■ 
 
 liliillilJiffillylllliiiil^ 
 
 ii'i 
 
 ■i II Ih!'!! 
 
 
 !" !i 
 
 lliiiihi if 
 
 m>'^ 
 
(^orttEll MnioEraitji ffiibtarg 
 
 3tt)aca, SJew ^atk 
 
 Hi^tte jlSlBtnrttal ffiiihrarH 
 
 THE GIFT OF PRESIDENT WHITE 
 
 MAINTAINEO BY THE UNIVERSITY IN ACCORD- 
 ANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS 
 OF THE GIFT 
 
CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924092454457 
 
THE WORKS OF 
 
 JOHN SMYTH 
 
 FELLOW OF CHRIST'S COLLEGE, 1594-8 
 
 IN TWO VOLUMES 
 VOLUME n 
 
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 C. F. CLAY, Manager 
 
 iLonSnn: FETTER LANE, E.G. 
 
 mmbmst}-. lOo PRINCES STREET 
 
 jp.tfa Sorii: G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 
 
 BomliiiiJ, Calnitta mi iMaBrae; MACMIM.AN AND Co., Ltd 
 
 Toronto: J. M. DENT AND SONS, Ltd. 
 
 BoitHij: THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA 
 
 All rights reserved 
 
M' 
 
 -^ , V / ■ J^/i T 'a *'2.'' 'Xf • .A- /A CI He 
 
 ■j^aj^ ciM^.U^'^'^ 'i^^'- ^-^' VtM^ Im'ylf Kd 
 
 
 
 (Uo-M- 
 
 
 
 
 Application to the Waterlander Church 
 Autograph of John Smyth, 1609-10 
 
THE WORKS OF 
 
 JOHN SMYTH 
 
 FELLOW OF CHRIST'S COLLEGE, 1594-8 
 
 TERCENTENARY EDITION FOR THE 
 
 BAPTIST HISTORICAL SOCIETY 
 
 WITH NOTES AND BIOGRAPHY BY 
 
 W. T. WHITLEY 
 
 M.A., LL.D., F.R.Hist.S. 
 Sometime Exhibitioner of King's College 
 
 None of the English Separatists had a finer mind 
 or a more beautiful soul. 
 
 Mandell Creighton 
 
 Cambridge : 
 
 at the University Press 
 
 1915 
 
Men whose life, learning, faith, and pure intent, 
 Would have been held in high esteem with Paul, 
 Must now be named and printed heretics. 
 
 John Milton. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 Cbbtayne dematjndbs, etc. 
 
 PaeatxiElbs, Censvrbs, Observations (1609) 
 Lettre to Mr. Ric. Bernard (1607) 
 Lettre written to Mr. A. S. (1606)? 
 Lettre written to certaine brethren in S. (16061) 
 
 The Character oe the Beast (1609) . 
 
 NoMIlirA AUTGLORUM (1610?) . 
 
 cordb crbdimtjs (1610?) 
 Defence of Ribs' Confession 
 
 ArGTHVIENTA contra BAPTISMUM INFANTUM 
 
 Propositions AND Conclitsions 
 Retractations and Confirmations 
 
 Appendix 
 
 Notes 
 
 FAOE 
 
 321 
 
 327 
 331 
 
 547 
 557 
 
 563 
 
 681 
 
 682 
 
 685 
 
 710 
 
 733 
 
 751 
 
 761 
 
 763 
 
 PLATE 
 
 Names of the EngHsh who applied in 1610 for union with the 
 Waterlander church in Amsterdam. Holograph of John 
 Smyth. Frontispiece 
 
Certayne demaundes 
 
 from the auncyent brethren 
 
 of the Seperation 
 
Certayne demaundes, wherto wee desire dire6l & sound 
 answer, with proof from the Scriptures. 
 
 1. Concerning the Kingdom & Preisthood of Christ. 
 
 Whither the Kingdom & Preisthood of the old Testa- 
 ment were not distin6t & severall, both in person, ofl&ce, 
 & actions. 
 
 Whither the Kingdom & Preisthood of the old Testa- 
 ment were not tjrpical, shadowing out the Kingdom & 
 Preisthood of Christ? 
 
 Whither the Kingdom & Preisthood of Christ are not 
 distinct, both in office & a6lion though vnited in one 
 person ? 
 
 Whither as Christ is both King & Preist, so also the 
 Saynts are not by Christ annoynted to be Kings & Preists 
 vnto God? 
 
 Whither the office & a6tions of the Sayntes in the 
 Kingdom & Preisthood, are not distin6t & several, though 
 vnited in person ? 
 
 Whither the office & a6lions of the Kingdom in the 
 Old Testament were not of opposition, difference, plea, & 
 strife? 
 
 Whither the office & a6lions of the Kingdom of the 
 Saynts in the new Testament are not of the same nature ? 
 
 Whither the office & actions of the Preisthood of the 
 Old Testament were not of vnion, concord, & agreem[en]t 
 in Sacrificing. 
 
 Whither the office & a6tions of the Preisthood of the 
 Sajmts in the new Testament be not of the same nature ? 
 Rom. 15. 6. 
 
 321 
 
322 Certayne demaundes, dsc. 
 
 2. Concerning the Spirit & Spirituall : the Lettre, 
 & Literal. 
 
 Whither in this phrase & the like (viz : The manifesta- 
 tion of the spirit) the Spirit doth not signifie principally, 
 both the Spiritual & regenerate part of the soule, & the 
 Spiritual matter in the regenerate part. 
 
 Whither the manifestation of the Spirit doth import 
 eyther the Spiritual! matter which a man bringeth out of 
 a book by reading: or the Spiritual & gracious gestures 
 & motions which a man expresseth in reading & per- 
 forming other a6tions. 
 
 Whither quenching the Spirit be not to withold & 
 restrayne the Spiritual matter which by the Spirit of 
 San6tification is stirred vp in the regenerate part of the 
 soule. 
 
 Whither reading wordes contayned in a book doth 
 manifest the Spirit ; that is, expresse the Spirituall matter 
 which is in the regenerate part of him that readeth, or 
 rather doth not cleane put it by, leave it, & diverteth to 
 an other subie6t & so quencheth it. 
 
 Whither the letter doth not properly signifie the 
 literall & ceremonial ordinances of the old Testament, 
 2. Cor. 3. 6. which began outwardly signifying & con- 
 veighing Spiritual matter into the regenerate part of the 
 soule from without? 
 
 Whither reading the wordes contayned in a booke be 
 not asmuch & as truly literal beginning outwardly & 
 conveighing matter inwardly as the sacrificing of a beast 
 in the Old Testament? 
 
 Whither sacrificing in the Old Testament may not as 
 truly be accounted the manifestation of the Spirit as 
 reading: seing sacrificing did expresse the Spiritual 
 matter Christ lesus, & was done with a grace by the 
 Preists, even as reading, doth expresse the Spiritual 
 matter of the book Christ lesus, & is performed with a 
 grace by the reader? 
 
Certayne demaundes, dhc. 323 
 
 3. Concerning, writing, & Reading. 
 
 Whither lettres or chara6ters are not invented by the 
 wiQ of man to expresse the articulate sounds of natural 
 speech: & whither the inventors of lettres are not 
 mentioned in historyes? 
 
 Whither writing be not the invention of man by the 
 same reason? 
 
 Whither reading be not the invention of man by the 
 same reason? 
 
 Whither writing & read[i]ng be not things meerly 
 artificial though speaking be natural 
 
 Whither writing & reading being meer artificial 
 devises may be properly called Spirituall worship: & 
 whither if reading be Spiritual worship, writing be not so 
 also? 
 
 Whither that bicause the manuarie trade of the 
 butcher & cook in killing rosting or boyling the Sacrifices, 
 of the ingraver in the stones of the brestplate of the 
 Apotecary in the annoynting oyle, of the Mason & 
 carpenter in the hewing of stone & wood, & so co[n]se- 
 quetly of the scribe or paynter in writing & reading, 
 were Uteral & ceremonial eyther worship or adlions in 
 the Old Testament, they may now be called Spirituall 
 worship or a6tions in the new Testament : & whither one 
 rather then another : & why ? 
 
 4. Of the Holy Scriptures & translations. 
 
 Whither the holy Scriptures viz: the originals 
 Hebrue & Greek do not conteyne in the infinite depth of 
 truth : & whither the holy Spirit did not intend by thes 
 to signifie al the truths, which al the men of the earth, 
 eyther hertofore, now, or hereafter truly colle6t from 
 thence ? 
 
 Whither the holy originals do not conteyne more 
 matter the the Prophets & Apostles that wrote them did 
 conceave ? 
 
 Whither the Hebrue & Greek tong in their idiomes, 
 words & phrases are not plentifully more comprehensive 
 
 1—2 
 
324 Certayne demaundes, due. 
 
 & significative of matter the any other language what- 
 soever ? 
 
 Whither as the original Scriptures are the jmage of 
 the mynd of God: so a translation be not the jmage of 
 the original Scriptures. 
 
 Whither the jmage can possibly expresse the thing 
 therby signified, fuUy. 
 
 Whither it be possible for any language verbatim 
 without paraphrast to expresse the Hebrue & Greek text 
 of the holy originals fully ? 
 
 Whither a translation made by the most learned & 
 holy men of the earth doth or can expresse truly & fully 
 the holy ghosts meaning in the originals ? 
 
 Whither therfor a translation made by the most 
 learned & holy men of the earth be not an Apocrypha 
 writing of an ordinary man? 
 
 Whither if any Apocrjrpha writing may be brought 
 into the worship of God to be read all may not: & 
 whither if some Apocrypha writings must be cast out of 
 the church why not all, yea the translation also? 
 
 5. Of worship, & vse of bookes in tyme of worship 
 in the new Testament. 
 
 Whither prayer, prophesying, & singing Psalmes be 
 the true & only parts of the worship of the new Testa- 
 ment? 
 
 Whether reading be eyther prayer, prophesy, or a 
 Psalme ? 
 
 Whither reading be lawfuU in tyme of prayer, pro- 
 phesy & singing Psalmes? 
 
 Whither reading doth not put matter into the hart 
 of him that readeth, & worship be not the producing of 
 matter out of the hart of him that worshippeth? 
 
 Whither the Apostles & primitive Churches did ever 
 pray, prophesy, & sing psalmes out of bookes, after the 
 day of Pentecost, Act. 2 ? 
 
 Whither they did not pray, prophesy, & sing Psalmes 
 as the holy ghost gave them vtterance? 
 
 Whither the place 1. Cor. 14. 26. doth not teach that 
 a man must have a Psalme, have do6lryne, that is in his 
 
Certayne demaundes, <&;c. 325 
 
 hart, whence he must produce it by the manifestation of 
 the Spu?it? 
 
 Whither if a book must be laid aside in prayer, it 
 must not be also in prophesy & singing Psalmes & 
 why? 
 
 Whither if a book be retayned in prophesy & a 
 psalme, it may not be so also in prayer & why? 
 
 Whither that be two kindes of prayer, prophesy, & 
 Psalmes, one with books, another without bookes: or 
 one sort of prayer without bookes: & two sorts of pro- 
 phesying & Psalmes : with & without bookes & why : & 
 whither this can be warranted by the Apostles do6tryne 
 & pra6lice? 
 
 6. Concerning a Psalme. 
 
 Whither as in prayer & prophesy one alone speaketh, 
 & the rest pray & prophesy by consent. 1. cor. 11. 4. 
 so in a Psalme one onely must speak, & the rest must 
 co[n]set. 1. cor. 14. 16. 
 
 Whither in a Psalme a man must be tyed to meter & 
 Rithme, & tune, & whither voluntary be not as necessary 
 in tune & wordes as in matter ? 
 
 Whither meter, Rithme, & tune, be not quenching the 
 Spirit? 
 
 Whither a psalme be only thanksgiving without meter, 
 Rethme or tune, yea or nay? 
 
 7. Concerning the Elders or Presbytery. 
 
 Whither al the Elders must not be able to teach, & 
 rule as the Apostle saith, didadtiooi, & proistamenoi, 
 1. Timoth. 3. 
 
 Whither dida6ticos that is apt to teach be not ex- 
 pounded by the Apostle, Tit. 1. 9. by three particulars: 
 viz: 1. to teach wholsome dodtryne: 2. to exhort: 
 3. to convince the gainsayers? 
 
 Whither Teaching & Ruling be not the two parts of 
 feeding ? 
 
 Whither feeding that is Teaching, Ruling, exhorting 
 
326 Certayne demaundes, dhc. 
 
 conforting be not the pastors office, & therfor all the 
 Elders pastors? 
 
 Whither the Eldership hath not aU their powre from 
 the Church? 
 
 Whither the Eldership hath a negative voyce in the 
 church that nothing can be concluded without them ? 
 
 Whither if most of the Church consent & the Elders 
 dissent, the matter cannot passe against the Elders 
 dissent ? 
 
 Whither seing the church may depose & excommuni- 
 cate the Eldership they may not passe other sentences 
 without or contrary to their hking? 
 
 Whither may not a man propound his mater to the 
 church without acquaynting the Elders with it in the first 
 place. 
 
 Whither in the second degree of admonition a man is 
 not bound to take an Elder for witnesse? 
 
 Whether one Elder only in a chm:ch be Gods ordinance 
 & whither if ther be chosen any Elder ther must be chosen 
 more then one? 
 
 Whither the seales of the covenant may not be 
 administred, ther being yet no Elders in office ? 
 
 8. Concerning the Treasury & contribution. 
 
 Whither the treasury be not Holy? 
 
 Whither contribution be not an a6tion of the com- 
 munion of the Saynts? 
 
 Whither as in other parts of communion so in this, 
 ther ought not to be a seperation from them that are 
 without ? 
 
 Whither the action of contribution must not be 
 Sandlified by prayer & thanksgiving ? 
 
 A Recapitulation of the Chapters to be found 
 according to their pages 
 
 [omitted here] 
 
PARALLELES, CENSVRES, OBSERVATIONS. 
 
 Aperteyning : 
 TO THREE SEVERAL WRITINGES, 
 
 1 . A Lettre written to Mr. Ric. Bernard, by lohn Smyth. 
 
 2. A Book intituled, The Seperatists Schisme pubHshed by 
 
 Mr. Bernard. 
 
 3. An Answer made to that book called the Sep. Schisme by 
 
 Mr. H. Ainsworth, 
 
 WHEREVNTO ALSO ARE ADIOYNED. 
 
 1. The said Lettre written to Mr. Ric. Bernard divided into 
 
 19. Seftions. 
 
 2. Another Lettre written to Mr. A. S. 
 
 3. A third Lettre written to certayne Brethren of the Seperation. 
 
 By lohn Smyth. 
 
 Mat. 24. 23. Then if any shaU say vnto you, Lo, heer is Christ, or there, beleeve 
 it not. 
 
 Vs. 24. For there shall arise false Christs, & false Prophets, & shall shew great 
 signes & wonders, so that if it were possible they should deceave the very eleft : 
 
 Vs. 25. Behould, I have told you before. 
 
 Mat. 7. 15. Beware of false Prophets , which come to you in Sheeps clothing 
 but inwardly are Ravening wolves. 
 
 Vs. 16. Yee shall know them by their Fruytes. 
 
 loh. lo. I. He that entreth not in by the dore into the Sheepfold but climeth 
 vp another way, he is a theef, & a robber. 
 
 Vs. 10, The theef commeth not, but for to steale, & to kil, & to destroy. 
 
 2. Cor. II. 13. For such false Apostles are deceiptful workers, & transforme 
 them selves into the Apostles of Christ, 
 Vs. 14. And no marvayle, for Sathan himself is transformed into an aungel of light. 
 
 Printed. 1609. 
 
TO EVERY ONE THAT SEEKETH AFTER 
 the truth in sincerity : Salutations. 
 
 Not every thing, Gentle Reader, which a man writeth 
 privately & sodaynly to his frend is fit to be pub- 
 lished openly to the view of the world : neyther did 
 I think that this lettre written to Mr. Bernard in private 
 vppon three dayes meditation should have been made 
 publique in print to every mans eye & censure: which 
 had I thought shoiild have come to passe, I would with 
 better advyse & leasure & so with more mature judgment 
 have conceaved & penned it. But seing it is justly 
 occasioned through Mr. Bernards importunity in his late 
 published book intituled the Seperatists Schisme, & his 
 slaunderous misoonstru6lions & misreports vp & downe 
 the country behind my back, that this lettre of myne is 
 strongly suspe6ted of error, bitternes, rashnes, vncharit- 
 ablenes, & imputations of the like nature: & by reason 
 thereof my self falleth vnder the hard & vnknowne, & 
 happily vndeserved censure of many weU affe6ted to the 
 truth: whereat I cannot but be much wounded, both in 
 myne owne soule inwardly, & in my good name out- 
 wardly, which is alwayes better & more to be esteemed 
 then a good oyntment : I thought it much more tolerable 
 to adventure my self, by exposing this vntymely byrth, 
 I meane this sodaynly conceaved & penned lettre, to the 
 variable censures of the multitude: the by burying it in 
 darknes & silence, like vnto one stil borne to superinduce 
 a strong presumption of iustly imputed blame vppon my 
 self by reason of this present lettre: Therefore I doe 
 earnestly intreat every one frend, or other, into whose 
 handes this present writing may come, to esteeme it, as 
 it is indeed, even a sodayne private lettre of one fred 
 vnto another: & not to respe6t it as it now falleth out 
 to be a publique writing proclaymed as it were vppon the 
 house top : I cannot nor may not with fidelity alter one 
 sentence or word of it, but as Mr. Bernard hath it eopyed 
 in his hands, so have I published it word for word without 
 
329 
 
 any the least chandg to my knowledg, least Mr. Bernard 
 should say it is not the lettre he had from mee & that 
 his slaunderous colle6tions & aspersions cast vppon mee 
 in respe6t of the lettre may be perceaved by them that 
 read this lettre, <fc compare it with his book, notes, & 
 speeches: And seing necessity enforceth the identity of 
 this lettre without corre6lion eyther of matter or wordes, 
 I beseech the Gentle Reader frendly & favorably to 
 construe aU things, & interpret them in the better part, 
 promising that if any e3rther error in matter: or tartnes 
 of speech be manifested vnto mee as my sinne, I shal 
 willingly confesse & repent it before the world. 
 
 And so vppon hope of a favorable construdtion I desire 
 to advertise fiu'ther that Mr. Bernard had in his hands 
 this lettre of myne six or seven monthes before he 
 pubhshed this his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme. 
 which book as may be perceaved by this letter, compared 
 therwith, is principally directed in opposition & repre- 
 hension thereof: but how litle cause Mr. Bernard had 
 so to doe, may now appeare. For he should have 
 answered before he had opposed: but that which he 
 doth oppose is indeed answered already in the lettre by 
 prevention & anticipatio that I shal not need to make 
 answere a fresh to Mr. Bernard, he being now twise 
 answered, once before his book was published, & now 
 againe since by Mr. Henry Ainsworth: Only I desire 
 the reader to be advertised that ther are some particulars 
 wherein Mr. Ainsworth hath left mee & the truth in the 
 open playne field to shift for our selves : In regard whereof, 
 as also bicause of Mr. Bernards misaledging & miscon- 
 struing divers parts of my letter written vnto him, I 
 have thought meet, not barely to publish this lettre, but 
 parallele-wise to compare Mr. Bernards book, Mr. Ains- 
 worths answer, & this my lettre together, as also to 
 annexe a few animadversios & observations aperteyning 
 therevnto, that by this meanes the agrement & difference 
 being discovered, the truth may appeare where it is. 
 
 Now although it be a greevous thing vnto me to raise 
 vp adversaries against me with out cause, especially 
 brethren of true Churches: yet seeing I am necessarely 
 interessed to defend the truth manifested in myne owne 
 
330 
 
 writings, which I cannot possibly doe but by way of 
 opposition, therfor it commetb to passe that will I, nill 
 I, I must needes answer the opponent, lest I betray the 
 truth which by due order I am particularly called & 
 singled out to defend. Wherfor for more evidence sake 
 I have caused this lettre written to Mr. Bern, to be 
 divided into 19. Se6tions, & in every Se6tion wher need 
 required, I have made parallels, animadversions, & 
 observations for severaU purposes as the reader shal 
 perceave in perusing the: Finally vppon perswasion of 
 frends & for further cleering of the truth I have annexed 
 two other lettres, the one written to Mr. A. S. a Minister 
 of the Church of England conteyning certayne principal! 
 & mayne groundes of our cause which I desire may 
 diligently be considered of every one that is willing to 
 see the truth : the other written to certayne brethren of 
 the Seperation for the confirming & estabhshing of them 
 in the truth, against the assaults of Sathan transforming 
 himself into an aungel of hght therby the better to deceave 
 the simple: & howsoever it be needlesse to publish any 
 thing further for the cleering of the truth of our cause 
 out of those mysts & foggs which subtil disputers & 
 pleaders for corruption have hke jannes & jambres those 
 Egiptian juglers cast before mens eyes, that they cannot 
 readely discerne a true serpent from a false : yet bicause 
 new adversaries arise dayly with new shifts & cavils 
 therfor it is not amisse to discover their forgeries also 
 that at the length it may evidently appeare that the 
 truth hath devoured error as Moses Serpent did the 
 Enchanters : So desiring every one that loveth the Lord 
 & the truth especially Mr. Ainsworth & Mr. Bernard to 
 judg wisely of my course, & not to take any thing in the 
 evil part which is a strong fruite of the flesh, I cease, 
 wishing the truth may be honoured though men be 
 shamed. Amen. 
 
 lOHN SMYTH. 
 
331 
 
 A LETTRE WRITTEN TO MAISTER 
 
 Ric. Bernard Minister ofi worksop, by loh. Smith Pastor 
 
 off the Church at Ganesburgh. 
 
 The First Seftion. 
 
 Aister Bernard I have sufficient reasons that 
 have moved mee to breake silence in respe6l 
 M of you, & by this Lettre to attempt a fiurther 
 tryall of your pretended Zeale for the truth & 
 faith of Christ: I have long tyme observed the 
 applanse yeelded you by the miiltitude : Likewise I have 
 taken notice of jowi forwardnes in leading to a Reforma- 
 tion by publique proclamations in Severall pulpits out of 
 that Text off Daniell. 3. 16. 17. 18. As if you had meant 
 contrary to the Kings mjnd to have caryed aU the 
 people in the country after you against the Ceremonies 
 & Subscription : afterward having lost your vicaridge of 
 worksop for refusing Subscription or conformity I have 
 observed how yow revolted back & vppon Subscription 
 made to the Prelate of york, have reentred vppon your 
 said vicaridg. Againe I have noted your vehement 
 desire to the parsonage of Sawenbie, & your extreme 
 indignation when you were defeated ojf it : Further your 
 earnest desire to have been vicar of Ganesburgh, & al 
 this after your subscription: besides I have carefully 
 weighed with my self your Readines to embrace this truth 
 wee professe. First, at Sr. W. Bowes his howse when it 
 was opposed by some adversaries, after that your acknow- 
 ledging of it before many witnesses at one tyme, & before 
 one or two witnesses at divers tjones, aledging Naamans 
 speech for your continuance in your Ministerie, 2. King. 
 5. 18. as if therby you meant to reserve libertie to sinne 
 against your conscience. And now of late I have con- 
 sidered your covenant made with one hundreth people, 
 a thing of such note & observation as that the whole 
 country ringeth of it : but alas againe you have revolted 
 from al this truth (only excepting your opposition against 
 the dumb ministers) & have not only rejected it, but set 
 your self against it, hinder divers from it, both in your 
 
332 Parallels : Censures : Observations 
 
 pulpits, & writings proclame against it as error & schisme, 
 yea & beginne to justifie all the corruptions of the 
 ministerie, worship & government of the assemblies & all 
 this with a high hand : Al these things & many more I 
 have noted in you, & all the forward professers, yea 
 & the verie ennemies also have observed the same. In 
 al which particulars two things may be mynded: your 
 inconstancy : & apostacy : (misconstre not the word) for 
 how can I judg it otherwise seing you have acknowledged 
 the truth, & now reje6t it & oppose it. your inconstancy 
 in falling of & on so often as you have done: now 
 allthough these general reasons might have moved any of 
 the Prophets & Teachers of our Chu[r]ch for the truths 
 sake, to have delt with you : & to have discovered you to 
 the simpler sort whome you seduce ; yet I have attempted 
 it vppon two private groundes wherein I am especially 
 interessed to this busines : one is certayne aspersions by 
 you personally cast vppon mee: Another is certayne 
 particular oppositions directed against some of my 
 writings: For the First, you may remember that at 
 Broxtow when you returned from Mr. Hildersham before 
 oertaine competent witnesses you vttered wordes tending 
 to this purpose : that in defence of the truth wee prof esse, 
 I chose out a fitt adversary (viz : Mr. Rich. Clifton) to 
 deale withall, a man that could not dive into the depth 
 of my arguments : & that I refused to deale with you 
 in that respe6t. This speech savoreth verie strongly of 
 pride, which vice take you heed of especialy : it conteyneth 
 also an vntruth, & manifesteth contempt against a man 
 of better hability then your self in the judgment of them 
 that know you both, besides the wrong that you doe mee, 
 as if I knowing the cause wee testife to be weake & bad 
 durst not adventure it to the trial of your sufficiency 
 & diving wit : but in good earnest Mr. Bernard tel mee : 
 is your dealing vpright in this point? Doe not you 
 remember that you have in your handes & had in your 
 handes at that instant when you vttered those wordes 
 my answer writte in one Columne, to certayne doubts 
 & obje6lions you made written in another Columne, 
 which I desired you to answer & wherto as yet I have 
 receaved no answer from you ? Surely you may pretend 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 333 
 
 holines &; zeale for the truth, but this deahng & these i 
 speeches declare no such matter: yea rather they doj 
 manifest the corruptio of your hart : This your speech 
 & deahng is one reason that moveth mee in Special to 
 deale with you that your mouth may be stopped in that 
 behalf: although it be stopped already sith you answer 
 not my writing that is in your handes : & for Mr. Richard 
 Clifton, I assure my self as you shal find shortly to your 
 litle credit, he wil approve his sufficiecy to be Superior to 
 your diving witt: A Second reason that in particular 
 leadeth me to medle with you in this matter, is yoiu: 
 oppositions against some truths which I have expressed 
 in some of my writings. 
 
 Paralleles : Censures : Observations : 
 aperteyning to the first Se6lion. 
 
 The place of Daniel mentioned in the beginning of 
 this Se6lion is: Dan. 3. 16. Nebuchadnezzar wee are 
 not careful to answere thee in this matter: 17. Behold 
 our God whome wee serve is able to deliver vs fro the 
 hote fiery f ornace, & he wiU 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. Bernard 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 vicaridg: that then he should 
 thus preach 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 com- 
 maundement of worshipping the golden jmage: Refusal 
 of Subscription, to the Refusal of worshipping the golden 
 jmage: the parts of Subscription to the golden jmage: 
 
334 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 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 lewes : I would therf or 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 feare of affli6tion & love of his Uving & 
 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 mercifuU 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 
 prof esse divers tymes, & was vppon the point of Seperation 
 with some of his people with him : yet loving the world 
 & pref ermet 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 without 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 : where- 
 vppon 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 tjmie to come: 
 & whither you be a worthy Minister of your owne Church, 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 335 
 
 lett the Reformists judg who have betrayed their cause 
 into the Prelates handes so shamefully as you have done : 
 wherefor be it knowne vnto you, first, that wee rejeft^ you, 
 Secondly, that the Reformists have just cause to rejedl 
 you. whither then wil you goe, but to your LI. the Prelates 
 to whome you have sworne your Can. obediece, & vnto 
 whome you have now at the last fuly returned as it were 
 a dog to the vomit, & a swine to waUow in the mjrre. 
 
 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 parishes 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 & therf or went to seek out an hundreth brethren 
 where your pro6tor or agent coiild find them? That al 
 your parish were not your brethre, being not of your 
 covenant though of the covenant of the Church of 
 Englad? or that you had two sorts of brethren, one of 
 a general nature, viz: aU 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 particidar 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 in the dust, men 
 of yoTir 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 aU 
 your hart: & therf or I say vnto you with the Apostle: 
 The love of the Father is not in you: I do therf or Pro- 
 clame you vnto the whole land to be one of the most 
 fearful Apostates of the whole nation that excepting, 
 Whyte, & Clapha, you have no Superior nor equal that 
 I know or remember, who have thus often confessed & 
 
336 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 witnessed much truth, & now not only have falle 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 were not known Sufficiently to 
 the world, you 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 Trends have see 
 & read & though you durst not print it your self, yet you 
 would have been content a Trend should have caused it 
 to be published vnder the vizard of an vnknowne Auther : 
 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 wotdd 
 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 ParaUele of your Famous 
 or rather infamous a6ts : compare your resolution against 
 Subscription & conformity, with your Subscription to the 
 Prelate of york : your acknowledgment of the truth with 
 Naamans presumptio 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 Chamseleon. And 
 whereas you objedl 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 judgmet & conscience, 
 I mast needes acknowledg it so to be, which was my greater 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 337 
 
 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, 
 rayhng, scoffing, inconstancy, Apostacy, conformity, sub- 
 scription, 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? 
 & amog the rest of your follyes ther is one vntruth that 
 I did kneele downe & praise God for Satisfa6lion after 
 doubting, Not so: I remayned doubting alwayes tiU 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 fel 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. 
 
 The second Sedtion, 
 
 These oppositions of yours you have written in a lettre 
 which came of late to my sight: which are thus in your 
 lettre. 
 
 f* Touching your oppinions in these things shall I never 
 be perswaded that you doe weU in : 
 
 1. In Seperating from aU the Keformed Churches. 
 
 2. In holding that one sinne of one man publiquely 
 & obstinately stood in & not reformed by a true con- 
 stituted Church doth so pollute it, that none may com- 
 m[un]icate with it in the holy things of God til the partie 
 offending be by the Church put out after lawful convi6tion. 
 
 3. In maintayning that its not lawful to heare any 
 ministers amongst vs whatsoever thy be, nor to joyne in 
 prayer with such as feare God among vs. 
 
 4. In holding that Princes have no more to doe in 
 Ecclesiastical causes, the one of you in a particular con- 
 gregation. 
 
 5. That the powre of binding & losing is given to the 
 whole multitude, & not to the principal members therof. 
 
338 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 6. that the word truly preached & Sacraments rightly 
 administred are no infallible tokens of a true Church. 
 
 7. That a minister may be made without Elders 
 ordinarily I meane for extraordinary courses are not now 
 to be vsed, for ought I see. 
 
 8. That such as are not in your way are to be 
 accounted without after the Apostles meaning, 1. Cor. 
 5. 12. 
 
 9. That those which are not of a true constituted 
 Church are no subje6ts of Christs Kingdom. 
 
 10. That an erroneous constitution of a Church is a 
 real Idol. 
 
 11. That only Saints as Mr. Smith defineth them by 
 4 properties are the matter only of a visible Church. 
 
 12. That every of our assemblies are false Churches, 
 al our ministers false ministers, our worship a false 
 worship. 
 
 13. That a company truly fearing God, if any open 
 wicked joyne with them are not capable to chose them 
 a minister over them. 
 
 14. That baptisme is not administred among vs 
 simply into the faith of Christ, but into the faith of the 
 Bbs. or Church of England. 
 
 15. That ministers ought only to live of voluntary 
 contribution & not of stipends or any set mayntenance. 
 
 16. That our Churches ought to be rased downe, & 
 not to be imployed to the worship of God. Al which 
 I do verely beleeve to be errors, & I see not which way 
 men can joyne to you to swallow vp al these as truths 
 into which you doe runne in avoyding our corruptions: 
 & that with such deep condemnation of vs, as is greatly 
 in your behalf to be lamented: but I am tedious, &c. 
 
 R. B. 
 This is your writing word for word : wherein you have 
 taxed mee by name in one particular, & indeed in most 
 of them: it shalbe my part therfor to cleer these matters 
 for your information, that if it be the wil of God, you 
 may see the truth & walk in it, which I vnfeynedly desire 
 of the Lord : or els that you may no longer seduce others 
 from the truth, your corrupt walking being once dis- 
 covered vnto the simple : my intent therfor is not to take 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 339 
 
 these points in that order which you have placed them 
 in, but to assume the in the natural order wherin things 
 vsually among Schollers are discoiu-sed. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the Second Se6tion. 
 
 I desire heer to advertise the reader, that these 16. 
 points which Mr. Bern, accounteth error are againe in 
 his book intituled the Seperatists Schisme rehearsed, 
 refined, augmeted 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 subje6ts of 
 Ch. Kingdom, pag. 80. 81. 
 
 4. That all not in their way are without, & do apply 
 agaist vs, 1. Cor. 5. 12. Eph. 2. 12. pag. 82. 
 
 6. That only Saynts, (that is) a people forsaking al 
 knowne sinne of which they may be convinced, doing al 
 the knowne wil of God : increasing & 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 Sacramets & 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 
 
 2—2 
 
340 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 stood in being not reformed, nor the offender cast out, 
 doth so pollute the whole congregation, that none may 
 comunicate 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 assembHes 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 owe congregations as they stand are all & 
 every of them vncapable before God to chose them 
 Ministers, though they desire the means of salv[a]tion. 
 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 fayth of Bishops or Church of 
 England, pag. 152. 
 
 4. That our faith & 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 Chiirch standeth in an adulterous estate, 
 pag. 162. 
 
 7. That they cannot say certaynly by any warrat off 
 Gods worde that any of vs hath eyther fayth, or feare 
 god, pag. 152. 
 
 8. That none off our Ministers may be heard, pag. 152. 
 
 9. That it is not lawful to jojoie 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 con- 
 tribution, & not ejrfcher off set 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. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 341 
 
 And thus much off this & al other their Brownistical 
 opinions, pag, 157. 
 
 This is the Recapitulation of our Brownisticall opinios, 
 as Mr. Bern, of his blasphemous vncharitablenes giveth 
 them their denomination: Remember herein that every 
 copany 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, Zwing- 
 lians, &c. As in the adi : Christias are caled the Se6t of 
 the Nazarits. whece I for my part should rather gather 
 encouragement in the truth we hold then any discourage- 
 met, seing no other thing befaUeth vs herein then befeU 
 al the witnesses of the L. truth in al ages: but let Mr. 
 Bern. & his consorts vnderstand that we chardg them with 
 Antichristianisme, which they can not deny, but which 
 the best & most sincere professors of the land acknowledg, 
 but the truths which he caUeth Brownistical, we justifie 
 fro the holy Scriptures, wherein let Mr. Bern, consider 
 whither he doe not wound the Holy Scriptures, the Holy 
 Apostles, Christ lesus himself, & the Holy Spirit, the 
 author off the Holy Scriptures, & that through our fides. 
 For if these opinions 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 con- 
 fessed them for truths can now without 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, herin chardgeth vs with nothing truly 
 which is not already answered in this lettre, & therfor he 
 needed not againe to have obje6ted these things pubUquely 
 except he had first pubhshed the lettre & answered the 
 particulars therof, but herin it seemeth he thought to 
 bleare the eyes of the world, & to beare me in hand that 
 he had somthing to say which was vnanswerable, which 
 notwithstanding was already answered as may be per- 
 ceaved. Secondly, that this book of Mr. Ber. is most 
 properly and diretftly aymed at my lettre, wherin I am 
 
342 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 most especialy interessed to yeeld answer, & although it 
 be once answered by another: & happily may receave 
 a third answer, yet I cannot overpasse it least seme to 
 betray the truth who am by name singled out to the 
 cobat? finaly seing Mr. Bern, hath published against vs 
 without answer to this lettre, let vs also herin cosider 
 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 : For aU these evil courses I wil discover evidently 
 to the reader, that Mr, Bern, in the particular Sedlions of 
 this lettre hath vsed with mee: & so let these be added 
 to his former sinnes mentioned in the First Se6tion, & it 
 wil appeare that he is now manifested by the L. to be 
 one that hath fulfilled the measure of his iniquity. 
 
 The third Seaion. 
 
 The first point therfor that I wil speak to is your 
 tenth, viz: 
 
 10. That an erroneous constitution of a Church is 
 a real Idol. 
 
 Heer I would fayne knowe whence you had this 
 position, I conf esse I have written some such thing : but 
 neither have I written neyther doe I hold it as you pro- 
 pound: I say that a Religious society framed after the 
 invention of a ma without the warrant of the word is 
 a real Idol: but I do not say that some errors in the 
 costitution of a Church maketh that Church a reall Idol : 
 For as in generation every fault in the seed which is the 
 matter, as for example a seed inclined to the gout, or 
 consumption, or stone doth not make a false man, but 
 the partie begotten may be a true man not withstanding 
 the infirmity of the seed: So in the constitution of a 
 Church not every error, (as if the members wherof the 
 Church is framed have ignorances errors or infirmities in 
 them,) maketh the Church a real idol : For so ther should 
 never possibly be a true Church in the world, seing it is 
 impossible to find men free from error. Therfor this is 
 the ground that I hold, that if either the matter of the 
 
Paralleles: Censxires: Observations, 343 
 
 Cliurcii be not such as the word teacbetli, but a devised 
 matter: or if the forme be not that which the word 
 teacheth, but a devised forme: or if the Church have 
 not the properties which Gods word teacheth, which doe 
 necessaryly proceed fro the forme induced vppon the 
 matter : then such a Church I avouch to be a real idol : 
 take a similitude to illustrate it: The seed of an asse 
 & a horse mingled together in generation doe not produce 
 eyther a true horse, or a true asse, but a third thing 
 formally differing from both viz : a mule : even so wicked 
 men joyned with Godly men in a Church, doe not produce 
 a true Church, but a false Church, viz: a reaU Idol the 
 church of Antichrist. For this point consider what the 
 holy Ghost writeth : Apoc 18. 2. That Antichrists Chiu-ch 
 is ther Prophesyed to be a cage of every vncleane & hateful 
 byrd, which might not be eaten or offered in Sacrifice by 
 the Holy people, Deut. 14. 3. 11. againe, 2. Cor. 6. 14. 
 The Apostle willeth the Corinths not to yoke with 
 vnbeleevers bicause as in the old Testament the Holy 
 people were forbidden to yoke an oxe which was a cleane 
 creature, & an asse which was vncleane to draw the 
 plough together, Deut 22. 10. Even so the faithful may 
 not now yoke themselves to draw the L. plough with 
 vnbelevers, bicause they may have no communion, con- 
 cord, agreement, f eUowiship, or part the one with the other, 
 but the faithful who are righteousnes, light of the body 
 of Christ the Temple of God, the Children of God, must 
 come out from the vnbeleevers, who are vnrighteousnes, 
 darknes, of Behal, the habitation of Devils, Apoc, 18. 2, 
 yea & must be seperated from them : & must touch none 
 of there vncleannes. For if they stil stand in confusion 
 with the vnbeleevers, consenting to al ther sines, they in 
 that constitution are not a true Church, but the prayers 
 they offer vp with the prayers of the wicked, comming 
 from that false constitution are taynted with the idolatry 
 of that constitution: but perhaps you wil say that 
 although a false constitution be a sinne. yet it is not 
 Idolatry: you must manifest it to me to be a sin of 
 another commaundemet if you plead that: otherwise 
 I stil hold it to be a sinne of the Second commaundement 
 viz: to worship God in a constitution of an humane 
 
344 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 invention, even as it was in the Church of leroboams in- 
 vention : & as it is in a popish parish assembly, & as it 
 is in the EngUsh assemblies : now further to prove vnto 
 you that a false constitution of a Church is an Idol: I 
 use these places. 
 
 2. Cor. 6. 16. What agreement hath the Temple of 
 God with Idols? 
 
 The faithful who have made a covenant with God are 
 heer called the temple of God: & thervnto are Idols 
 opposed: signifying that an assembly of men who are 
 vnfaithfull, (though some faithful me be among them who 
 are commaunded to come out & to be Seperated) endevor- 
 ing to worship God after ther fashion are an Idol : therf or 
 if the temple of lerusalem now stood, & the lewes 
 assembled to worship God ther after the fashio of the 
 Old Testament, that assemblie was an Idol: So are the 
 assembUes of Turkes Idols: So are the assemblies of 
 Papists Idols: as Abbayes, Monasteries, &c. Such are 
 al churches framed of a false matter, or having a false 
 covenant. 
 
 1. loh. 5. 21. Babes keep your selves from jmages. 
 Zach. 11. 17. 
 
 The Apostle who wrote the Revelation f orseing through 
 the Spirit of prophecy the abhominable Idolatryes of 
 Antichrist, which wotdd grow vp in the Church giveth 
 the Churches a caution especially to take heed of those 
 Antichristian Idolatryes : now the Idolatryes of Antichrist 
 are not heathenish & paganish, but of another nature, 
 viz: not false Gods, but meanes invented by men to 
 worship the true God in or by: Hence I gather thus: 
 
 Whatsoever meanes is devised out of a mans brayne 
 & vsed as a meanes to honour God in or by, is an idol: 
 
 A devised constitution of a Church is of that nature. 
 
 Ergo an idol. 
 
 For further ampUfication whereof consider that as a 
 false minister (wherof afterward) is an Idol minister: 
 Zach. 11. 17. So a Church of a false constitution is a 
 false Church that is an Idol Chu[r]ch : & as it was vnlawf ul 
 yea flat Idolatry for a Priest of leroboams devising to 
 offer Sacrifice to the L, So is it also Idolatry to offer vp 
 service to God in a Church of a false constitution. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 345 
 
 Col. 2. 23. Mat. 15. 9. wil-worship & vayne-worship is 
 forbidden in these two places: namely, such worship as 
 is offered to God after the wil & precept of man, whose 
 wisdome is enmity to God: 
 
 But a false constitution of a Chvirch is after the will 
 & precept of man even invented & devised: so it is for- 
 bidden : but wil worship & vayne worship is a transgres- 
 sion of the second commaundement, so: it is idolatry, 
 & so that false Church wherin or wherby it is offered vp 
 to God an Idol. 
 
