are very grosse in your apprehension: if you conceave that we entend that men should be abso­lutely according to the gospel in faith & repentance, or els to be none of Gods people, then your conceipt is true & fit, but your objection is frivolous & ridiculous: For then men either are so or none of Gods people, & this doth our places of Scripture which we quote, prove, for any thing you yet have manifested to the contrary: when wee see you manifest otherwise, you shal receave answer, in the meane tyme you have discovered your self to be but a wrangler.

Your fourth objection & reason is, for that Saints in Scripture are not so called, 1. ey­ther for soundnes of knowledg, 2. or internal pure affection, 3. or holy practise of their duty alwayes: But, 1. For their outward calling to Christianity, 2. For their profession of faith, 3. in [...]espect of their baptisme, 4. in regard of the better part, 5. or in respect of the visible signes of Gods favour, 6. & Gods good pleasure.

I answer you thus: you deny three things & affirme six: I doe poremptorily deny your three negatives: & I constantly affirme; that sound knowledg, pure affections, & continual obedience are most pregnant and couvertible properties off true Sanctifi­cation.

Soundnes of knowledg is a proper note of life Eternall. Iohn. 17.3. Heb. 8.11. & so a true note of Sanctification. Tit. 1.16. & that which you bring of Christs Disciples, being ignorant of many things (which we acknowledg) is nothing for your purpose: For you speak not of perfect knowledg, but of sound knowledg, & that Epithete doth not argue the quantity or perfect measure, but the quality or true condition of knowledg which I do avouch by the former groundes to be a true convertible signe of sanctifica­tion, & so of a Saynt.

Pure affection also is another true token of Sanctification. Matt. 5.8. 1. Tim. 1.5, Tit. 1.15. which pure hart or affection is not a hart voyde of sinn, but of hipocrisy, & for that you object of Paul, Rom. 7.18.21. it is nothing to overthrow his pure affection: For though he had sinne, yet he know nothing by himself, whereof he had not re­pented.

Continuall practise of Holy dutyes, also is a true signe of a Saynt, or a Sanctified per­son, Psal. 119.101.102.106.112. And although Ecclesiastes saith that ther is no man without sinne, vet that hindreth not, but that some may continualy practise their dutyes, sith this is the summe of al, that by repentāce & faith which are the continual practise of the Saynts, a man doth alwayes performe his duty: & the speech of Eclestastes is the sentence of the law, not of the gospel.

But heerin is your monstrous fraud and abhominable dissembling manifested, that [Page 34]vnder these doubtful termes of sound knowledg pure affection & practise of duty all­wayes, you would bleare mens eyes that they should not see the truth: VVhat doe you think that any of vs would be so absurd as to say that perfect knowledg, love, & obedience, without any imperfection or fault are the signes of Sanctification? And yet wee say, that sound knowledg, a pure hart, and continual practise of Holy dutyes are the most infallible tokens of true Saynts, and men truly Sancti­fied: But you are wholly transformed as I perceave into vayne jangling.

In the next place I doe acknowledg that your fix affirmatives are somthing to the purpose: But neverthelesse you have mingled much chaffe with the wheate: wher­fore breefly in all that which you write page 85. 86. 87. 88, Concerning this matter I doe observe these particulars: Namely, 1. That although an outward calling, profession, and baptisme to the faith be part of the signes of Saynts: Namely, vi­sible markes outwardly: yet they must be thus qualified, els they are nothing but pic­tures, or images, resembling & shadowing Sanctification superficialy: For they must be true & inward also: True calling, profession & baptisme: & inward calling, profes­sion, & baptisme, are the infallible tokens of Sanctification and Saynts: The inward must be discerned by the outward, the truth must be judged by the word: He that is so called, so professeth, is so baptised as the word teacheth: that is to say: He that is called and Seperated from the VVorld, Antichristianisme, & all false wayes knowne vnto him: he that professeth that true faith, taught in the New Testament of Christ, which is but one: he that is baptised into that true faith, after that true man­ner Christ hath prescribed, I must needs say that he is truly called, truly professeth, is truly baptized, and so he by reason of his outward true calling, true profession of the true faith, and true baptisme is discerned & judged to be inwardly called, inward­ly to have faith, to be inwardly baptized, & that truly. A company of men thus cal­led, professing, & baptized, are Saynts: But if half ot but some of them only be thus, & the rest impenitent & obstinate in sinne, it cannot possibly be that they should joynt­ly together be a true Church: being light & darkenes, righteousnes & impenitency, Christ and Belial: or being joyned together, those former called, professing, & baptized, doe forsake their righteousnes, & partake with the wicked in their sinnes, and so shal receave of their plagues: How then can that mixt company be called Saynts, yea they are as accessary to fearful sinne before the Lord, & before men judging according to the rules of Gods word, which is the touchstone of al truth: & according wherevnto all our judgments must be squared, as by a canon & rule of direction.

2. The better part, visible signes of Gods favour and presence, Gods good plea­sure & acceptation, are excellent respects in the Church: But they are not demonstra­tive proper adjuncts of saynts sufficiēt to cause a mixt company to be al saynts in defini­tion: But you speak of a mixt company one way, & wee vnderstand a mixt com­pany another way: You define a mixt company to be of men that are truly Sanctified and men openly wicked & profane: I for my part doe abhorre to call such a Company Saynts: Nay I should rather and that truly call such a mixt Company a false Church, and all of them visiblie Antichristians: Ney­ther doe I any whitt quayle that you say all divines say-so: I know ther is o [...], [Page 35]namely Iohn the divine, & the rest of the Apostles that teach the contrary & if the di­vinity of your divines be contrary to the divinity of the Apostles & Iohn that worthy divine I reject it, I abhorre it, I wish it cast to the bottomlesse pit, from whence it came: For know you Mr. Bern. that the worser part somtyme giveth denomination to the thing If a peck of wheate be intermingled with an hundreth quartar of chaffe, it is not a heape of wheate, but of chaffe: if a pint of wine be mingled with a gallon of lees, it is the lees of wine not wine: you know in Logick conclusio sequitur deteriorem partem. Now a company of wicked men having some few Saynts known only to the Lord among thē (for being mingled with the wicked in Spiritual communion, they cannot be judged Saynts by the rule of Gods word to man particularly & certaynly) as your assemblies of England are, cannot be al caled Saynts in any colour of truth: For then al the men of En­gland are Saynts, seing they al are joyned together into one Ecclesiastical body, which I suppose you cannot nor dare not say the Scripture ever intended so to give them deno­mination: but you must vnderstand that we acknowledg the visible Church a mixt company in the Lords account & estimation, & in our general comprehension: For so wee learne that the visible Church consisteth of wheate & tares, Mat. 13. The Lord he know­eth that the Church hath Hypocrites in it, & we are informed so by the scriptures: ther were but twelve Apostles, & one of them was a Devil: but eight persons in the Arck, & cursed Cham was one: but foure persons in the beginning & Runagate Kain was one: but stil we deny that open wicked impenitent persons can be called Saynts, bicause of the communion & presence of some elect ones who are only known vnto the Lord, being of one ecclesiastical body with the wicked.

Neither can a wicked company be called Holy or Saints truly in respect of the visible signes of Gods favour or presence, For then the Papists, Anabaptists, Familists, Arrians, & among them & Exod. 3.5. the ground was caled Holy: & Mat. 4.5. Ierusalem is caled the Holy cittie, typicaly not truly, as I have expounded vnto you before in respect whereof also the Lord is said to see no iniquity in Iacob, nor transgression in Israel, Nomb. 23.21-seing that people at that present was typically Holy & so typically without imputation of iniquity in respect of their typical communion.

And for the Parable, Mat. 13. of the wheate & tares I doe constantly avouch that though you & al divines with you doe expound it of open wicked impenitent persons, & Saints, supposed in communion together, yet the parable is wrested from the true purpose of Christ, who doth not intend to teach that, for then he should teach contrary to himself, who by the parable of the Leaven declareth that one wicked persone defileth the whole lump, Mat. 13.33 compared with 1. Cor. 5.6 Exod. 12.18,

And whe [...]eas in the conclusion of this point, pag. 88. you would prove that, bicause the auncient Church of the Seperation have (as you say) wicked men among them: ther­for the parable Mat. 13. is truly expounded in that sense of a mixture of good & bad: I say for that point as the parents of the blind man said, they are auncient enough, lett them answer for themselves.

And thus have I ended this parallele with you Mr. Bern. & concerning Mr. Ainsworth who renounceth this Holy truth of the Lords, which I have thus clered, I say hereby he renounceth the saith in this particular, & renounceth the Apostles testimony, who saith, [Page 36]they went out from vs, they were not of vs, for had they been of vs, they would have continued with vs, 1. Ioh. 2.19.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the seaventh Section.

In this Section I write & prove, that the powre of binding & losing is given to the whole multitude, & not to the principal members therof.

Mr. Bern. in his book intituled the Sep. Schisme, pa. 88. calleth it the A.B.C. of Brow­nisme to hold: That the powre of Christ that is, authority to Preach, to administer the Sacraments, & to exercise the censures of the Church, belongeth to the whole Church, yea to every one of them, & not the principal members therof.

Mr. Ains. answering Mr. Ber, pa. 174. Saith that Mr. Ber. may put this opinion, if he please in the Criss-crosse-rew of Bernardisme, he himself being the first that ever he heard to vt­ter such a position: & afterward pa. 175. 176. 177. 178. Expoundeth what that auncient Church whereof of he is teacher holdeth concerning it.

Wel: Let vs handle these things largely, & to ful satisfaction: & herein I professe be­for the Lord, & befor the whole world, that if I do not prove evidently my assertion that the powre of binding & losing is given to the whole multitude, & not to the principall members therof. I wil acknowledg the Churches of England, yea the Churches of Rome yea & the Greek Churches also to have a true ministery, & to be true churches of Christ For if the ministerie, & the holy things with the ministerie, come by succession from the Apostles handes, through the churches of Rome & the Grecians, & that ther are no mi­nisters, but such as are made by thē & frō thē successively, our whole cause of Seperation lyeth in the dust & we must disclaime our Schisme which we have made, & our heresies which we hold: but if it be proved that the true ministerie commeth not by succession from the churches of Rome or the Grecians, & that the holy things are not given to the ministery by sucessiō, but are givē first to the body of the church, the faithful, yea though they be but two or three, & that both the ministerie and all the powre that the mini­sterie hath doth [...]ow from the Fountayne Christ Iesus, through the body of the [Page 39] [...] [Page 40] [...] [Page 41]Church [...] the Presbytery, then is your Church & ministerie false, so are the Churches of the East & West much more: & then we & those Churches only which raise vp their Ministerie from the Election, aprobation, & ordination of a faithful people, are the true Church of Christ having the true Ministerie of Christ, & you with the rest of Gods people in Babylon must seperate & joyne together, & walk in the Lords ordinances as we & other true Churches doe, or els woe be vnto you from the Lord: Therfor in this parti­cular I would supplicate the Kings Majestie my Soveragne Lord on earth, the Lords of the Parliament, The Gentlemen that susteyne the person of the commons in the nether howse, al the learned men of the Land, to confider & to search out this point: For it being throughly cleered may breed peace & infinite good to the whole nation: whereas it being suppressed, choked, darkened, & neglected draweth with it al the contentions and controversies amongst them that professe Christ in the whole earth: For my part Mr. Ber. I wil endevour according to my poore hability to discover what I have conceaved, and doe vndoubtedly beleeve from the Scriptures, and doe make the beginning of my in­quisition after this manner which I desire the gentle reader to weigh & consider of with his best attention. Christs visible church which is his Kingdom, hath in it a spiritual powre and jurisdiction by the confession of al that professe Iesus Christ: which powre is of two sortes: 1. The powre of Christ himself, who is the Lord & King of his Church. Mat. 28.18 and he is the Fountaine of powre, being the head of the Church which is his body, Eph. 1.22.23. For as the head is the Fountaine of life, sense, motion, & powre to the whole body, & as the Mr. of the howse is the original of al oeconomical powre: So is Christ the original of al spiritual life, sense, motion, & powre to the Church which is his body & fa­mily: This is evident: & in regard of this powre which is inherent in Christ, the church which is Christs Kingdome may truly be termed a Monarchie, Mat. 23.8-11. Ephes. 4.5, Iam. 4.12. This powre which Christ hath in himself cannot passe from himself to any o­ther: For as his preisthood is eternal, & not passing frō him to another, Heb. 7.24. so may it as truly be said of his other offices, & particularly of his Kingdome & Monarchicall powre: Neverthelesse 2. The Lord Iesus hath ordeyned & appointed a certayne order to be observed in his absence in the true visible Church, & hath delegated a certaine powre & authority to his Servants & subjects for the preferving of that order, & for the exe­cution of those ordinances: This delegated powre & authority is mentioned Marc. 13.34 1. Cor. 5.4. This delegated powre is avouched by the Papists to be in the Pope, by the English Prelates to be in the Lord Bbs. & Archdeacons: By the Presbyterians to be in the Eldership: by the brethren of the Seperation to be in the body of the Church pri­marily and fundamentally: For if the Pope, Prelates, Presbytery, or Body of the Church do say that the powre which is in Christ Iesus is in them, they doe blaspheme most fear fully robbing Christ of his honour & Regal powre, & make themselves even Christ him self: The Pope therfor is not Antichrist for that he vsurpeth that regal powre which is proper to Christ: neither are the Bbs. of England Antichrist for vsurping that proper kingly powre which is only in Christ: nor the Presbytery Antichristian for challendging the powre Monarchical of Christ: but they are al Antichristian for vsurping the delega­ted powre of Christ which he hath originally given to the body of his Church which is his mysticall body.