 These things are manifest to him that wil not blindfold 
 himself, I pray you consider of the particTilars by mee 
 alledged : & if you find a truth in them embrace the truth 
 & lead on your people with you to the truth : if not, let 
 vs heer from you an answer, that we may see our errors, 
 & wee wU & can ref orme : so cannot you so long as you 
 stand as you doe: ther is no way to ref orme but to 
 Seperate, as we have done already. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the third Sedlion. 
 
 I pubhshed 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 Se6lion 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. saith. 
 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 
 
346 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 & being it is an Idol : Mr. Ainsw. calleth a falsely con- 
 stituted 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 apointed by God in matter 
 of Religion : So the Apostle willeth the brethren to keep 
 themselves from j mages or Idols, 1. loh. 5. 21. & the 
 Lord himself in the Second Commaundement forbiddeth, 
 vnder the phrases of making & worshipping j mages, 
 al inventions of men in matter of Rehgion, Exod. 20. 4. 5, 
 Now matter of rehgion especially subsisteth, in Religious 
 worship, or rehgious 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 con- 
 sciences 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. 16. 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, instrumet, 
 a6lion, & if ther 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 leroboam 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. day of that moneth an Idol 
 day. So in the old Testament the place where God was 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 347 
 
 to be worshipped was the Tabernacle or Temple. Deut. 
 12. 5-8. & ther for the high places in ludah also Da & 
 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 be rased downe. Deu, 12, 2. 3, so likewise a shepheard 
 or minister framed according to the devise of man is 
 called a fooHsh or Idol Shepheard: Zach. 11. 17: Such 
 were leroboams Preists 1. King. 12. 31. & the false 
 Apostles, 2. Cor: 11. 13-15. who are therefor called the 
 ministers of Sathan : In Hke maner Gideons Ephod : 
 judg. 8. 27. Michaes Ephod, Teraphim & molten jmage, 
 ludg. 17. 4. 5. The brasen Serpent 2. King. 18. 4. being 
 instruments of idolatry might justly have been called 
 Idol instruments: & so forth for adtions. 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, sayth 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 worship- 
 peth is a false Christ, who is neither a King to him, seing 
 he submitteth 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, Preist- 
 hood & Prophecy erefted & established according the 
 doctryne & commaundements of men: as shalbe sufii- 
 ciently cleered heare after & hath been oft 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 
 
348 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 as Esay said in his tyme of ludah, 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. 
 What is Real : I opposed Real to mentall as may be seen 
 Princip. Inferenc. pag. 9. & 10. Mental or intelli6tual is 
 that which hath his being in the mynd or vnderstanding : 
 as the frame of the EngHsh 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. Wherefore as 
 the true Church is the Holy Cittie the new lerusalem 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 Se6tion 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. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 349 
 
 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 f oUoweth that seing the Apostle opposeth 
 an Idol to the temple of God as he opposeth light to 
 darknes, Christ to Behal : & seing the Temple of God is 
 the true Chiu-ch, 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 particiilar. 
 
 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 con- 
 trary thus: 
 
 A true Church is true Christ as may be colle6led 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 dodtrjmes of the Lord lesus 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 dodtryne 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 rehgious a6tion. what the Lord accepteth in 
 
350 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 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 Chtirch of Israel 
 constituted by leroboam 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 faith, 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, 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 communio of the Saynts 
 there, the true Church, the true spouse of Christ, the 
 Spiritual Temple where God hath provised his presence? 
 So then it foUoweth invincibly that a true constitution 
 of a chtu'ch, that is a true communion of Saynts, is that 
 only lawful rehgious, 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 
 assembhes & the a6tions therein performed vnlawful, & 
 so abhominable in the sight of God, the summe of all is 
 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 
 Ecclesiasticall a6lions only acceptable : But a true visible 
 church, that is a communion of Saynts, joyned together 
 in the true covenant, is that only communion of me 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 351 
 
 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 a6tions ecclesiastical, as preaching & 
 prayers, &c. are only accepted. & by consequent on the 
 contrary I inferre 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 a6tions 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 com- 
 munion 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 Chiirch which is the Lords Holy 
 ordinace is that which San6tifieth al ecclesiastical adlions : 
 & that a false idolatrous, Antichristian constitution of a 
 church, corrupteth, poUuteth, stayneth al the ecclesiastical 
 a6tions 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: loh. 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 
 
352 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 being an Idol dotb conveigh her idolatrous & false con- 
 stitutio as a poison through all her EcclesiasticaU a6tions 
 or workes off communion: Breefly therefore to compare 
 True & False : Idols & Ordinances together : Bonum quo 
 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 Ministery, 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 a6tions of the 
 Church with her owne falsehood & idolatry: Therfor 
 I am bould to pronounce your false & idolatrous Church 
 constitutio to be worse then your false Ministerie, worse 
 then your false worship, worse then your false govern- 
 ment, &c. & on the contrary, our true constitution to be 
 the most honorable & beautiful ornament of our Church : 
 more glorious then our true Ministerie, worship, & govern- 
 ment, sith these latter issue & do flow from the former 
 as from the spring or 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, 
 eve as the jmage is of wood: So a false Church can 
 have nothing true in it, but al is false, idolatrous, vsiu-ped, 
 for what agreement hath Christ with Belial ? These things 
 are playne enough to them that wiU vnderstand. 
 
 The fourth Se6tion. 
 
 Your ninth position f oUoweth, viz : 
 
 9. That those which are not of a true constituted 
 Church, are no subje6ts of Christs Kingdome: This you 
 hold error, & I hold it truth which I wil manifest vnto 
 you most evidently, 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 353 
 
 The true Church in the Scripture is called the house 
 of God, Heb. 3. 6. 
 
 The Temple of God which the L. inhabiteth, & wherin 
 he walketh. 2. Cor. 6. 16. 
 
 The household of fayth, Gal. 6. 10. the body of Christ, 
 Eph. 4. 15. 16. 
 
 The Kingdome of heaven of Christ & of God, Eph. 5. 5. 
 Mat. 3. 2. Luk. 19. 11. 12. Aft. 1. 3. Further this true 
 Church is but of one shape, forme, fashion, or constitution : 
 Eph. 4. 4 The body that is the Church is one, that is 
 of one shape: For one in that place signifieth vnum 
 specie, not vnum numero, for ther are many Churches in 
 nomber, but one true Church in the frame or. constitution : 
 Let this therfor be set downe for an invincible truth that 
 the true visible Church is the Kingdome of Christ, wher 
 Christ the King only rvileth & raigneth in his owne lawes 
 & officers & over his owne subjects: & al those that wil 
 not be subie6ls to this King in this his Kingdome he 
 accounteth his enemies & wil have them slayne before his 
 face Luk. 19. 27. Hence then it foUoweth that those 
 that are not members of a true constituted Church, are 
 not subje6t8 of Christs Kingdome: which you say is 
 error, wherin you see you give the Holy Ghost the lie, 
 imputing error vnto the word of truth : But you wil say 
 if men be not subje6ts of Christs Kingdome, ther is no 
 salvation for them: I deny that: wil you condemne al 
 the lewes, Turkes, Papists in the world? yet I say they 
 are no subje6ls of Christs Kingdome which is the true 
 visible Church: I pray you therfor be as good to vs, as 
 you are to your selfe in that censure: wherfor we must 
 remember to distingmsh betwixt the visible Church which 
 is Christs Kingdome, & the Catholique Church which is 
 invisible. The visible Church hath in it a visible com- 
 munion, visible & sensible ordinances for men to walk in 
 a visible fayth expressed in the outward declarations 
 thereof in confession, & profession of the truth, this 
 visible Church must we joyne to & live in, this is the 
 sheepfold wherin Christ foldeth his sheep, into this 
 sheepfold both sheep & shepheard must enter by the 
 dore, & not clyme vp another way as theeves, & robbers 
 doe : Of al those that live & continue in this true visible 
 
354 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 Church we are bound to beleeve holines, fayth & ele6tion 
 in particular. Eph 1. 1. 4. Now the Catholique Church 
 which is invisible is the comprehension of al the el[e]6t in 
 al ages & places: whose persons are vnknowne to vs, & 
 such secreat things the L. hath reserved to himself, & 
 concealed from our knowledg, & therfor we are not to 
 search after them, but must walk in that way which he 
 hath taught in his word wher so much of his wil as is 
 fit for vs to know is revealed: now I would have you 
 manifest to me two things concerning this point: one is 
 that the Catholique Church is Christs Kingdome, another 
 is that al that are out of the visible Church are condemned : 
 I for my part hold the contrary, viz : First that the 
 visible Church truly constituted is the only Kingdome 
 of Christ, which he at the day of judgment shal give 
 vp into the handes of his Father, 1. Cor. 15. 24. & that 
 therfor they who are not members of Christs true visible 
 Church are no subje6ts of Christs Kingdome : & Secondly, 
 notwithstanding that ther are many who are no members 
 of the visible Church, & therfor no subje6ts of Christs 
 Kingdome, who notwithstanding aperteyne to the L: 
 Ele6lion, & are within the compasse of the Catholique 
 Church, out of which ther is no salvation, Now Mr. Bern, 
 if you have any thing to obje6l against this truth, let 
 vs have it I pray you that we may receave instru6tion 
 & reformation from you: you assume great dexteritie in 
 diving into mens arguments, I pray you dive into the 
 bottome of this point & discover the error therof if you 
 be able : iff not, lay your hand vppon your mouth, & give 
 glorie to God, & confesse your ignorance & errors. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the Fourth Sedtion. 
 
 In this Se6tion Mr, Bern, saith that it is error to hold : 
 that those that are not of a true constituted Church are 
 no subje6ts 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 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 355 
 
 (to wit, such a one as theirs is) are no subje6ts 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. 
 Ainsw. forsaketh the defence therof, yet I stU 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 
 
 i& captiously conceaveth, that whosoever is not adtually 
 
 a joyned member of a true visible Church not living in 
 
 communion with that church, is no subje6t' of Christs 
 
 Kingdome, but I say thus: they that are not of a true 
 
 constituted Church are no subje6ts of Christs Kingdom: 
 
 now it is one thing to be in a true church as a member 
 
 therof a6tual[ly] walking in presence & comunio therewith, 
 
 another thing to be of a true church which one may be 
 
 eyther as yet a6tually vnjoyned or being a joyned member 
 
 adtually & yet absent in regard of bodily presence. That 
 
 one vnioyned adtually may yet be of a true visible church, 
 
 I declare by divers particulars: as first, one that by 
 
 violence is detej'^ned from a true constituted church yet 
 
 may be of it in desire, wil, aflEedtion & purpose though 
 
 adtually vnioyned, the Lord accepting the wil for the 
 
 deed when it cannot be performed. Againe when as yet 
 
 ther is no true visible church estabhshed adtually ? a man 
 
 may be of it, in that he would be joyned vnto it, if it 
 
 had any real existence, so the Martjnrs in Q. Maryes dayes 
 
 maj'' be said to be of a true visible church, both for that 
 
 they would have adtualy joyned to the true costituted 
 
 church if it had bee 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 faith 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 
 
 3—2 
 
356 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 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. liastly, if some brethren though but two 
 or three walk to gether 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 contra6led together, though 
 weakely & corruptly yet truly. So that these particulars 
 being wel weighed may sufficiently 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 par- 
 ticular constituted Church, as ther is betwixt a man, 
 & this man or that man: the one is species: the other 
 individuum: & it is evident that a man may be of a 
 true constituted Church, & yet not of a particular con- 
 stituted 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 vp[b]rayding & 
 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 nomber. 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 Chxirch, such as should be saved : 
 A6t. 2. 47. that they that gladly receaved the word were 
 baptized & added to the Church, & continued therin: 
 A61. 2. 41. 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, whithout 
 this true Lord & King lesus Christ? & so are none of 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 357 
 
 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 demonstrative proper adjun6ts 
 of Gods visible people ? & how can you with any face of 
 truth or a good consciece of your judgment & knowledg 
 say, that to be of a true visible church, is no note of 
 Gods visible people ? but you say further that he synneth 
 which doth not hve in a true costituted Church ordinarily, 
 when he can & hath meanes offered : nay we say further 
 then so: that he synneth that doth not seek meanes to 
 hve in a true constituted Church, & not only he that 
 vseth not meanes oflfered so to doe : wherf or we say that 
 which you say & more also : but I pray you, what meaneth 
 your ordinarily Hving in a true constituted church: doe 
 you hold that ther are two sorts of mebers & conversers 
 in the true church some ordinary & some occasional or ex- 
 traordinary ? & do you think that to be of a true chu[r]ch, 
 & 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 & adtualy, as 
 I have already declared in the 4. former particulars. But 
 al this is nothing to that which I aflfirme, for I say thus : 
 that he which is not of a true visible Church, is no subje6l 
 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 
 ele6tion & grace invisiblie, & yet not in the true visible 
 church which is Ch. 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 subie6ts of the King of 
 England our Soveraigne Lord on earth, though we are 
 not adlualy 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 subje6t of Chr. visible politic & Kingdom, which is his 
 
358 Paralleles: Censiires: Observations, 
 
 church, eyther aiftually or potentially, although by banish- 
 ment that is by vndeserved communication, by imprisson- 
 met, by other occasions he be a6tualy absented & seperated 
 from the presence therof. wherfor Mr. Bern. I doe in this 
 se6tion indite you before the L & the world, as one that 
 of purpose & so maliciously perverteth my meaning & 
 slaundereth this excellent truth of God: doth not your 
 consciece tel you may you not read it in the copy of my 
 lettre that I distinguish betwixt Gods people, which are 
 of two sortes, visible subje6ls of Ch. visible church which 
 is his Eangd. & invisible ones known only to the L. 
 certaynly & particularly? further this dodtryn 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 faith are the children of Abraha. vs. 7. 
 & they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham : 
 which scripture proveth my do6tryne 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 lames saith, lam. 3. 21.-24. Speaking of the same 
 matter, viz : of Abrahams faith that it was made perf e6t 
 by works : for if Abrahams faith had not been manifested 
 by his workes, it had been invisible, & it would not have 
 been discerned by me : & therfor in the same place vs. 14. 
 the Ap. speaketh dire6tly of a visible faith : this place of 
 the Ap. therfor confirmeth my assertio plainly that they 
 that are not of a true constituted Church, are "no subje6ts 
 of Chr. Kingd. bicause they do not by their workes shew 
 their faith : 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. loh. 3. 14 where the Apostle 
 speaketh thus: Wee know we are traslated from death 
 to life, bicause we love the brethren? Who 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 subjedts 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 an invisible faith, of an invisible 
 Kingdome, of an invisible brotherhood or consanguinity : 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 359 
 
 whereas Christ saith dire6lely, 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 subje6ls 
 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 duty & of love: Christ saith 
 loh. 14. 15. if ye love me keep my commaundements : 
 obedience is the true touchstone of the love of God, 
 & 1. loh. 3. 17. whosoever hath this worlds good, & seeth 
 his brother need, & shutteth 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, edifica- 
 tion, vs. 11. among the 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 hve out of a true constituted Church wholy omit the 
 visible dutyes of love to the brethren, seing they neyther 
 know, nor have brethre vppo 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 conje6ture except 
 they be these : viz. in the second verse : with al those that 
 cal vpon the name of the L. lesus Christ in every place: 
 whence it may seem he would gather that ther were some 
 subje6ls of Christs Kingdome, & not of a constituted 
 Church. I do verely think that seing these persons that 
 were absent fro the Church of Corinthus, did call lesus 
 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 
 
360 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 villages about Corinth : & that this is so the place af ordeth 
 evidently: For he wrote both to the Church that was in 
 Corinth, & to the brethre that were in other places which 
 were no doubt of the church of Corinth, Els, 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 mebers of the Church of 
 Corinth : or els if they were no members off that church, 
 the Apostle in vayne doth diredt his Epistle to them taxing 
 them off the corruptions off that Church : Except it be 
 said that the Apostle doth hereby interest other churches 
 to deale with the Church of Corinth, for their corruptios, 
 & 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 nothi[n]g 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 reckon 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 excomunicate is in a midle condition neyther an enemy 
 nor a brother, but one that is vnder the censiire of the 
 church, as a meanes ordejmed 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 excommunicats are members of Christs 
 invisible Kingdome, how can you prove that this or that 
 excommunicate is so? do you know the Lords Ele6t 
 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 subje6ts of 
 Christs Kingdome : viz. Of the Kingdome which he shal 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 361 
 
 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, Melanchtho, the Martyrs, 
 Gods people in England, of Lot, lob, the people in cap- 
 tivity in Mordecay his tyme : wherto I answer as I have 
 already done: That lob was a member of a true con- 
 stituted church, & so a subje6l of Christs Kingdome, So 
 was Lot, so were the people of the lewes 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 & 
 foUy be gaine: to that of the Mart3rrs, Hus, Luther, 
 & Gods people in England, I say two things : ejrfcher that 
 in affedtion & 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? loh. 18. 33. 
 & 10. 16. 
 
 The two places of Scripture quoted by you do not 
 prove that Christ hath an invisible Kingdome, & so 
 invisible subje6ts knowne to vs. For loh. 18. Christ saith 
 my Kingdom is not of this world, that is to say: it is 
 not begunne, continued, & perfe6ted by worldly meanes : 
 So Christ expoundeth himself, afterward sa3dng my 
 Kingdom is not from hece: my subjedts would fight for 
 mee vs. 36. meaning that his Kingdom is neyther ere6ted 
 nor supported by worldly meanes as by sword, speare or 
 shield : in respedt 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 weapons of our warfare are not 
 carnal The second place is loh. 10. Wher Christ saith 
 not as you dreame very ignorantly & childishly, that he 
 hath an invisible Kingdome, but that he 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 fold: of the lewes and 
 
362 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 Gentils : both which sorts of people shal in Christ lesus, 
 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: nejrther 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 therf or saith both that 
 ther is one body & one Spirit : Eph. 4. & that al that are 
 baptized are baptized into one body, & al that communi- 
 cate 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 Spirit: 1. Cor. 6. 17. we grant you 
 therf or 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 lames saith: What avayleth it him? o thou vaine 
 man : shal thy fayth save the ? thy fayth 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, 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 363 
 
 for they are Gods : 1. Cor. 6. 20. he that is only an invisible 
 member of Christs kingdome, is but half a subje6t 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 subje6t 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, & therf or to conclude this ParaUele : 
 I say he that pleadeth himself to be a true subje6t 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 meber of a true Church though I must 
 needes say vnto him thou art holy, faithful, & Ele6l, yet 
 the Lord wil cal him an Hypocrite, & a worker of iniquity 
 in the day when he will bring vnto Ught 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 subjedt of Christs Kingdome. 
 
 The fifth Seftion. 
 
 In the next place followeth your eighth position which 
 you account error, viz. 
 
 That such as are not in your way are to be accounted 
 whithout after the Apostles meaning, 1. Cor. 5. 12. 
 
 I take it to be most evidently true vppon the former 
 groundes, that seing the true visible Church is Christs 
 sheepfold, his Kingdome, his howse, his household or 
 family, his Temple or Tabernacle, his body : That therfor 
 al those that are not within this sheepfold this kingdome, 
 howse, family, Temple, body, are without: For they are 
 either within or without, but they are not within: so: 
 they are without : Now for the Apostles meaning in that 
 place of the 1. Cor. 5. 12. I do also take it to be manifest 
 that he ajmieth not only at the grosse Idolaters in pagan- 
 isme, but at al manner of vnbeleevers, that is both lewes 
 & Gentils that did not embrace the faith: now these 
 persons were of 4. sorts, 1. persecuting pagans, 2. civil 
 
364 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 pagans, 3. persecuting lewes, 4. the lewes that were 
 Zealous & vnreprovable in the law of Moses, (as was Paul) 
 & yet refused Christ: Such as the Apostle speaketh of 
 Rom. 10. 1. 2. 3. Who have the Zeale of God, but not 
 according to knowledg who sought to establish their 
 owne righteousnes & did not submit to the righteousnes 
 of God : al these 4. sorts of persons were then without the 
 true visible Church of the Apostohque institution, which 
 is called the Kingdome of God: Now whereas you say 
 wee doe account al without that are not of our way, 
 I answer two things. First, that all the members of 
 every true Church in the world wee doe account within. 
 Secondly, that al the members of false Churches wee doe 
 indeed account without : & therefore we doe account your 
 particular Church at worksop to be without : For it is not 
 the true constituted Church of Christ, & therfor it is a 
 false Church, & therfor without according as the holy 
 Ghost testifieth, the court that is without the Temple cast 
 out : Apoc. 11.2. Now you know that in the old Testament 
 al sorts of people good & bad came into the vtter court: 
 but now in the new Testament, lohn by vision W£is 
 commaunded to cast that vtter court out & not to measure 
 it, bicause it is given to the Gentils who shal tread the 
 Holy Cittie vnder foot: & now only the true visible 
 Church, which is the Temple of God: 2. Cor. 6. 16. 
 consisteth of a holy people which must come out from 
 the vnrighteous & vnbeleevers that are Belial even 
 without the yoke of the L. ordinances: & must be a 
 Seperated people: And must have no fellowship nor 
 agreement with vnrighteousnes, nor touch any vncleane 
 thing: & such a people the L. promiseth to receave to 
 be his owne people & no other: I avouch therfor that 
 seing your parish Church wherof you are parish preist 
 consisteth of a confused rowt even such a people as came 
 into the vtter court in the old Testament, that therfor 
 by the commaundement of the Lord your parish church 
 must be cast out & not measured. & therfor it is without 
 & so are all such assemblies as yours is: what say you 
 Mr. Bern, now ? either justifie yoxir Church or forsake it : 
 Let vs heer what answer you make to this matter : for I 
 gesse it toucheth your freehold very neerly : but I proceed. 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 365 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the fifth Se6lion. 
 
 In the beginning of this Se6lion 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. 82. Mr. Bern, 
 saith, This is one error 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. confutation of Mr. Bern. pag. 173. saith: 
 we hold that al not in the way of Christ, are without. 
 
 In the midst of this fifth Sedlion I expounding what 
 wee hold, saying thus : All the members of true Churches 
 wee account within : & aU 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 particidar 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 Se6lion thus impute vnto vs : 
 I say, and so al of vs say : That the members of the true 
 Chiurches 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 & th&' 
 members of them, are without: Ther is one only faith 
 & truth, Eph. 4. 6. 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, Israehtes, 
 Samaritanes, & the rest were false churches, had a false 
 ministery, false worship, & false government, & only the 
 lewes had the true Church, Ministerie, Worship, & 
 Government with them: So in the New Testament al 
 Churches or assemblies of men whatsoever professing 
 
366 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 Christ (as Abbayes, Monasteries, Nunries, Colleges, Cathe- 
 drals, Seminaries, Re6tories, Parishes, &c.) & notSeperated 
 from the Antichristians & worldlings, are false Churches, 
 & so without : only the Seperated Churches are the true 
 Churches, & are within: you should have answered this 
 Se6tion of my lettre Mr. Bern, before you had printed 
 your book, if you had dealt ingeniously & plainly: but 
 seing you canot answer (for I take it so bicause you doe 
 not answer, for your book declareth that ther is no wil 
 wanting) let vs see what you obje6t, yowc obje6tions 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 lesus at al: your 
 argument is this : No Scriptures diredted against pagans, 
 can truly be applyed against Antichristians. 
 
 These places are dire6ted against pagans: viz: 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 of 
 pagans, & that they cannot be vnderstood of Antichristians 
 I deny it : & I prove the contrary evidently to your con- 
 science, & 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 Scriptiu"e dire6ted against 
 
 pagans, 
 
 Ergo : places of Scripture dire6ted against pagas 
 
 may by vs be applyed against Antichristians. 
 The Major is evident. The minor is proved by the con- 
 sideration of these Scriptures, Revel. 11. 8. & 18. 2. 7. 21. 
 where the holy ghost applyeth against the Antichristians, 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 367 
 
 matters & Scriptures spoken literally of Sodom, Egipt, & 
 Babylon, which were aU pagans. 
 
 Againe, if Antichristians be in condition eyther equal 
 to or worse then pagan, the by proportion. Scriptures 
 dire6ted against pagans, may be applyed against 
 Antichristians. 
 
 But Antichristians in the Lords account are in a 
 condition equall, yea 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. 44r-52. ludah, 
 Sodom, & Samaria are sisters in sinne & punishment, 
 & ludah hath justified Sodom. 
 
 Therfor, Scriptures diredted against pagans may be 
 applyed by proportion eyther of equaUty or superiority 
 against Antichristians. 
 
 Now for your further instrudtion in this point Mr. Bern, 
 consider that in the new Testament the phrases, speeches, 
 titles, priviledges & benefites of the Church of the lewes, 
 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 agai[n]st 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 
 Jerusalem & the Uke, & the false Church is called the 
 Gentils, Egipt, Sodom, Babylon, &c. the reason whereof 
 is bicause that the Church of the lewes was a type of the 
 Churches of the new Testament, so the assembhes 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 objedted to vs this one particular, that speeches 
 vnderstood of pagans may not be applyed against Anti- 
 christians: I pray you what vse do you make of the 
 prophesies of the old Testament against Nineveh, Babylon, 
 Elam, Madai, & the rest? What vse can you make of 
 the judgments threatned & inflidted vppon the Getils if 
 
368 
 
 Paralleles : Censures : Observations, 
 
 not this that Christ & the Apostles make, Mat. 11. 22. 24. 
 & 12 41. 42. 2. Pet. 2. 5-7. 15. lude. 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 wiU see afterward 
 in his proper place: in the meane tyme thus much we 
 have gayned that places of Scripture dire6ted against 
 pagans may as wel be applyed against Antichristians, as 
 places of Scripture spoken to the true Church of the lewes 
 may be applyed to the true Church of the new Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 Secondly you obje6t that wee cannot prove, lajdng 
 aside the forgeries of our owne braynes, that this scripture 
 phrase without, may be applied vnto you as to a people 
 with out. VVeU wee wil lay aside our owne devices & so 
 let us trye what wee can doe. 
 
 Arg. 1. Chiirohes that are in condition equal or 
 
 worse then assemblies of pagans are Avith- 
 
 out. Revel. 11. 2. 
 
 Antiohristian 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, Whoremongers, Mur- 
 
 therers, 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 hjrd, are without. 
 
 Antichristian Churches or Babylon are 
 
 such. Revel. 18. 2. 
 
 Ergo : Antichristian Churches are without. 
 Againe. 5. The vtter court which must not be 
 
 measured by the golde reed, but which is 
 
 given to the Gentils that persecute the 
 
 Holy Cittie, is without. 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 369 
 
 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 assembhes, & therfor you account 
 that one of our errors pag 109. viz: our 8. error as you 
 summe the: that position therfor: viz: your Churches 
 are false Churches shalbe proved vnto you fully in the 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations aperteyning to the 10. 
 se6lion of this lettre, whither I referre the reader desiring 
 him for his information & satisfaftion in that particular 
 to read that Seftion 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 obje6l is, that God Almightie 
 hath witnessed that you are his people: by giving you 
 his word, & Sacraments, by effedtual 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. 
 
 Nevertheleste I advertise you of one thing that we 
 do acknowledg that the Lord hath his people among you, 
 whome he calleth to come out from among you & to be 
 Seperated, & to touch none of your vncleanes. 2. Cor. 6. 17. 
 Sajdng vnto the faithfuU that are among you. Goe out 
 of Babylon my people, that ye be not partaker of her 
 sinnes, & 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 
 
 w. II. 4 
 
370 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 testimony. Yet neverthelesse we say that your assemblies 
 Ecclesiastical are false Churches that they are Babylon, 
 Egipt, 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 deliver- 
 aces which you have, even as the Lord gave Paul the 
 lives of al that Sayled with him in the Ship : A6t. 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 leroboam had, & as the 
 Samaritanes, the Edomites, Moabites, Ammonites, & 
 Ishmaelites had circumcision & the Sacrifices by vsurpa- 
 tion: 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 pra6tise 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 ReUgion 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 mercifuU vnto his people among 
 you, it is likely to come to passe among you as among 
 the Samaritanes, Edomites, Moabites, Ammonites, Ish- 
 maelites, 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. 
 
 Pinaly, to conclude this Parallele : whereas you obje6t 
 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 hereby 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 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 371 
 
 slaunders, that thus intitle vs, & yet account vs your 
 Brethren: For other wise 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, Comissaries, Officials of their Courts, to the 
 damned crew so termed in the Land, to your Church 
 Papists, to the adulterers, Theeves, Murtherers, Witches, 
 Conjurers, Vsurers, Atheists, Swaggerers, Dronkards, 
 Blasphemers, & infinite sorts of sinners impenitent in your 
 Churches, yea & take the forwardest preachers & pro- 
 fessors 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 reje6t the fraternity of those that deny 
 themselves to be ordinary members of your Chiu-ches, 
 & yet are so extraordinarily : that refuse communion with 
 you continually, & yet reserve liberty to heare, & com- 
 municate occasionally: For seing they hereby are made 
 one with your Antichristian body & wicked members 
 therof, being vnseperated from them, we cannot acknow- 
 ledg our selves their brethren, lest we joyne light & 
 darknes, Christ & BeUal, 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 respefts, but only as you have heard, 
 that we may be wel reported of by them that are without, 
 & that we may heape coales of fire vppon your head, 
 whe you acknowledg vs brethren, & yet slaunder vs so 
 shamefully. & this shal suffice as concerning this Se6lion. 
 
 The sixth Section. 
 
 Your eleventh position foUoweth to be considered of 
 which is this. 
 
 That only Saynts as Mr. Smyth defineth them by 
 4. properties are the matter only of a visible Church: 
 This you hould error: I hold it the most certayne truth 
 of Gods word as these Scriptures doe evidently prove: 
 Rom. 6. 4. 5. 8. 11-22. I. Pet. 3. 11. 2. Pet. 3. 18. 
 
 4—2 
 
372 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 1. lohn. 2. 19. Apocal. 3. 5. compared with Roman. 1. 7. 
 Eph. 1. 1. 4, Revel. 11. 2. & 22. 14. 15. & 18. 2. compared 
 with Deut. 14. 2. 3. 11. 2. Cor. 6. 16. compared with 
 1. King. 5. 12. 
 
 The 4. properties wherby I describe saynts are these 
 though you mention them not in this your note : 1. To 
 forsake all knowne sinne, 2. to doe all the will of God 
 knowne. 3. to grow in grace. 4. to continue to the end: 
 For the further cleering of this point consider that al the 
 members of the true visible Church of the Apostohque 
 institution are persons who are to be accounted, holy 
 faithful & eledl: now if they be ele6l, I hope they wil 
 continue faithful to the end: but you Avil happily obje6t 
 that many fal away by Apostacy : true & then they are 
 fit to be entertayned in your churches as some of ours 
 have been: of them I say as the Apostle John saith, if 
 they had been of vs they would have continued with vs : 
 Therf or they were none of vs : For although they were 
 in the outward communion, yet they were not of the true 
 visible Church, but were only Hipocrites, & as superfluous 
 excrescences in the body no natural true parts of the 
 body: For as in the natural body an eie of glasse is not 
 indeed a true part of the body, though it occupie the 
 place of a natural part: So an Hypocrite or one that 
 continueth not to the end possesseth only a rome in the 
 visible Church, & is not indeed a true member. You 
 wil demaund then why we receave Hypocrites among 
 vs: wherto I answer we cannot discerne an hypocrite, 
 & therf or we are to judg of men according to that we see 
 measuring them by the word of God: That which is 
 concealed from vs wee are not to prie into: VVherfor 
 our judgment must alter & chang as occasions varie: 
 & so the Scripture speaketh of a righteous man forsaking 
 his righteousnes, Ezech. 18. 24. VVhereas in truth the 
 gifts & calling of God are without repentance, Rom. 11. 29. 
 Breefly therfor to deliver vnto you the truth I hold 
 concerning this point: 
 
 1. The visible Church consisteth of an outward & 
 inward communion. 
 
 2. The inward communion is knowne only to God: 
 So are the members therof. 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 373 
 
 3. The outward visible communion is seen & discerned 
 by men : So are the members thereof. 
 
 4. Wee are to judg men for the present to be both 
 of the inward & outward communion if they manifest to 
 vs an outward visible faith. 
 
 5. Iff afterward men Apostate finaly then wee chandg 
 our mynd & say they were never of vs for had they been 
 of vs they would have continued with vs. 
 
 Now Mr. Bern. I pray you answer vs this which wee 
 thus justifiie out of the word if you can: if you cannot 
 yeeld to the truth & embrace the faith, & wee shal re Joyce 
 for you & with you. 
 
 ParaUeles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the sixth Se6tion. 
 
 Mr. Bern, in his book intituled 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 Se6tion 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. Ainsworth: 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 Churcla: yet that many be 
 called, & few chosen. 
 
 Let the reader consider the exposition that I have 
 given to this position in this se6tion of my lettre & then 
 let him give his verdi6t: the exposition is summarily 
 thus much: viz that seing the visible Church consisteth 
 of an outward & 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 abuse the World, to 
 
374 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 publish this position barely without my exposition, or 
 not to answer that which I brought for the confirmation 
 thereof, but nakedly to set it downe & then only to 
 obje6t against it: Herein you bewray to mee a mynd 
 willing to hyde the truth, & to deceave the World, & 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, loh. 10. 1. 10. 
 
 But bicause you are so importunate with your ob- 
 je6tions & reasons, let vs heer what they are. 
 
 First, you say my description of Saynts, is a proper 
 description of the invisible members of Christ lesus, 
 & 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 secreat: doe you 
 think Mr. Bernard that all that die thus qualified in the 
 estimation of men are indeed saved with the L ? I conf esse 
 to mee they are vndoubtedly saved, but are they so to 
 the Lord? make a dire6l answer to this particular, & 
 you shal be compelled to see & confesse your folly. 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 shew & 
 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 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 375 
 
 present, but as be is indeed for ever in tbe judgment of 
 men: neither do I define a Saynt as be is in the Lords 
 knowledg "which is not revealed to men, but as be is 
 revealed to be judged by the word of God: I wil declare 
 this by instances for your further information & satis- 
 f acti5 : Stephen : Demas : TertuUus : 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 Chmrch 
 indeed, but only in shew: Tertullus was no Saynt nor 
 true member of the visible church so much as in shew 
 or appearance : what TertuUus 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 stUl 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. loh. 2. 19. 
 
 Your second Obje6tion & reason is that by this my defi- 
 nition of Saynts, or the matter of the visible Chiu"ch so 
 determined, I exclude the members of the visible Church 
 of the old Testament, as Hezechiah, David, lehosaphat, 
 Moses, &c. Who committed & suffered knowne sinne: 
 yea & the Corinthians, 2. Cor. 12. 21. Also the Churches 
 of Asia. Revel. 2, 20. 21. Who did not amend, & yet 
 were Saynts & true matter of the visible Church. 
 
 I answer : First to that of the old Testament objedled 
 by you, I say you bewray therein great ignorance of 
 the true nature & constitution of the Church of the Old 
 Testament, as also of the ministery, worship, & govern- 
 ment thereof, which were al typical & ceremonial : Know 
 you therfor Mr. Bern, that ther is as much difference 
 betwixt the Old Testament with the ordinances thereof, 
 & the new Testament with the ordinances therof, as ther 
 is betwixt the signe & the thing signified: betwixt the 
 ceremony & the substance: the type & the truth: the 
 shadow & the body : Literal & Spiritual : the lettre & the 
 Spirit. For in these & the like Phrases doth it please the 
 
376 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 Holy Spirit in the Scriptures to 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 ther must be such 
 in the New Testament, neyther can you plead, for that 
 they had one high Preist in the Old Testament, therfor 
 ther must be one Pope or Patriarch over the Church in 
 the New Testament : To reason thus were to bring in 
 ludaisme, & to disanull the blood of Christ. Therfor if 
 you wil reason aright as you ought to doe, you must 
 frame your reason from the Type to the Truth after this 
 manner. This was a Type figure shadow, 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 Taber- 
 nacle, 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 material! 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 of the 
 sacrifices, sacrificers or Preists & of al other ordinances 
 of the old testamet: 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 govern- 
 ment : 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, lehosaphat, & 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 
 
Paralleles : Censures : Observations, 377 
 
 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 comunion which was the proper comunion 
 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 excommunica- 
 tion was typical: Nomb. 5. 2-4. & 12. 14. Hence also it 
 f oloweth 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 comunio: but their comunion being only 
 ceremonial & typical, their polution was only of that 
 kind : therfor you shal never find that in the old testament 
 the L. chardgeth the for comunion in their typical service 
 with wicked men, howsoever the wicked men theselves 
 are sharpely reproved for their wickednes. Besides the 
 nature of their worship being wel weighed doth instru6t 
 vs thus much : For their worship was reconcihation & 
 repentance to acceptation : but our worship is of another 
 nature, viz: Sacrifices of praise & thanksgiving after 
 repentance, reconcihation, & acceptation. For they did 
 worship to repentance, we do worship from repenta[n]ce : 
 therfor they might & did worship therby to reconcile 
 theselves to God : we being reconciled to God & accepted 
 in Christ do proceed to offer vnto the L. the calves of 
 our hps, the best grace we have: with vs men first 
 
378 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 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: Then- 
 worship began outwardly in the lettre, & proceded 
 inwardly to the Spirit, so did their costitution, ministery 
 & al: our worship beginneth inwardly in the Spirit, 
 & proceedeth outwardly to the lettre: Therfor our 
 constitution, ministery, worship, & government, is con- 
 trary to theirs : & therfor Mr. Bern, if you had knowne or 
 observed this, you would not have obje6ted 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 Testa- 
 ment : & abolish Christ, & sett vp ludaisme againe. 
 
 But I would fayne know how you can prove that 
 these holy me did suffer ope 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 cere- 
 monial worship was not vncleane vnto others. & if you 
 doe obje6l 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 & cere- 
 monial, & that only polluted others: For such as was 
 ther communion, such was ther pollution : Ther com- 
 munion 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 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 379 
 
 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 pointed by moral vncleanenes 
 vncleansed, that is, sinne vnrepented of. 
 
 But in the old Testament, ther visible typical co- 
 munion was typicaly pointed by the typical & ceremonial 
 vncleanes vncleansed. 
 
 Therfor in the new testament our visible Spiritual 
 comunion is realy pointed by moral vncleanes vncleansed, 
 that is sinne vnrepented of. 
 
 The major cannot be denyed for it is a just analogic 
 & 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. A6t. 21. 28. 29. 
 
 Againe: If in the old Testament the persons cere- 
 monialy vncleane dvn-ing the tyme of their vncleanes, 
 were 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 
 
380 Paralleles : Censures : Observations. 
 
 the tabernacle or host of Israel, as may be seen: Nomb. 
 5. 2-4 & 12. 14. 15. 2. Chron. 26. 21. 
 
 T[h]erfor 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. Se6tion, to manifest this particular, whither I 
 referre the reader. 
 
 Breeflie I answer concerning David his suffering of 
 loabs murther : The Kings of ludah suffering the brasen 
 Serpent to be worshipped, & the high places: Moses 
 giving the bill of divorce: that eyther they knew them 
 not to be sinne, or if they knew the that they were 
 polluted therwith by consent: but yet ther typical 
 communion was not defiled therby if they were cere- 
 monialy cleane : they therf or 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 
 me 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, 
 & therf or I think this second obje6tion of yours to be 
 idle & of no value. 
 
 YoTir third obje6tion & 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 obje6lion & 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 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 381 
 
 a false matter. Moreover I avouch flatly contradi6tory 
 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 affefted is none of Gods people : 
 Therf or you must observe the difference betwixt the com- 
 maundements Legal, & Evangehcal: The commaunde- 
 ments legal require absolute obedience in the highest 
 degree therof : The gospeU requireth true & vnfeyned 
 repentance in the best degre we can aford: I would 
 not have you think that wee imagine men should be 
 framed in obedience absolutely according to the exa6tnes 
 of the law, 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 ; wherf or 
 Mr. Bern, if you doe conceave that we intend the most 
 perfe6t obedience of the law as a proper adjun6t or 
 formaU 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 obje6tion 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 yoiu-self to be but a wrangler. 
 
 Your fourth obje6tion & reason is, for that Saints in 
 Scripture are not so called, 1. eyther for soundnes of 
 knowledg, 2. or internal pure affe6lion, 3. or holy pra6lise 
 of their duty alwayes : But, 1. For their outward caUing 
 to Christianity, 2. For their profession of faith, 3. in 
 respe£t of their baptisme, 4. in regard of the better part, 
 5. or in respe6l of the visible signes of Gods favour, 6. & 
 Gods good pleasure. 
 
 I answer you thus : you deny three things & affirme 
 six: I doe peremptorily deny your three negatives: & 
 
382 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 I constantly affirme that sound knowledg, pure affedtions, 
 & continual obedience are most pregnant and convertible 
 properties off true San6tification. 
 
 Soundnes of knowledg is a proper note of life Eternall. 
 lohn. 17. 3. Heb. 8. 11. & so a true note of Sandtification. 
 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 perfe6t 
 knowledg, but of sound knowledg, & that Epithete doth 
 not argue the quantity or perfe6t measure, but the quaUty 
 or true condition of knowledg which I do avouch by the 
 former groundes to be a true convertible signe of san6ti- 
 f] cation, & so of a Saynt. 
 
 Pure a£Ee6tion also is another true token of San6tifica- 
 tion. Matt. 5. 8. 1. Tim. 1. 5, Tit. 1. 15. which pure 
 hart or affe6tion is not a hart voyde of sinn, but of 
 hipocrisy, & for that you obje6t of Paul, Rom. 7. 18. 21. 
 it is nothing to overthrow his pure affedtion : For though 
 he had sinne, yet he knew nothing by himself, whereof 
 he had not repented. 
 
 Continu^all pradtise of Holy dutyes, also is a true signe 
 of a Saynt, or a Sandtified person, Psal. 119. 101. 102. 
 106. 112. And although Ecclesiastes saith that ther is 
 no man without sinne, yet that hindreth not, but that 
 some may continualy pradtise their dutyes, sith this is 
 the summe of al, that by repentace & faith which are the 
 continual pradtise of the Saynts, a man doth alwayes 
 perf orme his duty : & the speech of Eclesiastes is the 
 sentence of the law, not of the gospel. 
 
 But heerin is your monstrous fraud and abhomin- 
 able dissembling manifested, that vnder these doubtful 
 termes of sound knowledg pure affedtion & pradtise of 
 duty allwayes, you would bleare mens eyes that they 
 should not see the truth: What doe you think that 
 any of vs would be so absurd as to say that perfedt 
 knowledg, love, & obedience, without any imperfedtion 
 or fault are the signes of Sandtification ? And yet wee 
 say, that sound knowledg, a pure hart, and continual 
 pradtise of Holy dutyes are the most infallible tokens of 
 true Saynts, and men truly Sandtified : But you are 
 wholly transformed as I perceave into vayne jangling. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 383 
 
 In the next place I doe acknowledg that your six 
 affirmatives are somthing to the purpose : But neverthe- 
 lesse you have mingled much chaffe with the wheate : wher- 
 fore 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 pidtures, or images, 
 resembhng & shadowing San6tification superficialy : For 
 they must be true & inward also : True caUing, profession 
 & baptisme: & inward caUing, profession, & baptisme, 
 are the infaUible tokens of San6tification 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 World, 
 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 trtily baptized, and so he by reason 
 of his outward true caUing, 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 rnen thus cjalled, 
 professing, & baptized, are Saynts : But if half or 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, & bap- 
 tized, 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 al 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 dire6tion. 
 
384 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 2. The better part, visible signes of Gods favoiir and 
 presence, Gods good pleas\ire & acceptation, are excellent 
 respe6ts in the Church : But they are not demonstrative 
 proper adjun6ls of saynts sufificiet 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 San6tified 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 visibhe Anti- 
 christians: Neyther doe I any whitt quayle that you 
 say all divines say so : I know ther is one, namely lohn 
 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 & lohn that worthy 
 divine I reject it, I abhorre it, I wish it cast to the 
 bottomlesse pit, from whence it came: For know you 
 Mx. Bern, that the worser part somtyme giveth de- 
 nomination to the thing. If a peck of wheate be inter- 
 mingled with an hundreth quartar of chaffe, it is not 
 a heape of wheate, but of chafEe: 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 the (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 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 385 
 
 eight persons in the Arck, & cursed Cham was one : but 
 so are 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 ele6t 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 respe6t of the visible signes of Gods favour 
 or presence. For then the Papists, Anabaptists, Familists, 
 Arrians, & other Heretiques should truly be caled Saints, 
 seing they have the word & Sacraments among them: 
 & Exod. 3. 5. the ground was caled Holy: & Mat. 4. 5. 
 Jerusalem 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 lacob, nor 
 transgression in Israel, Nomb. 23. 21. seing that people 
 at that present was typically Holy & so typically without 
 imputation of iniquity in respe6t of their typical com- 
 munion. 
 
 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 whereas 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 T have thus clered, I say hereby 
 he renounceth the faith in this particular, & renoimceth 
 
386 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 the Apostles testimony, who saith, they went out from 
 vs, they were not of vs, for had they been of vs, they 
 would have continued with vs, 1. loh. 2. 19. 
 
 The seaventh Sedtion. 
 
 Now foUoweth your fifth position which you also 
 perswade your selfe to be an error, and which being wel 
 expounded I account the vndoubted truth, viz. 
 
 5. That the powre of binding & losing is given to 
 the whole multitude, & not to the principal members 
 therof : These are your wordes. 
 
 I hold & maintayne out of the word that a copany 
 of faithful people Seperated from al vncleanenes & joyned 
 together by a covenant of the L. are a true Church: 
 yea though they be but two or three : So Adam & Hevah 
 were a Church : so Lot, his wife, & his daughters were 
 a Church : So Noah & his family in the Ark were a church : 
 So the twelve men at Ephesus were a Chiirch, A6t. 19. 7. 
 So in Q. Maries dayes the Martyrs seperated were a 
 Church, if but two or thre of them Hved together: That 
 this is a truth, I prove vnto you thus. 
 
 2. Cor. 6. 16-18. with whome God maketh his 
 covenant to be ther God, & whome he re- 
 ceaveth to be his people, they are a Temple, 
 that is a Church vnto him, vs. 16- 
 
 But two or three faithful people comming 
 forth from the vnbeleevers, & being Seperated, 
 & touching no vncleane thmg, are Gods people, 
 & God with them maketh his covenant, & they 
 are his sonnes & daughters, & he is their Father, 
 vs. 16. 17. 18. 
 
 Therfor two or three faithful people are the 
 Temple and Church of God. 
 The Premisses are evidently delivered in the Scripture : 
 therfor the conclusion foloweth necessarily. 
 
 Mat. 18. 20. wher two or thre are gathered together 
 into my name, ther am I in the mids of them. 
 
 In the mids of whomsoever Christ doth dwel 
 & walk, they are a true Church of Christ : 
 Even his Temple, Tabernacle, & habitation : as 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 387 
 
 these Scriptures teacli being compared together, 
 Mat. 28. 20. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Levit. 26. 11. 12. 
 
 But among two or three gathered together 
 by love, & into the name of Christ by faith, 
 Christ is present to dwel & walk, Mat. 18. 20. 
 2. Cor. 6. 16. compared together. 
 
 Therefor two or three faithful people are the 
 
 Temple & Church of God. I could alledg other 
 
 Scriptures : but two or three witnesses are 
 
 sufQcient. 
 
 Remember for this point that the covenant made 
 
 with Adam, Ab[r]aham, Isaac, Jacob, & al the faithful, is 
 
 made with any faithful people in the world, as if two or 
 
 three faithful people should rise vp in the dominions of 
 
 the Turk, or Pope, or lewes, or Pagans, & joyne together 
 
 to walk in the faith, the Lord maketh his covenant with 
 
 them, he is their God, they are his people, they are his 
 
 Temple, he walketh ther, he is their Father, they are his 
 
 sonnes & daughters, Christ is their King, they are his 
 
 Kjngdome, even a Kingdome of Preists, &c : & therfor 
 
 whersoever in the Scripture the covenant is made with 
 
 any, it is to be vnderstood as made with Abrahams 
 
 childre according to the faith, & therfor with two or 
 
 three faithful people any w[h]ere in the world. 
 
 This being premised as the ground of our whole cause, 
 & we having departed from al the profane of the Land, 
 & having seperated & touching no vncleane thing, 2. cor. 
 6, 17 We are Gods people, his temple, his Church: he 
 dwelleth & walketh among vs, & he hath given to vs, 
 & made with vs his covenant, Heb. 8. 10. & although 
 we were but few in nomber, yet the Lord chose vs to be 
 his. 
 
 Wee being now the Church of God, wee have the 
 powre of the L. lesus Christ given vnto vs : For we have 
 himself our owne by title & possessio, & vse, & that by 
 vertue of the covenat God made with vs : for so God is our 
 God & our Father, only in Chr. & through him: & al 
 the promises of God in Christ are yea & Amen: Christ 
 therfor is ours : Christ he is our King & oiu" Preist, & we 
 are his Kingdome: & we have his powre, that this is so 
 I prove vnto you by these Scriptures. 
 
 5—2 
 
388 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 Marc. 13. 34. Christ ascending vp into Heaven (for 
 that is Ms going into a farre country as may be perceaved 
 by Luk. 19. 12. with Mat. 28. 18. & Eph. 4. 8.) gave 
 authority to his servants leaving his howse that is his 
 Church, according to his bodUy presence: now what 
 authority is this that Christ gave vnto his servats ? that 
 is evident by other places of scriptures, 1. Cor. 6. the 
 powre of our Lord Jesus Christ which the Corinths had 
 that is the powre of admonition & excommunication, 
 the powre of binding & losing, a powre to administer 
 Christs Kingdome, & al the ordinances therof. 
 
 Mat. 16. 19. The powre of binding & losing is given 
 to Peter. 
 
 loh. 20. 23. The powre of binding & losing is given 
 to al the Apostles. 
 
 Marc. 13. 34. The powre of Christ is given to his 
 Servants. 
 
 1. Cor. 5. 4 The powre of Christ is in the hands of 
 the Corinths. 
 
 Now let vs make coUecStions & gather instructions 
 out of these places, & the truth wil most evidently 
 appeare. 
 
 The Pope saith out of the 16. of Mathew, that the 
 powre of binding & losing is give to Peter & his successors 
 the popes of Rome : & that al the Bbs. & Preists in the 
 world, & the whole Church vniversal receaveth binding 
 & losing from him. 
 
 Nay say the English Prelates out of the 20. of John 
 Christ gave the powre of binding & losing to al the 
 Apostles & their successors the Lord Bbs. of Englad, 
 & that al the Preists, & people in the Land, receave 
 binding & losing from them in their severaU dioceses. 
 
 Nay say the Presbyterians of England out of Mat. 
 18. 17. The powre of binding & losing is given to the 
 E[l]dership, & the people they are bound or losed by the 
 Presbytery: For by the Church they vnderstand the 
 Presbytery. 
 
 Nay say we, the powre of binding & losing is given 
 to the body of the Church, even to two or thre faithful 
 people joyned together in covenant, & this we prove 
 evidently in this manner. 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 389 
 
 Vnto whome the covenant is given, vnto them 
 
 the powre of binding & losing is given. 
 The covenant is given to the body of the Church, 
 that is to two or three faithful ones: For 
 God is their God, & they are his people. 
 Therfor the powre of binding & losing is given 
 to them. 
 Againe. Vnto whom Christ is given for King, vnto 
 the the powre of Christ the King is given, 
 as being his deputies & lieftenants. 
 But Christ is given for King vnto the body of 
 the Church, even to two or three faithful 
 people, who are his Kingdome, & howse, & 
 cittie. 
 Therfor vnto them is given his powre, that is 
 his powre to bind & lose. 
 Finally. Vnto whome the covenant & Christ is given, 
 vnto them al the promises are given, for al 
 the promises are conteyned in the covenant, 
 & in Christ, as these places prove, 2. Cor. 
 1. 20. Psal. 133. 3. Aa. 2. 39. Gal. 3. 14. 15. 
 16. & the powre of binding & losing is one 
 of the promises, & is a part & parcel of the 
 covenant. Mat. 16. 19. loh. 20. 23. Mat. 
 18. 15-20. 
 But the covenat & Christ & al the promises, 
 are give to the body of the church even to 
 two or three faithful ones. 
 Therfor the powre of binding & losing is given 
 to them also. 
 But ther are certayne obje6lions which must be 
 answered in nomber three, 
 
 Ob. I. One is that Christ speaketh only to Peter 
 & to his Apostles, & giveth the powre only to them 
 therfor. Mat. 16. 19. lohn. 20. 23. Mat, 18. 17. 
 For answer thus much. 
 
 The place Mat. 16. although it be dire6led to Peter 
 personally, yet it is intended vnto aU the Disciples of 
 Christ: For vnto them is the powre given, that have 
 the faith and made the confession ther mentioned: But 
 the faith & confession of faith is of al the Disciples, 
 
390 Paralleles : Censures : Observations, 
 
 & spoken by Peter in behalf of them al: & therfor the 
 powre is by promise given to al, 
 
 The place loh. 20. 23. importeth plainly that Mary 
 Magdalene, & divers other of the Disciples were present 
 when Christ spake vnto them: for they were assembled 
 together in a howse, the dore being shut, & it was the 
 L. day: & not the Apostles only, but the rest of the 
 Disciples were assebled in al likely -hood for the Sandtifica- 
 tion of the L.-day: yea further Thomas was absent, 
 & so the promise of binding & losing could not be made 
 to him at that present, & afterward it was not made to 
 him, & so by consequent that one of the Ap. had not 
 the powre give him by ther reason which plead it to be 
 given to the Apost. only. The place Mat. 18. 17. doth 
 not prove that this powre was given to the Presbyterie, 
 for that place importeth that it was given to the Church, 
 now the Eldership is not the Church, but a part of the 
 Church, & it must be proved that the word Church doth 
 signifie the Eldership (or els this place wil help nothing), 
 as I am sure cannot be showed out of the word: besides 
 the circumstances of the place teach that Christ intedeth 
 the powre of binding & losing to be given to every brother, 
 for so he saith, if thy brother sin: & lett him be vnto 
 the: & take two or three witnesses: & where two or 
 three, &c. I am in the midst of them. 
 
 Finally, It cannot be denyed but admonition aper- 
 teyneth to every brother, & why should not excom- 
 munication: For their is powre to bind & lose in two 
 or thre witnesses toward a brother, & why not powre to 
 bind & lose in the body of the Church, if the whole 
 Church be but two or three: or some smal nomber. 
 
 Now for the vtter overthrowing of this conceipt of 
 the powre given to the Presbyterie only, consider that 
 the twelve were not yet Apostles, only they were nominated 
 to be Apostles : they were invested in their office at the 
 descending of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost: 
 which I prove vnto you evidently. Eph. 4. 8. 11, when 
 Christ ascended he gave gifts vnto men, viz : the gifts of 
 Apostles, Prophets, Evangehsts, Pastors & Teachers : For 
 Christ receaved his Kingdom when he ascended. Luk. 19. 
 12. For Christ obteyned a Kingdome by his death, & he 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 391 
 
 receaved his Kingdome, when he went into that farre 
 country : & Christ by his sufferings entred into his glory : 
 So that Christs Kingdome in regard of the outward 
 regiment & ordinances thereof beganne at the day of 
 Pentecost, when the Apostles were endued with powre 
 from on high Luk. 24. 49. A6t, 1. 8, & it shal end at the 
 day of judgment, 1. Cor. 15. 24. 25. Seing therfor that 
 they were not yet Apostles, but only Disciples, the powre 
 given to them was given to them as Disciples, not as 
 Apostles: & therfor aU Christs Disciples may justly in 
 al ages challendg that powre of binding & losing: For 
 a conclusion therfor in a word, the commaundement of 
 binding and losing is given to every brother, so the promise 
 & powre of bindmg & losing is give to them also : as the 
 forsaid places do evince. & as the charter of a corporatio 
 is fr5 the King & al the offices have powre from the 
 corporation, so the Church hath powre fro Christ, & the 
 Eldership from the church & as the body hath powre 
 from the head, & the parts of the body have their powre 
 from the body: So the church which is Christs body, 
 hath powre from Christ, & the Eldership a part of the 
 body hath powre from the body. 
 
 Ob. 2. A second obje6tion is this that if the powre 
 of binding & losing be give to the body of the Church, 
 then powre of preaching & administring the scales of 
 the covenant : truth : we conf esse it : & the church being 
 a corporation committeth powre to administer to such 
 officers as Christ hath apointed to his church, viz : to the 
 Elders or Bishops: stU reserving powre to corredl her 
 officers by the same powre of binding & losing in admoni- 
 tion & excommixnication, the benefit wherof doth as 
 wel perteyne to the Elders as other of the brethren, 
 except it be said the Elders are to be exempted from 
 censures, & so to want those meanes of Salvation which 
 the brethren have, which is a pitiful condition, & a 
 lamentable privUedg. 
 
 Ob. 3. A third obje6tion is that the benefit of binding 
 & losing, of the word & seales of the covenant is given 
 to the church, & al the members, but not the powre of 
 the: wherto thus much may be answered, viz: that 
 the Church, viz: two or thre faithful ones have as is 
 
392 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 said the covenant, Christ, the promises not only in vse, 
 but in title & possession: & the faithful have as good 
 powre & title or interest to the covenant, Christ, & the 
 promises, as a freholder hath to his lands & possessions. 
 Esa. 9. 6. Vnto vs a sonne is given: the church is the 
 spouse of Christ, & so hath powre to Christ the covenant 
 & promises : the Church is the body of Christ, the body 
 hath a real possession, title, & powre to the head & all 
 the helps therof : For the faithful are flesh & bones of 
 Christ, Eph. 5. 30. these things are manifest to them 
 that wil vnderstand: & if any man be ignorant let him 
 be ignorant. 
 
 But it may be Mr. Bern, you wU say that powre to 
 bind & lose are no properties of the Church, but only 
 priviledges: For shame say not so: Surely this plea 
 argueth that either you got litle Logick in the vniversity, 
 or that you have forgot it, or if you remeber it you either 
 carelesly negle6t it, or wilfully pervert the vse of it to 
 seduce your followers: I pray you tel me in good sooth 
 what difEerenee is there betwixt a priviledg & a propertie : 
 Is not a privilege according to the notation of the word 
 privata lex: a private law wherin one person or state 
 is interessed. The King hath certaine previledges or 
 prerogatives as to pardon condemned persons, to dispence 
 with his law, a negative voice in parliament &c. I would 
 faigne know of you, whither these be not properties, such 
 as the Kings & Queenes of the nation only have title to 
 & no other : but consider wel with your self what relation 
 ther is betwixt a priviledg & the person that is interressed 
 in the priviledg: Is it not the relation of the subje6t & 
 the adjun6l? A priviledg therfor is an adjun6t to the 
 priviledged person: Now al adjun6ts are either proper 
 or common adjun6ls: but a priviledge is not a common 
 adjun6l, as I am sure you wil confesse, or els you want 
 reason: therfor it is a proper adjun6t: If it be a proper 
 adjun6t it is a propertie, & so your distin6tion is sense- 
 lesse & vnschoUerlike. you may aswel say that pepper 
 is hot in working & cold in operation, as to say that 
 the true Church may be without her privUedges, but 
 not without her properties: Therfor I doe heer before 
 the L. attach you as a deceaver of the people in teaching 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 393 
 
 thus contrary to al learning & true vse of reason, that 
 the powre of the Lord lesus Christ given to the church, 
 one part wherof consisteth in binding & losing is only 
 a priviledg & not a propertie of the true Church : & that 
 the true Church may want it : It is as impossible for the 
 true Church to want Christs powre, as for a man to want 
 reason: Mr. Ber. answer now or els yeeld to the truth 
 you cannot for shame denie the one of them. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the seaventh Se6tion. 
 
 In this Se6lion 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. caUeth it the A. B. C. of Brownisme to hold: 
 That the powre of Christ ther 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-row 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 aimcient 
 Church whereof he is teacher holdeth concerning it. 
 
 Wei: Let vs handle these things largely, & to ful 
 satisf a6tion : & herein I prof esse 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 mtdtitude, & not to the principal! 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 minis- 
 ters, but such as are made by the & fro the successively, 
 our whole cause of Seperation lyeth in the dust & we must 
 disclaime our Schisme which we have made, & our heresies 
 
394 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 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 sucessio, but are give first to the body 
 of the church, the faithfid, yea though they be but two 
 or three, & that both the ministerie and all the powre 
 that the ministerie hath doth flow from the Fountajoie 
 Christ lesus, through the body of the Church to the 
 Presbytery, then is yorn* 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 Ele6tion, 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 suppHcate the Kings 
 Majestic 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 consider & 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, & negledted 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 habUity 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 jurisdi6lion by the confession of 
 al that professe lesus 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 oeeonomical 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 395 
 
 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, lam. 4. 12. This powre which Christ hath in himself 
 cannot passe from himself to any other: For as his 
 preisthood is eternal, & not passing fro him to another, 
 Heb. 7. 24. so may it as truly be said of his other offices, 
 & particularly of his Kingdome & Monarchical! powre: 
 Neverthelesse 2. The Lord Jesus hath ordeyned & ap- 
 pointed 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 
 preserving of that order, & for the execution of those 
 ordinances: This delegated powre & authority is men- 
 tioned 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 lesus is in them, they doe blaspheme 
 most fearfully robbing Christ of his honour & Regal 
 powre, & make themselves even Christ himself: 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 Anti- 
 chxistian 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 mysticaU body. 
 
 This delegated & Ministerial powre which the Pope, 
 Bbs. & Presbytery challendg, 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 
 
396 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 Presbyterians say that Ch[r]ist hath given this ministerial 
 powre to the presbytery, or Eldership, & they conveigh 
 it successively to the elders succeding to the worldes end 
 ui the Church: Al these three opinions are equally 
 Antichristian, for they al of them establish succession 
 which is lewish, & so Antichristian. For in the old 
 Testament the preisthood was conveighed by succession: 
 Heer therfor I will prove vnto you by vndeniable argu- 
 ments, 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. 
 
 First Argument. 
 
 If Christs ministerial powre be given by succession to 
 the pope, Bbs, or presbytery primarily, then the minis- 
 terie is before the Church : Seing that ther must needes 
 be a ministery before ther be any powre of Christ, this 
 consequent is infalUble. 
 
 But the ministerie is not before the Church, but 
 after the Church: For it ariseth out off the Church, as 
 a part off those Holy things which God hath given to 
 his Church. 
 
 Therfor Christs ministerial powre is not given to the 
 pope, Bbs. or presbytery primarily: but to the body of 
 the Church. 
 
 They that affirme the ministery to be before the 
 Church must needes hold that a minister is no relative 
 to a Church, but that a man may be a minister, & have 
 no flock to attend on, yea that ther may be & is a ministery 
 when & where ther is no Church: or that the chardges 
 of other men are his chardg: or that the world is his 
 chardge : they must also maintayne that aU grace floweth 
 from the ministerie to the Church: that the ministerie 
 is a more excellent ordinance then the Church: that the 
 Church hath no powre to make ministers, but that the 
 ministers have powre to make both ministers & churches : 
 & that ministers are properly by their office Apostles 
 over the whole world for the converting of men, & planting 
 of Chiu-ches: & the like absurdityes. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 397 
 
 Second Argument. 
 
 If Clirists ministerial powre commeth by succession 
 to the pope, Bbs. & presbytery: then the ministery of 
 Rome is a true ministerie, and al they that are made 
 ministers by the pope and his clergie, are true ministers : 
 Then it is lawful to joyne with the true ministerie of 
 Rome, and then whosoever are ordeyned and not by a 
 precedent ministery are falsely ordeyned, and so are false 
 ministers. 
 
 But the ministerie of Rome is no true ministery, and 
 they that are ordeyned by the pope and his clergie are 
 no true, but false ministers: and it is vtterly vnlawful 
 to joyne with the ministerie of Rome by the confession 
 of al the Protestants, and ministers may be ordeyned 
 truly without ministers by the confession of the sincerest 
 reformists. 
 
 Therefor Christs ministeriall powre commeth not by 
 succession to the Pope, Bbs. or Presbytery primarily: 
 but to the body of the Church. 
 
 Third Argument. 
 
 If Christs ministerial powre commeth by succession 
 to the pope, Bbs. & presbytery: then the Lord hath 
 absolutely bound men to sinne, seing that wee must 
 needes joyne to the sinnes off the Muiisters, otherwise 
 men cannot possibUe have & enjoy the holy things of 
 God: For it is the ordinance of God, that wee should 
 vse the holy things: & this assertion doth avouch that 
 we must have the from the ministery : & therf or let ther 
 sinnes be what they wU, we must have them from their 
 hands, & so must joyne to them in al ther sinnes. 
 
 But the L. hath not bound vs necessarily to joyne to 
 other mens sinnes, seing he hath commaunded vs to 
 Seperate from them, & this were to lay our sinnes vppon 
 the Lord most blasphemously. 
 
 Therfor Christs ministerial powre commeth not by 
 succession to the pope, Bbs. or presbytery primarily: but 
 to the body of the Church. 
 
398 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 The fourth Argument. 
 
 If Christs ministerial powre commeth by succession 
 to the pope, Bbs. or presbytery: then the Lord hath 
 made the Ministers Lords over the Church, so that the 
 Church can not have or enjoy any of the holy things, 
 any of the L. ordinances, except they wil agree or consent 
 them, vnto for ther Holy things are in ther powre. 
 
 But the L. hath not made the Ministers Lords over 
 his Church which is his inheritance but they may have 
 & enjoy his owne ordinances even al the Holy things 
 contrary to the wil of wicked ministers. 
 
 Therfor Christs ministerial powre commeth not by 
 succession to the pope, Bbs. or presbytery primarily, but 
 to the body of the Church. 
 
 The fifth Argument. 
 
 If Christs Ministerial powre commeth to the pope, 
 Bbs. or presbytery, then the presbytery may excom- 
 municate the whole Church: Then the Bbs. may ex- 
 communicate ther whole dioceses or provinces, then the 
 pope may excommunicate the whole church vniversal on 
 earth. 
 
 But the L. Bbs. of England say the Pope cannot 
 excommunicate England: The Reformists hold that the 
 Prelates cannot excommunicate their diocesses, & by 
 consequent & just proportion the Presbytery cannot ex- 
 communicate that particular Church whereof they are 
 Presbyters. 
 
 Therfor Christs ministerial powre commeth not by 
 succession to the Pope, Bbs. or Presbytery primarily, but 
 is given to the body of the Church. 
 
 The sixth Argument. 
 
 If Christs ministerial powre commeth by succession 
 to the Pope, Bbs. or Presbytery: Then the office of the 
 Deacons & widowes are lost sith succession in them is 
 interrupted & lost: for as in the old testament a Preist 
 came of a Preist, a Levite of a Levite, so an Elder maketh 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 399 
 
 an Elder, a Deacon ordeyneth a Deacon, a widow must 
 ordeyne a widow. 
 
 But the office of the Deacon & widow is not lost, for 
 none of Gods ordinances are perisht, but may be had, 
 or els Gods truth & mercy to his Church fayleth, who 
 hath said that he wilbe with his Church to the end of 
 the world. 
 
 Therfor Christs ministerial powre commeth not by 
 succession to the Pope, Bbs. or Presbytery primarily, 
 but is given to the body of the Church. 
 
 The seaventh Argument. 
 
 That do6tryne which destroyeth it self is false. 
 
 The do6tryne of succession, viz: that Christs minis- 
 terial powre commeth by succession to the pope, Bbs. or 
 Presbytery, destroyeth it self. 
 
 Therfor the doc^ryne of succession is a false do6tryne. 
 
 The minor I manifest thus: If the papists say truly 
 that al ecclesiastical powre floweth from Christ to the 
 Clergie th[r]ough the pope, then why doth the coUege of 
 CardinaUs make a pope by Ele6tion? & why doth not 
 one pope make another pope before his death? Therfor 
 Ele6tion overthroweth the succession of the popes office : 
 For the pope cannot both give Christs Ministerial powre 
 to the Clergie of Rome, & take the same ministerial 
 powre from the Cardinals by Ele6tion: but when the 
 pope is dead, then is Christs ministerial powre dead 
 also in the popes person : & thiis doth successio overthrow 
 it self in the pope: & by consequent in the rest: For 
 Christs ministerial powre being once interrupted in the 
 pope, can never be recovred againe, but is vtterly lost: 
 & so the Church is abolished: For if the presbytery be 
 lost the Church is lost : if the bbs. be lost, the presbytery 
 is lost : if the pope be lost the bbs. be lost : if the 
 pope be dead the pope is lost: if the pope be lost, 
 Christs ministerial poAvre is lost: for if it be said that 
 the pope hath his powre by Ele6tion from the Cardinals 
 the succession is destroyed : & so you may see evidently 
 that succession destroyeth it self, seing Ele6lion must 
 needes be interposed: Therfor indeed ther is no true 
 
400 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 succession, but that of the old Testament, viz: by 
 descent & genealogie : & this succession which is pleaded 
 for by ordination of precedent presbytery, bbs. pope is 
 mans invention & destroyeth it self, & therfor is a meer 
 Antichristian devise. 
 
 But heer certajme objedlions must be answered for 
 the fiirther manifestation of the matter of succession, 
 & for satisfaction therein. 
 
 The first Obje6tion. 
 
 Although the Ministerial! powre of Christ be not 
 given to the pope, & so perisheth not with him, yet it 
 is given to the bbs, who are the Successors of the Apostles 
 in that Ministeriall powre, and in the dispensation of 
 it to the Ministerie and Church: Seing therefore that 
 ther is a certayne and vndoubted Succession of bbs. 
 from the Apostles dayes hetherto, one ordejming another 
 successively, therefore though succession be interrupted 
 in the Pope whose ministerial headship we renounce, yet 
 it is continued in the Bbs. who are the Apostles successors 
 in dispensing this ministerial powre to the ministerie 
 & Churches. 
 
 Answer to the first Objedtion. 
 
 This obje6tion dependeth vppon an vncertainty, viz: 
 That ther hath been a succession of Bbs. one ordeyning 
 another successively fro Peter, Paul, lames, through the 
 Church of Rome, & the Greekes: & therfor I answer, 
 that except they can shew the courte rowles (that I may 
 so speak) of the vndoubted successive ordination from 
 Peter, Paul. lames, &c, I shal say vnto al the Bbs, of 
 England, as Nechemjah said to the Preists, that could 
 not shew ther succession from Aaron by Genealogie. 
 Nehem. 7: 64. 65. Bicause their successive ordination 
 is not found, they shal be put from their Bishopricks, 
 & they shal not administer in the Bbs. office til their 
 arise vp one as with Vrim & Thummim to divine vnto 
 vs, the truth of this matter : For we wil not beleeve the 
 records of the Church of Rome, who also are defe6tive in 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 401 
 
 this particular, for though they have the succession of 
 Popes, yet not of other Bbs. 
 
 Further the vanity of this obje6tion appeareth in this, 
 that hereby they are vrged for the justifying of this 
 Antichristian devise of succession by ordination to go to 
 the throne of Antichrist, the popedome, to fetch their 
 ministerie thence, as if the true ministerie off Christ could 
 be in the false Church of Antichrist: hereby also they 
 do acknowledg Rome to be the true Church, their Sacri- 
 ficing Preisthood a true Ministerie, orders a true Sacra- 
 ment, the Eucharist a true propitiatory Sacrifice for the 
 quick & dead, prayers for the dead, & a thousand such 
 abhominations, which are necessary dependances there- 
 vppon : They must also acknowledg themselves Schisma- 
 tiques from the Church of Rome, & are never able to 
 answer the popish bookes, & the petitions of the Papists 
 to the King, who obje6t these and the like things against 
 them. 
 
 The Second Obje6tion. 
 
 Although the pope & Bbs have not Christs ministerial 
 powre given to them by succession, yet the presbytery 
 may have that powre by delegation from Christ, when 
 ther shal arise a company of true faithful teachers, who 
 standing out against the popedome, & prelacy, & al the 
 abhominations therof : also renouncing al the corruptions 
 of their ordination, & refining both the do6tryne of faith, 
 & the true calling of ministers, from the drosse of Anti- 
 christianisme, doe yet notwithstanding retayne the truth 
 which they in the feare of Antichrist had, as in the faith, 
 so in the ministery: For Antichrist had not vtterly 
 abolished, but only corrupted the Lords ordinances. 
 
 Answer to the second Obje6lion. 
 
 This obje6tion dependeth vppon the former grounds, 
 namely, that the Church of Rome is a true Church 
 though corrupt, having a true ministerie though corrupt, 
 &c. of the rest: For otherwise how can they plead ther 
 ministery to be true from the Bbs. except they do ac- 
 knowledg also the Bbs Ministery to be true receaved 
 fro the Popedome: & the popish ministerie to be true, 
 
 w. n. 6 
 
402 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 for otherwise they must maintaine that a true ministerie 
 commeth from a false ministerie, which is as impossible 
 as to bring light out of darknes: So that this Obje6tion 
 is also answered in the former already, & needeth no 
 fiu*ther answer: yet neverthelesse I say vnto the point 
 that al the refining of the world can not bring a true 
 ministery out of a Sacrificing Preisthood: Or a true 
 presbytery out of a false Antichristian prelacy: For as 
 it was impossible for the preists of the Old Testament 
 to ordeyne true Ministers of the New Testament: So 
 much more is it impossible for the false popish Sacrificing 
 preisthood, to ordeyne true ministers of Christs true 
 Church : For the Sacrificing preisthood of Aarons Family 
 was the Lords ordinance sometyme, but the popish 
 Sacrificing preisthood in the mayne substantial parts 
 therof, is not only mans device, but infinitely impious 
 & blasphemously derogating from the honour & dignity 
 of Christs Sacrifice & preisthood which is aparabatos 
 intransitive, Heb. 7. 24. & according to the order of 
 Melchisedech : & seing the popish Sacrificing preisthood 
 is in the very essence of it false: how can the English 
 prelacy, preisthood, & Deaconry, which issued from that 
 Romish preisthood, be any other but a sacrificing preist- 
 hood ? & although the Enghsh prelates have cast away 
 that essential Sacrificing property (or forme rather) of the 
 Romish preisthood, & have reduced it to a better temper, 
 yet that wil not serve the turne: for al that they have 
 in their prelacy, preisthood, & Deaconry, they had fro 
 Rome or els where: If from Rome then their prelacy, 
 preisthood, & Deaconry is absolutely Romish & no other : 
 if elswhere then their Succession is gone: If both from 
 Rome & els where let them declare that Ridle vnto vs. 
 
 The third Obje6tion. 
 
 The presbyters may have ordination or imposition of 
 hands from the Romish preisthood, & yet not their ofiice : 
 For that may come from heaven, or by some extraordinary 
 meanes, even as the Lord raised vp some men extra- 
 ordinarily in these last tymes to restore the truth of 
 do6lryne, & to reduce things to the Apostolique primitive 
 institution as amongst others, Hus, Luther, & the rest. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 403 
 
 Answer to the third Obje6lion. 
 
 It is straunge that a man shal have imposition of 
 hands from one, & his office from another: Besides it 
 is contrary to the natm-e of Succession, wherein the partie 
 that ordeyneth giveth the office & ministerial! powre to 
 him that is ordeyned : for that is the thing that is pleaded, 
 that Christs ministeriaU powre commeth by Succession 
 through ordination of precedent presbyters: It contra- 
 di6teth their owne ground therefore to say, that imposition 
 of hands is from a popish preist, and the true office from 
 some other meanes: But let vs inquire what that other 
 meanes may be: To say that Christs MinisteriaU powre 
 is from heaven, is not denyed, but the question is : what 
 is the instrument or meanes which Christ hath appointed 
 to conveigh that MinisteriaU powre vnto man kind ? And 
 who are they that first receave it from Christs hand out 
 of heaven: Or what is proton dektikon the first subje6t 
 of this ministerial powre: We say the Church or two or! 
 three faithful people Seperated fro the world & joynedi 
 together in a true covenant, have both Christ, the cove- 
 nant, & promises, & the ministerial powre of Christ given 
 to them, & that they are the body that receave from 
 Christs hand out of heaven, or rather from Christ their 
 head this ministerial powre : you say : not so : but this 
 ministerial powre commeth by succession from the 
 ministery which is the first subje6t of this powre, & that 
 al this powre is derived from man to man, from the 
 Apostles hands through al the Preists hands of Rome, 
 & the Prelates hands of England to you Mr. Bern. & your 
 line & pedigree of Preisthood is lineaUy descended from 
 Peter or Paul, &c. to you through so many generations 
 of popish preists, as have succeded from Peters person to 
 your person: Even as Annas & Cayaphas descended 
 lineaUy from Aaron : only this is the difference, that the 
 succession of Annas & Cayaphas was by genealogie or 
 generation, yours is by succession of ordination or 
 imposition of hands: & therfor bicause you see that 
 you fal vnder this foule absurdity, that your Preisthood 
 must be of necessity of the same kind that the popish 
 preisthood is, you have invented a new trick to say that 
 
 6—2 
 
404 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 it commeth from heaven extraordinarily with Hus & 
 Luther, and the rest of those glorious witnesses which 
 the Lord in these last tymes raised vp to the destru6tion 
 of the man of sinne: VVhich if it be so: Then say I: 
 shew your succession from Luther, Hus, Prage, &c. Or 
 els Nechemiah mil putt you from your preisthood. 
 
 The fourth Obje6tion. 
 
 But every King in his dominions is appointed by 
 Christ to be a head ministerial to the Church, & al the 
 Preists of that country do receave their ministerial powre 
 from the King by the ordination of the Bbs. vnto whome 
 the King hath committed the dispensation of that powre : 
 so that the King being the Lords Lieftenant in his owne 
 dominions, hath this ministerial powre from Christ, the 
 Bbs. from the King, the Preists from the Bbs. the Church 
 from the Preists. 
 
 Answer to the fourth Obje6lion. 
 
 If the King of every country hath Christs ministerial 
 powre given to him immediately from heaven, & that 
 the Clergie of that nation have Christs ministerial powre 
 from the King, then these consequents folow: which are 
 intolerable absurdities. 
 
 1. The King of every country is a person civil & 
 Ecclesiastical, having al civil & ecclesiastical powre & that 
 immediately from Christ. 
 
 2. The King of every country can preach, administer 
 the Sacraments, exercise Spirituall jurisdi6tion, excom- 
 municate, &c. 
 
 3. The King of every country can make & ordeyne 
 Ministers. 
 
 4. The King of every country is a Pope or Patriarch 
 in his owne territories and Dominions. 
 
 How these points wil agree with the Analogic of 
 faith let every man judg, & so give sentence whither 
 this objedtion conteyne any the least shew of truth in it, 
 yea or nay. 
 
 Now what authority the Lord hath given every King in 
 his owne dominions I leave to be descussed in his proper 
 place, viz : in the 15. Sedtion of this lettre to Mr. Bern. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 405 
 
 The fifth Objeaion. 
 
 But the ministery is now extraordinarily raised vp: 
 For as in the first planting of the Churches the Lord lesus 
 vsed the extraordinary ministery of Apostles, Prophets, 
 EvangeHsts, to publish the Gospel to the world, & to 
 plant Churches, so after the Apostacy of Antichrist, in 
 the restoring of the truth the Lord vseth the same extra- 
 ordinary ministerie not indued with those extraordinary 
 gifts which they had, but apointed by the L. for the 
 same purposes, viz : the planting of true Churches & the 
 revealing of his truth. 
 
 Answer to the fifth Objedlion. 
 
 First the Ministers of England, & namely you Mr. Ber. 
 among the rest, do not chalendg to be Apostles, Prophets, 
 & Evangehsts, but you say you are true presbyters, or 
 Pastors of particular true visible Churches, & therfor this 
 obje6tion helpeth you nothing, if it were yeelded you: 
 
 Secondly, you cannot maintayne your ordinary minis- 
 terie as succeding by ordination from these supposed. 
 Apostles, Evangelists & Prophets, for then you must 
 acknowledg the prelates of England to be Apostles, 
 Prophets, Evangehsts, whereas they doe chaUendg no 
 such thing. But only maintayne themselves to be ordi- 
 nary Bbs. the ordinary Successors of the Apostles, neither 
 do they intend to make you ministers as Apostles but 
 as Bbs. 
 
 Thirdly, ther is none of the Reformists that ever 
 I heard of that vndertake as Apostles Prophets, Evan- 
 gelists, to ordeyne Elders. 
 
 Finaly, how can any of you be Apostles, Prophets, or 
 Evangehsts? who stand members of the assembhes in 
 subje6tion to the prelates, whose Lords you are, if you 
 be either Apostles, Prophets, or Evangehsts: but you 
 see they are your Lords : For either you are false Apostles, 
 & false Prophets, or els by the evidence of the word 
 & Spirit, you must rise vp & stand out against & depose 
 the prelates, whose authority you say is Antichristian : 
 besides that you must prove vnto vs by good & sufficient 
 warrant that the Lord raiseth vp Apostles, prophets, & 
 
406 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 Evangelists, to overtkrow Antichrist, & to restore the 
 true ministerie: & that you who with al your might 
 support the Throne of the beast are those Apostles, 
 prophets, & Evangelists, whome the L. raiseth vp for that 
 purpose: which yet you never have done or attempted 
 to do, & whither you can do or not I leave to the considera- 
 tion of al those that search after the truth. 
 
 Hetherto I have proved by sufficient arguments 
 negatively, that Christs Ministerial! powre is not given 
 by Christ primarily & by succession, either to the pope, 
 Bbs. or presbytery: whose claime dependeth vppon one 
 & the same title, viz: Successive ordination from the 
 Apostles, through the Church of Rome to the hands of 
 every preist or presbyter in England: & therfor the 
 Ministerial powre of Christ must needes be given primarily 
 to the body of every visible Church, though they be but 
 two or three in nomber : For this is a sufficient Enumera- 
 tion of parts that Christs ministerial powre is given 
 primarily either to the Pope, Bbs. Presbytery or body of 
 the Church: except that men wil say it is given to the 
 King of every Kingdom, which is an absurdity intollerable 
 as is already declared, & which I never heard pleaded 
 for, & which the Kings of England doe renoimce: But 
 Christs ministerial powre is not giuen by successive 
 ordination, either to the Pope, Bbs. or Presbytery prim- 
 arily or originally: therfor Christs ministerial powre is 
 give to the body of the Church, viz: to two or thre 
 faithful people joyned together into an Ecclesiastical 
 pohtique body by the true covenant, or new testament 
 of Christ lesus. But bicause happily some persons may 
 be vnsatisfied, seing the former arguments are only 
 grownded vppon reason, & not fro particiilar evidence of 
 Scripture: Therfor I hold it necessary furthermore to 
 eonfirme this truth of the L. by vndeniable growndes of 
 Scripture, & that affirmatively as followeth. 
 
 The first Argument from Mat. 16. 13-20. 
 
 From this place of Scripture I frame an argument 
 after this manner. 
 
 Christs Disciples are Christs Church, Mat. 16. 13. 18. 
 Christs ministerial powre is given to Christs Disciples. 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 407 
 
 Ergo : Christs ministerial powre is given to Christs 
 Chtirch, 
 The Minor of this argument which only is doubtful 
 1 confirme thus. 
 