This delegated & Ministerial powre which the Pope, Bbs. & Presbytery challendg, [Page 42]they say commeth to them by succession from Christ: The Pope he saith Christ hath gi­ven this ministerial powre to Peter only & his successors the popes of Rome: The Bbs. say Christ hath given this delegated powre to al the Apostles, & the Apostles have given it to the Bbs. their successors. The presbyterians say that Christ hath given this ministe­rial powre to the presbytery, or Eldership, & they conveigh it successively to the elders succeding to the worldes end in the Church: Al these three opinions are equally Anti­christian, for they al of them establish succession which is Iewish, & so Antichristian. For in the old Testament the preisthood was conveighed by successiuon Heer therfor I will prove vnto you by vndeniable arguments, that the powre of Christ is not given ey­ther to the pope, Bbs, or presbytery, but primarily it is given to the body of the Church.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the eighth Section.

Mr. Ber. in his book intituled the Sep. Schisme pa. 103. hath these wordes, viz: that ou [...] seaventh error should be to hold: That the sinne of one man publiquely & obstinately stood in, being not reformed, nor the offender cast out, doth so pollute the whole congregation, that none may communicate with the same in any of the Holy things of God, (though it be a Church rightly constituted) til the party be excommunicated.

In this eighth Section the position is thus vttered by you, & by mee justified, viz: [Page 71]That one sinne of one man publiquely and obstinately stood in and not reformed by a true constituted Church doth so pollute it, that none may communicate with it in the Holy things of God til the partie offending be by the Church put out after lawfull con­viction.

Afterward expounding this truth I say, that if the Church hold this obstinate, impe­nitent, convicted person in communion they consent to his sinne, as the civil magistrate suffering wilful murther consenteth vnto it.

Mr. Ains. confutat. of Mr. Bern. pag. 178.179. doth first renounce this truth, & denyeth it to be either their judgment or practise referring vs to the confession of their faith, Art. 26. wher their judgmēt is, that none is to Seperate for offences, but by due order to seek redresse: & yet afterward affirmeth, that if the Church will not rebuke nor cast out a man obstinate and impenitent in wickednes, but plead for him against such as call vp­pon them for judgment then are all such abettors of the wicked sinner them [...]elves, and that in a high degree: & now not that one mans sinne, but the sinne of them al polluteth them.

Wel Mr. Ains. you & I wil not differ about this point, for wither it be his sinne con­sented vnto by them, or their sin which is a consent & approbation to his sinne, or both, I regard not: The truth is the truth, that that one sinne polluteth them al by contagion, as the leaven leaveneth the whole lump: & although Mr. Bern. hath not so plainly & di­rectely propounded it as he might, yet let it not be denyed for it is the truth he doth chardg vs withal, giving a true exposition: & I tell you true Mr. Ains. you deny the truth, if you deny the position: but indeed your denyall, & your affirmation con­tradict.

Heer Mr. Bern. for your sake I wil performe two things: First I wil confirme this truth which we defend against you that joyne with open knowne sinners in the communion of your false Church: Secondly, I wil refel your cavils against this truth of God, wherin wee walk.

For the first point I wish you to remember what hath been proved vnto you in the former Section, viz, That Christs ministerial powre is given to the body of the Church: which if it be true as it is proved to be the vndoubted truth of God, then this second position followeth necessarily therevppon & therefore is to be embraced for the truth of God in like manner: For every consequent necessarily deduced from the Scripture is as wel & as truly the word of truth as that which is in plaine termes expressed & noted downe in nomber of wordes. For even as the branches of the tree doe as truly proceed from the root as the great graines or body of the tree, & are al of one kind & nature doth root, body, graynes, & braunches: So a necessary consequent growing by true dis­course out of the Scripture is aswel & as truly the word of truth as the position, or doc­tryne, or sentence is whence it was raised, wherfor I frame an argument from the for­mer ground aftēr this manner.

If they that have Christs ministerial powre to reforme obstinate convicted sinners, or to excommunicate thē: do neither reforme them nor cast them out frō among them, but suffer them stil in communion consenting therby to their sinn: then the persons so suffering & consenting to sinne are polluted by contagion of the sin, & impenitent wicked sinner.

But it may fal out that a Church true in the constitution having Christs ministerial powre yet afterward declining may neither reforme an obstinate convicted, sin­ner, nor cast him out of their communion, but may suffer him stil in communion therby consenting to his sinne.

Ergo: a Church truly constituted, having Christs Ministeriall powre of re­formation or excommunication, suffering and consenting to sinne & sinners convinced are polluted by infection of that sinne, and of that impenitent obsti­nate convicted sinner.

And so by necessary consequent I conclude after this manner.

If a Church truly constituted be all of them polluted by consent as is already de­clared, then they do violate and profane all the Holy things of God wherin they pertake: For to the vncleane nothing is cleane, as the Apostle testifieth. Tit. 1.15. & the Prophet, Esa. 1.12.

But a Church truly constituted may grow to polution by consenting to obstinate sinne & sinners as is already declared.

Therfor a Church truly constituted may grow to the violation & manifest profa­nation of al the Holy things of God.

From this evident truth I proceed & reason after this manner.

To that Church, company, or communion of men we may not joyne in Spirituall communion that violateth or profaneth the holy things of God.

But a Church truly constituted may grow to the violation & manifest profanation of al the Holy things of God.

Ergo, to a Church truly constituted growne to polute & violate the holy things of God, we are not to joyne in communion.

Thus you se Mr. Ber. the evidence of this truth manifested vnto your conscience, if the Lord vouchsafe you mercy to see the truth.

Like arguments may be drawne from many places of Scripture: as from Mat. 13.33. compared with 1. Cor. 5.6. an argument may be framed thus.

As the whole lump & the feast of the passeover was leavened with a litle leavē: so one open knowne sinne polluteth the visible Church, & the holy things therof: for you must vnderstand that the Apostle doth not cal vnknowne sinne leaven: but by leaven he vnderstandeth sinne openly knowne, convinced, & vnrepented: els ther could be no communion for men on earth.

But the Apostle & our Saviour saith out of the law that a litle leaven leaveneth the whole lump & feast of the passeover.

Therfor, one sinne convinced & vnrepented polluteth the visible church, & the holy things therof: & therevnto may no man joyne.

Againe, from persons ceremonialy poluted, & so defiling the Sanctuary of the Lord, as appeareth Nomb. 19.13.20. Hag. 2.14, I reason thus.

As persons ceremonialy poluted vnclensed entering into the Sanctuary of the Lord, or medling with the holy flesh or pottage, did polute the Sanctuary, & the holy flesh, pottage & the rest: So the visible Church of the new Testament morally poluted & impenitent in sin medling with the holy things of God polute & de­file the same.

But the L. avoucheth by the mouth of his holy Prophets, that persons ceremonialy vncleane vnclensed, entering vnto the Sanctuary, or medling with holy flesh or pottage, polute & defile them.

Therfor the visible Church of the new testament morally poluted & impenitent in sin dealing with the holy things do profane them: & therfor no man with good conscience can joyne with that profanation.

Finally: as in the old testament the King & Magistrates suffering sin vnpunished were poluted therwith by consent: So in the new testament the visible church (who are Kings Spiritualy, & have committed vnto them the judgments of the L. the mini­sterial powre of Christ) suffering sinne vnreformed among them, are polluted thereby.

But in the Old Testament the Kings and Magistrates (by your owne confes­sion Mr. Bernard pag. 94.) were poluted with sinne vnreformed in the common wealth.

Therfor in the New Testament the visible Church (who are Kings Spiritualy, having committed vnto them the judgments of the L. the ministerial powre of Christ) suffering sinne vnreformed among them are poluted therby: & so no communiō to be had with them, least partaking with them in sinne by consent, we receave of their plagues.

Now you se evidently proved by testimonies of Scriptures, & by direct consequents from the same, that it is vnlawful for any man to joyne to a Church that was truly con­stituted, now growne to profane & violate the holy things of God by consenting to sin & wicked, obstinate, convinced, impenitent sinners: & that therfor much more is it vnlawful to joyne to your false churches which never were truly constituted since the defectiō of Antichrist, but remaine in the gulfe of Antichristianisme vnto this day: the first point therfor being manifest, the second foloweth to be enterprised which is to answer the objec­tions & cavils which you make against this comfortable truth of the L. I cal it a comfor­table truth bicause herin consisteth the true comfort of churches & Christians publiquely & privately: that they neither live in nor consent to any known sin in themselves or other For otherwise seing sinnes & corruptions break out dayly in the best Churches & Chri­stians, herin is our comfor that we give no allowance to them no not so much as by our presence in that communion wher open known sinne is suffered, as it is most plenti­fully and abundantly in your false Churches and in other Churches that are of a true constitution.

In your objections against this truth the first thing that I reprove is that you do falsely interpret consent to sin: for a man may consent to sin, though he in judgment, affection, contenāce & action do declare his dislike of it as for exāple: Ely did al this to his sonnes that poluted the L. Sacrifices, & cōmitted adultery with the weomen that came to sacrifice, 1. Sā. 2.22.23. for he should have proceded to the vtmost that the word of God had required at his hāds, viz: to have put his sōnes to death, which bicause he did not he was poluted with their sinnes by consēt, & therfor the fearful judgmēt of God befel him which whsooever heard both their eares tingled, 1. Sa. 3.11. so except a mā do by al mē anes save himself from the froward generation, by Seperating himself as the Apostle practised & counselleth, Act. 2.4. & 19.9. & 2. cor. 6.17. he cannot be fre fro the contagion of their sin [Page 74] [...] the profanation of al the Holy things of God: For these places doe evidently declare th [...] Paul & the Apostles not only commaund to seperate from the Gentils, but frō the Iewes who were the true Church of God now growing obstinate in sinne, & so practised themselves commaunding the Disciples & training them vp by his example so to do: & so teaching vs to follow his example herein.

In the next place you proceed to declare by divers reasons (such as they are) that to joyne to the holy things when obstinate impenitent sinners partake in them is no sinne: your first reason is: For that in the old Testament ther was no Sacrifice appointed for this: Ergo it is no sinne: I deny the antecedent: & I declare the contrary by the examples of the tribe of Bemjamin consenting to the sinne of adultery committed vppon the Le­vites concubine, Iudg. 19. & 20. of the tribes of Israel, fearing lest wrath should fal vppon them for suffering their brethren to make another altar, & to forsake the true worship of God as they suspected, Iosh. 22. & of Achans sin which brought wrath vppon the whole congregation. VVherefore in the law the Lord did appoint a Sacrifice for the whole congregation aswell as for any particular person. Levitt, 4.13.

A Second reason of yours is: For that in the Old Testament the Godly are never re­proved for being present at the ministration of holy things though wicked men were present: but the Prophets reprove the Preists only for not Seperating the cleane from the vncleane. wherto I answer that their communion was typical, & therfor persons typically cleane though wicked in their lives might come to Sacrifice, & yet not pollute others as I have already sufficiently declared in the former Section: besides whereas the Prophets reprove the Preists, & the Saints in the new Testament succeed the carnal Preists as Spiri­tual Preists, therby it followeth that the Saints in the new Testament are polluted by not distinguishing & seperating the cleane from the vncleane: see these places of Scripture, Ezech. 22.26. compared with Revel. 1.6. & 11.1. Iude vs. 23.2. Cor. 6.17.