 That which was spoken & given to Peter, that was 
 spoken & given to al the Disciples of Christ, 
 Mat. 16. 13. 14. 19. 
 Christs ministerial powre was vttered, & delivered 
 to Peter, who spake for & in the name of the 
 rest. Mat. 16. 13. 15. 16. 18. 19. 
 Ergo: Christs ministerial powre was by speech & 
 indeed committed to all Christs Disciples. 
 The Major of this argument only is controversal which 
 I manifest thus : 
 
 Vnto them did Christ speake & commit his minis- 
 terial powre that made the confession, viz : that 
 Christ was that Christ, the Sonne of the hving 
 God. 
 But Peter & al the Disciples by Peters mouth made 
 that confession, viz : that Christ was that Christ, 
 the Sonne of the living God. 
 Ergo: Vnto aU the Disciples did Christ speake, & 
 give that his Ministeriall powre. 
 The Minor being cleered the whole Argument is 
 evident: VVherfor consider, 1. That Christ in the vs. 13. 
 asketh his Disciples a question, 2. In the vs, 15. he saith 
 whome do ye say that I am: by which it appeareth 
 that Christ asketh this question of all his Disciples 
 generally: and so it followeth by proportion necessarily 
 that seing aU were demaunded that question therfor all 
 made that answer & confession : the argument is framed 
 after this manner. 
 
 They answered & made the confession vnto whome 
 Christ propounded the question, or made the 
 demaund. 
 But Christ propounded the question or demaund to 
 all his Disciples, and not only to peter, or only 
 to the twelve Apostles, as may be proved in the 
 course of the text, vs. 13-24. 
 Ergo : All the Disciples answered & made the con- 
 fession, ther mentioned by the Evangelist. 
 
408 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 The Second Argument from Mat. 18. 15-20. & 16. 19. 
 
 From these places I reason after this manner. 
 
 That which is given to two or thre of Christs 
 Disciples, is given to the body of the Church, if 
 they be many in nomber. 
 Christs Ministerial! powre is given to two or three 
 
 Disciples of Christ. 
 Ergo : Christs ministerial powre much more is give 
 to the body of the church being many in nomber. 
 The Major is without controversie for iff Christs powre 
 be given to two or three, then much more to twenty, 
 thirtie, an hundreth,they being al of them Christs Disciples. 
 The minor is proved after this manner: 
 
 The keies of the Elingdom of heaven, or the powre 
 of binding & losing, is given to two or three 
 Disciples of Christ. 
 Christs ministerial powre is the keies of the Kingdom 
 
 of heaven, or the powre of binding & losing. 
 Ergo : Christs ministeriall powre is given to two or 
 three Disciples off Christ. 
 The minor being evident, the major may thus be 
 confirmed. 
 
 Vnto them doth Christ give the keies of the kingdom 
 of heaven, or powre of binding & losing to whome 
 & of whome he speaketh : 
 But Christ speaketh to Disciples, & of brethren. 
 Ergo : the keies of the Kingdom of heaven, or powre 
 of binding & losing, is give by Christ to the 
 Disciples or brethren. 
 The minor, viz: that Christ speaketh to Disciples 
 & of brethren, is manifest by divers particular, vs. 1. 15. 
 21. The Disciples move a question vnto Christ, con- 
 cerning the Kingdom of heaven : & Christ teacheth vnto 
 them, vs. 15. that the litle ones, that is the brethre & the 
 Disciples must not be offeded : or if they go astray & be 
 lost, they should be sought againe, & vs. 15-17. teacheth 
 the dutyes of admonition in the degrees therof for the 
 winning of our brethren, & preserving of them from going 
 astray : therfor vs. 18. he speaketh of brethren & Disciples, 
 attributing to them the powre of binding & losing, & vs. 19. 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 409 
 
 promising the hearing of their prayers, & vs. 20. promising 
 to them his presence, if they be but three or two, & 
 vs. 21. 22. teaching them remission of offences private, 
 vnto seaventy tyme seaven tymes : VVherevppon I ground 
 this infallible argument. 
 
 Ifi the whole scope & intent of this place, Mat. 18. 
 15-20. compared with Mat. 16. 13-20. doth ayme 
 at the Disciples of Christ, or the brethren. Mat. 
 23. 8. teaching that binding and losing, the keies 
 of the Kingdom of heaven, Christs presence, & 
 acceptance of their prayers, &c. aperteyneth to 
 them: then Christs ministerial powre is given 
 to the Disciples or brethren, if but three or two, 
 & so much more if they be a multitude. 
 But the whole scope of these places is diredted to 
 the Disciples or brethren : Teaching that offences 
 must be avoyded among them : Lost or wandring 
 sheep must be sought out: brethren impenitent 
 must be bound: & penitent losed: That they 
 have the powre of binding & losing on earth: 
 That Christ promiseth to them his presence & 
 acceptance, that they must til 70. tymes 7. tymes 
 remit offences private &c. 
 Ergo : Christs ministerial powre is given to the 
 Disciples or brethren, if they be but three or two, 
 & so much more if they be a multitude. 
 
 The third Argument from Mat. 28. 16-20. 
 
 From this place of Scripture I reason after this manner. 
 To whome preaching & baptiziQg is committed, 
 to them the powre of binding & losing is given. 
 Powre to preach & baptize is given to the Disciples 
 of Christ, or to the brethre, or to the body of 
 the Church. 
 Ergo : powre to bind & lose, that is Christs minis- 
 terial powre is given to the disciples, or brethren, 
 or the body of the Church. 
 The Major of this argument is true by proportion or 
 parity: For by one & the same powre, doth the Church, 
 preach, pray, baptize, administer the L. Supper, excom- 
 municate, absolve, &c. viz: by the ministerial powre of 
 
410 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 Christ: & therfor if the body of the church being more 
 or fewer have powre to preach & baptize, they have 
 powre to bind & lose: The rather considering that 
 preaching the Gospel is a mayne part of binding & losing 
 of men to & from their sinnes, & a principal part of the 
 powre of the keyes in shutting & opening heaven gates 
 to the impenitent or penitent sinners. 
 
 The Minor of this argument may be confirmed by 
 this reason. 
 
 To whome Christ promiseth his presence to the 
 worldes end : To them he giveth powre to preach 
 & baptize. 
 But to his Discipl[e]s Christ promiseth his presence 
 to the worldes end, even to two or three gathered 
 together into his name: Mat. 18. 20. & 28. 20. 
 yea to any Seperated people. 2. Cor. 6. 16-18. 
 Ergo: To his Disciples, to two or thre gathered 
 together into his name, doth he give powre to 
 preach & baptize. 
 
 The fourth argument from Marc. 13. 33-37. 
 
 From this place of Scripture I frame an Argument thus : 
 Christs Servants have Christs authority: 
 Christs visible Church, or two or three faithful people 
 
 are Christs Servants. 
 Ergo : Christs visible Church hath Christs authority. 
 
 Heer by the way may be noted that in this place 
 Marc. 13. 34. Christ giveth authority to his Servants: 
 But Mat. 28. 18. Christ receaveth authority or powre 
 from his Father, eve al the powre in heaven & earth, 
 wherby wee may coUe6t that which was before afiirmed 
 that Christs powre is double, 1. that powre Monarchicall 
 which is inherent in his owne person, & is incommunicable 
 to any creature, 2. That powre Ministeriall which he 
 delegateth to his Servants, to his Disciples, to two or 
 three faithfull people wheresoever. 
 
 But concerning the argument if it be obje6led that 
 Christs Servants are the Apostles, & their Successors: 
 I deny it: For ther is a distindtion made between the 
 Servants & the Porter: Now the authority is given 
 generally to the Servants of the bowse, & watching is 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 411 
 
 specially enjoyned to the Porter: & if it be any thing 
 that the Apostles & their Successors have, it is watching 
 by way of office, for so the porter is to wa[t]ch: & yet 
 that duty also is particularly apply ed & injoyned to 
 every one vs. 37. 
 
 The fifth Argument, from loh. 20. 18-24. 
 & Luk. 24. 35-53. 
 
 From these places of Scripture compared together 
 I coUe6t this argument. 
 
 If Christs Ministerial powre of binding & losing be 
 
 given to Marie Magdalene, & Cleopas, joyntly 
 
 with the rest of the Disciples of Christ: Then it 
 
 is given to the body of the Church. 
 
 But powre of binding & losing, remitting & retayning 
 
 sinnes is give to Marie Magdalene, & Cleopas, 
 
 joyntly with the rest of Christs Disciples. 
 
 Therfor Christs ministerial powre of binding & losing, 
 
 or remitting & retayning sinnes is given to the 
 
 body of the Church. 
 
 The Minor of this argument may easily be proved 
 
 by comparing the two former places of Scripture together : 
 
 For in Luke Cleopas & the other Disciple brought tidings 
 
 off Christs Resurre6lion to the eleven, & others that were 
 
 with them : Luke. 24. 33. 34. 36. Whence it is evident 
 
 that Cleopas, the other Disciple, the eleven, & others 
 
 were together: This day was the first day of the weeke, 
 
 vs. 23. 33. 36. Even that very day wherein Christ arose : 
 
 Now vppon this day Christ spake those wordes, & gave 
 
 the powre of remitting & retayning sinnes vnto al the 
 
 Disciples, not only to the eleven, but to Cleopas, Marie 
 
 Magdalene, & others assembled together that night when 
 
 Christ appeared to them al together jointly in the howse, 
 
 loh. 20. 23. 
 
 The sixth Argument, from A6t. 2. 39. & 3. 25. com- 
 pared with Rom. 4. 11. 12. & Gal. 3. 7. 9. 14. 15 
 
 From these places of Scripture compared together 
 I frame this argument. 
 
 Vnto whom the promises, the covenant, the blessing 
 
412 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 is given, vnto them the ministerial powre of Christ, 
 
 viz : the powre of binding & losing is given. 
 
 But the promises, the covenant, the blessing is given 
 
 to the posterity of Abraham, according to the 
 
 faith, that is to al the faithful, who are indeed 
 
 the true children of Abraham. loh. 8. 39. 
 
 Ergo: Christs ministerial! powre, viz: The powre 
 
 of binding & losing is given to the faithful : That 
 
 is to two or three f aithf uU people which are a true 
 
 body vnto Christ, 
 
 The consequent of this argument only is doubtful: 
 
 For cleering whereof wee must know that the keies of 
 
 the Kingdom of heaven is a promise which Christ maketh 
 
 to his Church, Mat. 16. 19. wherin the cheef part of the 
 
 comfort of the Church consisteth : it is also one principal 
 
 part of the covenant or new Testament which Christ 
 
 hath established by his blood & purchased for his Church, 
 
 which is sealed vp vnto the Church in administring & 
 
 pertaking in the seales of the covenant : it is also a special 
 
 part of the blessing by the same reason : For the blessing 
 
 is this : That they that blesse the Church & faithful shal 
 
 be blessed & they that curse the Chiu'ch shalbe cursed: 
 
 Genes. 12. 3. also remission of sins is a part of the blessing, 
 
 Rom. 4. 7. 8. & binding & losing is remitting or retayning 
 
 sinne, blessing & cursing, as is most evident. So that 
 
 seing that powre of binding & losing, remitting & retayning 
 
 sinne, is a part of the promise, covenant, & blessing, 
 
 therfor the faithfxill having the covenant, promise, & 
 
 blessing given to the, they have also therwith the powre 
 
 of binding & losing, that is Christs ministerial powre, 
 
 & therfor the consequent of this argument is firme & the 
 
 vndoubted truth of God. 
 
 The seaventh Argument from Esa. 9. 6. loh. 3. 16. 
 loh. 13. 13. Aa. 2. 36. & 3. 22. 23. Luk. 2. 11. 
 
 From these places of Scripture compared together 
 I reason thus. 
 
 Vnto whom Christ is given to be King, Preist, & 
 Prophet, dire6tly & immediately: vnto them is 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 413 
 
 Christs ministeriall powre given, viz: powre of 
 binding & losing. 
 But Christ is given as King, Preist, & Prophet, 
 diredlly & immediately to two or three faithful 
 people wheresoever living together in the world. 
 Therf or Christs ministerial powre of binding & losing 
 is also given vnto two or thre faithful ones where- 
 soever joyned together in the world. 
 The consequent of this argument only is doubtfuU 
 which may thus most manifestly be confirmed & ex- 
 pounded : when Christ is given, then with Christ al things 
 els are given, Rom. 8. 32. Christ I say with al his apurten- 
 ances: when Christ the King is given to the faithful, 
 then Christs Kingdom is given vnto them, then have 
 they Christs powre to administer that Kingdom according 
 to his diredtion: when Christ the Preist is given to the 
 faithful, then Christs Sacrifice is given vnto them, & powre 
 to administer al the efficacy of his Preisthood vnto the 
 Sajmts according to his dire6tion: when Christ the 
 Prophett is given to the faythful, then Christs Prophesy, 
 or the Holy dodtryne of Salvation is give to the Church, 
 with powre for the dispensing therof according to his 
 owne ordinance: by reason wherof the Saynts are said 
 to have an anoynting or Chrisma from him that is Holy, 
 1. loh. 2. 20. & therf or are called Christians, Aft. 11. 26. 
 being anoynted to be Kings & Preists vnto God, Revel. 
 1. 6. & Prophets, Aft. 2. 17. 18. Seing then that by 
 Christ the King, Preist, & Prophet who is given to the 
 Saints, the Saynts are made. Kings, Preists, & Prophets, 
 therf or as Kings they have a ministerial powre given 
 them of binding & losing, & so forth of the rest. 
 
 The eight Argament from Mat. 18. 15-20. compared with 
 1. Cor. 5. 4. 5. Mat. 6. 12. Luk. 17. 3. 
 
 From these places of Scripture I colle6t this argument. 
 If one brother hath powre to retayne the sinnes 
 of a brother impenitent privately, & to remit the 
 sinnes of a brother penitent privately: then a 
 communion of faithful men have powre to retaine 
 the sinnes of an impenitent member publiquely, 
 
414 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 & to remit the sinnes of one tliat is penitent 
 publiquely. 
 
 But one brother hath powre, given him by Christ 
 to retayne the sinnes of a brother privately im- 
 penitent, and to remit the sinnes of a brother 
 privately penitent. 
 
 Ergo : a communion of faithf uU people have powre 
 
 to retayne the sinnes of a member pubhquely 
 
 impenitent, & to remit the sinnes of a brother 
 
 publiquely penitent. 
 
 To the same sense the argument may be framed after 
 
 this manner. 
 
 If witnesses admonishing a brother have powre given 
 them by Christ to retaine the sinnes of a brother 
 impenitent before witnesse & to remit the sinnes 
 of a brother penitent before witnesse then a com- 
 munio of faithful men have powre to retain the 
 sinnes of a brother publiquely impenitent, or to 
 remit the sinnes of a brother publiquely declaring 
 his repentance 
 
 But witnesses admonishing a brother, have powre 
 from Christ to retayne the sinnes of a brother 
 impenitent before witnesse, & to remit the sinnes 
 of a brother penitent before witnesse. 
 
 Ergo: a communion of faithful men have powre 
 
 to retayne the sinnes of a brother publiquely 
 
 impenitent, or to remit the sinnes of a brother 
 
 pubUquely declaring his repentance. 
 
 The premisses of both those arguments are evident 
 
 out of Mathew & Luke : & the conclusion is the Apostles 
 
 dire6tion to the Corinths. 
 
 The ninth Argument from Eph. 5. 30. 32. & 1. 22. 23. 
 Revel. 21. 2. & 22. 17. 
 
 From these Scriptures compared together I draw this 
 argument. 
 
 The wife hath powre immediately from her husband, 
 
 & the body hath powre immediately from the head. 
 
 The visible Church or a communion of faithful 
 
 people, are Christs spowse, the wife of the lamb, 
 
 & Christ mystical body. 
 
Paralleles : Censures : Observations, 415 
 
 Ergo the visible Chiirch or a communion of faithful 
 ones have Christs ministeriall powre immediately 
 from him. 
 Againe: As the body hath life, sense, motion & 
 powre from the head, the hands & feet have 
 powre from the body : So the Church hath powre 
 from Christ the head, the members of the Church 
 as the Elders & Deacons have powre from the 
 Church. 
 But it is true in nature, that the body hath life, 
 sence, motion & powre fro the head: & al the 
 members have powre from the body. 
 Ergo : the Church hath powre from Christ the head : 
 the members of the Church, viz : the Elders & 
 Deacons have powre from the Church. 
 By al which arguments put together it appeareth 
 most evidently that Christs ministeriall powre of binding 
 & losing is given to the body of every true visible Church, 
 and that all the Officers of the Church have their powre 
 and authority to administer derived vnto them from 
 Christ through the body of the Chtirch where they 
 administer. 
 
 And thus have I proved evidently as I take it both 
 that Christs ministerial powre commeth not by successive 
 ordination by the hands of the ministery: & that it is 
 immediately given to the body of the Church. 
 
 And heer for your further inf ormacion Mr. Bern. I wish 
 you to take notice that succession is a typical ordinance 
 of the Old Testament, & therfor abolished by Christs 
 comming: For the Apostle wisheth vs to take heed of 
 lewish Fables & Genealogies. 1. Tim. 1 4. Tit. 1. 14. 
 bicause these genealogies were of necessity for the carnal 
 ordinances of the old Testament, but the Spiritual 
 genealogie & succession is for the new testament : In the 
 old Testament they had carnal parents a carnal seed, 
 carnal children, carnal circumcision, carnal commaunde- 
 mets, a carnal temple, a carnal cittie, a carnal preisthood, 
 a carnal Kingdom: in the new Testament we have 
 spiritual parents, a spiritual seed which is the word, 
 spiritual children, viz: the faithful, circumcision made 
 without hands, spiritual commaundements, a spiritual 
 
416 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 temple, an heavenly cittie, spiritual Preists & Kings, & a 
 spiritual kingdom & preisthood : Therf or succession in the 
 old Testament was carnal by genealogie : if you therf or wil 
 set vp a carnal succession in the new Testament by 
 ordination for the ministery, you must do it also, 1. For 
 the Church, & so fetch it from Rome, 2. For the baptisme, 
 & so fetch it from Rome, 3. For the L. Supper, & so fetch 
 it from Rome, 4. For the Faith, & so fetch it from Rome, 
 5. For excommunication, & so fetch it from Rome : & so 
 forth of the rest, & this is to tie all Churches to the 
 vnity & succession of the chayre of Rome, as in the old 
 Testament al were tyed to the vnity & succession of the 
 temple at Jerusalem: Herin therf or you see how you 
 vanish away in your jmaginations by setting vp succession, 
 approving your self before you be aware a lew, a Papist, 
 an Antichristian : this shal suffice for the matter of 
 ordination or succession, wherby it apeareth to be a lewish 
 Popish, & Antichristian devise. 
 
 In the next place let vs heer your nine reasons 
 Mr, Bernard which you bring to confute this our faith, 
 and most evident truth of God: wher first in generall 
 note that wee doe not deny, but that the powre of the 
 Church is for order sake committed into some particular 
 persons hands, who in the Churches name, & for the 
 Churches good, & in the Churches presence are to handle 
 al Church matters, & therfor whereas your 9. reasons 
 are brought against popularity as you cal it, you are to 
 remeber that Christs church in several respe(?ts is a Mon- 
 archie, an Aristocraty, a Democratie. In respe6t of Christ 
 the King it is a Monarchy, of the Eldership an Aristocratie, 
 of the brethren joyntly a Democratie or Popular govern- 
 ment : For Christ the King he ruleth by his owne lawes 
 & Officers: The body of the Church, the spowse of 
 Christ ruleth as the wife vnder the husband, according 
 to the wil & appointment of her husband: The Elders 
 rtile as the stewards of Christ the King, & of the church 
 which is the wife or spowse of the King: Now as it is 
 vnreasonable to appoint the steward or Servant of the 
 King either over the King himself, or over the Queen 
 who is the Kings wife: So is it Antichristian to place 
 the Elders as Rulers over the whole body of the Church, 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 417 
 
 although every particular person and cause is subje6t to 
 be ordered by that authority which the Church joyntly 
 receaved from Christ, and delegateth to them: wee say 
 therefore that the body of the Church hath all powre 
 immediately from Christ: and the Elders have al their 
 powre from the body of the Church, which powre of the 
 Eldership is not exercized, nor can not be vsed over or 
 against the whole body of the Church, for that is an 
 Antichristian vsurpation: but only it is exercised over 
 and against particular persons and disorders arising in 
 the Church, the Eldership herein dealing for the body 
 in the pubUque workes thereof : breefiy therefore to 
 answer in generaU to aU your nine reasons, vsed against 
 popularity, wee dispute not whither the Elders must 
 rule or not, but wee dispute who have the negative voice 
 in their hands, or who have the determining powre in 
 them : or who give the definitive sentence in al matters : 
 Wee say that the definitive sentence the determining 
 powre, the negative voice is in the body of the church, 
 not in the Elders: yet we say the Elders are to lead 
 & governe al persons & causes of the Church, but to 
 lead & governe contrary to the definition & voice of the 
 body that we deny, & that we say is Antichristian. 
 
 Your first reason Mr. Bernard is that popularity is 
 contrary to Gods order vnder the law and before the law, 
 vnder the law the powre of Governing was in the Levites : 
 befor the law it was in the first borne, & this governing 
 powre was not receaved from the people vnder the law, 
 but from the Lord by Moses : but the people only approved 
 the Lords appointment. 
 
 I answer: The first borne and so by consequent the 
 Levites did type two things, 1. That PrivUedg and 
 prerogative which Christ lesus hath, who is the first 
 borne having the preeminence in all things, Colos. 1. 18. 
 1, Cor. 15. 20. Revel. 1. 5. For Christ is the first & most 
 noble in the Church, even the head, & Fountayne of al 
 heavenly grace & excellency: 2. The first borne and so 
 by consequent the Levites did shadow out the church. 
 Exod. 4. 22. 23. who is the first borne of al the men of 
 the earth most deere and pretious to the Lord: So that 
 this reason of yours may thus be retorted vppon your selff . 
 
418 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 If the first borne before the law, & the Levites for 
 the first borne vnder the law, had the prehemi- 
 nence: then Christ, & the visible Church which 
 were shadowed out by the first borne, & by the 
 Levites, have the pre[he]minence & powre in 
 the new Testament. 
 But the first borne before the law, & the Levites for 
 the first borne vnder the law had the powre & 
 preheminence : by your owne confession. 
 Ergo: Christ & the visible church from Christ, 
 shadowed out by the first borne & the Levites, have 
 the powre & preheminence in the new Testament. 
 Remember for this particular that the first borne, 
 the first Fruites, the Preists, Levites, Kings & Princes 
 of ludah did al type forth vnto vs in the new testamet 
 the visible church & the Saints next vnder Christ who 
 is the head to the body of the Church as these scriptures 
 do manifestly declare, 1. Pet. 2. 5: 9. Revel. 1. 5, 6. 
 Col. 1. 18. 1. Cor. 15. 20. 
 
 The second of your nine reasons against popularity 
 is that it is without warrant in the Apostles tyme : The 
 Apostles alwayes begune, continued and composed church 
 matters, the body of the congregation were only made 
 aequaynted with matters, a liberty granted them to 
 chose officers, but they did never make any themselves : 
 nor attepted any thing of themselves. 
 
 This argument Mr. Bern, is partly vntrue, partly 
 against your self: Vntrue it is thus far forth that you 
 say the body of the congregation never attempted any 
 thing without Elders: For I demaund of you: what 
 did the 120. persons in the first of the a6ts, did they not 
 chuse an Apostle into office & ordeyne him? but they 
 had no Elders as yet : for the holy Ghost was not come 
 downe vppon them, & so ther were no Apostles, Prophets, 
 EvangeHsts, Pastors & Teachers. Eph. 4. 8. 11? did not 
 the Chiu-ches of Lystra, Iconium, & Antiochia think you 
 worship Grod, admonish & excommunicate, during the tyme 
 of the Apostles absence from them, when as yet they 
 had no Elders, Adt. 14 21-23? did not the Churches in 
 Creta think you worship God, & governe in the absence 
 of the Apostles & Titus when as yet Elders were not 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 419 
 
 appointed, Tit, 1. 5. you cannot deny that the Churches 
 were estabhshed before they had officers: if you do the 
 Apostle saith that they that are to be chosen Elders, 
 must not be newly planted into the faith, 1. Tim. 3. 6. 
 & so by consequent from the tyme of establishing Churches 
 til Ele6tion of officers, ther must needes be a space of 
 tyme for tryal of mens gifts & conversation & constancy 
 in the faith, during which tyme the Apostles being absent 
 from the Churches, I make no doubt, but they did worship 
 God, & performe the other parts of their Spiritual com- 
 munion: if they did so, then I say, look how many 
 Churches were established by the Apostles: So many 
 examples ther are of the congregation attempting every 
 thing almost, without Elders: & so the Second reason 
 of yours conteyneth so many vntruths as ther were 
 Churches planted by the Apostles in the A6ts, who did 
 not the Gist day of their planting institute their Elderships, 
 but some certayne competent space of tyme afterward, 
 wherin ther might be sufficient tryal & knowledg of 
 mens gifts & quaUfications fit for office: & this may 
 suffice for your vntruths. 
 
 Now further your reason is against your seK in this 
 particular wherein you yeeld the cause, that the body of 
 the congregation had a hberty to chose their officers: 
 whence I reason thus against you. 
 
 They that have liberty to chose their owne officers, 
 
 & to worship God pubHquely before they have 
 
 officers: they have al the rest of Christs powre 
 
 ministerial befor they have officers. 
 
 But the body of every congregation hath powre to 
 
 worship God pubUquely (as you see) & have 
 
 hberty to chose their owne officers (as you con- 
 
 fesse) & yet want Elders. 
 
 Ergo: the body of every congregation hath al the 
 
 rest of Christs ministerial powre before they have 
 
 officers. 
 
 I say the body of the Church hath powre: which 
 
 powre commeth after into a6t & execution when her 
 
 officers are chosen, viz : The powre of baptizing & admin- 
 
 istring the Lords Supper : & yet it may also be questioned 
 
 whither the Church may not as well administer the Scales 
 
 7—2 
 
420 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 of the covenant before they have Officers, as Pray, Pro- 
 phesy, Ele6t Officers and the rest, seing that to put 
 the Scales to the covenant is not a greater work then 
 pubhshing the covenant, or Ele6tion of officers, or ex- 
 communication. 
 
 The third of your 9. reasons against popularity is that 
 it is against Christs commission granted to the Apostles 
 & their Successors, as Timothie, Titus, & the cheef 
 ministers of the Gospel: & that therfor the place 1. Cor. 
 5. 4. must be expounded of the Elders as you say the 
 Apostle sheweth, 1. Cor. 2. 6. 
 
 Wei Mr. Bern, this is old rusty, rotten popish stuff e 
 even as auncient as the Church of Antichrist some of it, 
 viz: that of succession: which hath already receaved 
 answer, & the contrary been proved at large in this 
 Se6tion whither I referre you. 
 
 But heer are certaine vntruths avouched by you which 
 must be answered, viz: one is: that Christs commission 
 was granted only to the Apostles, & their Successors: 
 I have proved already in the forme[r] reasons that the 
 commission was given to the body of the Church ex- 
 pounding those f oure places which you quote, viz : Mat. 
 28. 19. & 16. 19. lohn. 20. 21-23. Marc. 13. 34. which 
 also is further cleered, for that the twelve were not yet 
 Apostles, but only nominated to the office, for they were 
 indued with powre fro on high vppon the day of Pentecost, 
 Luk. 24. 49. compared with A6t. 2. 4. Eph, 4. 8. 11. as 
 also for that Cleopas, Mary Magdalene, & others besides 
 the eleven were present when the commission was given 
 vnto the Disciples, finally bicause the Apostles were the 
 Church representative, yea every one of them: having 
 in them powre to performe al the offices of al officers, 
 & members of the Church : & the Church only is the true 
 Successor of the Apostles, & no one man or Minister 
 whatsoever, seing no one person hath powre to performe 
 al offices of all officers and members, which notwith- 
 standing the whole Church joyntly hath. 
 
 A second vntruth is this, that you say the Apostles 
 committed that commission given them by Christ not 
 to the body of the Church, but to Timothie, Titus, & ther 
 successors as appeareth 1. Tim. 6. 13. 14. as you say: 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 421 
 
 wherto I answer that the Apostles leave the powre which 
 they receaved from Christ joyntly with the rest of the 
 Disciples, in the hands of the Church not of Timothie & 
 Titus only, & that chardg which Paul giveth to Timothie 
 respedteth the whole Epistle and aU the contents thereof 
 which aperteyne to all sorts of persons in the Church as 
 weU as to Timothie, as may be seen in the whole second 
 Chapter: & how prove you that Timothy an Evangelist 
 Succeeded Paull an Apostle? Or that the Elders of 
 Ephesus succeded Timothie an Evangelist? 
 
 A third vntruth is this, that you say the place 1. Cor. 
 5. 4. 13. must be vnderstood of Elders as you say may 
 appeare, 1. Cor. 2 6. wherto I answer that this is a prety 
 trick, but it wil not serve your turne, to turne away the 
 truth & evidence to this place: For first the Epistle is 
 written to the whole body of the Church, al the circum- 
 stances of the Chap. 5. teach that the whole body was 
 leavened, & that their rejoycing was not good, & that 
 they ought not to be mingled with the brethren that 
 were fornicators, & that they ought not to eate the L. 
 Supper with such persons: that they have powre to judg 
 them that are within, & that they must cast out from 
 among them that incestuous person: & whereas you 
 would needes by one phrase (viz: the rebuke of many, 
 2. Cor. 2. 6.) expound this general as spoken of many 
 Elders not many brethren, I say herein you coyne a false 
 exposition For doth it foUow that bicause the rebuke 
 was delivered by many either brethren or Elders who are 
 to leade in al publique a6tions, therfor the Apostle 
 enjoyneth the Elders only to excommunicate? or bicause 
 some only pronounce the rebuke, & the sentence of 
 excommunication, therfor they only haA''e powre to decree 
 it? I desire you would make these consequents hang or 
 depend necessarily vppon ther antecedents or els you doe 
 but wrest the Scriptures to your destru6tion : besides that 
 place, 2. Cor. 2. 6. doth not teach who either decreed or 
 pronounced his excommunication, but only who rebuked 
 him for his sinne which were many (Elders if you wiU:) 
 For I take it the place is manifest that he was not ex- 
 communicate, bicause he repented vppon the reproof: 
 which the Apostle saith, is sufficient. And sometyme 
 
422 ParaEeles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 in the Scripture many, signifieth all : & all signifieth 
 many: as these places declare, Matt, 3. 5. Roman. 5. 
 18. 19. Therefore this quirck ofE yours is but a meer 
 SophisticaU cavill to put of the truth. 
 
 The fourth of your 9. reasons against popularity is 
 that the place of Ephes. 4. 11. 12. is against it, for ther 
 the Apostle declareth (say you) that gifts for the ministerie 
 are given to the Ministers for the Church, not to the 
 Church for the Ministers : and that therefore the powre 
 of Christ is not given to the body of the Church, but only 
 to the Elders : & this you shew by a similie from the parts 
 of the body which do not receave their qualityes, f acultyes, 
 or gifts from the body, but from God. 
 
 To this reason I answer: that you declare your self 
 
 to be either bhnd or willfully to shut your eyes against 
 
 the truth & evidence of this place: For it is as cleer as 
 
 the shining of the Sunne in the Firmament of heaven 
 
 against your exposition & obje6tion : For I pray you in 
 
 good sooth doth this argument follow, viz : Christ giveth 
 
 gifts vnto me not by the mediation of the body of the 
 
 Church : therf or Christ giveth his ministerial powre to the 
 
 officers, & not to the body ? yet this is the force of your 
 
 argument, which may for more evidence be framed thus. 
 
 If Christ give gifts to the officers of the Church, 
 
 not by the Church, but immediately by & from 
 
 himself: Then Christ giveth powre of binding 
 
 & losing to the officers of the Church, not by 
 
 the meanes of the church, but by such meanes as 
 
 God hath appointed: (that is as I gesse by 
 
 Succession. ) 
 
 But you say the Antecedent is true by the place of 
 
 the Eph, 4. 
 And I say the consequent or conclusion followeth 
 not vppon the antecedent: but it is meerly 
 asyllogiston. 
 But I wil declare the inconsequence more fully: The 
 Lord he giveth gifts to men either ordinarily or extra- 
 ordinarily: Extraordinarily he gave gifts to men in the 
 primitive Churches: Ordinarily he giveth gifts to men 
 by study, & paynes, & by nature, so he gave the gifts 
 of Tongs and Prophesy extraordinarily to the primittive 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 423 
 
 Churches, he giveth the same gifts now ordinarily by 
 meanes of Study and the help of naturaU witt: How 
 will it foUow that bicause the Lord gave gifts, therefore 
 he gave his MinisteriaU powre extraordinarily from 
 heaven ? Why ? you conf esse that powre of binding and 
 losing was given before Christs ascension, but now you 
 would prove by this place Ephes. 4. that the powre of 
 binding & losing is given after Christs assension, and 
 that these gifts and this powre are given together: is 
 not this to contradi6t your self? hereby you see the 
 weakenes of your reason : For you must distinguish 
 betwixt the powre of binding and losing which the 
 Disciples had committed vnto them before Christs 
 ascension : and betwixt the gifts of the day of Pentecost. 
 
 But what are those gifts mentioned in that place of 
 Ephes. 4. 8. 11. 12. and vnto whome are those gifts 
 given? I will declare it vnto you, and so your mouth 
 shalbe stopt. 
 
 These gifts which are said to be given to men are 
 those foure sorts of Officers which the Apostle men- 
 tioneth vs. 11. Apostles, Prophets, Evangehsts, Pastors 
 & Teachers, for the two last are one office. These 
 officers with their gifts are said to be given to men: 
 who are these men vnto whome these officers with their 
 gifts are give? are they not the Church? is not the 
 office of an Elder, Pastor, or Teacher the L. gift to the 
 Church? This place you see therefore is most pregnant 
 against your opinion: as may appeare thus, 
 
 That which is given by Christ to the Church is in 
 
 the powre & possession of the Church. 
 The officers & offices of the Church are given to 
 
 the Church. 
 Ergo: the officers & offices of the Church are in 
 the powre & possession of the Church. 
 
 Wherfor I say vnto you that the gifts of preaching, 
 administration of the Sacraments & Governing, are given 
 vnto some me, but the office & officers indued with these 
 gifts are given vnto the Church, who have powre to 
 appoint them to their office, & who do receave both 
 their office & powre to administer in their office from 
 the Church, vnto whome the office & powre of Christ 
 
424 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 is given primarily, being the next Lord therof vnder 
 Christ the Monarch. 
 
 And for your similie of the parts receaving their 
 properties from God : not from the body, it is perversly 
 applyed : For this is the true vse and apphcation of the 
 simiHe: as the head communicateth all the powre & 
 facultie which any part hath from it self, to that part 
 by the body: so the head Christ communicateth his 
 powre to the parts and officers of the Church by the body 
 of the Church : which is Christ mysticall : I confesse 
 some parts of the body have some special properties and 
 quahties which they receave not from the head: as the 
 Stomach hath the quality Chilij&candi, the Uver Sangui- 
 ficandi, &c. not from the head, but the powre and faculty 
 to vse the property it hath from the head: So some 
 members of the Church have special gifts given them of 
 God, but the powre of vsing those gifts they have from 
 the head Christ by the meanes of the body, which is 
 the pipe that from the Fountaine conveigheth all powre 
 Ecclesiastical to every officer. 
 
 The Fifth of your 9. reasons against popularity is 
 that the Scripture doth not lay the Government vppon 
 the people, nor reproveth them for suffering abuse of 
 Holy things: but vppon the governors civil & Eccle- 
 siastical, Ezech. 22. 26. 1. Sam. 2, 17. 1. King. 13. Mat 23. 
 Revel. 2. 1. 8. 12. 18. & 3. 17. 14. 
 
 I answer breefly from the Type to the truth concerning 
 matters of the Old Testament: Seing now the Sajmts 
 are all of them made Kings and Preists vnto God Revelat. 
 1.6. Or as the Apostle Peter saith : Basileion hierateuma, 
 1. Pet. 2. 9. a Kingly Preisthood: Therefore now in the 
 New Testament the Saynts succeede in the place of the 
 Kings and Preists of the Old Testament in Ecclesiasticall 
 causses: and as they were burdened with Government 
 and reproof for profanation of holy things: so are the 
 Saynts the members of the visible Church, now burdened 
 with Government Ecclesiasticall, and reproof for violating 
 the Holy things committed to their custody & fidelity: 
 & therfor I reason from your owne confession against 
 you thus. 
 
 If Kings & Preists in the Old Testament were 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 425 
 
 chardged with Government, and blamed for 
 violation of holy things : Then in the New Testa- 
 ment the Saints (who are Kings & Preists) are 
 chardged with government, & blamed for viola- 
 tion of Holy things. 
 But Kings & Preists in the old Testament were 
 chardged with government, & blamed for violation 
 of Holy things. 
 Therfor the Saints in the new Testament are 
 chardged with government ecclesiastical, & blamed 
 for violation of Holy things. 
 And thus you see Mr. Ber. how your owne weapon 
 entreth into your owne bowels: & concerning the places 
 of the Revelation that the Aungels of the seaven Churches 
 were chardged with government, & blamed for abuse of 
 the Holy things & not the body of the Church, I say 
 herein you vtter foule vntruths: For Chap. 1. vs. 4-7. 
 the Apostle w[r]iteth to the 7. Churches of Asia, & wisheth 
 grace & peace to the Churches & all the members of the 
 Churches: & Chap. 2. 11. & at the end of every Epistle, 
 the Apostle maketh application of every Epistle to al 
 that have eares, & to the particular Churches: wherfor 
 I wonder at your shamelesse ignorance that should thus 
 falsely belye the Scriptures, & abuse the reader: To 
 turne the point of this reason of yours also vppon your 
 self, I say thus. 
 
 If lohn chardgeth the whole Churches with gouern- 
 
 ment & abuse of holy things (though the message 
 
 be sent to the aungel to be published to the 
 
 whole church) then the whole churches are charged 
 
 therwith, viz : with government & violatio of holy 
 
 things. 
 
 But lohn chardgeth the whole Chiu-ches with the 
 
 government & abuse of Holy things: (though 
 
 the message be sent to the Aungel of every Church, 
 
 to be published to the whole Church.) 
 
 Therfor the whole Churches are chardged with the 
 
 government & violation of the holy things. 
 
 Thus much breefly concerning your fifth reason: & 
 
 heer you make a digression to prove vnto vs that Matt. 
 
 18. 17, Tell the Church must be expounded: Tel the 
 
426 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 Governors : For confirmation whereof you bring vs seaven 
 reasons which I will handle in order. 
 
 Your first reason to prove that: Tel the Church is 
 Tel the Governors, is this: for that otherwise Christ 
 could not be vnderstood, for if he had brought in a strange 
 course not heard of before, nor then pra6tised, no man 
 could vnderstand his meaning : Seing therfor before then 
 & after the pra6tise was to tel to the Elders or governors : 
 therfor tel to the Church is tel to the Governors or 
 Elders. 
 
 Alas for you Mr. Bern, this is borrowed stufEe, & yet 
 stark naught: For it is but froth & chafie: & what is 
 the chaffe to the wheat? Do not you think that the 
 whole GospeU is a mystery which was kept secreat 
 from the beginning of the world? & is not the visible 
 Church of the new Testament with all the ordinances 
 thereof, the cheef & principal part of the Gospel? & 
 therfor, seing this ordinance of telling the Chiirch is a part 
 of the Gospel, it was formerly hidden & mystical, & now 
 it was revealed plainly by Christ : & although happily 
 the Disciples vnderstood not Christs meaning at that 
 present, yet afterward the Holy Ghost brought that & 
 many other necessary things which they eyther vnder- 
 stood not Christs meaning at that present, yet afterward 
 the Holy Ghost brought that & many other necessary 
 things which they either vnderstood not or forgot, to 
 their knowledg & memory as the Scripture witnesseth: 
 But further I say even that particular was obscurely 
 signified by the Typical King and Preists in the Old 
 Testament vnto whome the Government was committed, 
 as I have already more then once declared vnto you: 
 & further the government was then given to al Christs 
 Disciples by commission as I have already proved suffi- 
 ciently to your conscience & the conscience of all that 
 love the truth in sincerity. 
 
 That of the excommunication of the bhnd man loh. 
 9. 22. was a devise of the lewes, for ther is no warrant 
 for it in al the law: & if it were the L. ordinance, it 
 tj^eth vnto vs thus much that the visible Church succeed- 
 ing in the place of the typical Kings & preists have in 
 their hands the powre of excommunication. 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 427 
 
 And although Cloe made complaint to the Governor 
 yet it is nothing to the purpose: For Cloe complayneth 
 of an whole Church to an Apostle : not of a particular 
 person to the Elders of a particular Church: and doe 
 you think that this is a good argument? That seing a 
 particular person complayneth to or inf ormeth the Apostle 
 of the state of the Church (who had an infalhble gift of 
 instru6ling and dire6ting of Churches) therefore a par- 
 ticular person in the third place or degree of admonition 
 must teU the Elders, & that therfor those Elders are the 
 Church? The argument is altogether inconsequent. 
 
 Your second reason that tel the Church is tel the 
 
 Governors is Christs chandg of the person: From the 
 
 third to the second: The force of your argument is this. 
 
 If Christ having spoken in the third person saying : 
 
 Tel the Church : afterward turneth his speech to 
 
 the second person saying : whatsoever ye bind 
 
 &c. then tel the Church is tel the Elders. 
 
 But Christ chandgeth his speech from the third to 
 
 the second person. 
 Therfor teU the Church is tel the Elders. 
 Mr. Ber. you were not wel advised in making this 
 argument: For it overthroweth your exposition most 
 manifestly, as thus. 
 
 If Christ calleth his Disciples the Church, then tel 
 the Church is tel the Disciples or the body of the 
 Church. 
 But Christ caUeth al his Disciples the Church : For 
 this commission of binding and losing is given 
 to aU the Disciples jointly as is already declared 
 more fuUy in the former arguments. 
 Therfor tel the Church is tel the body of the Church, 
 al Christs Disciples, & not only the Governors. 
 Therfor this reason confirmeth the truth we hold, & 
 not the error which you seek to defend by wresting the 
 Scripture. 
 
 Your third reason that tel the Church is tell the 
 Governors is, for that Christ speaketh of two or three: 
 That is to say (after your exposition) of two or three 
 Elders or governors & not of the whole body. 
 
 I answer that your argument is without al force of 
 
428 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 consequence: For to argue thus is to argue without 
 reason or force of argument, viz. 
 
 Iff Christ speaketh of two or three, then he speaketh 
 
 of two or three Elders or Governors. 
 But Christ speaketh of two or three. 
 Ergo: Christ speaketh of two or three Elders or 
 Governors. 
 Further by this argument one Apostle could do nothing, 
 but ther must needes be two or thre: & so one Elder 
 can do nothing, but ther must needes be two or thre: 
 & so your Prelates Monarchy in their dioceses falleth to 
 the ground, but your arguments grow ridiculous. 
 
 Now the reason why Christ speaketh of two or thre 
 is for consolatio to the Church & Disciples of Christ, 
 teaching that if but two or thre of them at any tyme 
 walk together in the faith & truth of Christ, those two 
 or thre have title to Christ & al his ordinances & have 
 promise of audience & acceptance: as also to instru6t 
 the Saynts, to stand for the truth against multitudes, 
 though they be the smallest nomber which is three or 
 two, for Christ he wil not leave them destitute of his 
 presence and asistance. 
 
 Your Fourth reason that Tel the Church is Tel the 
 Elders is this: that the person is changed from the 
 second to the third, vs. 19. if two of you shal agree, &c. 
 whatsoever they shal ask &c : the force of the argument 
 is al one with the second, & so hath receaved answer 
 there, but it seemeth you delight in nomber & multitude : 
 yet for further evidece I will show you the reason: the 
 frame whereof is thus to be conceaved. 
 
 Iff ther be a Grammaticall change of the person, 
 
 viz: you: they: then ther is a Reall chandg 
 
 off the person physicall, viz: The Governors: 
 
 The Church. 
 
 But ther is a grammatical chandg of the person, 
 
 you : they. 
 
 Ergo : Ther is a Real chandg of the person physicall, 
 
 viz: The Governors: the Church. 
 
 I deny your Major, & stU I avouch that the chandg 
 
 of the person is by way of exposition, teaching : that they : 
 
 & you : are one : namely, whither they be two of Christs 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 429 
 
 Disciples then living (viz: you) or any other two or 
 thre to the end of the world, (viz: they,) Christ hath 
 promised his powre, presence, & acceptance to them: 
 For so he saith wheresoever two or thre, vs. 20. & Mat. 
 28. 20. Lo I am with you alwayes: So that these two 
 general circumstances of place & tyme are for the con- 
 solati5 & instrudtion of the Church if they be but two 
 or three in al ages: For not the multitude, but the 
 truth is respe6led of Christ: & al tymes & places are 
 indifferent for the Church of the new Testament which 
 was otherwise in the old Testament: For the Lord then 
 promised his presence especially in the Temple, vppon 
 their Sabbaths, & to the special people : but now the 
 partition wal is broken downe, & now al tymes, places, 
 & persons are indifferet for the church & the Lord. 
 
 Your fifth reason that Tel the Church is Tel the 
 Governors is this: that otherwise absurdityes cannot be 
 avoyded that arise out of the text : the absurdityes you 
 suppose would follow are, 1. confusion. 2, carelesnes, 
 wherevppon foUow pride & contention, 3. weomen & 
 childre speaking in the Church, 4. that the whole Church 
 ca speak. 5. Christs should crosse himself, who giveth 
 the powre to two or three. 
 
 Herevnto I answer: the supposed absurdities either 
 do not f oUow, or if they do f olow are no absurdities : For 
 the truth is not absurd. 
 
 First, it doth not follow that ther must needes be 
 confusion, carelesnes, pride, or contention, if a brother 
 be promoted to the body of the Chxirch for his offence 
 after once & twise admonition: but rather the brethren 
 vnderstanding that al are interessed in the busines wilbe 
 careful to dischardg their dutyes, whereas by your fancy 
 the care & chardg being cast vppon the Elders & from 
 the brethren, they may whoUy negledt the matter, & the 
 Church grow corrupt through the Elders partiahty negli- 
 gence, or other sinister respe6t: & for confusion: it is 
 not intended as you grossely imagine that al should 
 speake, but that al should consent: For as in prayer 
 one speaketh & al the Church consent: So in pubhque 
 admonition & excommunication one speaketh at once & 
 the rest consent: & if any man have any thing to say 
 
430 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 he may speake, & the first hold his peace, as in Prophecy 
 so in admonition by proportion, 1. Cor. 14. 30. & yet 
 the Lords order not be violated. & if pride & therevppon 
 contentions do arise it is through the corruption of men, 
 not through the ordinance of God, & may ther not much 
 more pride grow in the Elders think you when they are 
 absolute Lords (as it were) over the people? & wil not 
 that breed much more contention? And to contend for 
 the truth is good and warrantable, yea & contentions 
 must be in the true church, but woe be to those by whome 
 they come. 
 
 Secondly, you say the whole Church cannot speake 
 joyntly, nor severally, one by one except weomen & children 
 speak: I deny it: the whole Church may speake joyntly 
 as in prayer & prophesying, 1. Cor. 11. 4. So also in 
 admonition & excommunication, by some persons deputed 
 therto either Elders if ther be any, or other if ther be 
 no Elders: & for the speaking of weomen in the Church 
 I say it needeth not: for they, & so al the brethren 
 may speake by silence: or if any dissent they may 
 speak either woman or youth, & yet the rule of the 
 Apostle not violated, who forbiddeth weomen to lead the 
 a6tion of worship in prayer or prophesy, or praising God, 
 or any aftion of Government in the presence of men: 
 but he doth not forbid a woman to speake when she is 
 called therto, in matter of Government: neither doth 
 the Apostle intend to forbid weomen to pray or prophesy 
 in the presence of weomen only, as somtyme the occasion 
 may be ministred if the church consist only of weomen : 
 that this is so you shal perceave by comparing these 
 places, 1. Cor. 14. 34. 1. Tim. 2. 12, & considering the 
 reasons of the Apostles prohibition: but let vs see the 
 force of your argument. 
 
 If tel it to the Church be tel it to the body of the 
 
 Church : then every member of the Church must 
 
 speake in rebuking the partie. 
 But every member must not speak in rebuking the 
 
 partie that is promoted to the Church for sinne. 
 Therfor tel it to the Church is not tel it to the body 
 
 of the Church, & so it must needes be tel it to 
 
 the Elders. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 431 
 
 I deny your consequent, for al may heare, take notice, 
 give consent, & speake if they se just cause orderly, 
 & yet it followeth not that al are bound to speake vocaly 
 one by one: For silence is a sufficient testification of 
 consent : Further I say your minor is weake : For every 
 one is bound to speake that seeth just cause or els he 
 shall ther by strangle his conscience, and quench the 
 Spiritt, and suffer sinne which he cannot do without 
 sinne. 
 
 Lastly, Christ crosseth not himself, in giving powre 
 to two or thre : For he may give powre to two or three 
 if ther be no more, & yet to twenty, an hundreth, a 
 thousand, if ther be so many: but you Mr. Bern, raise 
 vp false expositions, & wrack the text to support heresies, 
 therby making the Scriptures a leaden riile to frame to 
 your crooked conceipts, & a nose of waxe to be wrung 
 which way your perverse apprehensions incline. 
 
 Your sixth reason that tel the Church is tel the 
 Governors is this : that els the Corinthians offended who 
 were al commaunded to deale with the incestuous Corinth, 
 & yet some only did so : & Paul should sinne who vppon 
 the advertisement of Cloes howse, did not wayt for the 
 churches consent, but himself alone determined the 
 matter, & wils them to exente his sentece in the open 
 congregation. 
 
 I answer : al the Corinths did deale with the incestuous 
 person though many spake the rest giving consent to 
 their speeches: & therfor ther can no more sinne lye 
 vppon the for not rebuking by voice, then ther lyeth 
 sinne vppon the whole Church, for not lifting vp their 
 voice to speake in prayer & prophesy, being al com- 
 maunded so to do : besides all might speake : for many 
 somtyme signifieth al, as I have already shewed: but 
 this is but idle stuffe which you obje6t. Furthermore 
 Paul was an Apostle having powre & infahbility to plant 
 & diredt & reforme Churches, & wil you fro hence fetch 
 a rule for the perpetual government of the Church? it 
 foUoweth not Paii did thus: so, one Prelate may do 
 thus: nay by your owne exposition ther must nedes be 
 two or thre Prelates : but what did Paul ? did he performe 
 the whole decree of excommunication ? I deny it vtterly : 
 
432 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 but the Apostles meaning is that he for his part gave 
 his voice, & advise, & commaundemet (as having receaved 
 grace to be faithful) that the incestuous person should 
 be excommunicate: & note it wel Mr. Ber. Paul doth 
 bid the Elders (as you say) excommunicate him : ca these 
 things agre? I beleeve your wit was wandering when 
 you wrote these things: for you avouched out of the 
 2. Cor. 2. 6. that many Elders did excomunicate the 
 incestuous person: & now you say that Paul at the 
 information of Cloes Family, like a Lord Bb. decrees the 
 sentence of excommunication in his court, & comaundeth 
 them to pronounce it : you gave this powre of late to 
 the Elders, & now you take it fro the Elders, & give it 
 to Paul, & make the Elders only his deputyes : but I wil 
 shew you the reason of this your oversight & contradi6lion : 
 you had by you in your study when you penned your 
 book, the writings of the Reformists, & the writings of 
 the Prelates : & being in wrath & choler enraged against 
 vs of the Seperatio, you thought to make Herod & Pilate 
 frends against Christ, & have gathered both the Prelates 
 & Reformists obje6tions against vs & put the downe in 
 your book without judgment, & so through the weaknes 
 of your vnderstanding not discerning the reasons of the 
 Reformists & Prelates to contradi6t, bicause they fitted 
 you against vs, you not regarding the truth but the 
 vi6tory, have fallen into this grosse contradi6lion which 
 your learning can never salve: only your repentance 
 & confession can cure it. 
 
 Your last reason that tel the Church is tel the 
 Elders is this: for that al reformed churches judg 
 so: wel: yet you said even now that tel the Church 
 is tel the Apostle Paul, & the Lord Bb. by consequent 
 his successors: are you in your right mynd Mr. Ber. 
 that stumble thus? but you see what it is to resist the 
 truth. 
 
 But what if al the reformed Churches say so: is it 
 so? if the Scripture say contrary it is not so: & the 
 Churches must be reformed yet further according to the 
 Scriptures. 
 
 Finaly, you prove that figuratively the part may cary 
 the name of the whole : who denyeth it ? & that therf or 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 433 
 
 the Elders are called the Church: I deny that. For it 
 f oloweth not : yet I yeeld you thus much (which you shal 
 gaine nothing by) that two or three Elders may be 
 termed a church being severaiy by theselves, but jointly 
 with the body they are not so: so a Christian family, 
 or rather the Christians in a family may be truly termed 
 a church severaiy: yet jointly with the body they are 
 not so : For know you Mr. Ber. that the parts of the 
 Church are similares & Homogoncse: as every part of 
 water is water, so every part of a Church, if they be 
 a comunion, is a Church being severed necessarily from 
 the whole : you say also that a company without officers 
 no where is called a Church (Christian families only 
 excepted) in al the new Testament except A6t. 14, 23. 
 by anticipation : First you must prove vnto me Mr. Ber. 
 that this place A6t. 14. 23. is by anticipation: For doth 
 it follow bicause heaven & earth are so called by antici- 
 pation Gen. 1. 1. therfor a company wanting officers are 
 called a Church by anticipation? besides you speake 
 falsely, saying that in al the new testament a company 
 without officers is not caled a church: what say you to 
 A6t. 19. 41. any company of people is called a Church 
 in that place : and whereas you confesse that a Christian 
 famUy is called a Church by the warrant of the new 
 Testament, you yeeld the cause: For if two or thre 
 faithful persons of a family are a Church, then two or 
 thre faithful persons of divers f amihes are a Church : or 
 els shew you a sound reason to the contrary: hence 
 I reason thus. 
 
 They which the Scripture cal a Church, are a Church. 
 The Scripture caUeth two or thre beleevers in a 
 
 family a Church. 
 Therfor: two or tlire beleevers in a family are a 
 
 Church. 
 Againe: If two or thre beleevers of one family are 
 
 a Church: then two or thre beleevers of divers 
 
 families are a Church by proportion. 
 But two or thre beleevers of one family are a Church, 
 
 by your confession & testimony of the Scripture. 
 Therfor: two or thre beleevers of divers families 
 
 are a Church. 
 
434 Paralleles : Censures : Observations. 
 
 But know, Mr. Ber. that we strive not about the 
 word, but about the matter : bee they Ecclesia, Synagoge, 
 Disciples, brethren, Saints, we regard not the word: we 
 say that two or thre Disciples, Saints, brethren, are 
 Sinagoge, Ecclesia, a congregation with whome Christ 
 is present, who have Christs powre, vnto whome every 
 member of the body must be promoted for sinne, this 
 you neither have disproved, nor ever shalbe able : & heer 
 endeth yotir digression: & now you come vnto your 
 sixth reason. 
 
 Your 6. reason against popularity is a repetition of 
 things already answered in the fifth reason, that Tell 
 the Church is Tel the Governors: Therfor I referre the 
 reader thither. 
 
 Your 7. reason against popularity is that it is against 
 the comaundement of Christ : For Heb. 13. 17. 1. Pet. 5. 2. 
 the sheep must obey the shepheard, & the flock must 
 depend vppon the Pastor: & he is not to obey them or 
 depend vppon them. 
 
 I answer: To the place Heb. 13. 17. I say the Apostle 
 doth not intend to teach that the whole body of the Church 
 must yeeld to the voice of the Elders in every thing that 
 they list : nor that the Eldership hath in their hands the 
 powre of Christ to rule contrary to their liking: For the 
 Lord submitteth both Pastors & Flock vnto his owne 
 lawes & wil: but the intent of the Apostle is to show 
 that al the particular members in al their affaires must 
 submitt themselves to the instru6tion dire6tion & guidance 
 of the Elders: For although Christ hath placed the 
 Elders as stewards over the Servants, yet he hath not 
 appointed them as Lords over his spowse & wife: your 
 argument therfor is a faUacian a conjunftione & divisione, 
 thus. 
 
 Al the particular members must obey the Elders 
 in their lawful instru6lions, & their wholsome 
 admonitions severally. 
 Ergo, the whole body must jointly obey the voice 
 of the Elders. 
 
 Againe, the whole Flock consisteth of two parts, 
 Officers, and the Saints: The Saints must obey the 
 Officers, that is one part of the Church must be diredted 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 435 
 
 by another, as the f oote by the eye : yet the whole body 
 jointly is above any one member or members apart. 
 
 Fiirther al the Saints shal yeeld obedience to the 
 Elders in things comaunded by God, & the Elders shal 
 al of them obey the voice of the chm'ch in things co- 
 maunded by God, but the question is how far the sheep 
 must obey the Elders who are shepheards, & how far the 
 Elders which are the L. Servants must obey the wife 
 & spowse of Christ which is the Church: For know you 
 Mr. Ber. these things may well stand together, that the 
 whole Church may obey the Elders in some things: & 
 the Elders must obey the body of the Church in other 
 things. 
 
 The other place 1. Pet. 6. 2. to en humin: may 
 aswel be translated with al your best ability, as, that 
 dependeth vppon you: but I say further that the Flock 
 must depend vppon the shepheards, as they are sheep, 
 & as they al jointly are the wife of the lamb the best 
 members must submit to her voice being the voice of her 
 husband & Lord. 
 
 Your eight reason against popularity is this, that it 
 is against common sence that the parents should submit 
 to the Children, the workman to the work, the Seedsman 
 to the corne. 
 
 I answer, neither is it reason that the whole body 
 should yeeld to the hand, or the Servant to the Mx. Or 
 the wife to the mayd. But you know the Church is 
 a body & the Elders hands & other parts the church is 
 the Mrs. & the Elders are Servants: but comparisons 
 are not to be vrged further then their intention: lest 
 we break them in peeces & spoyle the proportion: & 
 somtyme in some cases the parets may lawfully submit 
 to children, the workemen to the work, & the husbandme 
 to the corne: For you know that relations chandg 
 arguments. 
 
 Your ninth & last reason against popularity is, that 
 it is against the dignity & office of true Ministers who 
 represent Christs person, having their powre from him 
 & which none but such as represent Christ can give or 
 take away : But the body of the Church doth not represent 
 Christs person, nor ever did depose or make Ministers: 
 
 8—2 
 
436 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 and bicause the body of the Church are not Ministers, 
 therfor they cannot make Ministers: & such like rotten 
 stuffe. 
 
 I answer: That the Ministers do represent Christs 
 person I deny not: but avouch that the Church doth 
 much more represent Christs person, who is the Spowse 
 & wife of Christ: & that the Ministers have their powre 
 from Christ I deny not, but al their powre commeth 
 from Christ through the body of the Church as I have 
 sufficiently proved already : That the Church hath made 
 Ministers I have shewed, A6t. 1. they chose an Apostle 
 when as yet they were not Apostles, they Ele6ted Deacons, 
 A6t 6, Now Ele6tion is the very essence of a true Minister : 
 The Church admonisheth an Elder, Col. 4. 17. & deposeth 
 false Apostles, Reve. 2. 2. preacheth, prayeth, & wor- 
 shippeth wanting Elders, Aft. 13. 22. 23 & whereas you 
 say that Ministers only make Ministers, I answer it is 
 the ground of Succession which I have formerly over- 
 throwne: & I say that the body of the Church hath in 
 it al ministerial powre immediately from Christ, & your 
 slender stuffe hath prevailed nothing against this truth 
 of the Lords: the vniversity may make a Do6tor, a 
 Bachelor, a Maister, & yet it [is] not any such thing, 
 but a compound body having a charter from the King, 
 for that purpose: a corporation may make a Major 
 & Sherifes, & yet the corporation is not a Major or a 
 Sheriffe: So the Church may make Ministers, & yet 
 the Church it self is not properly an Elder, or Deacon, 
 or Widow, but a body politique having powre to produce 
 such workes by ver[t]ue of the charter which Christ hath 
 given vnto it. 
 
 And thus Mr. Ber. I have done with you for this 
 point: but Mr. Ains. steppeth vp with a new kind of 
 Antichristianisme never heard of before: & he teacheth 
 vs if we wil beleve him, that Christs ruling powre is in 
 the Eldership, & that the Pope & Prelates are not Anti- 
 christs for taking into their hands the powre of the 
 multitude, but the powre of Christ. 
 
 Heer in the first place we must remember that the 
 powre of Christ which we speak of is a ministerial delegated 
 powre given to man: & that the question is who is the 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 437 
 
 first subie6t of this ministerial powre, who receave it 
 immediately from Christ : I say the body of the Church 
 is the first subje6t of it, & I say that whatsoever the 
 Eldership hath, it hath from Christ through the body of 
 the Church, & by the Churches disposition, & this if you 
 deny Mr. Ains. (which I think you do not) I say you are 
 therein departed from the faith : The body of the Church 
 having al her powre from Christ retaineth & keepeth it 
 intire to it self, & doth not so delegate it to any officers, 
 as that she leeseth it & is deprived of it: neither doth 
 she delegate any powre to her officers, but that which 
 she formerly receaved from Christ her head, husband 
 & Lord : For Christ giveth not a double ministerial powre, 
 one immediately to the body of the Church which she 
 hath & keepeth : another mediately to the Eldership by 
 the Churches disposition which the church hath not at al, 
 but is only a conduit pipe to conveigh it to the Eldership : 
 if you hold such a matter, declare it vnto vs out of the 
 word of God & we wil receave it when we see it : in the 
 meane tyme we hold that whatsoever the Elders have, 
 they have it from the Church by delegation: & that 
 the Church hath it in ther owne hands, & receaved it 
 from Christ by vertue of the covenant God maketh with 
 it in Christ, giving Christ for King, Preist & Prophet to 
 the Church, & therfor the Church hath from Christ the 
 head al powre, & al the members & officers of the Church 
 have al their powre from the body, which they hold 
 & vse in the body & not Seperated from the body : The 
 Elders as it were the hands are conjo3med to the Church 
 as to the body : The body of the Church is conjoyned to 
 Christ the head: The body hath no powre devided from 
 the head: the hands have no powre divided from the 
 body. So a company of men have no powre Seperated 
 from Christ : an Eldership hath no powre Seperated from 
 the Church: but as aU powre floweth from the head to 
 the body, & then to the hads through the body, which 
 is first in the body before it come to the hands: So al 
 powre Ecclesiastical or ministeriall is derived from Christ 
 to the Church, & then through the Church to the Elders, 
 which is first in the Church before it come to the Elders : 
 And as when the hands are cut of the body stil retaineth 
 
438 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 the powre intire though it wat hands & the powre of the 
 hands is stil in the body: So when the Eldership is 
 deposed the Church stil retaineth the powre of the Elder- 
 ship, though it want an Eldership: & as the hands can 
 do nothing contrary vnto the hking of the whole body, 
 but the a6tions of the hands are by consent of the body : 
 So the Eldership can do nothing contrary to the liking 
 of the Church: but the a6tions of the Elders must be 
 by consent of the Church : & as those hands are worthy 
 to be cut of that rebel against the body & wrong it, or 
 endaunger it: So are those Elders worthy to be cut of 
 from the Church that rebel against the Church, wrong 
 it, or endaunger it. This is the faith which I hold Mr. Ains. 
 & if you hold any other faith, it is not the faith of 
 Christ: but let vs see what your book wil aford vs. 
 
 First, you say : Christs ruling powre, which the papists 
 say is in the pope, we say not is in the body of the 
 congregation the multitude, but in Christ himself : & that 
 the Pope is Antichrist, not for taking into his hands the 
 powre of the multitude, but of Christ, to rule & governe 
 the Church as head of the same, confutat. of Mr. Bern, 
 pag. 175. 
 
 You know Mr. Ains. that the Pope doth not assume 
 that powre which Christ as Kjng hath in his owne hands 
 reserved to himself: but the pope claymeth to be a 
 ministeriall head vnder Christ, having a Ministerial powre 
 given vnto him by succession from Peter: & although 
 it cannot be denyed, but that he doth many adlions 
 which are proper works of Christs powre Monarchical 
 proper to himself, yet that is but the misinterpretation 
 of his ministerial headship, not vnderstading how far that 
 ministerial headship, which he chaUengeth, extendeth, & 
 it is not his proper clayme to Christs office: therfore 
 properly the Pope is not Antichrist for challendging 
 Christs Kingly powre proper to himself : but for assuming 
 Christs Ministerial powre delegated to his Church: al- 
 though I do not deny but the Pope enlargeth the delegated 
 powre further then Christ hath prescribed in his word: 
 So that the Pope is Antichrist in two respe6ls, 1. For 
 clayming that powre which Christ hath given to the 
 body of the Church, 2. For extending that ministerial 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 439 
 
 powre beyond the compasse which Christ hath limited in 
 the word. 
 
 Secondly, you say: Christs ruling powre, which the 
 Protestants say is in the Bbs. the Prelates, we do not 
 say is in the multitude, but in Christ himself, & that 
 the Bbs. are very Antichrists for assuming Spiritual juris- 
 di6tion aperteyning to Christ alone, confut. of Mr. Bern, 
 pag. 175. 
 
 Heer also you cannot be ignorant Mr. Ains. that the 
 Prelates do not challendg that Monarchical powre which 
 is properly inherent in Christs person, but renounce it 
 vtterly as confidently as you do : but they only challendg 
 that Ministerial powre which Christ (as they say) hath 
 delegated to the Apostles & their Successors the L. Bbs. 
 neither can you with any good conscience say that they 
 clayme Christs Kingly powre, but only they are Anti- 
 christs as the Pope is for two causes. 1. For clayming 
 that powre Ministerial! which Christ hath given to the 
 body of the Church. 2. For enlarging that ministerial 
 powre beyond that compasse which Christ in his word 
 hath determined. 
 
 Thirdly, you say : Neither that ruling powre of Christ, 
 which the Puritanes say is in the presbytery, do we say 
 is in the multitude: For we acknowledg Christ to have 
 ordeyned a presbytery or Eldership & that in every 
 Church, for to teach & rule them by his owne word 
 & lawes: vnto whome al the multitude, the members, 
 the Saints, ought to obey & submit themselves, as the 
 Scriptures teach, confut. of Mr. Bern. pag. 176. 
 
 Wee say Christs ruling powre is originally & funda- 
 mentally in the body of the Church the multitude : & we 
 acknowledg further that the Elders receave by delegation 
 powre from the body of the Church, which powre minis- 
 terial in the hands of the Elders is not so large as that 
 which is in the body, but it is rather a leading powre 
 then a ruling powre : neither are the Elders in al the new 
 testament (to my knowledg) called Rulers archontes, but 
 overseers, leaders. Elders, prohistamenoi, wherby the 
 holy Ghost would teach that their powre is not to rule, 
 but to leade & dire6t: I do therefore vtterly disclaime 
 this your error Mr. Ains. as one part of Antichristianisme 
 
440 Paralleles : Censures : Observations, 
 
 in yoiir Church: but you had need expound it wel for 
 the satisfa6tion of the brethren of the Seperation, least 
 you herein destroy your constitution before you be 
 aware. 
 
 What we hold concerning the Presbytery I have 
 delivered partly in that which before I have written in 
 answer to Mr. Bern, partly in that which I lately published 
 concerning the differences of the Churches of the Sepera- 
 tion in the second part, & the first Se6tion, Chap. 5. 
 & 6. wherfor if you hold that Lordly, vsurped, Anti- 
 christian powre of your Eldership to be that ruling powre 
 which the word of God warranteth, it shalbe your part 
 to justifie it, & to rebuke al that gainstand it, for herein 
 wee vtterly disclayme your judgment & pra6lise: we 
 maintaine that the powre of the Eldership is a leading, 
 diredling, & overseeing powre, ministery, or service, both 
 in the Kingdom & Preisthood of the Church, & that the 
 negative voice, the last, definitive, determining sentence 
 is in the body of the Church, wherto the Eldership is 
 bound to yeeld: & that the Church may do any lawful 
 a6t without the Elders: but the Elders can do nothing 
 without the approbation of the body, or contrary to the 
 body. 
 
 The eighth Se6tion. 
 
 In the next place foUoweth your second position which 
 is this in your copie. 
 
 In holding that one sinne of one man publiquely 
 & obstinately stood in & not reformed by a true con- 
 stituted Church doth so pollute it that none may com- 
 municate with it in the holy things of God til the partie 
 offending be by the Church put out after lawful convidtion : 
 you say is error : I say it is the most comfortable & holy 
 truth wee hold in our walking one with another in com- 
 munion of Gods ordinances. 
 
 i This truth ariseth from the former ground, that al 
 
 I the members of the Church have powre to the censures 
 
 ' of admonition & excommunication, to bind & lose : For 
 
 (observe I pray you) that every brother is bound to 
 
 admonish his brother for a fault he observeth in him: 
 
 if he reforme not he must take one or two witnesses 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 441 
 
 & admonish him: if he reforme not yet, he must bring 
 the matter before the Church, suppose the Chu^rch consist 
 of 12. persons as at Ephesus, Adt. 19. 7. The matter 
 being before the Church the eleven deale with the twelvth, 
 discover his sin, & convince it to his conscience, he 
 refuseth to heer them but despiseth the admonitions: 
 I say if they retaine him stil in communion they consent 
 to his sinne: For as the civill Magistrate in pardoning 
 willfull murther consenteth to it, bicause the murtherer 
 should die: Even so the Church suffering the vnrepent- 
 aunt persone among them, consent to his sinne, and are 
 polluted with it, and consent to all the profanation and 
 violation of the Holy things committed by that vnrepentat 
 person : For God hath commaunded the church to watch 
 over their brethren, & if they do not they hate their 
 brother in suffering sinne to rest vppon him : God hath 
 commaunded that no vncleane person should medle with 
 the Holy things, if they doe they profane & polute the 
 Holy things offering violence to the Lords ordinances. 
 
 But it may be you wil say that by this meanfes we 
 assume to our selves a kind of perfe<Stion & puritie in 
 that we wil have no sinners among vs: I answer that 
 you must distinguish betwixt our persons & our com- 
 munion: we confesse our persons severally every one of 
 vs to be subject to sinne, & that we doe sinne dayly: 
 & bicause of our sinning nature the Lord hath appointed 
 the ordinances of the visible Church as helps & meanes 
 to subdue this sinning nature of ours, especially these 
 ordinances of admonition & excommunication which are 
 to be vsed & administred vppon al & by al as occasion 
 is offered: Now this is the perfe6tion & puritie of our 
 communion that we suffer no vnrepented sinne, no 
 vnrepentant sinner among vs, but either we cast out 
 the sinne by repentance or the sinner vnrepentant by 
 excommunication: that our comunion may be pure & 
 holy, & the church without spot or wrinckle : & that we 
 may be a new lump dayly vnleavened, the leaven being 
 purged out of vs continually : oh Mr. Ber. if you knew but 
 the comfort & powre of the L. ordinances of admonition 
 & excommunication : as we do (blessed be our good God) 
 in some measure, & that growth & reformation which is 
 
442 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 in some of vs thereby, you would be so wonderfully 
 ravished with the powre of Gods ordinances, that you 
 would acknowledg the Church to be terrible as an armie 
 with banners, & yet amyable & lovely comely & beautef ul : 
 in so much as Christ himself saith that the love of the 
 church is faire that she woundeth his hart with one of 
 her eyes, in regard of the beautyful & holy communion 
 which is dayly maintayned in her by vertue of the 
 censures : but your confused assemblies & al the members 
 of them not only omit, but reje6l, yea oppose al these 
 holy ordinances which Christ hath given to his Church, 
 & therby you proclaime to all the world that you are 
 of Belial, that is without the yoke of Christs ordinances, 
 & you cast away from you these cordes & bandes wherwith 
 wee are bound one to another, & knit faster & faster vnto 
 Christ our head: & therfor you Hving thus without the 
 yoke, out of the Lords Holy order, having broken these 
 bandes & cast the cordes fr5 you, mingling your selves 
 vnto, & joyning with al manner of profane persons that 
 violate al Gods ordinances, how can we have any fellow- 
 ship, communion, agreement, concord or part with you? 
 Answer to this now Maister Bernard, and seduce your 
 hearers no longer with vanityes. 
 
 ParaUeles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the eighth Se6lion. 
 
 Mr. Ber. in his book intituled the Sep. Schisme 
 pa. 103. hath these wordes, viz: that our seaventh error 
 should be to hold: That the sinne of one man pub- 
 Hquely & obstinately stood in, being not reformed, nor 
 the offender cast out, doth so pollute the whole congre- 
 gation, 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 Se6lion the position is thus vttered by 
 you, & by mee justified, viz: That one sinne of one 
 man publiquely and obstinately stood in and not reformed 
 by a true constituted Church doth so poUute 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 convi6lion. 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 443 
 
 Afterward expounding this truth I say, that if the 
 Church hold this obstinate, impenitent, convi6ted 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 pradlise referring vs to the confession of 
 their faith. Art. 26. wher their judgmet 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 themselves, and that in a high degree: & 
 now not that one mans sinne, but the sinne of them al 
 poUuteth them. 
 
 Wei 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 poUuteth them al by contagion, as the leaven 
 leaveneth the whole lump: & although Mr. Bern, hath 
 not so plainly & diredlely propoimded 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 teU you true 
 Mr. Ains. you deny the truth, if you deny the position: 
 but indeed your denyaU, & your afitirmation contradi6l. 
 
 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 repel 
 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 
 
444 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 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 both 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 do6tryne, or sentence 
 is whence it was raised, wherfor I frame an argument 
 from the former ground after this manner. 
 
 If they that have Christs ministerial powre to 
 reforme obstinate convi6ted sinners, or to excom- 
 municate the : do neither reforme them nor cast 
 them out fro among them, but suffer them stil 
 in communion consenting therby to their slnn: 
 then the persons so suffering & consenting to 
 slnne are polluted by contagion of the sin, & 
 impenitent wicked sinner. 
 But it may fal out that a Church true in the con- 
 stitution having Christs ministerial powre yet 
 afterward dechnlng may neither reforme an 
 obstinate convi6ted sinner, nor cast him out of 
 their communion, but may suffer him stil in 
 communion therby consenting to his slnne. 
 Ergo: a Church truly constituted, having Christs 
 MlnlsteriaU powre of reformation or excommuni- 
 cation, suffering and consenting to slnne & 
 sinners convinced is polluted by infe6tlon of 
 that slnne, and of that impenitent obstinate 
 convi6ted 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 testlfieth. 
 Tit. 1. 15. &< the Prophet, Esa. 1. 12. 
 But a Church truly constituted may grow to 
 polution by consenting to obstinate slnne & 
 sinners as is already declared. 
 Therfor a Church truly constituted may grow to 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 445 
 
 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 htle leave : 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 poUut- 
 eth the visible church, & the holy things therof : 
 & there vnto may no man joyne. 
 Againe, from persons ceremonialy pointed, & so defiUng 
 the San6tuary 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 medhng 
 with the holy flesh or pottage, did polute the 
 San6tuary, & the holy flesh, pottage & the rest : 
 So the visible Church of the new Testament 
 
446 Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 
 
 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 San6tuary, or 
 medUng with holy flesh or pottage, polute & 
 defile them. 
 Therfor the visible Church of the new testament 
 morally poluted & impenitent in sin deahng 
 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 & Magis- 
 trates 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 Magis- 
 trates (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 minis- 
 terial powre of Christ) suffering sinne vnreformed 
 among them are poluted therby: & so no 
 communio 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 dire6l consequents from the same, that 
 it is vnlawful for any man to joyne to a Chvirch that was 
 truly constituted, now growne to profane & violate the 
 holy things of God by consenting to sin & wicked, obsti- 
 nate, convinced, impenitent sinners: & that therfor 
 much more is it vnlawful to jojme to your false churches 
 which never were truly constituted since the defedtio of 
 Antichrist, but remaine in the gulfe of Antichristianisme 
 vnto this day : the first point therfor being manifest, the 
 
Paralleles: Censures: Observations. 447 
 
 second foloweth to be enterprised which is to answer the 
 objections & cavils which you make against this com- 
 fortable truth of the L. I cal it a comfortable truth 
 bicause herin consisteth the true comfort of churches & 
 Christians publiquely & privately : that they neither hve 
 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[t] 
 that we give no allowance to them no not so much as 
 by our presence in that commimion 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 obje6tions 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, affe6tion, co[u]ntenace & a6tion do declare his 
 dishke of it : as for exaple : Ely did al this to his sonnes 
 that pointed the L. Sacrifices, & comitted adultery with 
 the weomen that came to sacrifice, 1. Sa. 2. 22. 23. for 
 he should have proceded to the vtmost that the word 
 of God had required at his hads, viz: to have put his 
 sones to death, which bicause he did not he was pointed 
 with their sinnes by conset, & therfor the fearful judgmet 
 of God befel him which whosoever heard both their eares 
 tingled, 1. Sa. 3. 11. so except a ma do by al meanes save 
 himself from the froward generation, by Seperating him- 
 self as the Apostle pra6tised & counselleth, A6t. 2. 4. & 
 19. 9. & 2. cor. 6. 17. he cannot be fre fro[m] the contagion 
 of their sin & the profanation of al the Holy things of 
 God: For these places doe evidently declare that Paul 
 & the Apostles not only commaund to seperate from the 
 Gentils, but fro the lewes who were the true Church of 
 God now growing obstinate in sinne, & so pra6tised them- 
 selves commaunding the Disciples & training them vp 
 by his example so to do: & so teaching vs to foUow 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 
 
448 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 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 Benjamin consenting to 
 the sinne of adultery committed vppon the Levites 
 concubine, ludg. 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, losh. 22. & of Aohans 
 sin which brought wrath vppon the whole congregation. 
 Wherefore in the law the Lord did appoint a Sacrifice 
 for the whole congregation asweU 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 Kves 
 might come to Sacrifice, & yet not pollute others as I 
 have already sufficiently declared in the former Se6tion : 
 besides whereas the Prophets reprove the Preists, & the 
 Saints in the new Testament succeed the carnal Preists 
 as Spiritual Preists, therby it foUoweth 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. lude vs. 23. 2. Cor. 6. 17. 
 
 But stil some may obje6l, that in the old Testament 
 they did pray, & preach, & praise God, & yet notwith- 
 stading the faithful herein were not defiled if the wicked 
 did joyne with them in communion thereof: & therfor 
 now vnder the new Testament, though me do joyne in 
 communion with open known sinne, & suffer known sinne 
 yet may be saynts, & vnpoUuted in communion : & this 
 is the very pith & marrow of your second objedtion 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 impenitent 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. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 449 
 
 he cannot be accounted impenitent though he hve in it: 
 sith ignorance is a sinne whereof a man repenteth generaly, 
 & so in his general! repentance of sinnes done of ignorance 
 that partictdar 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 hve 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 & the to admonish him before with- 
 nesses, & 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 admonished & 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 faithfiil 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 Ante- 
 cedent, and the consequence of this Obje6tion. 
 
 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 IsraeHte or proselyte clensed 
 according to the purification of the San6tuarie did joyne 
 in prayer, preaching & praising God, no man could 
 justly refuse his outward communion in these adtions 
 seing he was outwardly cleane according to the dispen- 
 sation of those tymes: For vs in the new Testament 
 ther are required other visible a6lions for our outward 
 clensing, which were not then required of the carnall 
 Israehtes for their outward clensing: if they did declare 
 their inward repentance by Sacrifices for their sinnes 
 general & SpeciaU, by clensing themselves with those 
 rites & ceremonies which were appointed by the Lord 
 
460 Paralleles: Censures: Observations, 
 
 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 San6tuary, they were 
 not visibly cleane, & therfor communion could not be 
 had with them without sinne, & so Hezechiahs prayer 
 importeth, 2. Chron. 30 18-20. & the Prophets declare 
 plainly. Nob. 19. 31. 20. Hag. 2. 14. yet heer also cautions 
 must be remembred, viz: That this ceremonial! vn- 
 cleanenes 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 Behal very vUd wicked men did deale with the holy 
 things in the old Testament, but yet I say it cannot be 
 proved but they were visibhe 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 acknow- 
 ledgment 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 visibhe, 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. seconomie 
 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 objedtion: if the faithful did keep com- 
 munion with persons visibhe 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 
 Behal, & 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 : wherf or 
 both the Antecedent & consequent of the argument are 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 451 
 
 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, so in the 
 New 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 negle6ted 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 possibiHty 
 of enjoying the Lords ordinances though a man for- 
 sake 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 Hberty, whereas in the old 
 Testament they were in bondage vnder worldly ordi- 
 nances, 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 T[est]ament 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 ceaseth to be a true Church being obstinate in 
 sinne, & from a false Church Seperation is lawful, 2. the 
 Lord hath commaunded to come out from among persons 
 obstinate in sinne, & so the Apostles pra6tised. 2. Cor. 
 6. 17. A6t. 19. 9. & 2. 40. 3. bicause the Lord hath said 
 
 9—2 
 
452 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 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 instru6tion & 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 dehver the truth: The Church, 
 Ministery, Worship, & 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 Jerusalem: in the New Testament, 
 the Church, Ministery, Worship & 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 Seperation wilbe evident 
 vnto yoiir consciences: in the meane tyme you cannot 
 but be ignorant. 
 
 A fourth reason whereby you would prove that to 
 joyne to the Holy things in the communion of obstinate 
 impenitent persons is no sinne, is, for that the Scripture 
 teacheth the contrary (as you say) two wayes, 1. by 
 acquitting 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 
 
ParaEeles, Censxires, Observations. 453 
 
 at al, for the iron is blunt, & you had need put to more 
 strength, & your reason hath in it no cutting quahty 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 
 same condition though not in the same degree of sinne: 
 what say you to the sinne of Achan? the sinne of the 
 men of Gibeah concerning the Levites concubine? The 
 feare of the IsraeHtes in respe6t of the Altar built in the 
 border of the Land of Canaan by lorden? These places 
 are evident, that consent to sinne poUuteth 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 dis- 
 chargeth his duty is acquit, so if he discharg not his duty 
 he shalbe accessary to the sinne, & partaker of the punish- 
 ment 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, & lob 
 shal dehver 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 aUedged by you 
 also make as htle 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 impiire 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 
 
454 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 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 yoiu- assemblies are true churches as these were: 
 againe, you must prove also that these persons negle6ted 
 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 pointed 
 tU 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 
 teUeth them vs 9. that a htle leaven leaveneth the whole 
 lump : that is to say : if you consent to this false do6trine 
 of joyning circumcision to Christ the person that per- 
 swadeth you shal beare his burthen whosoever he be, yet 
 you also shalbe punished receaving the false do6lrine, 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 of God, for the wickednes 
 of other, & for this purpose you alledg, 1. Sam. 2. 24. 27. 
 wher (you say) the wordes are plaine, & cannot be 
 avoyded by another exposition of the word gnabar. Well : 
 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 construc- 
 tion that the Sonnes of Ely by their sinnes caused the 
 people to sinne by abhorring the L. ofEering through 
 occasion of ther wickednes : I answer thus : in the old 
 Testament no man was to forsake the Sacrifices for other 
 mes sinnes if they were ceremonialy cleane: & therfor 
 that the people did abhorre these ordinances of God 
 vppon the wickednes of Elyes Sonnes was ther trans- 
 gression : 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 f olloweth 
 necessarily thus: that as in the old Testament & the 
 communion therof which were typical, persons tjrpicaly 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 455 
 
 cleane might not have communion typical, with persons 
 typically vncleane, without polution ceremonial: So in 
 the new Testament & the comunion therof which is the 
 truth, persons moraly cleane may not have Spiritual 
 communis 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 hberty 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. [er]go: so may we do. 
 