But stil some may object, that in the old Testament they did pray, & preach, & praise God, & yet notwithstāding the faithful herein were not defiled if the wicked did joyne with them in communion thereof: & therfor now vnder the new Testament, though mē do joyne in communion with open known sinne, & suffer known sinne yet may be saynts, & vnpolluted in communion: & this is the very pith & warrow of your second abjection Mr. Bern. wherto I make answer many waies.

First▪ I deny him to be a Saynt or that he ought to be esteemed a Saynt of vs, that is impen [...]tent in any knowne sinne: Knowne I say to him: For I may know it to be a sinne, & yet bicause he knoweth it not so to be, he cannot be accounted impenitent though he live in it: sith ignorance is a sinne whereof a man repenteth generaly, & so in his generall repentance of sinnes done of ignorance that particular sinne is included.

Secondly, I am to judg of another according to that which I know & according to the rule of the word therin: wherfor if i know any of my brethren to live in any sinne knowne to me: I must admonish him & prove it to him to be sinne, & require his repen­tance: if he repent not to take withnesses & thē to admonish him before withnesses, & so to convince it againe to his conscience, if he repent not, then to tel it to the Church, wher also he is to be admoni [...]hed & convinced openly: if then he repent not, to mee he is a Heathen & Publicane, & no Saynt: what he is in the L. account, & to himself in se­creat I know not, nor regard, for it aperteyneth not to me.

Lastly, for the consequence of the argument, viz: That seing in the Old Testament the faithful were not defiled joyning in prayer, preaching & praising God with open known sinners, therefore wee in the New Testament so doing are not defiled, I deny vtterly: yea and I deny the Antecedent in some sence also: It shall not be vnprofitable therefore fully to discussce both the Antecedent, and the consequence of this Ob­jection.

The Antecedent is thus to be expounded & conceaved of, namely.

That the L. required one thing outwardly in the communion of the Church, another thing inwardly in the hart for acceptation before God.

If any circumcized Israelite or proselyte clensed according to the purification of the Sanctuarie did joyne in prayer, preaching & praising God, no man could justly refuse his outward communion in these actions seing he was outwardly cleane according to the dispensation of those tymes: For vs in the new Testament ther are required other visible actions for our outward clensing, which were not then required of the carnall Israelites for their outward clensing: if they did declare their inward repentance by Sacrifices for their sinnes general & Speciall, by clensing themselves with those rites & ceremonies which were appointed by the Lord for those infant tymes of the Church, they were to be judged holy by al men, & so communion might be had with them without sinne: but if they were not clensed according to the purification of the Sanctuary, they were not visibly cleane, & therfor communion could not be had with them without sinne, & so Hezechiahs prayer importeth, 2. Chron. 30.18- [...]. & the Prophets declare plainly, Nōb. 19.31.20. Hag. 2.14. yet heer also cautions must be remembred, viz: That this ceremoniall vncleanenes must be made known vnto others, for otherwise how could it polute others if it were vnknowne to them: Furthermore it cannot be denyed, but that the Sonnes of Belial very vild wicked men did deale with the holy things in the old Testament, but yet I say it cannot be proved but they were visiblie cleane according to the dispensation of those tymes: the Lord did not then require men to proceede with their brethren in the thre degrees of admonition, & so to bring them to the acknowledgment of their sinne & repentance. That is the Lords dispensation for the new Testament: But the L. order for those tymes was 1. reproof for sinne, Levit. 19.17. 2. The partie reproved was to offer a Sacrifice which if he did he was clensed from hys sinne visiblie, Levit. 4.23. 3. If he wilfully refused to harken he was to be promoted to the Magistrate, & put to death for his presumption, Levit. 15.30.31. Deut. 17.12. This was the L. aeconomie for those tymes when this order was violated, then al communion was defiled, whiles it was observed all was wel in the visible communion: Let any man declare the contrary if he be able: breefly therfor to make a ful answer to the objection: if the faithful did keep communion with persons visiblie vncleane, (according to the vncleanenes of the old Testament,) knowne vnto them, I say they were polluted with their vncleanenes by consenting therto, & to the violation of the Lords order appointed for those tymes: if men were the children of Belial, & yet were clensed according to the dispensation of the Old Testament, their vi­sible clensing did intitle them to the ordinances of the old Testament before men, though before God their consciences were impure: wherfor both the Antecedent & consequent of the argument are weake and vnsound: & so this truth of God remayneth firme, that impenitency in sinne defileth the communion of the visible Church, as in the old Testa­ment,

Your third reason is for that the Prophets did not Seperate who did know the mea­ning of the L. for this thing, nor taught not the people so to do: I answer as in the new Testament so in the old ther ought not to be Seperation til the vtmost meanes be sought for redresse of things: The vtmost meanes for reforming abuses in the Old Testament was the Magistrates authority, in whose hands the powre of reforming was: Hence it is that the Prophets alwayes reproove the Kings for the wickednes of the Land: but the Lord did never teach (bicause he thought it not meet, ther being but one true Church) that when the King neglected his duty the people should forsake the Holy things of God & Seperate, but stil they ought to depend vppon the Lord for redresse of things: but now in the New Testament the Lords administration in this particular is otherwise, 1. Visible Churches may be infinite, & so ther is a possibility of enjoying the Lords ordi­ [...]ances though a man forsake the communion of one Church, 2. the fulnes of tyme being come, & the nonage of the Church being past, the Lord hath now revealed his whole wil & pleasure, & hath set vs at liberty, whereas in the old Testament they were in bon­dage vnder worldly ordinances, 3. The Saints now in the new Testament are answerable to the Kings in the old Testament having powre Ecclesiastical in their hands (but not ci­vil) to reforme the abuses that arise in the visible Church, 4. Therfor we are in the new Tament to vse al meanes appointed by the Lord for reformation before wee Seperate, al the meanes I say whatsoever: If then ther be no reformation what then? I answer Se­peration is then lawful: why? The reasons are these 1. The visible Church cealeth to be a time Church being obstinate in sinne, & from a false Church Seperation is lawful, 2. the Lord hath commaunded to come out [...]om among persons obstinate in sinne, & so the Apostles practised. 2. Cor. 6.17. Act. 19.9. & 2.40. 3. bicause the Lord hath said that if we pertake with them in their sinnes, we shal receave of their plagues, 4. bicause if but two or thre faithful ones being Seperated joyne together, they are a true Church vnto Christ where the Lords presence & acceptance is: But in the Old Testament they were necessarily tyed, to the Kingdome, Preisthood, & Temple for the worship & obedience of God, but now in the New Testament al things are free, & the bondage is gone: Mr. Bern. I would have you note this wel & lay it vp in your hart for your instruction & re­formation, for in this particular I know you al that feare God in the land are scandalized from the truth, not vnderstanding the difference between the New Testament & the or­dinances thereof, & the Old Testament with the ordinances thereof: Summarily therefor to deliver the truth: The Church, Ministery, VVorship, & Government of the Old Testa­ment were so constituted by the Lord as that no Seperation could be made from them seing they were al by Succession & the people therfor were necessarily bound over vnto them, otherwise they could not find the Lord & his truth which was only at Ierusalem: in the New Testament, the Church, Ministery, VVorship & Government are so constitu­ted by the Lord, as that in them ther is no Succession nor alligation of tyme, place, per­son, &c. But when the Church is become false by impenitency, the faithful may Seperate & cary the truth with them if but two or three.

Mr. Bern. the L, open your eyes, & the eyes of al his people in England to see this bles­sed truth of the Lord: & then the cause of Separation wilbe evident vnto your conscien­ces in the meane tyme you cannot but be ignorant.

A south reason whereby you would prove that to joyne to the Holy things in the [Page 77]communion of obstinate impenitent persons is no sinne, is, for that the Scripture teacheth the contrary (as you say) two wayes, 1. by acquitying the Godly from the transgression of others, 2. by declaring it to be a sinne to leave the Holy things of God, for the wickednesse of others: & this you say cutteth deepely.

I answer you Mr. Ber. that we do not feele this cut at al, for the iron is blunt, & you had need put to more strength, & your reason hath in it no cutting quality at all: For I doe acknowledg that the Godly, if they consent not to, nor approve not the sinne of others, are by the Lords sentence acquit from the transgression. but I would learne of you, if the Holy Ghost in the Scripture doth not account the principal & the accessary in the lame condition though not in the same degree of sinne: what say you to the sinne of Achan? the sinne of the men of Gibean concerning the Levites concubine? The feare of the Isra­elites in respect of the Altar built in the border of the Land of Canaan by Iorden? These places are evident, that consent to sinne polluteth the person consenting: & the places by you quoted do not prove any thing contrary to this assertion of ours: but rather they prove this vndoubted truth of the Lords: the place Ezech. 33.9. proveth that as the watchman that dischargeth his duty is acquit, so if he discharg not his duty he shalbe accessary to the sinne, & partaker of the punishment as may be seen, vs. 6. the place Ezech. 18.14.17.20. doth declare two things, that if the child follow not the sinne of the parents he shalbe guiltlesse: if he partake in ther sinnes he shalbe partaker of the. punishment the place Ezech. 14.18.20 sheweth that Noah, Daniel, & Iob shal deliver their owne soules by their righteousnes: but al those that are polluted with other mens sinnes shal partake of their plagues, Revel. 18.4. So that you see these places of the old testament quoted by you do not only not help you, but vtterly overthrow your conceipt.

The places of the new Testament alledged by you also make as litle for you. Tit. 1.15. teacheth that al thing are pure to the pure, yet the intent of the place is not to shew that sinne is pure to any man: & although I may lawfully vse the Holy things of God being my self cleane: yet being partaker of another mans sinne by consent, I polute al the holy things to my self, & have no title to vse them, & so the Apostle saith presently to the impure is nothing pure: the place Revel. 3.4. teacheth that so many of the Church at Sar­di as defiled not their garments by consenting to the polution of the rest of that Church, but that stood out against their corruptions to the vtmost, shalbe innocent: & the other place, Revel. 2 22-24. sheweth the same thing: but for these two places I say: you must prove Mr. Ber. that your assemblies are true churches as these were: againe, you must prove also that these persons neglected their duty of admonishing & standing forth against the Church: & that the church was convinced by them & yet did joyne with them in communion of Holy things: For otherwise we say we are not to Seperate till wee have done our vtmost endevour: neither are we poluted til then: your last place is Gal. 5.10. wher the Apostle teacheth that he that troubleth the Galatians shal beare his condemnation whosoever he be: & yet the Apostle telleth them vs. 9. that a litle leaven leaveneth the whole lump: that is to say: if you consent to this false doctrine of joyning circumcision to Christ the person that perswadeth you shal beare his burthen whosoever he be, yet you also shalbe punished receaving the false doctrine, but I hope otherwise of you: this is the meaning of the Apostle.

Secondly, you say the Scripture teacheth it to be a sinne for to leave the holy things [Page 78]of God, for the wickednes of other, & for this purposes you alledg, 1. Sam. 2.24.17. wher (you say) the wordes are plaine, & cannot be avoyded by another exposition of the word gnabarwell: although the word doth as properly signifie to passe vppon or to passe by as to trespasse, & that it is so expounded by Pagnin: yet I will not plead it at this tyme sith it needeth not: Therfor take the place according to your construction that the Sonnes of Ely by their sinnes caused the people to sinne by abhorring the L. offering through occasion of ther wickednes: I answer thus: in the old Testament no man was to forsake the Sacrifices for other mēs sinnes if they were ceremonialy cleane: & therfor that the people did abhorre these ordinances of God vppon the wickednes of Elyes Sonnes was ther transgression: the L. taught no such thing in the old Testament & in the typical communion therof: but now in the new Testament we having the truth that was then signified by the old Testament & the ordinances therof, it followeth necessarily thus: that as in the old Testament & the communion therof which were typical, persons typicaly cleane might not have communion typical, with persons typically vncleane, without polution ceremonial: So in the new Testament & the cōmunion therof which is the truth, persons moraly cleane may not have Spiritual communiō with persons moraly vncleane without polution moral which is sinne: & so you are answered according to your expo­sition of the place: yet I deny it to be necessary to expound the place so as you doe.

Your fifth reason proving it lawful for the Saints to hold communion in the holy things though persons obstinate in sinne be present is: For that in the word we have liberty given to come to partake in the holy things if wee look to our selves to reforme our owne wayes, mat. 5.23.24. 1. Cor. 11.28. & the Corinths did partake in the holy things with them that were once & twise admonished, 2. Cor. 12.21. go: so may we do.