 I answer. The place of Christ Mat. 5. 23. 24. teacheth 
 that a ma must first reconcile himseK 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 
 vnref ormed from sinne, & therfor by this place of 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 impenitecy & so in the violation of the holy things : 
 For they being al pointed 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. 
 
456 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 wee are pointed 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 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 com- 
 munion 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 pointed 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 f ul & 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 
 commmiion without sinne with that poluted & obstinately 
 impenitent 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 reaso wherby you endevour to prove 
 it lawful to vse the holy things though obstinate impeni- 
 tent sinners be present in communion, is, that Gods 
 commaundement must be obeyed absolutely, & another 
 mans sinne cannot dissolve the bond of allegiance betwixt 
 
Paralleles, Censiires, Observations. 457 
 
 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 a6tions: prayer, hearing the word & 
 partaking in the Sacraments are a£lions of communion, 
 & ther is in the performance of them a manner of doing 
 (modus agendi) to be observed : wee must therfor respe6t 
 two things in performing these a6tions of ReUgion : First 
 that our communion be such as it ought to be, for I may 
 not keep communion with lewes, 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 a6tions 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 kneehng. 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. comaundemet teacheth, & after the maner he hath 
 taught as the third commaundement informeth, otherwise 
 ther is idolatry coromitted in violating the second com- 
 maundement worshipping God by other meanes then 
 he hath ordeined: & 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 
 dire6tly to your obje6lion, 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 
 
458 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 of Sain[t]s as the Lord hath appointed, not with al manner 
 of persons, as theeves, mnrderers, witches, conjurers. 
 Papists, Atheists, Dronkards, perjured, persons, &c. as 
 in your Church : nor after your manner which is devised 
 by man as leroboam 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 assembhes, to certaine topical or categorical 
 heads, & so give them answer according to your fashion : 
 as thus : the places that f orwarne 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 ludah from Israels 
 calves. 
 
 3. From persons ceremonially poUuted. 
 
 The places vrging Seperation vnder the Gospel are 
 thus to be taken 
 
 1. From lewes not receaving Christ, but rayhng 
 against him. 
 
 2. From Gentils without Christ. 
 
 3. From Antichrist vnder the shew of Christ perse- 
 cuting Christians. 
 
 4. From famihar 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 respe6tively 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 imagine 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 lewes 
 members of that true Church of the old Testament, 
 refusing Christ & rayhng 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 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 459 
 
 Antichristians & Gentils be in degree equall (as they are 
 in the Holy Ghosts account as I have formerly proved) 
 the from you who are Antichristias & 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 famUiar com- 
 munion with excommunicate & wicked persons then much 
 more must I shun Spiritual! holy communion with them : 
 except any man wilbe so ridiculous as to say that the 
 Holy & Spiritual communion afordeth more hberty to 
 sinne & sinners then private civil communion in meate 
 & drinck: &c. & so by your owne 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, false Churches, 
 & false worshippers, & persecutors 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 assembhes men 
 do not convert to the true visible 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 invisibhe ? & what doe you 
 gaine by this fancy? neither they nor you convert to 
 the faith or new Testament of Christ, but they pervert 
 me from you, & you pervert men from the Seperation: 
 & both hinder & draw from the truth: what you do 
 invisibhe I seek not nor ought not to respe6l for visible 
 walking : yet know that we hold that ther are 7000. that 
 are of the Lords Ele6tion in your false Churches: So 
 are ther in Rome itself. Revel. 18. 4. whence did al the 
 worthy witnesses of Christ arise, as the waldenses, Hus, 
 
460 Paralleles, Censiires, Observations. 
 
 Prage, Luther, the Martyrs in Q. Maries dayes in Englad, 
 & at other tymes in other places ? did they not come out 
 of the bottomlesse pit of Antichristianisme being con- 
 verted 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 therf or 
 the argumet be not good for them no more is it for you: 
 for you wilbe proved to be Antichristia Ministers as 
 truly in quahty, though not asmuch in quantity as they 
 are: & this shal suffice for answer to this point. 
 
 The ninth Se6lion. 
 
 Your next point wherto I wiU speak is the sixth in 
 nomber: which you hold error, but I hold as a truth 
 if it be wel conceaved: it is this. 
 
 6. That the word truly preached & Sacraments 
 rightly admirdstred are no infaUible tokens of a true 
 Chiirch. 
 
 I am sure you doe or may remember that proprium 
 cum specie convertitur as the Logicians speak: For 
 example: Every man is reasonable, & every reasonable 
 creature is a ma. Now al I say is: that the word truly 
 preached, & the Sacraments duely administred are no 
 properties of a true chiu-ch: For although this be true, 
 that whersoever the word is truly preached ex officio, 
 & the Sacraments rightly administred, ther is a true 
 Church, yet I denie the other, viz : That whersoever ther 
 is a true Church, the word is truly preached, & the 
 Sacraments are rightly administred: For these two are 
 not convertible: but this I hold that a true Church, & 
 powre to preach the word truly, and administer the 
 Sacraments duely, are convertible: and therefore that 
 the powre of our Lord lesus Christ given to the Church 
 is an essential propertie of a true Church, and therefore 
 convertible with a true Church : Now sometyme it f alleth 
 out that a true Church hath not the word ministerially 
 preached, nor the Sacraments administred, namely, when 
 it wanteth Officers, as it sometjmae falleth out : This point 
 also is plaine enough if you have not lost your Logick: 
 & therefore I leave it requiring yoiu- answer. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 461 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the ninth Se6tion. 
 
 I cannot find in all Mr. Bern, book intituled the Sep. 
 Schisme, any thing in opposition to this Sedtion of my 
 lettre vnto him, whereby I colle6t 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 Se6tion is 
 thus much: that as not the a6t of reasoning is the true 
 propertie of a man, but the faculty to reason: Non 
 ratiocinari sed rationale: So not the a6tual preaching 
 & administrtng of the Sacraments, but the powre of 
 Christ to have & vse al the holy things of God is the 
 true property convertible, & infaUible token of a true 
 Church: For as every man although he be reasonable, 
 yet doth not a6tually vse reaso at al tymes, as namely, 
 being an infat, being asleep, being in a Lethargic or 
 sincope So the true Chiu-ch though it have alwayes 
 powre to al the holy things, yet a6tually it doth not vse 
 the powre: But I Hst not to speak much concerning 
 this particular which is more ScholasticaU then profitable, 
 the rather seing Mr. Bernard contendeth not about it. 
 
 The tenth Se6lion. 
 
 The next position is according to your order the 
 twelvth, viz: 
 
 That every of ovir assemblies are false churches, al 
 our ministers false ministers, oxa worship a false worship : 
 you cal this error, I cannot beleeve you: wherfor I 
 declare them vnto you particularly in order after this 
 manner. 
 
 But bicause your wordes seem to import that you 
 doe not defend aU your assemblies to be true Churches, 
 all yoiu- Ministers true Ministers, & the worship of every 
 assemblie to be a true worship, for that I gesse by your 
 covenant you exclude dumb Ministers, & the assembhes 
 over which they are, & the worship offered vp by them: 
 Therefore I wil onely plead against your parish Church 
 at worksap, and your owne Ministerie, and the worship 
 
462 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 offered vp by you for your people in the parish Church 
 at worksap. 
 
 First, for your assembhe I vse this reason to prove 
 it no true Church: wher the people are not Holy, Ele6l, 
 & faithful, having not entered covenant to walk in all 
 Gods wayes, standing in confusion with every abhomi- 
 nable Hver, subje6t to al the Antichristian orders & 
 officers set over them, deprived of the powre of Christ 
 for ther mutuall help & edification, ther is no true Church. 
 
 But the parish affembhe of worksap is such: go, it 
 is no true Church. 
 
 The Major is manifest by these Scriptures compared 
 together, Math. 15. 9. Apocal. 14. 9—11. Ephes. 1. 1. 4. 
 2. Corinth. 6. 14—18. Math. 28. 20. & 5. 19. Apocal. 
 18. 4. Math. 5. 24. 
 
 The Minor you dare not deny I assure my self: For 
 you have at least five or six hundreth communicants, 
 & you account not past 30. or 40. of them faithful : & al 
 of you submit to Antichrist his lawes & courts dayly: 
 especially your seK who cap & knee runne & ride after 
 Antichrists officers & courts feeing him with your money : 
 yea you plead for them & write your peny pamphlets 
 for them, and yet once you wrote against them, and lost 
 your vicaridg in your testimonie against them, but 
 bicause you could not buy and seU except you receaved 
 the mark of the beast, now you are content to yeeld to 
 aU, yea & to plead for aU, that you may traffique with 
 your marchandize. 
 
 Secondly, for your self I hold you to be no true minister 
 of Christ: For your Church being false, how can yoiir 
 ministerie be true: For if the Fountaine be bitter the 
 streame ca not be sweet: your Church is false, your 
 ministerie which ariseth out of your Church as a streame 
 from a Fountaine is false also. 
 
 Thirdly, your worship which commeth from a false 
 Church, & a false ministerie cannot be true: but is false 
 in that double respe6t, but particularly I except these 
 things against your worship. 
 
 1. That it is quahfied with your false ministerie. 
 
 2. That it is offered vp in a false Church. 
 
 3. That it is offered vp to God in the behalf of al 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 463 
 
 your people which are many of the (I presume) lewd 
 persons, al of them subje6ls of Antichrists Kingdome: 
 this I except against your conceaved prayers. 
 
 Against your service book I except thus besides the 
 former. 
 
 1. It is devised & invented by the man of sinne. 
 
 2. That it is imposed vppon you & your people of 
 necessity. 
 
 3. That it is stinted & hmited & the Spirit therby 
 quenched. 
 
 4. That it is read vppon a book. 
 
 5. That it is corrupt in aU the particular errors 
 objedted by the Puritans. 
 
 All these 8 particulars are contrary to these Scriptures 
 compared together, Roman 8. 26. Math. 16. 9. Apocal. 
 5. 8. & 8. 3. 1. Thessal. 5. 19. Apocal. 9. 20. & 16. 13. 14. 
 Aa. 16. 18. & 19. 13—16. Math. 24. 23—26. 1. Corinth. 
 12. 7. and 2. 4. and 14. 15. 26. lerem. 23. 16. Deut. 13. 3. 
 Col. 3. 16. lam. 5. 13. loh. 4. 24. 
 
 Mr. Ber. I would not have you passe by these things 
 lightly but weigh them wel and let vs have your answer 
 vnto them. 
 
 Paralleles, Censiires, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the tenth Sedtion. 
 
 This Se6tion 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 assebhes Ecclesiastical 
 of England are false churches, 2. the Ministers administring 
 the holy things to these Ecclesiastical assembh'es are false 
 Ministers, 3. the worship performed by the ministery & 
 people in the communion visible to be a false worship: 
 Secondly, Mr. Bern. obje6tions & cavils must be refuted: 
 wher the reader must be advertised that in performing 
 this latter part I shall not endevour to handle aU things 
 that Mr. Bernard propoundeth, for ther is much truth 
 by him propounded, which I with him consent vnto, only 
 the points of difiEerence shalbe discussed, & the rest omitted. 
 
 In the first place therfor to deale as they say positively 
 
464 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 Kataskeuasticos : I prove that al the Ecclesiastical 
 assembhes of the Land, as they stand estabhshed by 
 law are false Churches: that is to say not framed or 
 constituted according to that presidet 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 Arch- 
 enemy of Christ. 
 
 The first Argument from Mat. 3. 6. lam. 2. 18. 
 Rom. 1. 7. 1. Cor. 1. 2. Eph. 1. 1. Mat. 28. 19. 
 
 From these places of Scriptiu-e compared together 
 I colle6t an argument which may thus be framed. 
 
 The true Churches of Christ were established of 
 men that did repent & beleeve, and shew their 
 faith by their workes, that were Saints & faithful 
 visibhe: & of these only. 
 The assembhes Ecclesiastical of England are not 
 estabhshed only of such persons : but of al sorts 
 of persons, even the most profane of the Land 
 being compelled by law to submit therto. 
 Ergo: the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England 
 are not the true established churches of Christs 
 institution. 
 Heer it may be considered that before the Churches 
 of the new Testament were estabhshed the gospel was 
 preached, & vppon the pubhshing of the gospel men were 
 converted to the faith of Christ, being made the Disciples 
 of Christ, & so many of them whither lewes or Gentils as 
 gladly receaved the word were baptized, & added to the 
 Church, & continued in the Apostles do6trine, & fellow- 
 ship, & breaking of bread, & prayer : this was the consti- 
 tution & walking of the Churches of the Apostolique 
 institution: & therfor the Churches of England being 
 raised by compulsion without procedent teaching, & 
 conversion to the faith, & making of them Disciples of 
 Christ, being newly & hardly drawne from the Egiptian 
 darknes of most palpable Antichristianisme, being many 
 of them brutishly ignorant, professed Papists, vild 
 Atheists, witches, conjurers, theeves. dronkards, blas- 
 phemers, al of them submitted to Antichristian Lords 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 465 
 
 & Lawes, to Popish Sacrificing Preists, (for their ministers 
 were not newly ordeyned) to a stinted devised, corrupted, 
 Popish service book or worship: they in this their 
 constitution & walking cannot be accounted the true 
 estabhshed Churches of the ApostoHque institution but 
 rather are yet remayning in the gulfe of Antichristianisme. 
 
 The second Argument from 2, Cor. 6. 17. Revel. 18. 4. 
 Aa. 19. 9. & 2. 40. 47. & 5. 13. 1. Timoth. 6. 5. 
 
 From these & such like places of Scripture compared 
 together & truly expounded, may be coUedted an argument 
 framed after this manner. 
 
 True Churches of the ApostoHque institution con- 
 sisted of a people seperated from vnbeleevers, 
 whether lewes or pagans or other. 
 The Ecclesiastical assembhes of England consist 
 not of such a Seperated people: but are com- 
 pounded of a mixt people, which for the most 
 part are as bad as lewes or Pagans, viz : persons 
 notoriously wicked. 
 Ergo, the Ecclesiastical assembhes of England are 
 not the truly constituted Churches of the Apos- 
 toHque institution. 
 Heer it wil nothing availe them to aUedg as they are 
 accustomed that they are neither lewes nor Pagans: 
 For I have already proved that persons that submit to 
 Antichrist & his abhominations are in the Lords accoimt 
 equal to Pagans, being caUed in the book of the Revela- 
 tion, Egiptians, Sodomites, Babylonians, GentUs: & the 
 Apostle willeth the Disciples to Seperate themselves from 
 brethren walking inordinately from persons excommu- 
 nicate, from covetous persons, & al other that either 
 teach false dodlrine, or deny the powre of GodHnes 
 indeed, though in word they professe the same. 2. Tim. 
 3. 5. Tit. 1. 16. 2. Thes. 3. 6. 1. Cor. 5. 11. 
 
 The third Argument from Mat. 28. 19. 20. A61. 19. 
 4. 5. &. 10. 48. Mat. 18. 20. 
 
 The true Churches of the ApostoHque institution 
 were by baptisme gathered into the covenant or 
 new Testament of Christ. 
 
 w. n. 10 
 
466 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 The Ecclesiastical assemblies of England are not 
 by their baptisme conunited into the New 
 Testament of Christ, but only into the consti- 
 tution, ministery, worship, & government, & 
 into that faith & do6trine which is by law 
 estabUshed in the Land. 
 Ergo: the Ecclesiastical assembhes of England 
 are not the true Churches of the ApostoUque 
 institution. 
 The ground of this argument is this : that the Apostles 
 baptized men indefinitely into the whole new Testament 
 of Christ, & al the ordinances thereof, which was not 
 stinted or limited at the pleasure of men vnder certaine 
 canons, injun6tions, articles, or Ecclesiastical constitu- 
 tions, but was large, even as large as the whole word of 
 truth then inspired or written by the Apostles & Prophets : 
 whereas the assembhes of England do neither themselves 
 professe the true faith of Christ conteyned in the new 
 Testament, their faith being stinted & hmited vnder 
 certaine devised articles & convocatio howse Synodical 
 decrees or constitutions, wherevnto al the ministers of 
 the lad are bound to Subscribe & which is the faith of the 
 whole nation: neither therfor do they baptise into the 
 new Testament of Christ indefinitely & simply, but 
 respe6tively & definitely into that faith & do6trine which 
 is taught in their stinted book of articles, wherto they 
 subscribe which they beleeve & teach, & whereof the body 
 of that Church is, wherin & wherto they are by baptisme 
 admitted & receaved : their faith therfor being devised & 
 stinted, or false: therfore their baptisme false: therfor 
 their covenant false: therfor the forme of their Church 
 false: & therfor the Church it self a false Church: For 
 how can that be a true Church, which hath a false faith, 
 covenant, forme? 
 
 The fourth argument from Mat. 18. 18-20. Marc. 
 13. 34. loh. 20. 23. Mat. 16. 19. 
 
 These places & other like Scriptures afoard an argu- 
 ment which may be framed after this manner. 
 
 The true Churches of the Apostolique institution 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 467 
 
 had Christs powre ministerial in the body of 
 
 the Church. 
 The Ecclesiastical assembhes of England have not 
 
 Christs ministerial powre residing in the body 
 
 of the Church. 
 Ergo: the Ecclesiastical assembhes of England 
 
 are not the true Churches of the primitive 
 
 Apostohque institution. 
 The Major or first part of this Argument hath been 
 largely proved in the seaventh Se6tion and in the 
 ParaUeles, Censures, Observations, therto aperteyning: 
 whither the Reader is to be referred: where this parti- 
 cular is handled affirmatively and negatively. 
 
 The Minor or second part of the argument is evident 
 in it self : For the powre Ecclesiastical of the assemblies 
 is resident in the hands of certaine Archb. Lordb. Arch- 
 deacons, Chancellors, Commissaries, Officials, and other 
 Ecclesiastical Superintendents, which have powre over 
 thousands or hundreths of Parish Ecclesiastical assembhes, 
 and the Ministers in them : & which have powre Ecclesi- 
 astical one over another to suspend excommimicate, and 
 absolve them according to their canons, decrees, and 
 decretals : the Prelate in his diocese or jurisdi6tion having 
 absolute powre to interdict one or more Parish Churches 
 from having any prayers or Service : they have no powre 
 to come into the Parish Church, or Temple to worship, 
 whiles the interdi6lion with the Bbs. seale cleaveth vppon 
 the Church dore, &c. & divers particulars of like nature 
 which doe evidently declare that the parish assemblies 
 have no powre at aU of themselves, but are meerly and 
 wholly subje6t and in bondage to the Ecclesiasticall 
 Hierarchy, and subordination of Clergie-men, having 
 Superintendency, Superiority, & jurisdi6lion over them 
 as their proper Spiritual! LL. to whome they dayly yeeld 
 Spirituall homage and Subje6tion in their oaths off 
 CanonicaU obedience, and a6lions of hke Servitude. 
 
 The fifth Argument from 1. Timoth. 2. 5. Heb. 9. 15. 
 Gal. 3. 15. 16. lohn. 17. 9. 
 
 These places of holy Scripture & other of Uke nature 
 may afoard an argument which may thus be framed. 
 
 10—2 
 
468 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 The true Church of the primitive institution 
 ApostoUcal had Christ lesus for their mediator, 
 that is, for their King, Preist, & Prophet. 
 The assembhes Ecclesiastical of Englad have not 
 lesus Christ for their Mediator, that is then- 
 King, Preist, & Prophet. 
 Ergo, the Ecclesiastical assembhes of England are 
 not the true Churches of the primitive institution 
 Apostohcal. 
 The Minor or second part of the Argument may be 
 confirmed by divers particulars, as 1. Christ is not their 
 King, seing he onely ruleth by his owne Lawes and 
 Officers, and not by Antichristian Lords, and Lawes, 
 such as are their Prelates, and their Officers, Courts, and 
 Canons. 2. Christ is not their preist to ratifie vnto them 
 by his blood that ordinance of Church, Ministery, Wor- 
 ship, and Government which they retaine among them, 
 which is not Christs Testament, but the Testament of 
 Antichrist the vtter enemy of Christ: neither doth he 
 prostitute the blood of his Testament to establish such 
 a worship as their service book affoardeth: or such a 
 Ministery as their Clergie is from the ArchB. to the 
 ParishP: or such a Government as their Ecclesiasticall 
 Hierarchy: or such a people for his body, as are com- 
 pounded of the Serpents seed, a viperous brood of wicked 
 men of aU sorts. 3. Christ is not their Prophett to 
 teach them by the false Prophetts the instruments of 
 Antichrist, which dayly by their do6trine set vp Anti- 
 christs Officers, & Lawes, & oppugne the true New 
 Testament of Christ in the true constitution, Ministerie, 
 Worship, & Government taught in his word: Seing 
 therfor Christ is not their King, Preist, & Prophet, how 
 is he their Mediator ? Seing his mediation consisteth not 
 in the execution & dispensation of these their ofiices of 
 King, Preist, & Prophet. 
 
 The sixth Argument from Eph. 1. 22. 23. 1. Cor. 
 12-27. 12. Gal. 3. 16. Eph. 5. 23. 
 
 From these places of Scripture compared together, & 
 truly expounded, may an argument be drawne framed thus. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 469 
 
 The true Church of the Apostohque primitive 
 institution hath Christ for the head, and is a 
 true body vnto the true head Christ, truly 
 vnited by the Spiritt of Christ. 
 The ecclesiastical assembHes of Englad are not a 
 true body vnto Christ the true head truly vnited 
 by the Spirit of Christ. 
 Ergo, the ecclesiastical assembUes of England are 
 not the true Churches of the primitive Apos- 
 tohque institution. 
 The Minor or second part of the Argument may thus 
 be confirmed in the three parts therof, 1. Christ is not 
 their true head seing they deny all his offices (though 
 they hold the do6tryne of his nature and persons soundly) 
 as is plainly proved before in the fifth Argument, 2. the 
 assembHes as they stand in confusion with aU the vngodly 
 and vitious persons of the Land, vnder the Antichristian 
 Lords and Lawes Ecclesiastical!, can not be a true body 
 vnto Christ, but is a monstrous body, hke vnto the body 
 of Nebuchadnetzars image: Daniel. 2. 32. 3. this mon- 
 strous body cannot be vnited to the true head Christ by 
 his Spirit, but the people of the assembhes being for the 
 most part the seed of the Serpent must needes be knit 
 together, and vnto their head Antichrist by thp Spirit 
 of Antichrist, the Spirit of Sathan. All this I speak of 
 their visible communion, and of that poUtique body 
 EcclesiasticaU which is called their Church : For otherwise 
 I doe acknowledg vnfeynedly, and doe vndoubtedly 
 beleeve that the Lord hath his thousands among them, 
 even a remnant according to the Ele6tion of grace. 
 
 Thus have I proved vnto you Mr. Bernard positively, 
 that the Ecclesiastical assembhes of England in their 
 present constitution, and walking, are not the true 
 churches of the primitive Apostohque institutio, but are 
 in their outward, visible, pohtique subsistence the churches 
 of Antichrist, framed after the shape of the popish as- 
 sebhes, though much refined from the venemous drosse 
 of popery: now in the second place it remayneth that 
 I deale anaskeuasticos with you answering those things 
 which you aUedg for your Churches to prove them true : 
 The great & main pillar of your building is this, that 
 
470 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 seing your Church hath not a false head, false matter, 
 false forme, false properties, therefore it is not a false, 
 but a true Church. 
 
 To these 4. particulars I answer distin6lly: First, 
 you have a false head in that you worship God in a 
 fantastical Christ of your owne devising, in that you 
 shape him a Kingdom Preisthood, & Prophesy of your 
 owne invention, making him a mediator & intercessor 
 to al the profane people of the Land, causing him to 
 offer vp other worship & worshippers to his Father then 
 he hath taught in his new Testament purchased by his 
 blood: by this meanes deahng with Christ as somtyme 
 the lewes did, putting a reed in his hand, a crowne of 
 thornes vppon his head, & kneehng downe vnto him as 
 to a King, & bidding him prophecy, & yet smite him 
 vppon the face, spit at him & presently crucify him : For 
 whereas you frame him a Kingdom, Subjed^s, Officers, 
 Lawes, & a government after your owne invention, or 
 rather out of the Popes decretals & decrees, hereby you 
 seem to make him a King, but indeed you Crucifye him 
 againe, and tread vnder foote the blood of the Testament, 
 which he hath purchased & estabhshed at so high a rate. 
 
 Secondly, your church hath a false matter: For 
 seing you do al this indignity to Christ the head of his 
 true Church, do you think that he wil entertaine you 
 for the true matter of his Church, the true subje6ts of 
 his Kingdom, the true members of his body, the faithful 
 Servants of his howse, his chast & true welbeloved 
 Spowse & wife? either you must repent & reforme your 
 selves of al that vild indignity which you offer vnto 
 Christ or els he wil never receave you for the matter of 
 his Church, the Subje6ts of his Kingdom, the members 
 of his body, the Servants of his howse, his espowsed 
 wife: For Christ wil not take a wife of fornication, & 
 children of fornication, Hos. 1. he wil not have the 
 Servants of Antichrist to be his howsehold Servants, 
 Mat. 6. 24. nor wil he take the members of an harlot, 
 & make them the members of Christ, 1. Cor. 6. 15, & the 
 Subjects of his vtter enemy Antichrist, cannot possibly 
 be the true faithful Subje6ts of Christs Kingdom Luk. 
 19. 27. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 471 
 
 But in the pa. 111-116. of your book you make a 
 distin6tion of matter, as : No matter True matter, False 
 matter : they are no matter of a church (say you) which 
 do not prof esse Christ: as lewes, Turks, Pagans: They 
 are true matter that professe Christ to be the Sonne of 
 God, & the Sonne of Mary, & the only Savioiu- of man. 
 False matter (say you) is contrary to the true: Further 
 this true matter of the Church (you say) is good & bad : 
 good matter (you say as it seemeth to me) is men walking 
 vprightly in this profession of Christ: bad matter are 
 men walking wickedly: & this you illustrate by the 
 matter of mariage, for she may be a true wife though 
 a bad one, & also by the similitude of subjedts to a King, 
 who may be true, though bad ones, breaking his lawes : & 
 a true tradesman though vnskiKul in his prof essio : & for 
 your selves you say you are true matter of Christs church 
 (though not good matter) bicause you professe Christ 
 truly as is said before : wel Mr. Ber. I yeeld the general 
 distindtion of matter, but I deny the particular apphcation 
 of it to your selves : & I say you are false mat[t]er : how 
 therfor do you prove vnto vs that you are true matter? 
 by 4. reasons: wherof the first is for that you beleving 
 this forsaid truth you beleeve the summe of the gospel: 
 I deny it vtterly: the summe of the gospel is this, that 
 lesus Christ the Sonne of God, & the Sonne of Mary, is 
 the only King, Preist, & Prophet of his Church, governing. 
 Sacrificing, making intercession, & prophecying after that 
 holy manner & according to those rules which he hath 
 prescribed in his Testament: Now to beleeve truly 
 concerning the person of Christ, & to beleeve falsely 
 concerning his office as you doe, is not to beleeve the 
 whole gospel, but only a peece of it : So that this is the 
 do6trine alone by which the Apostles did gather a people 
 to make them a Church & disciples of Christ: & the 
 profession herof admitted men as true matter of a Church : 
 & this only differenceth the true Church from lewes, 
 Tiwkes, Pagans, Papists, & al other Antichristians & 
 Heretiques, viz : Jesus Christ, God and man. King, Preist, 
 & Prophet, & mediator of his owne Testament: Therfor 
 your second, third, & fourth reasons fal flat to the ground, 
 the first being vnderminded as you see: but ther is one 
 
472 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 thing that I wonder at: that you should hold the 
 Papists to be false matter of a Church for holding justi- 
 fication by workes, therby denying Christs Preisthood: 
 & hold your selves to be true matter of the Church 
 denying Christs Kingdom in the true frame, ministery, 
 worship, & government of his Church: what is not 
 Christs Kingdom as pretious as his Preisthood? is it 
 not as horrible impiety to deny Christs Kingdom, & the 
 ordinances therof: as to deny his Preisthood & the 
 vertue therof ? or is Christs Preisthood more fundamental 
 then his Kingdom? or justification by workes more 
 pernitious then to deny Christ to raigne as King, & to 
 refuse his regiment? wel if the papists be false matter 
 by your owne confession for the one, you must needes 
 also be false matter for the other: For I am confident 
 that Christs Kingdom is as pretious an office as his 
 Preisthood, even as the Kingdom in the old Testament 
 was as excellent as the Preisthood: now Mr. Bern, what 
 is become of the Church seing your matter is false as you 
 may perceave by this description? & what shall your 
 simUies of a bad wife, a bad subje6t, of a bad artificer 
 help you ? you see they vanish away as chaffe before the 
 wind: your matter is false & not bad, as appeareth 
 evidently if you wil not be bhnd. 
 
 To proceed, pag. 116-122. of your book you describe 
 vnto vs the true forme of the Church, inwardly, to be 
 the Spirit, Faith, & Love: & outwardly, the word, 
 profession, & the Sacramet of the L. Supper: & these 
 things (say you) are in your assembhes: Ergo: you 
 conclude yom- Church hath a true forme. 
 
 I answer: have not the Papists the word preached? 
 do not they make profession & live as stri6tly as you? 
 do not they communicate in the L. Supper? & so by 
 consequent have Love, Faith, & the Spirit? yet you say 
 they are false Churches, wanting the true forme, even so 
 are you although you do al that they doe, & much more, 
 (for so you are much bettered in do6trine & vse of the 
 Sacrament, but in profession & pradtise I suppose you are 
 inferior to many of them:) bicause reje6ting Christ in 
 his offices as hath been said especialy in his Kingdom, 
 it is impossible in that constitution & communion, you 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 473 
 
 should aright vse the word, make profession, & partake 
 in the Sacrament, or have the true visible Love, 
 Faith, & Spirit of Christ: For a false matter is vn- 
 capable of a true forme: & it is impossible that the 
 body of Antichrist should have the true Spirit of Christ, 
 or the true covenant & new Testament of Christ invested 
 vppon them: invisibly I hope wel & am perswaded of 
 milhons among you: but I speake of your visible, 
 pohtique, body Ecclesiastical in that mixtxire of persons, 
 & subordination of Ecclesiastical officers, & communio 
 Spiritual in the Holy things, which by Law is estabhshed 
 & supported in your Ecclesiastical assembhes. 
 
 But pag. 121. you bid vs note this: what? viz: that 
 corruptions doe not hinder men from being a true Church 
 before men, no more then the corruptions of the hart do 
 hinder a man from being an ele6t one invisibhe to the 
 Lord : I suppose bicause you bid vs in the margent of your 
 book note this, that you account it a matter worth noting : 
 and I surely think it a note worth nothing : For although 
 corruptions of matters accidental! make not a false Church, 
 yet corruptions essential of matters essential make a false 
 church namely, if the matter be false or the forme false : 
 yea I avouch that if a truly constituted Church dete6ted 
 of corruptions accidental, convinced, & impenitent therin, 
 do so continue, they become a false Church as hath been 
 proved aheady before in the 8. Se6tion : for impenitency 
 inward or outward, maketh a false Christian & Church, 
 inwardly or outwardly, according to due proportion. 
 
 Furthermore, pag. 122-128. you bring vs three true 
 visible properties of your true Church as you say, 1. 
 continuance in the vse of the word. Sacraments & prayer, 
 2. the holding forth of the truth against the enemyes 
 thereof, 3. mutual care for the welfare each of other: 
 & al these (you say) you have among you, & so you say 
 you must needes be a true Church. 
 
 I answer : Seing your matter and forme is false, your 
 propertyes cannot be true: For they arise necessarily 
 from the vnion of, the matter and forme, or from the 
 forme induced vppon the matter: seing therefore the 
 first is already proved, the latter also must needs follow : 
 but let vs examine these things particularly: I denie 
 
474 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 therfor in the first place that you have wel propounded 
 the propertyes of the true Church: For the first and 
 principal essential property of a true Church is interest 
 and title to al the Holy things, which is extant in divers 
 particulars as parcels of that general and whole property, 
 therfore a people declaring their faith and repentance by 
 Seperating themselves from aU vncleanenes, & by resigning 
 themselves wholy to the Lord to become his people, have 
 God for their Father, & Christ for their King, Preist, and 
 Prophett, and so with Christ have title to all the meanes of 
 Salvation : and this title consisteth in the Word, Sacra- 
 ments, Censures, Prayers, Almes, and al other parts of 
 Spiritual! visible communion whatsoever: even as when 
 the soule is induced vppon the matter, viz: when the 
 breath of life is breathed into the nosthrils of dust of the 
 Earth. Genes. 2. then ther is a man with a reasonable 
 and Rehgious Soule: So when a company of faithful 
 people are invested with the New Testament of Christ, 
 then ther is in them title to al the holy things of God 
 whatsoever : This is evident by that which I have before 
 manifested in the seaventh Se6lion whither the Reader 
 is to be referred: wherfore Mr. Bern, to apply this vnto 
 your Church, I avouch that seing you are a false matter 
 of a Church: and have a false forme or covenat induced 
 vppon you, as hath been shewed before, therefore you 
 have no true title to the meanes of Salvation, but in 
 vsurping the Word, Sacraments, Censures, Prayers, 
 Almes, &c. you therein incurre the reproof of the Prophet, 
 saying: Psahn. 50 16. what hast thou to doe to declare 
 myne ordinances, that thou shouldest take my covenant 
 into thy mouth, seing thou hatest to be reformed, and 
 hast cast my wordes behind thee? And as the Prophet 
 speaketh: Esay. 1. 11-18. your worship is iniquity, I 
 cannot beare it, I am weary of it, I hate it: Therefore 
 you may plead as long as you will the Temple of the Lord : 
 the Temple of the Lord : yet I say, vntiU you intertajme 
 Christs true Kingdome, Preisthood & Prophecy, you are 
 but vsurpers of all that visible communion in the Word, 
 Sacraments, Prayers, &c. which is among you: For it 
 doth not foUow that bicause you have the Word, Sacra- 
 ments, Censures, prayers, &c. therefore you are a true 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 475 
 
 Church: neither are the vsing of these, true propertyes 
 of a true Church: But the title to them is the true 
 propertie of a true Church: For the Papists and all 
 Antichristians and Heretiques vse the Word, Sacraments, 
 Censures, prayers, but they are not therfor a true Church, 
 as I know you will confesse. 
 
 But heer you wish vs againe pag. 122. to observe well : 
 Lett vs heer what it is that you wish vs to observe well : 
 Namely, the true Word preached, and the true Sacra- 
 ments administred, are the true propertyes of a true 
 Church: And that you have those things as you say: 
 well: What is the true word? and what are the true 
 Sacraments? is not the true word the true do6tryne of 
 the word? the true do6lryne of the New Testament? 
 but you have rejedled the whole do6tryne of Christs 
 Kingdome in a manner, and have advanced all that false 
 do6tryne of the Antichiistian hierarchy, which is taught 
 and commaunded by Law to be taught in your Church : 
 And you in your pulpits proclayme all them Heretiques 
 or Schismatiques, that teach and erefb the Church, 
 Ministerie, Worship, and Government, according to the 
 paterne of Christ his New Testament: And so you have 
 abrogated and disanulled the Word of God by your 
 traditions and Antichristian devises. Againe: VVhat 
 are true Sacraments? is the breaking of bread, and 
 drincking of wine performed by any persons, after any 
 manner, or washing with water likewise, true Sacraments ? 
 I think you will not say it : it is therefore necessary that 
 there bee a concurrence of other matters: viz: That 
 seing Sacraments are in relation and reference, those 
 references or relations must needes be annexed, els they 
 are not true Sacraments: as a baptized person, must 
 baptize into the true Faith of Christ, a person capable 
 of baptisme: A communion of men having title to the 
 Lords Supper must break bread, and drinck wine, to 
 remember Christ, and shew forth his death till he come: 
 Therefore whereas you hold and teach, that the whole 
 bimdel of the Antichristian constitution, ministerie, 
 worship, and Government of the assembhes are the Lords 
 ordinances, you teach a false word: and whereas you 
 being a false Church and Ministery, doe baptize with 
 
476 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 water, and break bread & wine to remember a false 
 Christ, and a false Testament, and a false Faith, therein 
 you declare plainly that you have not the true Sacraments : 
 and whereas in your (Observe well) you say, Truly and 
 Rightly, respe6t grace in administring the Word and 
 Sacraments, and therefore to preach the word Truly, and 
 Rightly to administer the Sacraments, are no convertible 
 signes of a true Church. I answer: That Truly and 
 Rightly to administer, doe also respe6t the outward 
 manner of doing in the Essentiall relations spoken of 
 before and not onely grace: And so your (Observe well) 
 is not worthy observation. 
 
 In your third essential propertie, you wil needes have 
 discipline no true convertible signe of a true Church: 
 Sir, I confesse vnto you that the vse of the Censures of 
 admonition & excommunication which I suppose you 
 cal discipline, is not a convertible signe of a true Church : 
 but only powre & title & interest to vse them : this title 
 I deny you to have: For how can you being in your 
 constitution mingled with the world, & vnseperated, & 
 pointed with so many Antichristian fornications as yet 
 are extant in your assemblies, have title to any of the 
 Lords ordinances: doth the Lord (think you) give his 
 covenant & new Testament, purchased by the blood of 
 Christ vnto such persons as trample vnder foot the whole 
 Testament of Christ, & the ordinances therof ? hath the 
 theef title to the true mans purse though he have the 
 possession of it? no more have you title to Chr. visibly 
 though you vsurp him & challendg him never so peremp- 
 torily: wherefor to end this point of the properties of 
 the true Church I say til you have Seperated your selves 
 from al the wicked people & Antichristian ordinances 
 in your assembhes, til you have vowed & covenanted 
 to embrace & pra6tise al the ordinances of Christs new 
 Testament you can have no title or interest to the holy 
 things of God: vse them as long as you Mst, you abuse 
 them. 
 
 Lastly, to conclude this first part of the Se6lion, viz: 
 that your Churches are false churches : I say to that which 
 you obje6t, pag. 110. that many corruptions may be in 
 a church, yet it a true Church the constitution being true, 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 477 
 
 viz : So long as they are not impenitent after convi6tion : 
 & tlierfor Israel the Lords people so long as they retained 
 their true costitution, Ezech. 16. 21. 22. the men of 
 Ephesus beleevers ignorant of the visible gifts of the 
 Holy Ghost, A61 14. 2. The Corinthians Saints though 
 incest dronkennes, fornication false do6tryiie, contention, 
 & much evil among them, bicause they were not impeni- 
 tent after twise admonition or convi6tion: & so forth of 
 the rest. But you wil confesse that the Prelates & their 
 fa6lion are obstinate after convi6tion: & we avouch that 
 the Puritanes are obstinate after convi6lion, for they 
 neither have answered nor can answer that we objedt 
 against them: & therfor although your constitutio had 
 been true (which was never) yet your Church is become 
 false being obstinate in sinne & persecuting to death, 
 imprissonment, losse of goods, &c. al that testify against 
 her abhominations : that this is a signe of a false Church, 
 read, 2. King. 17. & lerem. 3. 8. Math. 23. 37. 38. Math. 
 21. 33^3. A61. 19. 9. 
 
 The second point to be handled in this Se6tion, is, 
 that al your ministers are false ministers: in handhng 
 whereof I wil proceed as in the former point of this 
 Se6tion, viz: First, confirme the truth by arguments 
 drawne from the Scriptures. Secondly, refute your f ancyes 
 wherby you would prove your ministery true. 
 
 Therefore in the first place to prove your ministers 
 false Ministers, I vse these Arguments. 
 
 The first Argument. 
 
 The true ministerie cannot be raised out of a false 
 Church. 
 
 The Ecclesiastical assembhes of England are false 
 Churches. 
 
 Therfor the ministers of those assembhes Ecclesiastical 
 are false ministers. 
 
 The ground of this argimaent is propounded & con- 
 firmed in the 7. Se6lion, where it hath been proved by 
 divers vndeniable reasons that Christs ministerial powre, 
 wherof one part is the caUing of Ministers, is not given 
 by succession to the Pope, Bbs. or presbytery, but to 
 the body of the congregation, if they be but two or three : 
 
478 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 So that seing the true Church is in nature & being before 
 the ministery, & the ministerie is but one of the holy 
 things given to the Church: one part of Christs powre 
 delegated to the Church: one branch of that true title 
 & interest which the L. lesus the Bridegrome & husband 
 of the Church giveth to the Bride, the Spowse of Christ, 
 the true Church: The Ministerie therfor must needes 
 follow the Church, be after the Church, be raised out of 
 the church: & therefore the true Ministery of Christ is 
 only where the true Church of Christ is, & so it cannot 
 be in the assembhes Ecclesiastical of England, being not 
 the true Churches of Christ. 
 
 The second Argument. 
 
 The true ministerie hath a true office, in execution 
 
 wherof it is exercised: Rom. 12. 7 1. Cor. 12. 
 