I answer. The place of Christ Mat. 5.23.24. teacheth that a mā must first reconcile him self to his brother before he offer his gift: truth: but it must be for al the sinnes he com­mitteth against his brother: now to hate his brother by suffering sinne to rest vppon him & not to admonish & bring him to repentance, is a greevous sinne of one man against his brother, & so it is a very greevous hatred for a man to suffer the whole Church vn­reformed from sinne, & therfor by this place or Christ you gaine nothing, but rather leese the cause which is hereby confirmed, viz: that til a man doe his duty to the vtmost to his brethren, he cannot offer his gift: now his vtmost duty is, either to bring him to re­pentance, or to leave him impenitent, & al them that justifie his sinne in their impenitēcy & so in the violation of the holy things: For they being al poluted with his sinne have deprived themselves of title & powre to the holy things, & so vsing them doe violate them, & al that partake with them therin partake with sinne, & shall receave of their judgments.

The place 1. Cor. 11.28. is also against you: For the Apostle willeth the Corinths to examine themselves how they have performed their duty to God, & their brethren, in the first & second table: & finding themselves to be cleere then to eate & drinck: other­wise finding our selves to faile in that commaundement, Mat. 14.15-17. wee are poluted by contagion & cannot eate & drinck without hurt & judgment, bicause we have not judged our selves aright.

But your last place Mr. Ber. is somthing to the purpose: viz. 2. Cor. 12.21. & 13.1.2. compared [Page 79]together, for I wil help to vrge your argument, & then give you an answer.

Your argument may thus be framed.

If the Corinths might without sinne have communion with the Church, of the Corinths after they were once & twise admonished, & did not repent: then may we have communion, with persons obstinate & impenitent, in the holy things without sinne in vs.

But the Corinths had communion with the Church of Corinth poluted with sin after once & twise admonition, without sinne.

Ergo: we may have communion, with persons obstinate in sinne, in the holy things without sinne in vs.

This is the force of your reason: wherto I answer, that you must prove your minor: For it is weake: & the places of Scripture do not confirme it: For you must know that the latter Epistle to the Corinths was the second admonition as may be seen, 2. Cor. 13.2 & before the despising of the second admonition they could not be judged obstinate & impenitent in sinne: now for the ful & sufficient confirmation of your minor you should prove vnto vs two things: First, that the Corinths did despise Pauls second admonition in this his second Epistle: Secondly that if they did despise this his second admonition, the faithful among the Corinths did keep communion without sinne with that poluted & obstinately impenirent company: now bicause I know this is to hard a task for you, I will therefore conclude that this argument of yours is insufficient to prove your pur­pose.

Your last & least reasō wherby you endevour to prove it lawful to vse the holy things though obstinate impenitent sinners be present in communion, is, that Gods commaundement must be obeyed absolutely, & another mans sinne cannot dissolve the bond of allegiance betwixt God & man, which our position seemeth (as you pretend) to dissolve: seing we say that a man must not keep communion in the holy things if wicked men be present in communion with vs:

To this argument I answer thus: viz: that God indeed commaundeth vs to pray, heare the word, & communicate in the Sacraments, but he also prescribeth both the persons wherwith, & the manner how we must performe these actions: prayer, hearing the word & partaking in the Sacraments are actions of communion, & ther is in the preformance of them a manner of doing (modus agendi) to be observed: wee must therfor respect two things in performing these actions of Religion: First that our communion be such as it ought to be, for I may not keep communion with Iewes, Turks, Pagans, Papists, but with Christians, viz: true Christians such as the new Testament describeth ought to be mem­bers of the visible Church which is the mystical body of Christ: Secondly, that the actions of our communion be performed after that holy manner & order as the new Te­stament of Christ teacheth: as that prayer be conceaved not read out of a service book, that prophecy come out of the hart, & not be read out of a book as Homilies be: that baptisme be administred simply as Christ teacheth without Godfathers, the crosse, questi­ons to infants: & that the L. Supper be vsed sitting not kneeling. finaly, that al the parts of worship be clensed according to the primitive institution, & not vsed with those po­lutions which the man of sinne hath cast vppon them: breefly, we must worship God with the meanes he hath apointed as the 2. cōmaundemēt teacheth, & after the māner he hath [Page 80]taught as the third commaundement informeth, otherwise ther is idolatry committed in violating the second commaundement worshipping God by other meanes then he hath ordemed: & profanation of the name of God in violating the third commaunde­ment when his ordinances are not so vsed as he hath prescribed: So that to speak directly to your objection, the bond of alleageance betwixt God & vs is preserved & kept inviolable by our position: for we teach that men must pray, heare the word, & receave the Sa­craments, but in a true visible communion of Sains as the Lord hath appointed, not with al manner of persons, as theeves, mu [...]derers, witches, conjurers, Papists, Atheists, Dron­kards, perjured, persons, &c. as in your Church: nor after your manner which is devised by man as Ieroboam devised in Israel: but as the Lord hath in the new Testament taught vnto vs.

And heer Mr. Bern. you take vppon you to reduce the places of Scripture which wee alledg for Seperation from your assemblies to certaine topical or categorical heads, & so give them answer according to your fashion: as thus: the places that forwarne Gods people to Seperate vnder the law are thus to be taken:

• 1. From idols of false Gods: as Israel from heathenish Gods.
• 2. From Idols of the true God as Indah from Israels calves.
• 4. From persons ceremonially polluted.

The places vrging Seperation vnder the Gospel are thus to be taken

• 1. From lewes not receaving Christ, but rayling against him.
• 2. From Gentils without Christ.
• 3. From Antichrist vnder the shew of Christ persecuting Christians.
• 4. From familiar companying with excommunicates or wicked men.

But (say you) what are al these places to vs who are not vnder any of these heads of re­ference? I answer you Mr. Ber. that your Church is respectively vnder al these topical pla­ces which you mention excepting the first, For 1. you make Idols of the true God, in set­ting vp your own inventions, & making Christ a King, Preist, & Prophet, as you jmagine 2. you ought much more to Seperate from persons morally vncleane, if the lewes ought to Seperate from persons ceremonialy vncleane, 3. if the Apostles commaund Seperation from the Iewes members of that true Church of the old Testament, refusing Christ & rayling against him: Then much more ought we to Seperate from you the members of false Churches, refusing & persecuting Christ in his members & new. Testament vnto death: as they have felt, 4. if Antichristims & Gentils be in degree equall (as they are in the Holy Ghosts account as I have forme [...]ly proved) thē from you who are Antichristiās & visible members of false Churches ought Seperation to be made, 5. although you are not excommunicate from the true Church whereof you never were, yet you entertaine excommunicates from true Churches, & you are cages of every vncleane & hateful bird: & if I must avoyd private familiar communion with excommunicate & wicked persons then much more must I shun Spirituall holy communion with them: except any man wilbe so ridiculous as to say that the Ho [...]y & Spiritual communion afordeth more liberty to sinne & sinners then private civil communion in meate & drinck: &c. & so by your own: confession al the places of Scripture alledged against you by vs, may by just & due proportion be applyed vppon you, being as you stand in your constitution & worship, [Page 81]false Churches, & false worshippers, & persecuters of Christ his truth & faithful wit­nesses.

To end al: you say that it cannot be proved that it is sinn to heare the word preached & to receave the Sacraments of one that hath converted him, & is called of the church, wel Mr. Bern. I vnderstand your drift, & I wil give you an answer: I say in your assemblies men do not convert to the true visiole faith of Christ taught in his word, viz: in the new Testament: nor you ever converted man therto, but pervert men from it, as this book of yours & al your railings against our testimony do plainly evince: what you do invisibly the Lord knoweth, & every mans owne conscience can speak that feeleth: but what say you of the Popish preachers do you think they convert none invisiblie? & what doe you gaine by this fancy? neither they nor you convert to the faith or new Testament of Christ, but they pervert mē from you, & you pervert men from the Seperation: & both hinder & draw from the truth: what you do invisiblie I seek not nor ought not to respect for visible walking: yet know that we hold that ther are 7000. that are of the Lords E­lection in your false Churches: So are ther in Rome it self. Revel. 18.4. whence did al the worthy witnesses of Christ arise, as the waldenses, Hus, Prage, Luther, the Martyrs in Q. Maries dayes in Englād, & at other tymes in other places? did they not come out of the bottomlesse pit of Antichristianisme being converted there? yet I hope you wil not say that they might stil joyne to that ministery: & yet the ministers then had the calling of that church, such as it was: if therfor the argumēt be not good for them no more is it for you: for you wilbe proved to be Antichristiā Ministers as truly in quality, though not as­much in quantity as they are: & this shal suffice for answer to this point.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, apertey­ning to the ninth Section.

I cannot find in all Mr. Bern. book intituled the Sep Schisme, any thing in opposition to this Section of my lette vnto him, whereby I collect that he yeeldeth it as a truth: & it is not material to the point of Seperation any thing at al: only the truth must be de­fended for the Author of truths sake that the Lord & his truth may in all things be ho­nored: the summe of al this Section is thus much: that as not the act of reasoning is the true propertie of a man, but the faculty to reason: Non ratiocinari sed rationale: So not the actual preaching & administring of the Sacraments, but the powre of Christ to have & vse al the holy things of God is the true property convertible, & in fallible to­ken of a true Church: For as every man although he be reasonable, yet doth not actually vse reasō at al tymes, as namely, being an infāt, being a sleep, being in a Lethargie or sincope So the true Church though it have alwayes powre to al the holy things, yet actually it doth not vse the powre: But I list not to speak much concerning this particular which is more Scholasticall then profitable, the rather seing Mr. Bernard contendeth not about it.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, apertey­ning to the tenth Section.

This Section consisteth of three maine branches which Mr. Bern. handleth from pag. 109. to the 150. of his book called the Sep. Schis. Heer therfor I must endevor two things: First, to prove by vndeniable arguments drawne from the Scriptures that 1. the assēblies Ecclesiastical of England are false churches, 2. the Ministers administring the holy things to these Ecclesiastical assemblies are false Ministers, 3. the worship performed by the mi­nistery & people in the communion visible to be a false worship: Secondly, Mr. Bern. objections & cavils must be refuted: wher the reader must be advertised that in per­forming this latter part I shall not endevour to handle all things that Mr. Bernard [Page 84]propoundeth, for ther is much truth by him propounded, which I with him consent vnto, only the points of difference shalbe discusted, & the rest omitted.

In the first place therfor to deale as they say positively Kataskeuasticos: I prove that al the Ecclesiastical assemblies of the Land, as they stand established by law are false Chur­ches: that is to say not framed or constituted according to that presidēt which Christ hath left for the constituting of the Churches of the new Testament: but are framed according to the invention of man, even that man of sinne, Antichrist the Archenemy of Christ.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the eleventh Section.

Mr. Bern. Sep. Schis. pag. 152. Saith that those men have lost the feeling of former grace & all true charity, that say thus, viz: That they cannot say certainly, by any warrant off Gods word, that any of vs hath eyther Faith or feare of God: & he nameth Mr. Smyth in the margent.

Againe, pag. 58. he writeth thus, viz: one of them writeth that certainly he cannot by the word be perswaded that any of vs hath eyther true Faith or feare of God: naming Mr. Smyth in the margent.

I write in this Section thus: that particularly, & certainly, I cannot say by any war­rant of Gods word that I see, that this or that person hath Faith, & feare of God among you: yet I say also: That I verely beleeve generally that God hath his people among you, & that they are in al likely hood the persons that are miscalled Puritanes:

Heer I wish the conscionable reader to consider Mr. Bern. evil dealing whither ignorāt­ly or maliciously I know not: I speake generally & specially: Generally I doe certainly beleeve that the Lord hath his people in England: Specially I say certainly & particular­ly, I know not who they be yet in likelyhood they are the Puritanes so called: now Mr. Bern to make the Lords truth odious, & his owne part good, perverteth this speech off myne in 3. particulars, 1. he leaveth out the good that I say, viz: that I certainly beleeve Gods people to be in the Lād, & that in likelyhood they are the Puritanes, 2. in his speach he leaveth out this word particularly knowne to mee, 3. he in one of his speeches, viz: pa. 59. transporteth the word, Certainly, to the beginning of the Sentence, as if I were cer­tainly perswaded that none of the Land feared God or had Faith: I beseech the Gentle Reader to marke his fraud & evil dealing, & so to trust him according to his desert, as also to consider what I say, & therefore to read the beginning of this Section where my words are manifest: al that I entend is this: That visibly, certainly, & particularly I cannot say any one to have Faith or feare of God in the Churches of England, which are False Churches: buc generally, certainly, & invisibly, I beleeve ther are thousands, viz: a rem­nant according to the Election of grace: See for this Rom. 11.3.4. compared with 1. King 19.10. Revel. 18.4. Mr. Bern. I will not desire the Lord to reward you according to your workes as Paul did: but I desire the Lord to give you eyes to see, & a hart to acknow­ledg this your sinne, & I desire all men to take notice of Mr. Bern. deceiptfull dealing in this one particular, and accordingly to judg of the rest, of his dea­ [...]s.

Further, pag. 152. Mr. Bern. accounteth this one of our errors, to hold that None of the Ministers of England may be heard: and pag. 155. He reckeneth this as another of our errors, to desend it to be vnlawfull to joyne in praver with any of the as­semblies.

Seing the assemblies Ecclesiastical are false Churches, and the members of the assem­blies members of false Churches, how can the members of true Churches have com­munion with them in that estate and standing. For Christ and Antichrist, the mem­bers of Christ, and the members of the strumpet cannot bee mingled together, and as it is impossible that oyle & waters should mingle, so cannot the body of Christ and An­tichrist the members of the one body and of the other be made one: Brasse, Iron, Sil­ver, Gold, cannot possibly be mingled with clay or earth: No more can the members of the true Church, and the members of the false Church: but in al the parts of Spirituall communion, as prayer, prophecy, praysing God, the Sacraments, the persons that partake in them are commingled, & make one body. 1. Cor. 5.9.11.2. Thes. 3.14. 1. Cor. 10.15.17 & 2. Cor. 6.14-18. Therfor whosoever shal mingle with false ministers or members of false Churches therin offer as shameful indignity to Christ, as it is to take the members of Christ, & make them the members of an harlot. 1. Cor. 6.15.

And heer Mr. Bern. pag. 153-156. indevoureth to prove it, 1. Lawfull to heare their Ministers, 2. to be vnlawfull to heare vs, 3. to be lawfull to pray with them that are Faithful among them: For the first you say, who ever heard, that to heare the word should be a sinne? yes: I have heard it in these places of Scripture, Deut. 13.3 Math. 7.15. 1. Timoth. 6.3-5. & 2.3.5-6. againe you say: you have converted by the word, go: you may bee heard: I deny that ever you converted men visibly to the Faith of the New Testament, I regard not what you doe invisibly, for I cannot see it nor know it: what say you to them that convert in popery, shal they be heard? or doe you think they convert none invisibly? Visibly I am assured they convert not: the like I say of you. Further you plead that the Scripture commaundeth to heare the word, pronounceth them blessed that heare it, and maketh it a marke of Gods Child so to doe: I grant it, if it be preached in the Lords true ordinance, els men are forbidden to heare it, pronounced accursed that heare it, and are marked for the Servants of An­tichrist for so doeing, Revellat. 14.9-11. Moreover you say, Christ forbiddeth not to heare the Scribes and Pharisees: true, for they were members of the true Church of the Old Testament, and their communion Typical was not polluted by Typicall vn­cleannes for ought that is mentioned to my knowledg: but you say Paull rejoyced that Christ was preached, though of contention & with a purpose to encrease his afflic­tions: Well: Paull rejoyced not that false Ministers in false Churches preached Christ, or that Christians heard them so doe: neyther doth Paull speak of visible sinnes, but of invisible affections, which he by the Spiritt discerned to bee in the Teachers, even as Peter discerned Ananias and Sapphyras dissembling: And what is this to your purpose who are both false Ministers in false Churches, & Antichristian convinced Heretiques, except you can and doe make answer, which when you have done, then, &c.

For the Second, you say wee are not to bee heard, bicause (as Brownists) wee speake our owne fantasies, & visions of our owne harts, and are obstinate [Page 110]Wel Mr. Bern. I say no more for this point, but this, that every Godly mynded man give sentence whither you or wee have the truth: the tyme wil come when secret things will come to light: & your selves doe approve al that wee professe in substance except the Se­peration: the Lord judg betwixt you & vs: you say againe, that wee convert none but are our selves converted by you: I say al that come from you to vs are▪ by vs converted to the truth from your errors & false wayes, & you doe not convert one man visibly to the faith: Besides I demaund when you Seperated from Rome, who converted you from Rome? Finally, wee condemne no man among you, only wee declare what you are visibly in the account of the Scriptures, by reason of your false Church, & standing: & they that see the truth to be the truth & yeeld not to it woe be vnto them: & take heed you be not of them who have seen it to be the truth, & have confessed it so to be, & yet write your bookes against it: if it be so, woe be vnto you from the Lord: I say from the Lord except you repent you shal grow worse and worse: as for them that sinne through ignorance, their is a Sacrifice for their sinnes: Lett willfull scorners looke to them selves.

For the third, you say, that if wee hold you the children of God wee may pray with you: For so Christ hath taught vs to say our Father: Well: I deny not but those among you that apertayne to the Lords Election have God for their Father, but I say they are in visible, vnknowne to vs certainly & particularly, therefore wee cannot have visible com­munion with them: For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne: I may have visible communi­on with one that is a reprobate in the Lords account, as Peter had with Iudas: & I may not have visible communion with one that is Elect in the Lords invisible Electiō, bicause he is not visibly faithful to me, as namely with thousands of you in the assemblies, bicause I cannot possibly know them certainly, & particularly.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the twelfth Section.

Mr. Ber. Sep. Schisme, pag. 151. Saith that this is one of our errors to hold: That our congregations as they stand, are all & every of them vncapable before God to chuse thē Ministers, though they desire the meanes of Salvation,

In the beginning of this Section, I say, that a company truly fearing God, if any open wicked joyne with them, are not capable to choose them a minister over them: & after­ward in the end of the Section I say, such a mixt company are not a true Church, & a mi­nister chosen by them is not a true minister.

Heer I desire that it may be observed that I doe not deny, but men that are mixt may apoint one to preach the word vnto them: but that which I say, is, that a mixt company of good & bad is not a true Church: & that a man chosen by them to be their Minister, is not a true minister: If men desire instruction I deny not, but they may appoint one to teach them, & that Magistrates in ther dominions may appoint men to preach the word to ther subjects for ther conversion, & that it is a lawful thing, for the people to heare such men, & for men of gifts to preach to such a people, this we see practised Act. 13.42. & 17.19-21▪ & 28.30. & otherwise how is it possible that men should be brought to the knowledg of the truth & Mr. Ber. if you think that we deny the lawfulnes of this, you doe vs open wrong: & if his Matie. should dissolve the parish Ecclesiastical assemblies & the false ministery, & should cōmaund men of knowledg & gifts to preach the word to his subjects, I doubt not, but al of vs would herein readily yeeld our selves to heare & learne the truth at any such persons, & ourselves to teach the truth to such a people: but to say that such a people are true Churches, or such preachers the true Pastors of true visible Churches that wee deny: & that you shal never be able to prove: but if af­ter such preaching by such preachers the L. work with the people, so as that they gladly receave the word, repent, & beleeve, & desire to walk in the truth, & therevppon do promise to the L. & each to other to walk in his wayes, this promise maketh them a true Church: & then if they chose among them men able to lead & seed them, & appoint such men to such office, the men so chosen & apointed are the true Pastors which the Scripture describeth: but what is all this to your assemblies & Ministers? who as yet have not cast of the yoke of Antichristian bondage, whose communion & ministery is not dis­solved, but remayneth firme, the same in nature (though much bettered in degre) with the Romane assemblies Ecclesiastical: & whereas you in this particular object to vs, that two or three of vs Seperated from you, & gathered together into the new Testament of Christ, assume powre to make Ministers, a practise (as you say) farre from plaine evidence of Scripture, or any practise of the Church these thousand yeeres: I answer it is no mater for the practise of the Church these thousand yeeres, for Gregory the great Bb. of Rome who lived a thousād yeeres since, hoysed vp Antichrist into the highest exaltation against God & his Christ in a manner: & his Successors especially Boniface & some other have maintayned & enlarged that Antichristian Kingdom even to our dayes: & yet the mistery [Page 112]of iniquity is exalted in these particulars: wherfor this allegation of yours is nothing to the purpose, if you be a sound protestant: For if prescription of a thousand yeeres bee good in any thing, why not in al things? if not in al things then in nothing. And wher­as you alledg that it is also far from plaine evidence of the Scripture, I answer the evi­dence is plaine to them that wil vnderstand: & I would know what is plaine evidence of Scripture: is not a true natural consequence plaine evidence? is not this plaine evi­dence, Math. 18.20. whersoever two or three shalbe gathered together into my name, I wilbe in the midst among them? & this, 2. Corinth. 6.17. bee yee Seperated, & I will receave you & bee your Father: & this. Gallat. 3.16. the promises are made to Abra­ham and to his seed: So then they that are of Faith are blessed with Faithful Abraham. Gallat. 3.9. If Christ wilbe present with two or three of his Disciples: If God will re­ceave them that are Seperated, & bee their God: if the promises bee given to them that beleeve as Abraham beleeved: Then Christ is their Christ, God is their Father, the pro­mises are theirs, and the ministery is theirs by plaine evidence, then they may assume the ministery & vse it as God hath appointed, But for this point read the seaventh Section, & the Paral. Censur. Observat. therto aperteyning.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, apertey­ning to the thirteenth Section.

Al this thirteenth Section hath for the subject matter of it the ordination or making of ministers, & the question of it is this, viz: whither a company of faithful people gathe­red into the name of Christ by the voluntary covenant of the new Testament, have not powre of themselves to create their owne Pastors, & Deacons: Although that which hath been spoken concerning the seaventh Section may fully & sufficiently satisfie al this doubt: yet I thought meet to add certaine argumēts of plaine evidence for the further declaration hereof that al scruples & shifts may be taken away.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, apertey­ning to the Fourteenth Section.

Against this Section of my Lettre Mr. Ber. taketh exception in two particulars, pa. 252. [Page 117]of the Sep. Schisme: accounting them both errors. 1. that baptisme is not administred in­to the Faith of Christ simply, but into the Faith of Bbs. or Church of England: (so say I,) 2. That our Faith and repentance, is a false Fayth, and a false repentance, (so say I of their visible Fayth, not speaking of things secreat:) Mr. Ainsw confutat. of Mr. Bern. pag. 159. accounteth both those imputations of Mr. Bern. vncharitable collections, and caluminations: Seing Mr. Ainsw. doth renounce them, I wil therefore vndertake the defence of them vnto whom they aperteyne and heer I wish the Reader to observe whi­ther it lay not vppon mee justly to answer Mr. Be [...]n. whose whole book in the essen­tial parts of it was directed against this lettre of myne as may evidently be perceaved as in the whole tenor of it, so especially in these two particulars against which he excepteth in this Section.

Now for the first let vs consider the intendment of the baptizer: How the Ministers of the Church of England intend their baptisme: How the law of the Land intendeth bap­tisme: how the Service-book intendeth & directeth baptisme: how the parents Suscep­tors or Suretyes do demaund baptisme & consent to baptisme administred: & vppon the conceaving of these particulars the baptisme must be censured: now if al these intend de­finitely that Faith which is by law established in the Land, & that the partie is baptized into that Faith which they intend, it wil follow necessarily that baptisme is administred not simply & indefinitely into the Faith of Christ, but particularly & definitely into that Faith which the Bbs. & the Church of England do teach & professe: For which conside­ration an argument may be framed thus.

Into that faith are the members of the Church of England baptized, which the Law establisheth: which the Prelates & Ministers teach: which the Church of England profes­seth: which the minister baptising intendeth: & wherto the parents, witnesses or Suscep­tors consent: & which the Service-book expresly mentioneth.

But the law doth not establish: the Prelates & ministers do not teach: the Church of England doth not professe: the baptizer doth not intend: the parents & Susceptors doe not consent to: & the Servicebook doth not mention the Faith of Christ simply, but the Faith of Bbs. or Church of England.

Ergo, The members of the Church of England are not baptized into the Faith of Christ simply, but into the Fayth of the Bbs. or Church of England, which is the false Fayth of the baptizer, of the Suertyes or parents, and so the Faith of the bap­tisme.