 5. 28. Eph. 4. 11. 
 The ministerie of the Ecclesiastical assembhes of 
 
 England have not a true office, in execution 
 
 wherof it is exercised. 
 Ergo, The ministerie of the Ecclesiastical assembhes 
 
 of England is not the true ministerie. 
 The foundacion of this argument is this: viz: that 
 seing the ministerie of the Church of England ariseth out 
 of the ministerie of the Church of Rome, as a branch out 
 of the root of the tree, therfor it must needes be of the 
 same nature & kind with the ministerie of the Church 
 of Rome: For as a man begetteth a man, one hght 
 commeth of another, one Preist begetteth another in the 
 old Testament, so in ordination by succession, one 
 Minister maketh another: & therfor, as the branch is of 
 the same nature with the root, the Sonne with the Father, 
 one candle hght with another, one Aaronical Preist with 
 another: So must the minister ordeyned be of the same 
 nature & office with him that ordeyneth him: Seing 
 therfor the ministerie of the Church of Rome is a popish 
 Sacrificing Preisthood, that is a false ministerie, having 
 a false office: it must needes foUow that the ministerie 
 of the Church of England proceeding from the ministerie 
 of the Church of Rome, as one hght is inflamed of another, 
 is of the same nature & office, & therfor a false ministerie : 
 
Paralleles, Censiires, Observations. 479 
 
 neither can it suffice to say, that (as it is most true & I 
 do willingly confesse) the ministerie of England is much 
 Refined & Reformed from the drosse of popery: For 
 Refine Sugar as long as you wil, it is Sugar stil in nature : 
 Refine Ught as oft as you please, from brimstone hght to 
 a taUow light, from tallow to Rosen, from Rosen to 
 wax, from wax to Venice Turpentine, from that to the 
 most pretious subje6l that can be devised, yet the hght 
 is of the same nature with the brimstone hght: So 
 Refine the ministery by Succession of ordination as long 
 & as oft as you wil, yet it is stil of the first nature: & 
 til it be Refined to nothing, that is, til it be abohshed 
 & extinguished, a true ministerie can never be raised 
 vp againe : For who can bring a cleane thing out of that 
 which is vncleane? 
 
 The third Argument. 
 
 The true ministerie hath a true vocation & calling, 
 by ele6tion, approbation, & ordination of that 
 faithful people wher he is to administer. 
 The ministery of the Ecclesiastical assembhes of 
 England, hath not the true vocatio & calhng, 
 by ele6lion, approbation, & ordination of a 
 faithful people where th[e]y doe administer. 
 Ergo, the ministery of the Ecclesiastical assembhes 
 of England is not the true ministery which 
 Christ hath placed in his Church. 
 The Major or first part of this argument is evident 
 by these Scriptiu-es compared together, A6t. 6. 2-6. 
 and 14. 23. 1. Timoth. 3. 10. and 4. 14. also it is evident 
 by that which was observed, proved, and answered, 
 concerning the seaventh Se6tion of this Lettre. 
 
 The Minor or second part of the argument is evident 
 in it self : For it is apparant that the ministery of England 
 is called by Successive ordination made by a Prelate & 
 his chaphn, in his owne chappel, with Subscription to 
 the abhominations of Antichrist, conteyned in the 3. 
 articles, with the oath of Canonical obedience to the 
 Antichristian prelacy their Spiritual LL. & jurisdi6tion, 
 courts, & canons: by giving the holy Ghost, apishly & 
 blasphemously abusing the words of Christ, loh. 20. 22. 23. 
 
480 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 giving therby to the Preist ordeyned, powre to remit & 
 retayne sinnes, which Christ hath given only to the 
 body of the Church, & not to the ministers by Successive 
 ordination, as Sacrificing powre was propagated by 
 Genealogie in the old Testamet from Preist to Preist: 
 then the preist thus ordeyned is inforced vppon a parish, 
 with the Patrons presentation, & the LordB. his insti- 
 tution, & the Archdeacons indu6tion, & his owne tolling 
 of a beU, & taking hold of the Ring of the Church dore 
 contrary to the liking of al the bad men in the parish 
 if he be a reformist, & contrary to al the Puritanes in the 
 parish, if he be a Formahst & with the Hking of al the 
 goodfeUowes in the parish if he be a dumbdrincking- 
 swaggering Preist: & if this be the true vocation of 
 Christs true Ministers, taught in his Testament, then are 
 the ministers of England true: if not, then is their 
 Mim'stery false : & for this point I appeale to every good 
 conscience & vpright hart in England: if any man be 
 made minister any other way, he is not made according 
 to law, & his ministery is voyd by law & a nulUty in 
 England: & I dispute only against the ministery estab- 
 hshed by law & if ther be any other ministery besides, or 
 contrary to law, which you Mr. Bern. wiU plead for, let 
 it be discribed & confirmed by the rules of Christs Testa- 
 ment, & when we know it, we wil then acknowledg it, if 
 the Lord lesus in his new Testament wil give approbation 
 vnto it : otherwise this we hold for the present cocerning 
 the ministery of the assembhes Ecclesiastical of the 
 land. 
 
 The next point to be handled is the answering of your 
 obje6lions, reasons, & cavils which you bring against this 
 do6tryne which we teach, & for the ratefying of your 
 ministery to be true, & I tel you Mr. Bern, you had need 
 bring good ground, or els you & your Fellow ministers 
 wilbe found False Prophets, Theeves, and Robbers. 
 Math. 7. 15. lohn. 10. 1. 
 
 That which you alledg for your selves is conteyned 
 from the pag. 128-146. of your book. The first point 
 wherof is this that (you say) your ministery is true bicause 
 you convert Soules: I answer two things, 1. that you 
 convert no man to that true visible faith taught in the 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 481 
 
 new Testament of Christ, wherby mans conversion must 
 be judged: but you do pervert men from it dayly: as 
 evident experiece teacheth: For your books against the 
 Seperation, your preaching & Sermons against the way 
 of the Lord, your conferences & disputations, & perswa- 
 sions, for men to forsake the truth, & to continue stil 
 with you in the communion of your Antichristian abhomi- 
 nations, or having forsaken you to returne back againe 
 into Egipt, these & the hke courses of yours most frequent 
 to the best Reformists of the land plainly manifest that 
 you convert none at aU to the faith of Christs new Testa- 
 ment, but you pervert al that you possibly can from the 
 same: Now what you do in secreat betwixt the L. & 
 the soules of them that heare you, he only that seeth 
 in secreat knoweth in particular : particularly & certainly 
 we know not nor enquire not : See more of this point in 
 that which is written before & in the lettre to Mr. S. at 
 the end of this book, 2. let it be granted that you do 
 convert me even to the true visible faith of the new 
 Testament, I say this is no proof sufficient of the truth 
 of your ministery, that is to say, that you are those 
 true Pastors mentioned, Eph. 4. 11. A6t. 20. 28. 1. 
 Pet. 5. 1-3. 1. Tim 3. 2. Tit. 1. 6-9 For these officers 
 were give to the true church: which Church was estab- 
 lished befor these officers were, & these officers were 
 occupied about the feding, that is teaching & guiding 
 of those particular Churches wherto they attended: the 
 Churches therfor consisting of Saints already converted 
 to the faith of the new Testament, how doth conversion 
 argue a true ministerie of Pastor, or Elder, or Bb. which 
 converteth not as his proper work, but only feedeth, that 
 is edifieth & buildeth vp men converted, by teaching & 
 guiding them in the wayes of the Lord ? See more of this 
 point also in the letter to Mr S. at the latter end of this 
 book: & in that which is written before which I desire 
 may be considered. 
 
 But heer you obje6t that the Apostle, that is, one sent 
 proveth his caUing by the scale of his ministerie, viz. 
 conversion: see: Rom. 4. 14. 15. 1. Cor. 9. 2. & 2. Cor. 3. 
 1-3. & 13. 3. 5. & that it cannot be proved that lesus 
 Chr. doth worke by false meanes, & it is our owne grant. 
 
 w. n. 11 
 
482 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 I answer that if your argument be framed into forme it is 
 this. 
 
 He that converteth Soules is an Apostle, as Paul, 
 2. Cor. 3. 1-2, 
 
 The Ministers of England convert Soules. 
 
 Ergo, the ministers of England are Apostles as 
 Paul: or thus. 
 
 He that converteth Soules is sent of God. Rom. 10. 
 14. 15. 
 
 The Ministers of England convert Soules. 
 
 Ergo, the ministers of England are sent of God. 
 If I should yeeld your first argument the it would 
 follow that you & al the ministers that convert soules 
 in England are Ap. but you intend not to prove your 
 selves Apst. but ordinary Pastors of visible churches: 
 & therfore yom- argument if it were yeelded proveth not 
 your purpose: & I know you do not challendg to be an 
 Apostle as Paul was. 
 
 Againe to answer to your second argumet, we yeeld 
 you that no ma ca covert to the true faith of Chr. new 
 Testamet which is visible, except he be sent of God: but 
 seing you pervert men fro the new testament of Chr. (as 
 I have proved) how can you herby prove your selves to 
 be sent of God? nay I say you are the instruments of 
 Sathan sent by the L. in his wrath to keep the people in 
 bondage fro the obedience of the faith taught in the new 
 testament: I do not determine what you are invisibly, 
 secreatly known to the L. neither doth the Scripture 
 teach vs so to judg of faith: For how can the Scripture 
 teach vs visiblie to judg an invisible thing which is not 
 appearing in visible Fruites? 
 
 Further wher as you say that the 1. Cor. 9. 1. & 
 2. Cor. 3. 1-3. doth not intend the constitution of the 
 Chiu-ch of the Corinths, & other Churches: but their 
 conversion from idolatry to embrace the do6tryne of the 
 gospel by faith: I answer that these two things which 
 you distinguish are al one, & they are no other in distinc- 
 tion then Aarons beard, & the beard of Aaron (as you 
 speake) : for to convert men to the Faith of the gospel, 
 is to convert men to the true constituted Church of 
 Christ: For they are not converted to the true faith til 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 483 
 
 they be converted & established into the true Church if 
 it may be found : So that this obje6tion of yours is very 
 insufficient if not altogether ridiculous: & for the force 
 of the Apostles argument in these two places of the 
 Corinths, I say it is mistaken by you vtterly, & so wrested 
 from the Holy Ghosts purpose, & misapplyed by you to 
 prove your intention. For the scale of Pauls Apostleship 
 was the Church of the Corinths converted to the faith, 
 & estabhshed into the true constitution of the new 
 Testament 1. Cor. 9. 2. & so Paul expoundeth himself in 
 the other place 2. Cor. 3. 10. saying, that he was made 
 an able l^Cnister of the new Testament, even as Moses 
 was of the old: For the vnderstanding of which place & 
 the whole matter, you must remember what Moses did 
 to the Church of the lewes, & what Paul did to the 
 Church of the Corinths : Moses did constitute the Church 
 of the lewes, according to the paterne shewed him in the 
 mount & that most faithfully, Heb. 8. 5. Paul being the 
 Apostle of the Gentils sent by Chr. lesus for that purpose, 
 hath estabhshed the Church of the Corinths, according 
 to that paterne which Christ the Mediator revealed 
 vnto him: which none could doe but an Apostle sent 
 by Christ: So that the force of Pauls Argument to 
 prove himself an Apostle must thus be propounded & 
 conceaved. 
 
 He that hath the scale of an Apostelship is an 
 Apostle. 
 
 Paul hath the seale of an Apostelship, viz : an inf alhble 
 dire6tion from Christ lesus by the Spirit to convert 
 & establish the Church of the Corinths into the true 
 constitution of the new Testament. 
 
 Ergo : Paul is an Apostle of lesus Christ. 
 
 Now Mr. Bern. I would require you to answer dire6tly 
 & plainly whither this be not the true Scope & intent of 
 these two places of Scripture: if yea: then are you a 
 most ignorant & shameles perverter & false interpreter 
 of the Scriptures, wherof I require your repentance before 
 the Lord & the world (for your sinne is publique : ) if nay : 
 then discover the contrary if you can & justifie your self: 
 or els I doe professe vnto you, & to aU the ministers of 
 England, that you doe abuse the honest harted people 
 
 11—2 
 
484 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 of the Land, misleading them meerly by the pretence of 
 this argument of converting soules: For they feehng in 
 their consciences secreatly the Lords work of inward 
 conversion by the ministery of the Land, especially the 
 sincerest & most forward puritans thereby are brought 
 to reverence their ministery: & vnder the vizard of this 
 inward work in their consciences pretending conversion 
 to the visible faith of Christs new Testament, doe hereby 
 resolutely persist vnder that ministery whereby (say 
 they) they were converted, assuring themselves that it 
 cannot be a false ministery that converteth men to the 
 Lord inwardly and secreatly: then you the ministers of 
 the Land, deceaving others, & being deceaved your 
 selves by the misconstrudtion of these & the like places 
 of Scripture stand vp stoutly to defend your ministery 
 after this manner: are wee not true ministers of lesus 
 Christ ? have wee not converted Soules ? are not you the 
 Seale of our ministerie, the forward professors of the 
 Land? wee appeale vnto yom' consciences if you in our 
 ministery have not felt the powre of the word to your 
 inward conversion: If this be so: how can you forsake 
 your Fathers that begat you? how can you go to the 
 Seperation that never coverted you? &c. I answer 
 what you doe inwardly in conversion, I dispute not, & 
 the Scripture regardeth not: what you doe outwardly 
 that I plead, & the Scripture discovereth: you convert 
 not a man to the true faith of Christ which is visible in 
 the visible communion of the true Church of the Apostle 
 Pauls constitution such as was the Church of the Corinths : 
 and therfor you cannot by your inward invisible con- 
 version (which you plead for) prove your ministery: 
 For except you can produce such an efie6t as Paul did 
 in the Corinths you cannot prove your selves to be the 
 true ministers that are sent of God. For Paul saith yee 
 Corinths are our Epistle vnderstood & read of al men: 
 So that Pauls Seale of his ministery was an outward 
 visible, legible faith, viz: The faith of the true Church 
 of the new Testament whereinto the Apostle had estab- 
 hshed them, which al men did see behold, & read mani- 
 festly: wherefore if you the Ministers of England wil 
 prove your selves to be the true ministers of the new 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 485 
 
 Tes[t]ament, then shew mee such a seale of yotu- ministery 
 as the Apostle heere speaketh of: convert men, & estab- 
 hsh them in the true Apostohcal Church of the primitive 
 institution, & I for my part wil yeeld vnto you, that as 
 paul was sent extraordinarily, so are you ordinarily by the 
 Lord, & you are the true ministers of lesus Christ truly 
 sent : Rom. 10. but seing you doe what you can to hinder 
 al your disciples from the true Corinthian Church estab- 
 hshed by paull according to the paterne of Christs new 
 Testament, not bringing the people that depend vppon 
 you so far as you know & acknowledg, but stil coimsel 
 them to stay & wayt for a better tyme, til the civil 
 Magistrate wil give his allowance, vnder these pretences 
 stil keeping them in Spiritual boundage to the abhomina- 
 tions of Antichrist retayned in the Land: I say herby 
 you manifestly discover vnto al the world, that seing 
 you know the wil of your Lord & Mr. Christ, & doe it not, 
 you are worthy to be beaten with many stripes: that 
 seing you break the commaundements of Christ & teach 
 men so, you are the least (that is none) in the Kingdome 
 of Heaven : pra6tising flat contrary to the Apostles who 
 thought it better to obey God then man: & yet the 
 Magistrates that forbad them were the Magistrates of 
 the true Church of the lewes : wherefore breefly to answer 
 both Ministers & professors: To the professors I say: 
 Shew mee your faith by embracing the whole new Testa- 
 ment of Christ: To the ministers I say: Shew mee the 
 Seale of your ministery by converting & establishing a 
 Church after the Apostohque Corinthian frame & consti- 
 tution: & I wil grant that then you are true ministers, 
 & your disciples truly converted: in the meane tyme 
 I wil judg your visible standing in Christianity as it is 
 visible : & your invisible being in Christianity I wil leave 
 to the Lord, who seeth in secreat, & who knoweth who 
 are his, not doubting but the Lord hath his thousands 
 even in the depth of popery much more among you: & 
 this is that Mr. Bern, which wee hold & grant concerning 
 this point. 
 
 Now for your obje6lion which you for vs make & 
 answer pag. 129. 130. That private persons may convert, 
 I say you herein also are deceaved & deale deceiptf ully : 
 
486 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 For you are to distinguish of conversion according to the 
 circumstance of tyme wherein me were converted to 
 Christ: lohn converted & baptized many into Christ 
 lesus before the visible Church of the new Testament 
 was revealed, which came vppon the day of Pentecost, 
 A61. 2. Eph. 4. 11. Thus were al the Disciples of lohn 
 & of Christ converted, of this conversion & Faith must 
 the places of the Evangelists be vnderstood: as namely 
 that loh. 4. 39. & others: so were the lewes, Proselites, 
 & some of Samaria converted, for as yet Chr. was not 
 preached to the Gentils, which he himself forbad to be 
 done. Mat. 10. thus were me converted to beleve that 
 the Messias which they knew should come, was come, 
 & that lesus the Sonne of God, & the Sonne of Mary was 
 hee: who vppon their conversion & baptisme became 
 Christs Disciples to learne & pradtise whatsoever he 
 should afterward teach them: That this is so read, 
 Aa. 18, 23. & 19. 2. 3. Now after the day of Pentecost, 
 conversion was larger as I may so speake in respe6t of 
 the visible manif estatio therof & other hke considerations : 
 For then men were converted to the matter of the day of 
 Pentecost, & to al that frame & constitution of the church 
 of the new Testament which was purchased by Christs 
 death, & exhibited vnto the Apostles by the promise of 
 the Spirit given vnto them: Thus were men converted 
 after the death, resurre6tion, & ascension of Christ, & 
 after the comming of the Holy Ghost as may be seen, 
 Aa. 2. 38-42. & 8. 16. 17. & 10. 44^8. So that lohn 
 converted men to the Faith of Christ to be manifested: 
 after the day of Pentecost, the Apostles converted men 
 to the Faith of Christ already given & exhibited: Seing 
 therfor that the new Testament of Christ is now confirmed 
 & estabhshed, & revealed manifestly in the Scriptures 
 of the Apostles of our Lord, al that are converted now 
 are converted to the new Testament & the ordinances 
 thereof, or els they are not converted to vs visiblie: 
 This being thus premised as necessarily to be vnderstood 
 for the true knowledg of true conversion: in the next 
 place we must take notice (for the answering of the 
 obje6tion of private mens converting) that Antichrist hath 
 defaced the Faith of Christ in the whole new Testament, 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 487 
 
 & so the true ministery: & therfor it must needes be 
 that whosoever doth convert from Antichristianisme, & 
 estabhsheth a people into the true Faith & new Testamet 
 of Christ performeth that work either as a minister of 
 Antichrist: or as an Apostle, Prophet, EvangeUst of 
 Christ: or as a Private person: For this is a sufficient 
 enumeration of parts : ther being no other sort off persons 
 to convert men from Antichrist to Christ but one of these : 
 For you have heard that Pastors do not convert but 
 feed the flock: I suppose you dare not avouch that the 
 Ministers off Antichrist do convert to the true Faith & 
 new Testament off Christ lesus: neither dare you say 
 that ther are now in the world the offices of Apostles, 
 Prophets, Evangehsts: wherfor when men convert they 
 do it as private persons: Therfore choose Mr. Bern, 
 which of these three you wil aifirme: & then tel mee 
 whither private persons doe not convert, as A6t. 11. 
 19-21. & this shal suffice for this point, of converting 
 performed by private persons in the rising vp from the 
 Apostacy of Antichrist, & for the discovering of your 
 objection & answer. 
 
 Now from the pa. 130-141. you teach vs the do6lryne 
 
 of the vocation of ministers which I wil not altogether 
 
 disalow, nor approve wholly : & seing it aperteyneth not 
 
 to our question, I leave it wholy vntoucht: & come to 
 
 that which is pa. 141-146. wher you endevoiu- againe 
 
 to prove your ministery true, & that after this manner. 
 
 They that are called of Christ, having both gifts & 
 
 graces: they that are also outwardly caled of the 
 
 church being examined, aproved, ele6ted, ordeyned : 
 
 they that preach true do6trine, administer the true 
 
 Sacraments, performe their office faithfully, Hve 
 
 conscionably, are assisted by Chr. to convert soules, 
 
 & are aproved by the people, are the true ministers 
 
 of Christ. 
 
 The ministers of the Church of England have al these 
 
 particulars. 
 Ergo, the ministers of the Church of England are the 
 
 true ministers of Christ. 
 I answer you Mr. Ber. that the Popish ministers have 
 al these f orsaid qualifications in common with the ministers 
 
488 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 of England, (I plead not of the degree or measure of 
 these things, for I confesse some of them to be much 
 more in the English ministers but I speake of the kind or 
 nature of the qualifications) : which I prove by indudtion 
 thus. 
 
 1. The Popish ministers many of them have excellent 
 outward gifts & graces as much learning, vtterance, zeale, 
 & gravity as any ministers of England, though al of them 
 have not so : as al the ministers of England have not so. 
 
 2. The Popish min[i]sters are called examined, aproved, 
 ele6ted, ordeyned of the Church, (that is as you expound, 
 the cheef governors, who are as true ministers as you are, 
 seing yoTor ministery is a branch of the roote) : So are you. 
 
 3. The Popish ministers preach the true do6lryne of 
 Christ, & administer his true Sacraments : for you retaine 
 the baptisme that men have in popery as true, and they 
 breake and eate bread and wine in remembrance of 
 Christs death: & although you preach more truth then 
 they do, & administer baptisme & the L. Supper more 
 purely, or rather lesse corruptly, yet they have the same 
 truths & Sacraments that you have, even the Scriptures, 
 baptizme, & the L. Supper. 
 
 4. The Popish ministers many of them performe their 
 office Faithfully in many things as Faithfully as you do : 
 & the best of you do not performe al the parts of the true 
 ministery, & the worst of you are as bad as the worst 
 popish preist. 
 
 5. The popish ministers some of them five conscionably 
 according to their rule, the best of you do no more: & 
 the worst of you are as vild beasts as the grossest shave- 
 lings in Rome. 
 
 6. As the Popish ministers convert none visibly to 
 the true Faith and new Testament of Christ, & yet I 
 doubt not but that thousands are by them converted & 
 saved (what Mr. Be. wil you condemne al the men that 
 have lived from Gregory the great til the councel of 
 Constance, & to this day vnder the dominions of the pope ? 
 For shame do not so. ) So though the f orwardest ministers 
 of England convert many invisibly to life & -Salvation by 
 Christ, yet you ordinarily say, that the Formalists convert 
 none, & the dumb ministers cannot convert, bicause they 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 489 
 
 cannot preach: & none of you al convert a man visibly 
 to the true Faith taught in the new Testament of Christ, 
 but with al your might pervert men from it. 
 
 7. Finally, the popish ministers are approved by their 
 people, aswel as the best or worst of you are, according 
 to the dispositions of the people. 
 
 Seing therfor that al these things are as evident & 
 pregnant for the popish ministers as for you, therfor 
 either they are true ministers if you be true : or els bicause 
 they are fals (as you say) & yet have al these forsaid 
 quahfications, therfor these quahfications make not a 
 true ministery: So that you see Mr. Ber. that your 
 argument is weak to prove your ministery true, & you 
 must seek out a better definition of a true ministery, 
 & according therto shape your ministery, if you wil have 
 it true. 
 
 In the next place you with an obje6tion & answer 
 would prove that although your ministers have a false 
 entrance, viz: ordination of the Bb. yet may be true 
 ministers: & namely by two reasons, 1. For that none 
 were ever ordejmed but by ecclesiastical persons; as 
 Apostles, Evangehsts, Bbs. 2. a false entrance cannot 
 make a false ministery, as in marriage. 
 
 I answer : First, if it were yeelded you that ther could 
 be no true ministers made without ordination of Apostles, 
 Evangehsts, Bbs. yet bicause your L.Bbs. are not those 
 true Apostles, Evangehsts, Bbs. of the primitive insti- 
 tution, but rather the Servants of Antichrist, (as your 
 forwardest professors & preachers instantly affirme) 
 therefore ther ordination is Antichristian, and so your 
 ministery is false in the entrance: but Secondly, I deny 
 it to be true which you aflfirme for ordination by precedent 
 Elders : For I have proved vnto you by many vndeniable 
 reasons that the whole ministerial! powre of Christ is 
 given to the body of the Chiurch, whereby, as in the first 
 constituting of Churches, so in the rising of Churches from 
 Antichristianisme, the body hath powre to al the Holy 
 ordinances of Christ for ther mutual edification to hfe 
 & Salvation, whereof the true ministery is a principal: 
 & therefor the Chvu-ch hath powre to enjoy the true 
 ministery: & you confesse the Church wanting officers 
 
490 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 hath powre to ele6t her officers, which is the principal, 
 A61. 6. & 14. & why not to approve & ordeyne which are 
 but the inferior & lesse principal? Further, you may 
 read A6t. 1. that before ther were any Apostles a6lually 
 in office, the Church did cho[o]se Mathias into the rome of 
 ludas, & that by a commo consent: wherfor this first 
 exception of yours is nothing. 
 
 Your Second exception is as weake: that seing a 
 faulty entrance into mariage which is one ordinance of 
 God, doth not disanul it, why should a faulty entrance 
 into the ministery disanul it? I say the violating of 
 accidental circumstances through ignorance shall not 
 disanul any of Gods ordinances: For then their should 
 be no true having of any or[di]nance of God whatsoever : 
 Seing it is impossible wee should perfe6tly & stri6tly keep 
 all & every circumstance therto aperteyning: but the 
 wilful breach of essential parts of the ordinance doth 
 corrupt the ordinance & make it false: as for example: 
 The matter or forme being false, the ordinance cannot 
 possible be true : A man marieth a mayde that is 6. yeer 
 old: or a woman marieth an Evnuch: the mariage is 
 false, for the matter is false : A man taketh a woman not 
 as his wife, but as a concubine, as the yonger brethren 
 the getlemen of Venice doe, this is no true mariage, 
 bicause it wanteth the true forme of mariage: so: your 
 Ch\u"ches assume them ministers, suppose they be the 
 true pastors described in the word, as I am perswaded 
 your Puritanes so endevour, I say bicause your churches 
 or Ecclesiastical assembUes are false, yom* ministery is 
 not true: For a true Minister & a false Church cannot 
 mary together: Further, if your Church & ministery 
 were true, yet if you should be presented by a Patron, 
 ordeyned by a Prelate, indudted by an Archdeacon, 
 contrary to the wil of the Church, the mariage is false, 
 bicause the calhng is false: So then you see Mr. Ber. 
 how Htle your simihes help you wherein notwith- 
 standing you by your disciples are thought Specialy to 
 excel, and to have the prehemenence over your fellow 
 Preists. 
 
 And heer you bring a flourish out of the 10. of lohn 
 to prove your ministers true ministers: what Mr. Bern. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 491 
 
 in good sooth doe you plead tMs for all your Ministers 
 of England? Speak plainly & double not with God & 
 man: doe you in your conscience think that al the 
 ministers of England, eve yoiu- dumb Preists (whome you 
 have excluded by yom: covenant) your grosse nonresidents 
 & idle beUyes the Cathedral or Collegiate Preists, your 
 double benificed men, that al these & every one of them 
 doe enter in by the dore? have entrance by the porters 
 opening, know their sheep by name, lead the by sovuid 
 doctrine & holy Hf e save many & destroy none ? Speak 
 plainly Mr. Ber. to this point, & seek no shifts: & yet 
 these are the only men alowed by Law in your ministery : 
 For be he never so dumb, idle, non resident, wicked, yet 
 if he subscribe weare the geere, & do read the Service 
 book, & wil do homage to his Spiritual Lords & their 
 Courts, if he be amicus curiae, if he be conformable & 
 obedient al is wel: is not this even so? this you know 
 in your conscience Mr. Bern. & therfor pag. 143. Lin. 7. 8. 
 you speake warily: you say: The propertyes of a true 
 Shepheard agree wel with Ministers in England: you 
 dare not say with al the Ministers of England : Therefore 
 by your owne conscience al the Ministers of England are 
 not true Shepheards: your Lords the Prelates wil con 
 you Htle thank for this: but let vs exclude your dtmib 
 Preists, idle bellyes, and al the rable of the conformists 
 if you wil, which are 9. parts of 10. (and then I think you 
 are excluded your self among them:) I wil plead only 
 against the best minister that standeth by Law in your 
 assembUes: 1, he entereth not in by the dore, seing the 
 dore is only in the Sheepf old, that is in the true Church : 
 & seing you are a False Church (as is proved) yoiir dore 
 cannot be true. 2. The porter (that is as you say Gods 
 Spirit : but I think rather the porter to be the watchman, 
 that is the whole Church, Mat. 13. 33-37.) he openeth 
 not to you, for you convert none to the true visible Faith 
 of the new Testament, or if you did, it doth not prove 
 your true Pastorship, seing Shepheards do not make 
 sheep, but feed them : it should only prove that you are 
 Spiritual Fathers that convert men which private persons 
 doe as you have heard, 3. he doth not know them nor is 
 knowne of his Sheep: For of 300. perhaps he wil not 
 
492 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 acknowledg above 30. to be sheep, the rest he thinketh 
 goates, & the goates wil not acknowledg him as Shepheard, 
 but hate & fly from him. 4. he doth not lead them by- 
 sound do6tryne to perfedlion, but by False dodtryne per- 
 verteth them from the truth, which blasphemously he 
 proclaymeth dayly in his pulpit to be Brownisme, Schisme, 
 Heresy, &c. 5. he doth not lead them by Godly Ufe, for 
 if the cheef part of GodHnes be the true worship of God, 
 how doth he lead them in GodJines, that leadeth them 
 vp & downe in your False Chiu-ch, Ministery, Worship, 
 & Government, blindfold hke the men of Sodom that 
 sought Lots dore : Therefore I dare in the true f eare of the 
 Lord cal the best of you al a Spiritual theef , & a robber, 
 yea a Wolf that cometh to kil, rob, and destroy: not 
 that you so entend to doe: or that you do so wilfully, 
 (& yet I would have you Mr. Bern. Look wel to your 
 self, for I dare not cleare you from sinninge against your 
 conscience, who have acknowledged the truth:) but for 
 that you do so indeed, & by necessary consequent: 
 For seing you are in a False Church, & Ministery, and 
 vse a False worship, & submit to a False Government, 
 you must needes by defending al this Falsehood & teaching 
 it to others, & perswading them to the obedience therof, 
 perswade them to al these abhominations of Antichrist, 
 & so do rob them, kU them, & raven them, like wolves, 
 theeves, & robbers: For men may rob, kil, & destroy 
 ignorantly, as Paul did when he was a Pharisee, as I 
 my self did when I was one of your Preists, & as many 
 do in popery, except you wil say that they al do sinne 
 against their conscience, A6t. 3. 17. 1. Tim. 1. 13. 
 
 And heer you have a fling at our ministers, & wil 
 needes have them no Lawful ministers: you dare not 
 say false : & this you endevour to prove bicause that we 
 are not made Ministers by Successive ordination. 
 
 First, Mr. Be. I tel you bicause of your importimity 
 in this particular of ordination by Succession that if it 
 must needes be (which we deny vtterly) that we have it, 
 if you have it, for we were made Preists by your prelates : 
 why then do you condemne our ministery say you ? why 
 do you condemne the ministery of the Church of Rome say 
 I ? For if you may have a true ministery, & yet condemne 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 493 
 
 the ministers of the Church of Rome, from whence yours 
 came: then may we have a true ministery, & yet con- 
 demne jour ministery whence ours cometh : this I speake, 
 not for that I plead it, but to stop your mouth: For I 
 vtterly renounce your orders which I had from Wicka 
 prelate of Lincolne, when I was chosen FeUow of Christs 
 College in Cambridg: & I receaved & doe retayne my 
 ministery from that particular Church wherof I am Pastor : 
 which hath the whole powre of Christ ministerial! dele- 
 gated to her from Christ her Husband, when he contra6ted 
 with her. 
 
 Secondly, you neither can nor do prove Succession in 
 the new Testament: For that which you alledg for the 
 Succession of the old Testament, I say it was typical, 
 & is abolished by Christ. For do you think this is a 
 good argument: one Preist begat another in the old 
 Testament, therfor one minister must ordeine another in 
 the new Testament: why may you not plead after this 
 manner: Therfor one Preist may beget another Preist 
 in the new Testament? & wheras you say that Preists 
 did consecrate preists, which consecration was ther 
 ordination, I deny it vtterly, & I prove the contrary, 
 that diiring the captivity of Babilon ther were many 
 priests borne & none consecrated, only for their admission 
 in to the preists office it was requisite that they should 
 shew their Genealogie, Nehe. 7. 64, 65. but their ordination 
 was their generation or byrth: though I deny not but 
 when they entered into the performance of their office 
 ther were some rites performed which was no part of their 
 ordination : but I would know of you what is ordination : 
 is it any thing but the declaring of the partie ele6ted & 
 approved to be in office, by prayer for him & a chardg 
 given vnto him ? can none do this but a precedent officer ? 
 Againe, for the old Testament I say, God created the 
 first Preist, viz : Adam, then til Aaron men begat Preists, 
 for the eldest in the Family were the Preists : Moses who 
 was the yonger brother & no preist ordeined Aaron & 
 his Sonnes: after that Preists begat preists tU Christs 
 tyme: then Christ appointed officers in the Church: 
 Apostles made Evangelists, Evangehsts & Apostles or- 
 dejmed Bbs. & Deacons: al this I confesse Mr. Ber. 
 
494 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 what is this to Succession in the new Testament ? I shew 
 you plainly that the Church Eledled Mathias, ther being 
 yet no Apostles, A6t. 1. ther being Apostles the Church 
 ele6ted Deacons, A6t. 6. & Elders, A6t. 14. & seing they 
 performed ele6tion which is the contra6t, why may they 
 not performe all? For ordination is nothing in respe6t 
 of Ele6lion, as you may see in al Societyes & corporations 
 whatsoever: The contra6t which is the mutual consent 
 of a man & woman for mariage maketh man and wife 
 before God: Ele6tion which is the mutual consent of the 
 pastor & his Flock, maketh a man pastor of his Flock: 
 So that in. this particular Mr. Bern, you show your will- 
 fullnes and bhndnes asmuch as in any thing in your 
 book, although I doubt not, but it is the best that can 
 be pleaded for Antichrist: & thus much for the second 
 part of this Se6tion. 
 
 The third part of this Se6tion is, that your worship is 
 a false worship wherin, as I have dealt in the two former 
 points, so wil I deale in this, viz, first prove the position : 
 Secondly answer your cavils. 
 
 To prove your worship a false worship I vse these 
 Arguments following. 
 
 First Argument. 
 
 The true worship of the L. cannot possibUe be offered 
 vp in a false Church. 
 
 The Ecclesiastical assembUes of England are false 
 Churches. 
 
 Ergo. The worship offered vnto the L. in those Eccle- 
 siasticaU assemblies is a false worship. 
 
 The ground of this argument is this, that al the 
 Ecclesiastical adtions performed by a false Church are 
 stajmed with the false constitution of the church: For 
 God wil not have every communion of men worship him, 
 but he wilbe worshipped by such a company of people 
 as he hath described in his new Testament: & as in the 
 old Testament no man or company of men might worship 
 or be accepted visibly, but such as were circumcized. 
 Gen. 17. 14. Exod. 12. 48. Deut. 23. 1-4. A6t. 21. 28. 
 2. King. 17. 25-28. loh. 4. 22. So in the new Testament 
 no man or communion of men visiblie can be accepted 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 495 
 
 of the L. but such as are described in the new Testament, 
 viz. men Seperated from al the abhominations of Anti- 
 christ, 2. Cor. 6. 17. & gathered into the name of Christ 
 lesus, Mat. 18. 20. & being made Disciples have receaved 
 baptisme whereby they are counited into Christ, Mat. 
 28. 19. If any communion of men otherwise constituted 
 (viz: men not Seperated, not gathered together, not 
 gathered into Christs name, not made Disciples, not 
 baptized truely with the baptisme of the new Testament,) 
 if any such company of men do worship God ther worship 
 is not accepted of God : but as the L. sent Lyons among 
 the Samaritanes for persuming to worship him in the land 
 of Israel, they being an vncircumcized copany, 2. King 17. 
 
 24. 25. & as the L. punished the vagabond lewes, exorcists 
 by the violence of an evil Spirit, for naming the L. lesus 
 being an vnbeleeving & vnbaptized company, A6t. 19. 
 13-17. even so wil the L. be avenged on al them that 
 joyning together to worship God, have not Seperated 
 themselves, or calling vppon the name of the Lord, do 
 not depart fro iniquity, 2. Cor. 6. 17. 2. Tim. 2. 19. neither 
 Avil it serve to say that the worship is true bicause it is true 
 conceaved prayer, or true preaching, or thanksgiving : For 
 true worship must be defined, not only in the matter, but 
 cheefly in the forme: For otherwise among the Anti- 
 christian papists & Heretiques ther is true conceaved 
 prayer, preaching & thaksgiving. & els in the old Testa- 
 ment ther was true Sacrificing among the Babylonians 
 whe they Sacrificed an oxe to the God of Israel, Dan. 6. 
 
 25. 26. whereas it was manifested that no Sacrifice could 
 be accepted that was offered with straunge fire, Levit. 
 10. 1. 2. & therefor the Sacrifices of the Babylonians 
 must needes be abhominable, though the matter was true, 
 bicavise the forme which cheefly consisted in the fire was 
 false: So though the matter of the worship of the new 
 Testament be true, viz: conceaved prayer, preaching, 
 praising God, yet bicause it proceedeth not from the true 
 fire which is alwayes hving vppon the Altar, Levit 6. 
 9-13. at lerusalem, that is, in the true Church and 
 Temple of God, bicause it is not inflamed by the true 
 Spirit of Christ, the true visible annoynting which is 
 only in the true body the true Church, (Ephes. 4. 4. For 
 
496 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 there is one body and one Spirit:) Therefore the worship 
 is not true worship visibly: what it may be inuisibly I 
 dispute not : nor doe not censure at all, but leave to the 
 Lord, and to every conscience. 
 
 The Second Argument. 
 
 The worship that is offered vp vnto the L. by a false 
 
 Ministerie, is a false worship, & canot visibly be 
 
 judged true or accepted. 
 The worship of the Ecclesiastical assembhes of England 
 
 is offered vp by a false ministery: as hath been 
 
 proved already. 
 Ergo: the worship of the Ecclesiastical assembhes 
 
 of England is a false worship, & cannot visibly be 
 
 judged true or accepted. 
 The ground of this Argument is the same with the 
 former: wherefore as in the old Testament the worship 
 that was performed in Israel by the Preists of leroboams 
 devising which were not of the Linage & genealogie of 
 Aaron was a false worship, & could not be accepted 
 visibly, or be judged as accepted judging by the rules 
 of the word. 1. King. 12. 31-33. and as the incese 
 which Azariah the King of ludah would have offered, 
 could not be accepted or so judged, bicause it was not 
 offered by the true Preists the Sonnes of Aaron, 2. Chron. 
 26. 16-22. and the King was punished with Leprosy 
 for his presumption: So al the worship which is offered 
 vp vnto the Lord by a false ministery, is visibly to be 
 judged abhominable, bicause Christ only offereth vp to 
 his Father the worship of the worshippers which his 
 new Testament hath described & no other, Rev. 8. 3. 4. 
 copared with Revel. 5. 8-10. & 11. 1. stU let it be 
 remembred that I dispute not, nor censure not, the 
 invisible things of the Lord. 
 
 The third Argument. 
 
 lewish, that is Hteral, stinted, imposed book-worship 
 is false worship. 
 
 The worship of the Ecclesiastical assembhes of England 
 is lewish, that is hteral, stinted imposed, book- 
 worship. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 497 
 
 Ergo, the worship of the Ecclesiastical assembhes of 
 England is a false worship. 
 
 The ground of this argument is the Analogie and 
 proportion which ther is betwixt the type and the truth, 
 the shadow and the substance, the lettre and the Spirit, 
 the Old Testament with the ordinances therof, & the new 
 Testament with the ordinances thereof : For seing the old 
 Testament was a type of the new, therfor the Church, 
 ministery, worship, & government of the old Testament 
 were types of the Church, ministery, worship, and govern- 
 ment of the new Testament, therfor the worship of the old 
 testamet being lyteral beginning in the lettre (as was carnal 
 circumcision Rom. 2. 29.) did type forth the worship of the 
 new Testament to beginne in the Spirit, loh. 4. 23. 24. 
 For the Lettre was a type of the Spirit, Col. 2. 17. Seing 
 therfor that Reading the Law was a t5rpical ordinance of the 
 old Testament, & therfor hteral, stinted, manifesting the 
 letter, & book- worship, it foUoweth that it is now abohshed 
 by Christ, & the thing signified by the hteral Reading 
 is now to be retayned in the new testament, which is, 
 vttering matter out of the hart, called the manifestation 
 of the Spirit, the demonstration of the Spirit, the minis- 
 tring of the Spirit, & the like : by which phrases of Speech 
 the Holy Ghost would teach vs, that seing we are set at 
 liberty from the bondage of the law which was a Schookor. 
 to leade to Christ, we are not therfor againe to be intangled 
 with the yoke of bondage in any thing, no not in this 
 matter of stinted, hteral, book-worship which is flat 
 ludaisme: but we being placed in the hberty of the 
 Spirit, are to vse our gifts in Gods worship, as the spirit 
 giveth vtterance, as we see the Apostles pra6tised vppon 
 the day of Pentecost, when the promise of the Spirit was 
 fulfilled vppon them, & as we see the Church of Corinth 
 praaised, 1. Cor. 14. 15. 16. 26. & 12. 7-11. He that 
 desireth to know further of this particular of book- 
 worship let him read the book lately pubhshed intituled : 
 The differences of the Churches of the Seperation : wher this 
 point is largely discussed, which if it be the truth I desire 
 may be embraced, if not I require an answer of them 
 to whom it is specially dire6led: to conclude this first 
 point, Mr. Bern, seing your Worship for the most part 
 
 w. II. 12 
 
498 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 is book-worship, I conclude it to bee lewish, and so false 
 Worship. 
 