For the second point let vs consider the faith & repentance of the Church of Englād, I meane of the faith that is visibly professed & expressed in the fruites of repētance amōg them & therby we shal know the tree.

The faith of that Church is not a true faith which teach & professe a false mediator: & the repentance of that Church is not a true repentance, which practise according to that false doctryne.

But the assemblies Ecclesiastical of England with the teachers & professors of them, teach and professe a false Mediator: For they teach that Christ is a Mediator of all that false Church, Ministery, VVorship and Government, established in the Land: Sacrifi­cing and making intercession for them in the dayly practise al those abhominations: Ruling and Governing them by all the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy, and by the [Page 118]courts & canons Ecclesiastical, which are the inventions of the man of sinne: Teaching & Prophesying vnto them by those Antichristian, Prelates, Preists, & Deacons, which raigne in the Land: & so practising according to this false Faith practise a false repen­tance.

Ergo, the Faith of the Church of England, of the teachers & professors therof, & the repentance of them is not true, but false.

But it wilbe objected against both these assertions that although one thing be inten­ded in baptisme, yet the Lord may admit of & accept another & though they professe & preach falsely, yet the Lord he can & doth no doubt work mervaylously besides al that we can think or speak: Truth I yeeld it most willingly: & blessed be the Lord for his in­finite & vnspeakeable mercy therein: but we dispute not what God can do of his powre or wil, do of his mercy, things vnknowne vnto vs: but we speake of things revealed and manifested vnto vs, according whervnto we must walk & judg of matters according to that which we see: according as the word judgeth: according as the Church & members of the Church of England teach, professe, & practise visibly, which is seen & discerned of vs, we are to passe our censure: but we judg no man before the tyme: we doe not clyme vp into Gods judgment seate: our Faith is visible: our repentance is visible: our charity visible: our Spirit visible: our baptisme visible: our preaching visible: our covenant visible, our Church visible: our judgment visible: things that are revealed aperteyne to vs & our Children, that say we is false in the assemblies Ecclesiastical: Secreat things aperteyne to the Lord: these we leave to the Lord, we medle not with them: this I desire may once for al be remembred & pondered, & so I end this matter.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, apertey­ning to the fiftenth Section.

I desire heer that the reader would observe carefully: that although Mr. Bern. in his Lettre to Mr. Hel. had charged vs with this slaunderous vntruth concerning our disloyal­ty to Magistrates: yet I having written this Lettre vnto him, he in this his book sayeth not a word to this Section of my lettre: whereas if he had dealt vprightly he should have cleered vs in that particular of disloyalty, wherein he chardged vs falsely: but like a subtil adversary he thought to bring vs into disgrace & hatred by al meanes, & wherein he saw vs approvable therein he craftily forsaketh vs: & leaveth vs to the obloquy of the world, which vsually lay this false imputation of disloyalty vppon vs: wel let Mr. Bern. & al men know, especially al lawful civil Magistrates of what degree soever, that the Chur­ches of the Seperation are in their judgments as sound, & in their harts as loyal & duti­ful [Page 120]vnto Princes & civil States, as the best prelate of England, & that the more popelike they are the more trayterous they wil prove vnto the civil Magist. & that if they bee let alone, they with the Pope at the length wil take vppon them: Petrus dedit Petro, Petrus diadema Radolpho, & cause the Emperor to hold the stirrop.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, apertey­ning to the sixtenth Section.

Mr. Bern. pag. 136. of the Sep. Schisme avoucheth that to deny tithes, & a set maynte­nance to Ministers is contrary to the Lords wisdom, who vnder the law appointeth tithes a set maintenāce, & ther is nothing against it in the gospel: I answer with the Apostle, the old Testament (I doe not meane the w [...]tings of the Law, the Prophets, & the Psalmes) and the ordinances thereof are abolished: The bond woeman and her Children are cast out, Gallat. 4.30. and if ther bee a chandg of the Preisthood ther must needes bee a chandg of the law, Heb. 7.12. wherefore seing set stipends by tithes were a part of these worldly ordinances of the old Testament, of those impotent & beggerly rudiments, of that yoke of bondage whence Christ hath set vs free: It followeth that set maynte­nance by tythes is [...]bolished by Christ & as the liberty of the gospel is to be carefully preserved in other things, as in that of circumcision, of the passeover, of the preisthood, of the Sacrifices and the res [...] ▪ So must it bee ca [...]efully preserved even in this particular of se [...] maintenance by tithes, for if any Mosaicall, impotent, beggerly rudiment, [Page 121] [...]r worldly ordinance: if any part of the yoke of bondage may be joyned with Chris [...], why not all? if not all, why may any? Againe whereas you say there is nothing a­gainst set mayntenance by tithes in the New Testament, I demaund two things: 1. Vhither Christ hath not abolished the Mosaical ordinances & brought in the New Te­stament? & whither this be not contrary to set maintenance by tithes? 2. whither wee ought not to have somthing for set mayntenance by tithes in the New Testament, (if it must be retayned) that wee vppon fayth may submit vnto it? Seing that what soever is not of Fayth is sinne: So that this speach of yours, viz: ther is nothing against it in the gospel, is both false, & if it were true, yet is insufficient, seing that it is not a good plea to say ther is nothing against it, except wee can also say, that ther is somthing for it: & thus much for this point.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning to the sevententh Section.

Although Mr. Ainsw. hath sufficiently stopt your mouth Mr. Bern. in this parti­cular, yet I think it not amisse to add thus much, for further cleering of the matter: know therefore, that as Iehu turned the Temple of Baal into a jakes after he had defa­ced it, 2. King 10.27. and as Hezechiah brake in peeces the brasen Serpent, the Lords owne ordinance being abused to Idolatry, 2. King. 18, 4. So the Kings of the earth should doe wel to follow the Holy Ghosts prophecy, Revel. 17.16. even to make the whore of Babylon desolate, and naked, to eate her Flesh, and burne her with fire: and not [Page 118] [...] [Page 119] [...] [Page 120] [...] [Page 121] [...] [Page 122]to suffer her wares, that is her vessels of wood, Ivory, Brasse, Iron, marble, to be bought any more: which I am perswaded shal in due tyme be accomplished: that as the goodly buildings of the Abbayes, Monasteries, & Nunries, are already destroyed, & made barnes, stables, swineslyes, jakes, so shal it be done with al the Idol Temples when the howre of their visitation shal come: & whereas you object for the justifying of the vse of the Idol Temples, that seing Antichrist sitteth in the Church of God, that therfor when the Idol Temples were built, the Church took possession of them to keep possession for the Lord in his creatures, therby concluding a lawful vse of them now for the Church re­stored, I answer you: your ground is faulty, & therfor your building tottereth: the place of the Apostle, 2. Thes. 2.4, wher it is said that Antichrist sitteth in the Temple of God, is falsely by you conceaved & interpreted, for it doth not import that (as you would have it), Antichrists Church, & the true Church of Christ are one & the same, & that the same company of men can be, and are, both the true visible Church of Christ, & at that same tyme the Church of Antichrist: this is impossible: for the true Church is not the false Church. But this is the meaning, viz: either that Antichrist shal sitt in the consciences of men which is properly the Temple of God: Or that Antichrist shall arise vp out of that company of men which once were the Temple of God, as Rome was: or that the Church being true in the constitution, Antichrist shal foyst into it by litle and litle his false ministery, VVorship, and Government, as experience teacheth he hath done: For a true Church may have Antichristian ordinances retayned & raised vp in it: this being the true meaning of the Apostle, how can you hence conclude sound­ly that the true Church tooke possession of the Temples, which the false Church of Antichrist built? Seing the true Church is not the false Church, & seing that the temples were built in the palpable darknes of grosse popery, some of them perhaps dedicated to heathen Idols, some of them to Antichristian Idols, as ther Hee, & shee Saints; al of them to Devils. For if Ieroboams Preists were appointed for Devils, 2. Chron. 11.15. & if the Antichristian preists are the Spirit of Devils, Revel. 16.14. & the worship of Antichristi­ans the worship of Devils, Revel. 9.20. & the Antichristian Churches the habitation of Devils, Revel. 18.2. then the Temples are dedicated to Devils: not that they intended so to dedicate them. but for that they are so indeed the Lord accounting that to be done to the Devil, which is not done to him as he hath commaunded: & the Devill substituting himself in Gods place, when men go a whoring after ther owne inventions: Therefor the Apostle saith plainly that the Gentils Sacrifice to Devils, 1. Cor. 10.20. to conclude this point therfor, & so to leave you to meditate vppon these things: Seing the Gentils Sa­crifice to Devils, seing the Antichristians worship Devils, seing Ieroboams preists were appointed for Devils: & yet al these intended to worship God even the true God: then it followeth that though the Antichristians did intend to dedicate their Temples to the true God (which yet is not granted) neverthelesse they were dedicated to Devils: & therfor are to be raced downe & converted to the habitation of Iim, & Zijm, Satyres, Shrich [...]yles, & Raveas as the Prophet speaketh Esay. 34.8-15.

Paralleles, Censures, Observations, apertey­ning to the eighteenth Section.

Heer I desire the Gentle Reader not to be offended that wee endevouring to walk in the liberty of the gospel, do not tie our selves to any Church or Churches whatsoever, but only to the rules of Gods word: & therfor howsoever it may seem odious that wee Seperate from al churches, yet the causses being indifferently considered, the matter wil seme reasonable, for we Seperate from al Churches vppon several reasons, 1. From some (such as are the English Churches) we Seperate for the Falsehood of them: & that is a just cause in any indifferent mans judgment, 2. from other (such as are the Reformed Churches) wee Seperate not for that they are false, but for that being true they are corrupt: & herein our Seperation is not total but for a tyme, til we have performed our dutyes vnto them: whē we have therfor admonished them of their corruptions & they repent, then we joyne in communion with them: if they repent not wee leave them to the Lord: & we must needes keep our selves vnspotted, & take heed that we partake not with other mens sinnes,

The first Likelyhood against the Sep. is thus framed.

Novelty is not the truth: The Seperation is Novelty, go not the truth: For answer to this argument: I ask, whither Luthers & Calvins opinions were false, bicause they were new: For popery had the prescription of a thousand yeers against Calvin: but Calvin hath not had the prescription of an hundreth yeeres against the Seperation: nay I suppose not above fifty yeeres: & may not the Prelates reason against the Puritane thus: or the papists against the Protestants? wherfor although I wil not scoffe at this argument, yet I pity your simplicity in it: but I alter your argument, and frame another after this manner against you, Antiquity is the truth: The Seperation is true antiquity: go: the truth, the reason of this Argument is for that we approve the Doctryne and practise of sepe­ration from the beginning out of the writings of the Holy Apostles: and on the contrary I reason thus against your Protestancy: Novelty is not the truth: The ministery, worship, & government of the protestant churches of England are Novelty go: [Page 126]Not the truth that al these things are novelty, I prove bicause they are not of the primi­tive Apostolique institution as I have sufficiently proved in the former Treatise: Thus much for your first Likelyhood.

The second Likelyhood against the Sep. is thus framed.

They that in some things agree with auncient Heretiques & Schismatiques, are He­retiques & Schismatiques, & their opinions heresy & Schisme.

The Sep: in some things agre with auncient Heretiques & Schismatiques.

Ergo, they are Heretiq. & Schismatiq. & their opinions heresy & Schisme.

I answer by this arg I can prove you Mr. Bern. to bee an Heretique and Schismati­que, except you will renounce the Deity, and Trinity, the fall of Adam, redemption by Christ, &c. For I can prove that Heretiques, yea most vild Heretiques have held these opinions with you: if my argument be not good against you, neither is yours good against vs, besides you should, counting vs to agree with auncient Heretiques & Schis­matiques, have proved two things, 1. that they were indeed & in truth Heretiques and Schismatiques, for holding the points that wee hold, 2. you should have set downe the particulars wherin we agree with them: but you have done neither of them: & therefore fayle in your proof: and so let this Likelyhood also passe as a matter not worth ta­king vp.

The third Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus.

That is not the truth, the Teachers, & professors wherof somtyme do give straung ex­positions, & therby do wrest the Scriptures.

The Teachers & professors of the Seperation doe straungely expound & wrest the Scriptures somtyme.

Ergo, the Seperation is not the truth.

I answer: First do you expound no Scripture straungely to the Papists: do not they in­stantly defend against you al, that you shamefully wrest those two places of Scripture, Mat. 16.18. vppon this rock wil I wil build my church. 1. Cor. 11.24. this is my body: yea & a hundreth more besides? if therfor the argument be good for you against vs, it is good for the Papists against you: but the argument is naught: For may not a company of men have the truth & somtyme through ignorance misinterpret, & so pervert the Scripture? it may be so vndoubtedly, except you wil say that men professing the truth have in them (as the Pope saith he hath in Scrinio pectoris) the infa [...]ibility of expounding Scriptures, as the Apostles & Prophets had in writing Scripture: & except you wil say that men have the perfect & ful knowledg of the Scripture: but secondly what are the Scriptures wee do straungely expound & wrest: I require you Mr. Bern, before the Lord to produce the places of Scripture that I do wrest & pervert, & eyther I wil acknowledg my sinne, or els justifie them to be truly expounded: in the meane tyme the reader may se that this is but simple stuffe, & the Papists can take it vp every whit aga [...]nst you.

The 4. Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus.

They that are not approved by the Reformed Churches, have not the truth.

The Sep. is not approved by the Reformed Churches.

Ergo, The Seperation is not the truth.

I answer: That seing the Seperation have published the confession of their Faith wher in they have by name desired the approbation of the vniversities of the Reformed Chur­ches, either by writing or silence, & the said Christian vniversities have not disalowed that their confession though long since published, their silence is therfor in al equity to be accounted their consent: & Mr. Iunius his silence what is it els to be esteemed but con­sent? but suppose that al the men vppon earth should disalow the Seperation, if the Re­formed Churches of Corinth, Rome, Thessalonica, Galatia, & the scaven Churches of A­ssa, the Mother Church of Ierusalem planted by Christ, Iohn Baptist, & the Apostles, all of them being of one & the same primitive Apostolique constitutiō, if I say the Seperati­on have the allowance & approbation of these Apostolique Churches it shalbe sufficient for them: & therein they shal rest contented by my consent. In the meane season you for get that your Church is vtterly disalowed by the reformed Churches in regard of your prelacy, which is one of the cheef abhominations among you: & in many other particu­lar which I shal not need to relate: but remember for a conclusion for this point: The stone which the builders refused is become the cheef corner stone: & I appeale vnto your consciences if you do not think the Churches of the Seperation better then your owne & then tel me how you can stay in a worse knowing a better.

The 5. Likelyhood against Sep, may be framed thus.

Whatsoever Mr. Whittakers, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Bredwel. Mr. Willat, Mr. Allison, Mr. Cart­wright, Mr. Iames, Mr. Rogers, Mr. H. Smyth saith of the Seperation is true.

These forsaid learned men say the Sep. is not the truth.

Ergo, The Seperation is not the truth.

I make another argument like vnto this which shalbe your answer.

VVhatsoever, Herod, Pontius Palate, Annas, & Cayphas, the learned Scribes & Pha­risees, Tertullus the Oratour and all the Lerned men of the Church of the Iewes say is true, that is true.

These persons al of them with one consent say that Christian Religion is Heresy and schisme, as you may see in the History of the Gospel & acts.

Ergo, Christan Religion is Heresy & schisme,

If this argument be faulty then is yours faulty much more: but I wil reason thus for the Seperation & against you: whatsoever Christ the Apostles the Holy Scripture [...] the Primitive Apostolique Churches collected of the Iewes & Gentils do allow or disalow, is to be allowed or disallowed:

The seperation is allowed, & the Church, ministery, worship & Governmēt of the En­glish assemblies is disallowed by these forsaid persons.

Ergo, The sep. is to be allowed, & you are to be disalowed.

The minor of this argument is proved in this book which I present to every honest hart of the Land, to be measured by the golden reed.

But mee thinks Mr. Bern. should blush at his Logick.

The 6. Likelyhood against Seperation may be framed thus.

They have not the truth that are judged of the Lord.

The seperation is judged of the Lord.

Ergo: The Seperation hath not the truth, & againe.

They have the truth that are prospered by God in their course.

The English Protestants are prospered in their course.

Ergo, The English Protestants have the truth.

I answer: That this is false doctrine: For the wiseman saith Eccles. 9.1-3. That prospe­rity or adversity are no signes of love or hatred, & Ierem. 12.1, 2. that the wicked are in prosperity: and 1. Pet. 4.17. judgment beginneth at Gods howse: This your reason therfor is most absurd & false, & is fit to breed Atheisme, & overthrow the whole truth of the Scriptures: but let vs see what judgments are vppon the Seperation: you frame them thus.

If Mr. Bolton that Apostated did hang himself: if Mr. Harison & Mr. Browne did differ, & one fel back: if Mr. Barrow & Mr. Greenwood, for calling you serpents, generations of Wipers, were martyred by the persecuting Prelates: if Mr. Iohnson pronounced excommu­nication against his brother: & if the Church excommunicated the Father: if Mr. Burnet died of the Plague: if Mr. Smyth was delivered twise from the Pursivant, & was sick all­most to death, & doubted of the Seperation for 9. monethes space: then the Seperation is not the truth.

But al these things befel Mr. Bolton, Mr. Browne, Mr. Harison, Mr. Iohnsons, Mr. Burnet, Mr. Smyth.

Ergo: The seperation is not the truth.

I answer: The Churches of England have had thousand thousands of such accidents as these are befalling their Officers and Leaders, and yet as it were folly in vs to alledg them against you as the Papists doe: so it is no wisdom but weaknes of judgment in you to mention them in your book against vs: VVhat is it good reasoning to say?

Iudas hanged himself, Christ was Crucified for blasphemy: Demas embraced the world: Nicholas the Deacon proved an Heretique: Paull and Barnabas fel out: Paull chard­ged Peter and Barnabas with dissembling: Peter denyed Christ: All the Apostles were put to death for heresy. Ergo, the Christian Religion is [...] bee false, yours false: yet this is your goodly reason: if this bee a good argument wher is your Faith [...].

But in this Likelyhood you have a sting at me in particular Mr. Ber. charging me with divers vntruths, which I wil manifest.

1. That I doubred 9 months I acknowledg: but that ever I did acknowledg the sepe­ration for truth, & seperated from the English assemblies, & then returned againe vnto them (which you say) I do vtterly deny, & I appeale to the towne of Ganesbrugh, & those ther that knew my footesteps in this matter: & therfor herein I indite you as a publique slaunderer.

[Page 129] 2. VVhereas you say I became satisfied at Coventree after conference had with cer­tayne Ministers, and herevppon kneeled downe and praised God: I answer: I did not conferre with them about the seperation as you & they know wel inough in your consciences: but about withdrawing from true Churches, Ministers, and VVorship, corrupted: VVherein I receaved no satisfaction, but rather thought I had given instructi­on to them: and for kneeling downe to praise God I confesse I did, being requested to performe the duty at night after the conference by the Ministers: but that I praised God for resolution of my doubts, I deny to death and you therein are also a slaunderer: I praised God for the quiet & peaceable conference, & such like matters, & desired par­don of the L. for ignorances, & errors, & weaknes of judgment, & any disordered cary­age: if the ministers that heard my prayers & praises of God did misconstiue my meaning let them look vnto it.

3. VVhereas you impute an absurdity to mee as yet vnanswered, viz: that I should affirme the spit whereon the passeove was rosted was the Altar: I say: seing the passeover was a sacrifice, Marc. 14.12. & that every sacrifice hath an altar, either the spit was the al­tar, or els it had no altar: Now [...]el me which is the Likeliest of the two? & if this be a rea­sonable speech that the wooden crosse was the Altar whereon Christ was sacrified, why may not by a good reason, the spit be the altar of the passeover? the sacrifice was not slayne vppon the altar, but it was burnt vppon the altar: so that was not the altar where­vppon the passeover was killed, but wherevppon it was burnt or rosted: Mr. Bern. I doe confidently affirme against you, that the spit was as much the altar to the passeover, as the crosse was an altar to Christ: & let me heare what you in your best Logick can say against it.

The 7. Likelyhood against the Sep. is framed thus.

The truth increaseth in short space into a multitude.

The Seperation doth not increase, but is kept vnder.

Ergo, the Seperation is not the truth.

I answer you Mr. Bern. that this is but a popish argument: & Christ saith his Flock is but a litle Flock: but how very many yeeres hath the cause of the Seperation had il suc­cesse? Forsooth 20. or 30. yeeres: alas as Mr. Be. what increase hath the Prelacy gotten in the world this hundreth veeres? they say that is the truth against the Presbytery: what increase hath puritanisme gotten this 20. or 30. yeeres in England: yet they say that is the truth against the Prelacy: is not the cause of the Reformists almost dead and buryed? but know Mr. Bern. that the cause of the Seperation being the same in the mayne groundes, and essentiall parts with the Reformed Churches, it hath had infinite in­crease ever since Luthers tyme: and whereas you object heer that wee leave our coun­try without leave: I answer that you know the Law of the Land doth banish vs all: and if Abraham did lawfully passe from one country to another people, I [...]se no reason that wee may not doe so: & though Israel could not get from Egipt, nor Iudah from Babylon being deteyned by violence in captivity, yet the Lord in working ther de­liverance declareth that he will have his people depart wher they may freely pro­fesse it without let or disturbance: besides you doe pervert the Prophet Ezechiell his [Page 128] [...] [Page 129] [...] [Page 130]speeeh: Cap. 3.6. For was not Ionas sent to Nineveh: were not the Iewes caryed into cap­tivity? were not the Apostle sent to al Nations? did al the Corinths speak with straunge Tonges? is it vnlawful to send men to convert the Pagans? but the meaning of Ezechiell is that though the Iewes vnderstand his preaching yet they wil not beleeve: & the straun­gers (viz: them of Tyrus & Sidon as Christ saith) would sooner beleeve him then the Iewes, for a Prophet is not without honor save in his owne country: & so the place is misconstrued by you. Finally whereas you object that the L. leaveth a curse behind vs in the Land, I say that is an argument that it is the truth we professe, which bicause it is not intertained doth therfor prove the savour of death vnto death, and hardeneth the hart of that people where it hath been offered and is refused: & thus much breefly of your froth.

In the next place you bring vs reasons of more force then bare probabilityes, wherby you confesse that your 7. Likelyhoods are of litle force, which I desire the reader to take notice of, that the alledging of them by Mr. Ber. argueth an ill mynd seing he confesseth them to be of smal force against our cause.

The first reason against sep. may be framed thus.

That way is not the truth which teacheth to renounce the constitution, ministery, worship, & Government of the English assemblies Ecclesiasticall as false: & so in respect thereof to seperate from them & al spiritual communion with them: & to entertayne the true constitution, ministery, worship, and Government of the Apostolique institution.

The way of the seperation teacheth thus much.

Ergo, the way of the seperation is not the truth.

I answer: if the scriptures approve this which we teach of you & of our selves, then is your arg. worth nothing: now whither the seperation be the truth or not I refer me to the scriptures, wherby I desire that which I have written may be examined, & if it bee sound sound let it be intertayned, if not, follow the truth whatsoever it be: & whereas you say heer that men in seperating from you must cast of the word which begat them, I deny it, & you are a slaundeter herin: For we retaine al truth that you have, & we reject only your Antichristianisme: & for acknowledging your Faith, repentance, baptisme false I say it is necessary, but vnderstand that we speak of your things that are visible, & leave things invisible to the Lord: & for that objection you make from our owne confession that we say our Seperation is only for corruptions, I say it is truth: but yet know that your corruptions are essential: and effential corruptions corrupt the essence of things, & make them false: viz. when the matter is essentially corrupted, or the forme, &c. as a mule procreated of an horse & an asse: Now such is your Church, Ministery, worship, & Go­vernment, as is already proved sufficiently.

The 2. reason against Sep is framed thus.

That way is not the truth, which teacheth the professors thereof to entertayne and joyne with open wicked, obstinate sinnes & sinners.

The Seperation Teacheth men so to doe.

Ergo, The Seperation is not the truth.

I answer: That the truth may be the truth though men that professe it walk never so wickedly in it: neither doth it follow bicause the Churches of the Seperation walk cor­ruptly, therfor the Seperation is not the truth: you know Mr. Bern. that this is but sophi­stry, & hereby you might prove the Doctryne of Christ not to be the truth, bicause the Corinths had contentions, incest, fornication, dronkennes & heresy among them: & what say you to your selves who have as many thousand obstinate sinnes & sinners in the land as ther be men of the Seperation among vs? is your way therfor error? For the force of this argument therfor I referre mee to your owne conscience, & to every indifferent mans censure.

VVel: Let vs see what obstinate sinnes & sinners are in the Separation: the sinnes are these as you recken them vp, 1. vnthankfulnes, 2. spiritual vncharitablenes, 3. abusing the Scriptures, 4. Obstinacy in schisme, 5. Rayling & scoffing, 6. false opinions or Brownisme, & the persons persisting in these sinnes are (you say) obstinate wicked.

Let vs handle these things in order.

1. Vnthankfulnes to God that regenerated vs by the word among you, & vnto the Church of Englād our mother that bare vs, in calling her an harlot: I answer: what truth the Lord hath wrought inwardly in vs we do thankfully aknowledg: & I for my part do professe that in your assemblies I receaved the seedes of true faith invisible, which (if I had dyed not knowing the Seperation) should I doubt not through Gods mercy have been effectual to my justification & salvatiō in Christ: but this was so invisibly judging ac­cording to the inward feeling of my hart, not according to the outward censure of the word: For though I could truly judg so of my self out of myne owne feeling, yet I deny other men could so judg of me judging truly according to the Scriptures. & this I sup­pose none of the Seperation wil deny: This is the thankfulnes which we can yeeld, & do yeeld to God dayly: but for our visible conversion we learned it not from you: & therfor we deny any thākfulnes to be due vnto you for it: neither do we acknowledg the church of England our mother therin, but we say she is barrē & beareth no children vnto the L. in respect thereof.

2. Sinne you impute to vs is spiritual vncharitablenes apearing first in censuring 3. sorts of persons among you, 1. The ignorant as blinded by the God of the world, 2. judging them that know the Seperation, & do not yeeld vnto it as fearfull persons & worldlings, 3. such as tasting of it & falling back are censured as Apostates by vs: wel Mr. Bern. if the way of the Seperation be the truth (as it is proved to be) then I know not why it is vn­charitablenes thus to censure you: For it is but the censure of the holy Ghost in the scrip­tures, & in censuring of you herein wee manifest no more vncharitablenes toward you then the Scriptures teach. & take heed you do not blaspheme the scriptures censure through vs.

Secondly, our vncharitablenes appeareth (say you) in our vngodly desire to have the word vtterly extingnished among you & Egyiptian darknes to come over you rather thē it should be preached by your false ministery: I āswer you by making a demaund which is this: of two sinnes, viz: of murther or adultery which is to be chosen? I suppose you wil answer, neither of them, & that truly: so say I for this particular: if it be demaunded [Page 132]whither wee would that the word should be vtterly extingnished, or preached by your false ministery, I make answer: wee would neither of them: but wee desire both that your false ministery were dissolved, & that the word might by the Kings commaunde­ment, or allowance, or permission bee preached throughout his dominions by men fitted therto: wherefore in this point I challendg you for an vncharitable slaunderer of vs: and heer you digresse to prove that the word may bee preached without a true constitution of a Church: & that preaching is more necessary then a true constitution: I confesse it vnfeynedly & most hartily: neither came the contrary into the thoughts of the brethren of the Seperation I suppose: For certainly the true constitution must bee taught, & men must bee brought to the faith, before the Church can bee constituted: & this is it which wee must labor for, that first the word be preached by men of able gifts, & that men bee taught & converted to the Faith, & then they bee established into the new Testament of Christ but you have done & doe practise the contrary: First, you have established thē into an Antichristian communion & constitution jumbling together al the people of the Land, of what Religion or condition soever, & then you set over them a false mini­stery, & then teach them stil to hold & retayne that Antichristian constitution, ministery worship, & government, placed over them: & wholy to reject any reformation offered: & in this your disgression you [...]unne out into another calumny, viz: that some of vs are so in dislike with your Church, as that wee would rather intertayne popery, then returne to you againe: For my self I confesse my thoughts & speeches have been & are to this pur­pose, that whensoever I returne to keep communion with the English assēblies acknow­ledging them true Churches, & their Ministery true, then must I also of necessity acknowledg Rome to be a true constituted Church, & their ministery true: For your Church & ministery are of the same nature & kind, though of divers degrees of corruption, yours being much refined from infinite drosse which is stil remayning with them. Now if I should returne to succession, & so acknowledg, the East churches of the Grecians, and the VVest Churches of Rome, & her Daughters wherof England is one (for Rome is the Mother-Church.) to be true Churches, yet I would make my choise ther to joyne wher are fewest corruptions: & so rather returne to you then to Rome: & therefore herein I suppose also you are but a slaunderer, in advancing a false report, Psalm. 15.3. wherefore brefly I say, to desire your reformation, & the truth to be practised among you, is neither hatred of you (as you strongly plead) nor any vncharitable desire to have the truth extinguished, and popery intertayned, as you most vncharitably suggest vnto your Reader.

Thirdly, our vncharitablenes appeareth (you say) in this that we envy that good things prosper with you: wretched man that you are thus to slaunder & calumniate vs falsely: I professe that I wish from my Soule, that every Formalist in the Land were a Reformist, & that every Reformist were of the Seperation, & this is al the hurt that wee wish vnto you: whereas you object that the Seperation, & this is al the hurt that wee wish vnto you: whereas you object that the Seperation scoffe at your Religious exercises and your conversion: I doe detest scoffing, & if I my self have at any tyme scoffed I doe proclayme my repentance for it vnto you & the whole Land: yet know that scoffing at Baals preists was lawfull in Elias, if you cal scoffing an Eironie: neither doe we scoffe at any thing that is good, but at your irrecoverable stifnes in your corrupted courses: neither is this ei [...]onie used as a mock to disgrace you, but as a meanes to reforme you as Elias his eironie was: [Page 133]againe you say wee pray not for your Ministers, but wish discontentment, that men may thereby come to the Seperation: I answer wee pray for the Ministers and peo­ple, that they may repent and yeeld to the truth: and wee wish that men may bee dis­contented with their corrupt and evil wayes, which is the high way to repentance: but wee wish no man through discontentment of poverty, or reproach, or disgrace to fall from any truth, as it seemeth you have done from Puritanisme to the Prelates faction & conformity: Further you vrge vncharitablenes in hasty excommunications for smal matters: I answer, (not for others) but for our particular Church of the Seperation, that wee doe not vse excommunication as a matter of hatred, but of love, neyther doe wee excommunicate any man but for finne convinced, and that after once and twise admonition, and that is not hastily: and whereas you teach vs not to excommunicate for every sinne wee doe practise your advertisement: but if you wil have vs retaine in our communion any sinner willfully impenitent and peevishly obstinate sinne, wee answer, that wee abhorre your counsel, and wee think such persons fitter for your Anti­christian Synagogues, then for the true Church of Christ, which is a communion of Saints only.

Againe, you censure the Seperation of vncharitablenes for excommunicating them that heer the word of your Ministers: I deny it except they continue impenitent in that sinne: and then indeed wee doe: and the reason is, bicause wee hold according to the truth, that you are false Churches, and false Ministers, and that wee ought not to have any Spirituall communion with Idols: and doe you think that impenitency in Idola­try is not worthy excommunication? and doe you think that impenitency in Idola­try is not worthy excommunication? and for that you say it is no sinne to heare the true word of any man: I ask whither you think it lawfull to heare the Popish preists preach, & to pray with them: if it bee vnlawful then you are answered: and the Lord for­biddeth to heare false Prophets. Deut. 13.3. & the Apostle willeth to Seperate from such as teach false Doctryne, 1. Timoth. 6.3-5. to reject an Heretique after once and twise admonition: Tit. 3.10. and not to give entertayment to the false teachers. 2. Iohn. 10.

Heer I omit your gibe of the annoyning which is the Holy Ghost, that the Apostle saith the Faithful have to teach them all truth, whereby the brethren of the Seperation presume (as you say) to teach wanting gifts: & referre you to the Apostles speech. 1. Cor. 14. wher he willeth al the brethren to endevor to prophecy: & teacheth them that they may prophecy one by one: & wil you to remember that this gibe of yours falleth vppon Paul, the Holy Scriptures, the Spirit of God, & Christ Iesus the mediator or of the new Te­stament which hath established the exercise of Prophecy in the Church for all the bre­thren that have gifts: & ther is no man that doth beleeve but he can speak.

Finally, this want of love which you impute to vs, I wonder how it is bettered amōg you who persecute one another so hatefully as you do: as the Prelates & their factiō do devoure the reformists & ther faction: So as it seemeth you are blind at home, though you can see so dragon-like abroad.

3. Synne you impute to vs is misaledging, & wresting the Scriptures: instances you give none, onely you say that some have accused some of the principals of vs: but doth it follow therefore that the accusation is true? Christ was accused for blasphemy: was hee therefore a blasphemer? But if you meane that the Ministers in the con­ference [Page 134]the conference of Coventre with my self have accused mee thereof: I answer it was be­fore I knew the Seperation, as you & they can tel: & what is this to the Seperation: but for their chardging me with wresting the Scriptures I answer that wherein I have wres­ted the Scripture it is of ignorance, & I doe not presently remember the particulars: Let them bee produced to the world, I desire no savor, if it bee my sinne I will confesse it, but neither doe I know it, neither do you prove it, only you say it, & whither you must be beleeved on your bare word that are so common a slaunderer in this your book I re­ferre mee to the Censure of every man that is not partiall, and doteth not vp­pon you.

4. Synne you chardg vs with is wilful persisting in Schisme joyned with contempt & scorne of others: I answer: doe not you wilfully persist in your Schisme from Rome, con­temning & scorning of them? you will say, they are in error: & wee say you are in error, & that the difference betwixt you & vs is more, then betwixt you & them: For your constitution, ministery, & Government is one with theirs: but wee are opposite vnto you in all these. If it be no finne in you thus to deale with Rome: it is no sinne in vs thus to deale with you: but I deny vtterly that wee Schisme from you: For ther can bee no Schisme from a false Church, ministery, worship, & Government, except it be Schisme to depart out of Babylon.

Againe we do neither contemne nor scorne any man, only we single the truth, & leave their corruptions & errors, & refuse to build our Faith vppon men, or Churches, or false expositions of Scriptures: & we desire no man to come to vs further then wee have the truth, which whither we have or not, I referre it & must doe to the conscience of every one that loveth the truth, who shal live by his owne Fayth, and dye for his owne sinnes.

5. Synne you cast vppon vs is Rayling, Scoffing, and blaspheming, this you exemplify in two particulars, 1. Mr. Barrowes sharp speeches in the discovery, 2. our approbation of it in him.

I answer: First: that Mr. Barrowes Scripture phrases whatsoever I doe approve, & justify them fitly to be applyed to your false Church, Ministery, worship, & Government: & til you have forsaken al that falsehood they doe deservedly lye vppon you: Secondly, The phrases which Mr. Barrow alledgeth & borroweth els where, I dare not either alow them or reprove them, bicause I know not what particular motion of the Spirit guided him so to write: but the things signified by those phrases declaring the Idolatry of your Church, Ministery, VVorship, and Government, I approve. Thirdly, that Mr. Barrow ei­ronically vpbraydeth the preaching and VVorship of the assemblies, following therein Elias his example, I dare not censure that as an vngodly act of his though I doubt not but you doe performē these Religious exercises in the honesty of your ignorance, as I my self somtyme did. Fourthly, that he specially inveigheth against the Reformists he doth it not for that they are the worst men, but for that by their doings the Lords truth is most hindered, they being like the Pharisees aptest to deceave. Finally, I wil not vnder­take the defence of Mr. Barrowes tartnes, neither dare I absolutely condemne it, seing the Prophet Esay is as sharpe against the true Church as ever was Mr. Barrow against your false Church: & whereas you alledg my writing vppon the Lords prayer before I saw the Seperation, as a confutation or contradiction to Mr. Barrow, I say you may aswel [Page 135]alledg against St. Paul his Pharisaical practises, persecutions, & blasphemies befor he came to the truth, as evidence to confute Christian Religion which afterward he embraced.

6. Synne you lay vppon vs is our opinions the matter of our Schisme Brownisme as you call it: which I have already cleered to be the vndoubted truth of God, & wherto I require you [...] answer, or els I affirme before the Lord that you are not able: & that being convinced & your mouth stopped, either you must yeeld to the truth, or els woe be vnto you from the Lord.

And so lend my answer leaving your advertisements & counsels of peace vntoucht as matters nothing perteyning to the cause of the Seperation: they being like Apollos O­racles apt to bee expounded eyther way: or like Delphos sword fit to be vsed for any pur­pose: for they may fit, eyther Papist, Protestant, Reformist, or the Seperation.