 Now I come to answer your cavils which are conteyned 
 pag. 146-151. 
 
 First, you referre vs to the treatise in the end of your 
 book, & I referre you for answer partly to Mr. Ains. 
 partly to the book intituled the differences of the Churches 
 of the Seperation: For I doe acknowledg that in the 
 Old Testament, Psalmes, Prayers, & Prophecies were 
 read out of a book : & yet further I answer three things : 
 1. that it wiU not foUow that seing it was so in the old 
 Testament, therf or it must be so in the new : nay contrary : 
 it was so in the old Testament, therefore it must not be 
 so in the new: This is the true manner of reasoning: 
 or thus: In the Old Testament they had Psalmes, 
 Prophecyes, Prayers, read out of a book, which was the 
 Type, the manifestation of the Lettre: Therefore in the 
 new Testament, wee must have Psalmes, Prophecyes, 
 Prayers, brought out of the hart, which is the Spiritual 
 book of the New Testament, wherein the Lord doth 
 write his Lawes, Heb. 8. 10. which is the truth, the 
 manifestation of the Spirit, 2. it will not foUow that if 
 it were granted that reading the Prayers, Prophecyes, & 
 Psalmes of Scripture out of the Original! tongs the Hebrue 
 and Greek, were lawfull, that therefore the reading of 
 the Apocrjrpha translations which are the workes of men 
 is Lawful: For the one is interpretation of a Language 
 or Tong, that is the vttering of matter from the knowledg 
 of the Tongs and the gift of interpreting: the other is 
 reading wordes out of a book, which a child of eight yeeres 
 old may doe. 3. neither wiU it follow that if it were found 
 lawfuU to read the Enghsh translation of the Scriptures, 
 therefore it shalbe lawful to read your Enghsh Masse- 
 book, your book of Homilies and Articles, your book of 
 Canons : For then why may you not read also Mr. Perkins 
 vppon the Creed, Henry Smyths Sermons, or any other 
 good Catechisme, Commentary, or Sermon book? 
 
 Secondly, you prove your worship true by two reasons, 
 1. Say you, you worship no False God. 2. you worship 
 the true God with no False worship : For you preach the 
 true word, admi[ni]ster the true Sacraments, pray such 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 499 
 
 prayers as are agreeable to the Scripture, & the forme of 
 prayer taught by Christ : & if any things els be prescribed, 
 it is not imposed as worship : Or if it were prescribed as 
 a part of worship, it doth not therefore follow that all 
 the worship is False: well: I answer: That Israeli in 
 leroboams tyme and after, and when Aaron made the 
 CaKe, did not worship a false God, & yet their worship 
 was false: So may your worship be false though you 
 worship the true God that hath revealed himself in the 
 old Testament: but their worship is not true by your 
 owne confession: therfor yoiu: consequent is not good 
 that seing you worship the true God, your worship must 
 needes be true: if the meanes wherby you worship be 
 a false meanes devised by the wit of a man & not taught 
 in the word of God, I say your worship is false: & so 
 that place of Mat. 15. 1. importeth that whosoever 
 worshippeth God by any invented meanes, taught by 
 mans precept worshippeth God in vayne: Such is an 
 image as the second commaundement teacheth: now 
 the meanes of your worship are false, as first your false 
 Chm-ch which is an Idol. 2. your stinted devised, im- 
 posed, Kteral service book, which is an Idol, 3. your false 
 Christ which is not your King, Preist, & Prophet, which 
 is one of our Idols: For though you truly beleeve con- 
 cerning his person, yet your Faith is false, & your dodtryne 
 false concerning his offices & mediation: & therfor these 
 meanes of your worship being false meanes, they must 
 needes be false worship: therfor, seing your do6tryne is 
 much of it false: your communio false: your worship 
 stinted & bookworship: it followeth that your word is 
 not the true word, your Sacraments the signes of your 
 false Faith & communion are not true: your prayers 
 are not true: & whereas you plead that other things 
 besides the word. Sacrament, & prayer, are not imposed 
 as worship, I answer : what doe they then in your worship ? 
 wil you mingle that which is no worship, & worship 
 together? either they are worship, or els let them be 
 cast out of your worship : & f xu-ther, whereas you aUedg 
 that though some parts of your worship be false, yet al 
 shal not be false, I grant it, if your Church were true, & 
 yom- ministery true : but seing yoiu" Church & ministery 
 
 12—2 
 
500 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 be false, therfor though you do preach the true word, 
 & administer the true Sacraments, & pray true prayers, 
 yet they can not be true worship offered vp in a false 
 Church, by a false ministery, for the falsehood of the 
 Church & ministery doth essentially cor[r]upt the worship : 
 if al that is set vppon the table be either poiso, or poysoned 
 meate, I say such is your worship : For death is in your 
 worship, as Coloquintida was in the pot: So that you 
 see the distin6tion of true & false doth most properly 
 aperteyne to your worship: as it doth also to your 
 ministery & Church, as hath been shewed. 
 
 In the next place you declare vnto vs out of PhOip 
 Momseus the order of the worship of the old Testament, 
 & out of the Scripture the parts of the worship of the new 
 Testament, & out of lustinus Martyr the order of worship 
 in his tymes, which I wil not contradidt, & yet I plead, 
 that seing your Church is false, your ministery false, your 
 servicebook a false meanes of worship, therfor though 
 al that you alledg were true, it doth not foUow that your 
 worship is true : & wheras you plead that reading. Col. 
 4. 16. is comaunded as a part of worship, I Avish you to 
 read the book intituled the differences of the Churches of 
 the Seperation, & you shall have your answer: and thus 
 much for this Section. 
 
 The eleventh Sedtion. 
 
 The next position is your third, which is this, viz. 
 
 3. In maintaining that it is not lawful to heare any 
 ministers amongst vs whatsoever they be, nor to jojme 
 in prayer with such as feare God among vs: I for my 
 part hold both vnlawf ul : bicause your ministers are false 
 ministers: & your people of false Churches: Now how 
 can wee who are the Church and body of Christ, have any 
 Spirituall communion with you, who are the ministers and 
 subje6ls of Antichrist. 2. corinth. 6. 14^16. 
 
 But heer you would needes have vs beleeve that ther 
 be many that feare God among you, & that they are 
 particularly known vnto vs: for my part I do beleeve 
 generaly that God hath his people in Babylon, & even 
 among you who are Babel that is confusion : & I do also 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 501 
 
 beleeve that those who are miscalled by the name of 
 Puritanes, are the most likely to be Gods people: but 
 to say, certainly this or that Puritane hath faith or 
 feareth God, I cannot doe by any warrant out of the word 
 of God that I see. For know you that ther is only one 
 true forme of a visible Church, Eph. 4. ther is one body : 
 in this body ther is one only true faith, for the Apostle 
 saith the faith is one : but none of you al are mebers of 
 this body which is a communion of faithful men Seperated 
 from al vncleanes, & walking in the obedience of al Gods 
 ordinances: & therefor none of you al are of the true 
 faith which is foimd only in the true body. 
 
 You shal see Mr. Be. how many things I chardg you 
 al with. 
 
 1. You are mingled with al the abhominable people 
 of the land cotrary to these scriptures. 2. Cor. 6. 17. 
 Apoc. 18. 4. 
 
 2. You cal God Father jointly with al the people of 
 the Land who are brethre of you & members of the same 
 Church with you : which is vntrue if you take your selves 
 to be faithful: For they are of their Father the Devil. 
 
 3. You make Christ a Mediator to you al in common 
 with al the profane people of the land, which is contrary 
 to Apoc. 8. 2. loh. 17. 9. 
 
 4. You make al the wicked people of the land members 
 of Christ, & members of your selves, in the scales of the 
 covenant, if you chaUendg your selves to be Faithful: 
 which is contrary to 1. Cor. 6. 15. & 10. 16. 17. 
 
 6. You refuse Christs Testament & his Eangdome, & 
 will not have him to raigne over you in his owne Offices 
 & Lawes : which is contrary to these places. Luk. 19. 27. 
 Apoc. 14. 9-11. 
 
 6. You vtterly reje6t the censures of admonition in 
 the thre degrees therof contrary to Mat. 18. 15-17. 
 Heb. 10. 24. 25. 
 
 7. You suffer your selves (if you chaUendg to be Gods 
 people) to be deprived & robbed of the powre of Christ, to 
 cho[o]se your own officers contrary to A61. 6. 5. & 14, 23. 
 1. tim. 3. toto. & 5. 21. & 6. 13. 14. 
 
 8. You rejedt the truth, we by our testimony ofifer 
 vnto you, yea you persecute it by slaimders, by lyes. 
 
502 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, 
 
 by raylings, though many of you have been enKghtened 
 by it: how then can we account you faithful certainly: 
 but we must certainly know the to be Faithful with whome 
 we pray : For whatsoever is not of Faith is sinne : I pray 
 you mi[s]construe me not : For although I dare not say 
 you have Faith of a certainty, yet I hope wel of many of 
 you in particular : but to tel you plainly I hope better of 
 many that never knew this truth then of you & some of 
 your Disciples whome I know by their owne confession to 
 have bee inlightened with it, & yet now oppose against it : 
 look to your selves, yom- estate is fearful : if our gospel be 
 hid saith the Apostle, it is hid to them that perish, 2. cor. 
 4. 3. & when certaine were hardened & disobedient speak- 
 ing evil of the way before the multitude (as you doe) Paul 
 departed from them, & Seperated the Disciples, A6t. 19. 9. 
 & so doe wee to you, and therefore our pra6tise is warrant- 
 able: Therefore consider these things that I write, for 
 I professe before the Lord that this truth which wee 
 testifie vnto you is as cleer and evident vnto vs as the 
 noone day: and observe it well that those among you 
 that have been enhghtened with it, and now quench it, 
 shall grow from evill to worse, and shal have Gods hand 
 out against them, so as every man shal say the Lord is 
 avenged of them, except they returne againe: and so I 
 leave this point. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the eleventh Se6lion. 
 
 Mr. Bern. Sep. Schis. pag. 152. Saith that those men 
 have lost the feehng of former grace & all true charity, 
 that say thus, viz : That they cannot say certainly, by any 
 warrant of Gods word, that any of vs hath eyther Faith 
 or f eare 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 per- 
 swaded that any of vs hath eyther true Faith or feare of 
 God: naming Mr. Smyth in the margent. 
 
 I Avrite in this Sedtion 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 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 503 
 
 tliat 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 deaUng whither ignoratly or maMciously 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 hkely hood they are the Puritanes so 
 called : now Mr. Bern, to make the Lords truth odious, & 
 his owne part good, perverteth this speech of mjme in 
 3. particulars, 1. he leaveth out the good that I say, viz: 
 that I certainly beleeve Gods people to be in the Lad, 
 & that in likely hood 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 deaKng, & so to trust him according 
 to his desert, as also to consider what I say, & therefore 
 to read the beginning of this Se6tion 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 : but generally, certainly, & invisibly, 
 I beleeve ther are thousands, viz: a remnant according 
 to the Ele6tion of grace: See for this Rom. 11. 3. 4. 
 compared with 1. King 19. 10. Revel. 18. 4. Mr. Bern. 
 I wil 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. deceiptfuU 
 deahng in this one particidar, and accordingly to judg 
 of the rest of his dealings. 
 
 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 defend it to be vnlawfuU to joyne in 
 prayer with any of the assembhes. 
 
 Seing the assemblies Ecclesiastical are false Churches, 
 and the members of the assembhes members of false 
 
504 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 Churches, how can the members of true Churches have 
 commimion 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 & water 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. 1^18. 
 Therfor whosoever shal mingle with false ministers or 
 members of false Chiarches 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. LawfuU to heare their Ministers, 2. to be 
 vnlawfuU 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 hke 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 acciu-sed 
 that heare it, and are marked for the Servants of Anti- 
 christ for so doeing, Revelat. 14. 9-11. Moreover you 
 say, Christ forbiddeth not to heare the Scribes and 
 Pharisees: true, for they were members of the true 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 506 
 
 Chiirch of the Old Testament, and their communion 
 Tjrpical 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 con- 
 tention & with a purpose to encrease his afflictions: 
 Well: PauU rejoyced not that false Ministers in false 
 Churches preached Christ, or that Christians heard them 
 so doe: neyther doth PauQ speak of visible sinnes, but 
 of invisible affe6tions, which he by the Spiritt discerned 
 to bee in the Teachers, even as Peter discerned Ananias 
 and Sapphjras dissembhng: And what is this to your 
 ptu-pose 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. Wei 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 hght: & your selves doe approve al that 
 wee prof esse 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 willf ull 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 
 
506 Paralleles, Censvtres, Observations. 
 
 vs to say our Father : Well : I deny not but those among 
 you that apertayne to the Lords Ele6tion have God for 
 their Father, but I say they are invisible, 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 ludas: & I may not have visible communion 
 with one that is Eledt in the Lords invisible Eledtio, 
 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. 
 
 The twelfth Se6tion. 
 
 The next particular of yours is the thirteenth in 
 nomber, viz 
 
 13. That a company truly fearing God if any open 
 wicked joyne with them, are not capable to choose them 
 a minister over them : which is a truth, though you hold 
 it error: I manifest it in this manner. 
 
 First, you cannot approve to vs certainly that you 
 truly feare God. 
 
 Secondly, you cannot convince that they who suffer 
 wicked men in communio with them truly doe feare 
 God: bicause they hve in confusion with the wicked 
 from whome they ought to be Seperated : & that therf or 
 in that confusion & estate they have no title to choose 
 them a minister. 
 
 Thirdly, let it be graunted for disputation sake that 
 some fearing God doe consent with open wicked in 
 cho[o]sing a minister, I say that Minister so chosen by the 
 good & bad is no true Minister: For that mixt people 
 are not the true Church : Seing the holy Ghost testif yeth, 
 2. Cor. 6. 17. that God wil receave only those that are 
 seperated to be his people : & that seing those supposed 
 faithful have the Spirit of God, & the open wicked have 
 the Spirit of Satan, they cannot possibhe combine together, 
 except you wil say that the holy Spirit and sathan can 
 combine: seing then those contrary persons cannot 
 conjoyne how can they in common choose them a minister. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 507 
 
 or if they doe how is he a true Minister ? seing they that 
 choose him are not a true Church: I pray you Mr. Ber. 
 in your answer dissolve vs this knot, if you can, that 
 we may receave instrudtion. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, apertejniing 
 to the twelfth Se6lion. 
 
 Mr. Ber. Sep. Schisme, pag. 161. 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 the Ministers, though they desire the meanes of 
 Salvation. 
 
 In the beginning of this Se6tion, 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 Se6tion 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 ap[p]oint 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 subjedls 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 pra6lised, 
 A6t. 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 
 lawf ulnes of this, you doe vs open wrong : & if his Matie. 
 should dissolve the parish Ecclesiastical assembKes & 
 the false ministery, & should comaund men of knowledg 
 & gifts to preach the word to his subje6ls, I doubt not, 
 but al of vs would herein readily yeeld our selves to heare 
 & learne the truth at any such persons, & our selves to 
 teach the truth to such a people : but to say that such a 
 people are true Churches, or such preachers the true 
 
508 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 Pastors of true visible Churches that wee deny: & that 
 you shal never be able to prove : but if after such preach- 
 ing 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 & feed them, & appoint 
 such men to such office, the men so chosen & ap[p]ointed 
 are the true Pastors which the Scriptiu'e describeth : but 
 what is aU this to your assemblies & Ministers? who as 
 yet have not cast of [f ] 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 Ecclesi- 
 astical: & whereas you in this particular obje6t 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 pra6tise (as you say) farre from 
 plaine evidence of Scripture, or any pra6lise of the Church 
 these thousand yeeres : I answer it is no mat[t]er for the 
 pra6tise of the Church these thousand yeeres, for Gregory 
 the great Bb. of Rome who lived a thousad 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 of iniquity is exalted in these particulars : wherf or 
 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 aUedg 
 that it is also far from plaine evidence of the Scripture, 
 I answer the evidence is plaine to them that wil vnder- 
 stand: & I would know what is plaine evidence of 
 Scripture: is not a true natiu-al consequence plaine 
 evidence ? is not this plaine evidence. Math. 18. 20. wher- 
 soever 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 wiU receave you & bee your 
 Father: & this, GaUat. 3. 16. the promises are made to 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 509 
 
 Abraham and to bis 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 wiU 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 Se6tion, & the Paral. Censvir. 
 Observat. therto aperteyning. 
 
 The thirteenth Sedtion. 
 
 The next point to be handled is your seaventh in 
 nomber, viz. 
 
 That a minister may be made without Elders (ordi- 
 narily I meane) for extraordinary courses are not now to 
 be vsed for ought I see: this point you blame as error: 
 Let vs see whether it be error or not. 
 
 I hold that a minister may be made without Elders: 
 more plainly I say that when the Church wanteth Elders, 
 the Church hath powre to Ele6t, approve & ordeyne her 
 owne Elders, also : to ele6t, approve, & ordeine her owne 
 Deacons both men & woemen: For if you remember 
 what was before spoken to your fifth position, viz : that 
 the church hath the powre of Chr ia it self, viz: that 
 it hath Chr. the covenant, & al the promises given to it 
 being yet but few in nomber, & that the Church hath 
 these things in true title & interest as her owne freehold : 
 then you shal see what wil follow hervppon: namely 
 that the Church hath powre to receave in members & 
 east out members, to receave in her Officers & to dischardg 
 the of office, the church hath powre to the preaching of 
 the word to the administring of the scales of the covenant, 
 to binding & losing, which workes she cannot do herself 
 being many, therfor she appointeth fit persons therto, 
 viz: such officers as Christ hath given to his Church, 
 which are the Elders, stil notwithstanding reserving her 
 powre to herself when occasion shalbe offered: these 
 things are sufficiently proved aheady in answer to your 
 
510 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 fifth imputation : but you bave some tbing perbaps to say 
 for ordiiiation, tbat tbe Cburcb batb not powre of it : tben 
 belike al tbe promises are not given to tbe Cburcb, for if 
 ordination be not given to tbe Cburcb, tben tbe ministery 
 is not given to tbe Cburcb, for it seemetb you make ordina- 
 tion a great part of tbe ministerie : but know for your learn- 
 ing tbat ordination dotb give notbing at al to tbe Minister : 
 For ele6tion is tbe verie essence & forme of tbe minister : 
 for in ele6tion powre to administer is given to tbe officer 
 eleGb : For wben tbe Cburcb cbo[o]setb the minister, dotb 
 not tbe Cburcb in effe6t say : we give tbe A.b, powre to 
 administer tbe word, seales of the covenant, & censures 
 in the behalf of the whole Cburcb ? & tbe minister Eledl 
 dotb then a6lually possesse & assume that powre delegated 
 vnto him by tbe Church : so when the Church cbo[o]setb 
 her Deacons dotb she not in effeft speake thus : we give 
 you, c.d.e.f. powre to colle6l, & distribute the Churches 
 Treasury, & to minister for tbe body & mebers of tbe 
 Cburcb in other general services, helpful to tbe body & 
 outward part: this is evident enough if you wil not be 
 bhnd wilfully: For as in matter of mariage, this is tbe 
 very forme of mariage : I take tbe for my wife, & I take 
 tbe for my husband: So in tbe matter of ofiice this is 
 tbe very forme therof : we take the for our Pastor: I 
 take you for my flock : & so forth of tbe rest : now ordi- 
 nation is notbing but the pubhshing of tbe officers ele6tion 
 with prayer made for him & admonition given to him to 
 be faithful: The Church dotb tbe former which is al in 
 aU even the very forme, tbe latter is but the lesser & 
 an accident without which tbe officer may be a true 
 officer: declare tbe contrarie to this if you can if not 
 yeeld to tbe truth. 
 
 Ob. But you wil say the word mentionetb an Elder- 
 ship which must ordeine, & Paul commandeth Titus to 
 ordeyne Elders, Tit. 1. 5. 1. Tim. 4. 14. 
 
 Ans. 1 . Tbe place of Timothie compared with 2. Timoth, 
 1. 6. yeeldeth this sence, tbat Timothie by tbe exercise of 
 prophecy wherein be was trayned, & by tbe imposition of 
 the Apostles bandes whereby tbe extraordinary gifts of tongs 
 & prophecy were tben vsuaUy conferred, bad an excellent 
 grace (so tbe word is in tbe originall) conferred vppon him. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 511 
 
 But let it be granted that Timothie had a ministerie 
 conferred vnto him, surely it must needes be the office 
 of an EvangeUst, & what is that to an ordinary Elders 
 office : Paull only & the Apostles could create Evangehsts. 
 
 Further let it be yeelded you that Timothie was made 
 a Bishop of Ephesus by the Eldership of Ephesus, the 
 Eldership in that a6tion did nothing but that which the 
 Church appointed them to, & for the e£fe6ling wherof 
 they had powre & authority from the Church who is 
 the Fountaine of al the powre that any officer hath, 
 
 Ans. 2. To the place of Titus I thus answer, that 
 Titus ther is not commaunded to ordeyne ministers, but 
 to constitute Elders: For the word is not to ordeyne, 
 or to lay on hands, but to constitute : if you vnderstand 
 the Greek tongue you wil acknowledg that I say to be 
 true: now to constitute an Elder signifieth Ele6tion, 
 approbation, & ordinatio: not ordination only as the 
 obje6tion importeth: but you know, or els you are a 
 sworne slave to the Prelates, that the Church hath powre 
 to Ele6t & approve her Elders: yet Titus is heer com- 
 maunded to doe it: whence wee must needes conclude 
 that Titus only should teach & dire6t the Churches in 
 constituting of her Elders according to the Apostohque 
 institution : which what it was Titus being an Evangelist 
 & wel acquainted with the Apostles course, could wel tel : 
 & this must needes be the sence of this place, except you 
 have any thing to say against it, which we pray you let 
 vs heer if ther be any thing: you seeme in this point 
 to distinguish the calUng of Elders, as if ther were two 
 manners or formes of calling Elders ordinary & extra- 
 ordinary : I know no such thing, & therf ore I leave that 
 tUl I see it expounded. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the thirteenth Se6lion. 
 
 Al this thirteenth Se6tion hath for the subje6t 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 cove- 
 nant of the new Testament, have not powre of themselves 
 
512 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 to create their owne Pastors, & Deacons: Although 
 that which hath been spoken concerning the seaventh 
 Sedtion may fully & sufficiently satisfie al this doubt: 
 yet I thought meet to add certaine argumets of plaine 
 evidence for the further declaration here of that al scruples 
 & shifts may be taken away. 
 
 The first Argument. 
 
 They which have powre to enter into, & to assume the 
 New Testament, have also powre to assume al the ordi- 
 nances of the new Testament, & so by necessary consequent 
 the ministery. 
 
 Two or three faithful people have powre to enter into, 
 & to assume the new Testament of Christ: 
 
 Ergo: two or thre faithful people have powre to 
 assume al the ordinances of the new Testament, & therfor 
 the ministery. 
 
 The Minor only is doubtful : which may thus be con- 
 firmed, Gal. 3. 14-16. wher the Apostle saith plainly 
 that the promises were made to Abraham & his seed, viz : 
 to the Faithful, vs. 16. that the blessing of Abraham 
 came vppon the beleeving gentils: vs. 14. & that these 
 promises & blessing is the covenant or new Testament, 
 vs. 15. wherevppon it foUoweth that seing the Faithful 
 have the blessing, the promises, the new Testament, ther- 
 for they have the powre of enjoying the ministery: For 
 the ministery is one part or ordinance of the new Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 The second Argument. 
 
 They that have Christ & with Christ aU. things els: 
 they that have al things aperteyning to fife & Godhnes: 
 they that have the promise of this fife & of the life to 
 come have the powre to assume the ministery, for that 
 is a part of Godlines. 
 
 But the Faithful, be they but two or thre, have with 
 Christ al things els, Rom. 8. 32. have the promise of life 
 & Godlines, 2. Pet. 1. 3. have the promise of this fife, & 
 of the hfe to come, 1. Timoth. 4. 8. 
 
 Ergo : The Fa3^hf ull though but two or three have 
 powre to assume the Ministery. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 513 
 
 The third Argument. 
 
 They who have powre to examine, & ele6t their 
 Officers have also powre to pray for them, & to com- 
 maund them to minister, which is ordination. 
 
 But the Scripture teacheth plainly that the Faithfull 
 have powre to Ele6t and choose their owne Officers: as 
 Deacons, A6t. 6. one to bee an Apostle, A61. 1. 26. Elders, 
 Aa. 14. also to approve them : A6t. 6. 3. 1. Timoth. 3. 10. 
 and you confesse no lesse your self. 
 
 Ergo: the Scripture teacheth plainly, (& you by 
 consequent grant indeed, though you deny in wordes) 
 that the Faithful have powre to pray for ther officers 
 Eledl, & to commaund them to administer: & that is 
 ordination. 
 
 The Fourth Argument. 
 
 They that have powre to make a Church, have powre 
 to make a minister or ministers: For they that can doe 
 the greater, can do the lesse. 
 
 Two or thre Faithful people have powre to make a 
 Church. 
 
 Ergo: two or thre Faithful people have powre to 
 make ministers. 
 
 The reason of this argument is, for that the Church 
 is the body of Christ, the Spowse of Christ, & the ministery 
 is but one part of the body, one Servant of the Spowse, 
 one of the ornaments of the Church. 
 
 The Minor is plaine : For two or three Faithful people 
 have Christ lesus, have the promises, have the holy things 
 of David, which are Faithful, have the blessing of Abra- 
 ham, being Abrahams seed & furthermore the Apostle, 
 Heb. 8. 10-12. expounding what the new Testament is 
 teacheth that they that have the Lawes of the Lord put 
 in their mindes, & written in their harts, are the people 
 of God, & have God for their God, & so are the Church of 
 the new Testament: Mr. Bern, this point is cleerer then 
 can be denyed, & al the world can never be able to 
 overthrow it: the vnderstanding & feeHng whereof I do 
 hartily wish vnto your soule, & to al the vpright harted 
 of the Land. 
 
 w. n. 13 
 
514 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 The Fifth Argument. 
 
 They that are the true matter of the Church of the 
 new Testament, shallbe invested with the true forme of 
 the new Testament : they that have true matter & forme, 
 have the true property which ariseth from the vnion of 
 matter & forme, that is Christs ministerial powre to 
 assume al the meanes of their edification to Salvation : 
 & so by consequent the ministery. 
 
 Two or thre Faithful people are the true matter of 
 the true Church of the new Testament: & therfor have 
 the true forme or covenant of the new Testament induced 
 vppon them: & so being a Church subsisting of true 
 matter & forme, have the true property arising from the 
 vnion of the matter & forme, viz: the powre of our L. 
 lesus Christ, to assume & vse al the meanes of their 
 edification to salvation: & so by consequent have powre 
 to assume the ministery. 
 
 Ergo : two or thre Faithful people being a true Church, 
 may create, that is Ele6t, approve, & ordeyne their owne 
 officers. 
 
 And this may suffice for the proof of this point. 
 
 The Fourtenth Sedtion. 
 
 And so I passe to another point which is you[r] Four- 
 tenth, viz. 
 
 14. That baptisme is not administred among vs simply 
 into the Faith of Christ, but into the faith of the Bbs. 
 or the Church of England. 
 
 This point you say is also erroneous: let vs consider 
 of it I pray you seriously : I would know into what Faith 
 they are baptized if not into the Faith of the church of 
 England, they are members of the Church of England, 
 & they professe the Faith of the Church of England, are 
 they not then baptized into that Faith of the Church 
 wherof they stand as members, & of which Faith they 
 make profession ? are they baptized into one Faith, and 
 do they professe another Faith? or do you think that 
 the Faith of Christ & the Faith of the Church of Engeland 
 are not one ? me thinkes Mr. Bern, you lay a f owle impu- 
 tation vppon your Church: in holding that the Faith of 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 515 
 
 the Church of England is not the faith of Christ, & that 
 baptisme is not administred into the Faith of the Church 
 of England respe6tively, but into the faith of Christ 
 simply. I dare say your Lords the Prelates wil co you 
 Htle thank for this geare: but let vs consider of your 
 Faiths. The Prelates & Church of England have one 
 Faith wherto they Subscribe: The Puritanes & their 
 Fadlion have an other Faith, for they wil not Subscribe to 
 the Prelates Faith : Christ & wee of the Seperation have 
 a third Faith, for we wil Subscribe neither to the Bbs. 
 Faith, nor the Puritanes Faith, but to the Faith of Christ 
 indefinitely comprehended in the Holy Scriptures: Heer 
 now are thre Faiths : thre Churches : & so thre baptismes. 
 But the true Faith is one, the true Church is one, the 
 true baptisme one : Therf or you & we have not both the 
 true Faith, Church, & baptisme : but we approve vnto you 
 oiu" Faith, church, & baptisme to be true: & therf or 
 your Faith, Church, & baptisme is false: & so certainly 
 it is: For whosoever have stinted their covenant, & 
 hmited their repentance, & abridged their Faith, have 
 a false Faith, Covenant, & Repentance: but you in 
 your assembhes have your Covenant, Faith, & repentance 
 at the wil of the Prelates, & you dare not covenant and 
 practise al that you know, but walk in violating of the 
 whole Kingdom of Christ, are mingled among al the 
 refuse of the Land in your Church, worship, & commtuiion 
 of holy things: therf or your Repentance, Faith, & 
 Covenant is false, your church false, your Ministerie false, 
 your worship false, your baptisme false, the Lords Supper 
 false, al false: & heer give me leave to advertise you to 
 look to your selves that know the wil of God & doe not 
 nor dare not praffcise as you know: I wish you consider 
 your own do6tryne that whosoever hveth in any open 
 knowne sinne hath no grace : but you live in open known 
 sinnes : For you know you should ref orme many things, 
 which you doe not nor cannot seing you want the Censures : 
 how then can you perswade vs that your repentance is 
 true, & that your faith is true: you plead you have a 
 true ministery, bicause you conuert soules: you convert 
 soules a pace do you not? when you convert them to 
 yotu" false repentance, false Faith, false Church, false 
 
 13—2 
 
516 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 Ministery, false Worship, false Government: is this the 
 conversion wherby you would prove your ministery ? not 
 only to live in your false repentance, covenant, Faith, 
 Church, vnder your false Ministery & Government, but 
 to rejedl & oppose the truth, & that with such slaunderous 
 & l3ring courses as we heare of you? you must affoard 
 vs better evidences of jowr Faith, repentance, & of your 
 true ministerie, or els we hold them al false. Consider 
 what I say Mr. Bern. & the Lord give you vnderstanding 
 in al things. 
 
 ParaUeles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the Fourteenth Se6tion. 
 
 Against this Se6tion of my Lettre Mr. Ber. taketh 
 exception in two particulars, pa. 152. 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 coUedtions, and calumniations : 
 Seing Mr. Ainsw. doth renounce them, I wil therefore 
 vndertake the defence of them vnto whom they apert6yne : 
 and heer I wish the Reader to observe whither it lay not 
 vppon mee justly to answer Mr. Bern, whose whole book 
 in the essential parts of it was dire6led 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 Se6tion. 
 
 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 & dire6teth 
 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. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 517 
 
 it wil follow necessarily that baptisme is administred not 
 simply & indefinitely into the Faith of Christ, but parti- 
 cularly & definitely into that Faith which the Bbs. & 
 the Church of England do teach & prof esse: For which 
 consideration an argument may be framed thus. 
 
 Into that faith are the members of the Church of 
 England baptized, which the Law estabHsheth: which 
 the Prelates & Ministers teach: which the Church of 
 England professeth: which the minister baptising in- 
 tendeth: & wherto the parents, witnesses or Susceptors 
 consent : & which the Service-book expresly mentioneth. 
 
 But the law doth not estabhsh: the Prelates & 
 ministers do not teach: the Church of England doth 
 not prof esse: 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 Chiu-ch 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 Suretyes or parents, 
 and so the Faith of the baptisme. 
 
 For the second point let vs consider the faith & 
 repentance of the Church of Englad, I meane of the faith 
 that is visibly professed & expressed in the fruites of 
 repetance amog them : & therby we shal know the tree. 
 
 The faith of that Church is not a true faith which 
 teach & prof esse a false mediator: & the repentance of 
 that Church is not a true repentance, which pra6tise 
 according to that false do6l-ryne. 
 
 But the assembhes 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, Worship and Govern- 
 ment, estabhshed in the Land: Sacrificing and making 
 intercession for them in the dayly pra6tise of al those 
 abhominations : Ruling and Governing them by all the 
 Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy, and by the courts & canons 
 Ecclesiastical, which are the inventions of the man of 
 sinne: Teaching & Prophesying vnto them by those 
 Antichristian, Prelates, Preists, & Deacons, which raigne 
 
518 Paralleles, Censiires, Observations. 
 
 in the Land: & so pra6tising according to this false 
 Faith pra6tise 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 obje6led 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 wilHngly: & 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, & pra6tise 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: oiu" 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 assembhes 
 Ecclesiastical: Secreat things aperteyne to the Lord: 
 these we leave to the Lord, we med[d]le not with them : 
 this I desire may once for al be remembred & pondered, 
 & so I end this matter. 
 
 The Fiftenth Seftion. 
 
 The next point is your Fourth wherin you do vs open 
 injury, viz. 
 
 4. In holding that Princes have no more to do in 
 ecclesiastical causes then one of you in a particular con- 
 gregation: these are your wordes. 
 
 Mr. Ber. I challeng you in this particular imputation, 
 to be either a mahcious or an ignorant slaunderer: For 
 eyther you know not what we teach concerning Princes 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 519 
 
 Authorityes, & so slaunder vs ignorantly : or if yon know 
 our judgmet in that matter you slaunder vs malitiously : 
 Remember that the Prophet in the Psalmes complayneth 
 that his enemyes digd pits for him, laid snares, ginnes 
 & nets in his way to catch him vnawares & to bring evil 
 vppon him : are you now become such an enemy vnto vs ? 
 doe you think by calling into question the Supremacy 
 of Princes imputing therin treason to vs to catch vs in 
 a snare, & cause vs to fal into the pit? if this be your 
 course, thus to hunt the Soules of men, look vnto your 
 self, therin you manifest htle grace to me: but let vs 
 heer the cause you impute to vs. You say we hold that 
 princes have no more to do in ecclesiastical causes then 
 one of vs in a particvilar congregacio: I say for myne 
 owne part, & I think I may say it for al the brethren of 
 our Church, that herin you do shamefully beheve: I wil 
 therfor manifest what we hold & teach concerning Princes 
 Supremacy. 
 
 1. First, wee teach & hold according to the Scriptures 
 that Princes & civil Estates are the Lords blessed ordi- 
 nance, Rom. 13. 2. 
 
 2. Secondly, that every Soule ought to be subje6t 
 vnto the civil Magistrates of what estate & condition 
 soever they be, Rom. 13. 1. Tit. 3. 1. 1. Pet. 2. 13. 
 
 3. Thirdly, that we must absolutely submit vnto the 
 civil Magistrate eyther to do his lawful commaundements, 
 or to suffer his vnlawful punishments: by consequence 
 from the former places. 
 
 4. Fourthly, that it is vnlawful for any subje6t to 
 make insurre6tion or rebelhon against the civil Magis- 
 trates: by consequence from the former places. 
 
 5. Fifthly, that it is the Magistrates office to be the 
 keeper of both the tables of the comaundemets : both 
 to abolish Idolatry & al false wayes, also to forbid & 
 punish al vnrighteousnes as also to commaund & cause 
 al men within these Dominions to walk in the wayes 
 of God, being fitted & prepared therevnto: and that by 
 the examples of David, losaphat, Hezechiah, losiah, 
 Nehemiah, Roman. 13.4. 5. Psalm. 101. toto. and 132. 2-5. 
 
 6. That a Prince hath powre in a particiilar visible 
 Church, to punish any wickednes any one committeth: 
 
520 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 and to cause that visible Church to assume & pra6tise 
 any truth Gods word teacheth: ex prsecedentibus : now 
 this is more authority then any one particular member hath. 
 
 7. Wee teach notwithstanding that Princes if they 
 wilbe saved must bee members of a true visible Church, 
 & must walk ther in the obedience of Gods Commaunde- 
 ments & ordinances, submitting to the censures for the 
 reformation & salvation of his soule, as well as to the 
 preaching of the Word, administration of the Scales of 
 the covenant, prayers, &c. bicause God hath appointed 
 but one way to save the Soules of Princes and Subje6ts. 
 
 8. If civil Magistrates be by censures cast out of the 
 true visible Church, yet they are stil to be accounted 
 Gods ordinance, stil to bee obeyed in the L. stU to be 
 submitted to in regard of their punishment, no rebeUion 
 or insurre6lion to be made against them by any of the 
 Church whatsoever: but prayer to bee made for them 
 instantly and dayly. 
 
 Now Mr. Bern, stop your mouth & cease slaundering, 
 & take away the poyson from vnder your Tong. 
 
 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 Se6tion 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 impu- 
 tation 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 vnto Princes & civil States, as the best prelate 
 of England, & that the more popehke they are the more 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 521 
 
 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. 
 
 The sixtenth Sedtion. 
 
 Your fiftenth point foUoweth: which is this, viz. 
 
 15. That ministers ought only to live of volimtary 
 contribution & not of stippends, or any set maintenace: 
 this you impute to vs : we reje6t it, for we hold it lawful 
 for the Elders of the Church to receave weekely, monthly, 
 or yeerely a pencion of the Church for their labors, al 
 that we teach concerning the mayntenance of the minis- 
 terie is this. 
 
 1. That it is vnlawful for the Elders of the Church 
 to chaUendg at the hands of them that are infidels & 
 vnbeleevers, tithes, & offerings as you do. 
 
 2. Wee hold that tithes are either Jewish or popish. 
 
 3. That the officers of the visible Chxu-ch may receave 
 any gift of any Frend that is without, & hve of it. 
 
 4. That the officers of the Church in the necessity of 
 the Church ought to work for their living, as Paul made 
 tents. 
 
 5. That the officers of the Church may challendg 
 mayntenance of the Church, if the Church be able to 
 yeeld it. 
 
 6. That also the poore of the Church may require 
 majmtenance vppon the same grounds for we are al 
 members one of another, & have al things common in 
 vse, though not in possession: al these particulars are 
 plaine by these Scriptures, Heb. 7. 12. & 9. 9. A6t. 2. 
 44. 45. 1. Cor. 9. 1-15. Gal. 6. 6. & 4. 9. 10. Col. 2. 16. 
 17. 20. 21. 
 
 This is the substance of that wee hold herein: and 
 therefore Mr. Bern, you do vs open wrong in this point also. 
 
 ParaUeles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the sixtenth Sedtion. 
 
 Mr. Bern. pag. 156. of the Sep. Schisme avoucheth 
 that to deny tithes, & a set mayntenance to Ministers 
 is contrary to the Lords wisdom, who vnder the law 
 
522 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 appointeth tithes a set maintenace, & ther is notiing 
 against it in the gospel: I answer with the Apostle, the 
 old Testament (I doe not meane the writings of the 
 Law, the Prophets, & the Psalmes) and the ordinances 
 thereof are aboUshed : The bond woeman and her Children 
 are cast out, GaUat. 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 f oUoweth 
 that set mayntenance by tythes is abolished by Christ: 
 & as the hberty of the gospel is to be carefully preserved 
 in other things, as in that of circumcision, of the passe- 
 over, of the preisthood, of the Sacrifices and the rest. 
 So must it bee carefully preserved even in this particular 
 of set maintenance by tithes, for if any Mosaicall, im- 
 potent, beggerly rudiment, or worldly ordinance: if any 
 part of the yoke of bondage may be joyned with Christ, 
 why not aU? 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. [V]Vhither Christ hath not abohshed the Mosaical ordi- 
 nances & 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 
 whatsoever 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. 
 
 The sevententh Se6tion. 
 
 Your sixtenth point followeth, viz. 
 
 16. That our Churches ought to be rased downe, & 
 not to be employed to the worship of God: we are not 
 absolute & peremptorie in this: only this we think for 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 523 
 
 the present that al the reliques, shapes, formes, memorials, 
 instruments, & remembrances of Antichristian Idolatry- 
 ought now as wel to be defaced, as in the old Testament 
 ought ReHques of paganisme, bicause that the proportion 
 of paganisme & Antichristianisme is equal, therfor the 
 L. calleth Rome & al Antichristian assembhes, Babylon, 
 Egipt, Sodom, Apoc. 18. 2. & 11. 8. & Antichristians 
 are called by the same reason, Gentils, Apo. 11. 2. even 
 Babylonians, Egiptians, Sodomites. & so by consequent 
 proportion the Temples Babylonish Temples, pagan 
 Temples, Egiptian Temples, Sodomitish Temples: & 
 therfore to be defaced vtterly according to the com- 
 maundement, Deut. 7. 5. 6. & 12. 2. ludg. 2. 2. Gen. 35 
 1^. 2. King. 10. 27. 28. & 18. 4. 5. Psal. 16. 4. Exod. 
 23. 13. Esay. 30. 22. the same may be said of yom- holy- 
 dayes, your tithes & offerings, your Surplices, Copes, 
 Crosses, Fonts, & al other Superstitious rehques, that 
 God wil not be honored by instruments of Idolatry: 
 nor Idols must not bee so much honored as to retayne a 
 nayle or pinne of them or their implements to honor 
 God with aU: Lett vs see Mr. Bernard what you can 
 say, to convince vs of error: You see the reasons that 
 move vs thus to think tiU wee see better. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the sevententh Se6lion. 
 
 Although Mr. Ainsw. hath sufficiently stopt your 
 mouth Mr. Bern, in this particular, yet I think it not 
 amisse to add thus much, for fiu-ther cleering of the 
 matter : know therefore, that as lehu 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 foUow 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 to suffer 
 her wares, that is her vessels of wood. Ivory, Brasse, 
 Iron, marble, to be bought any more: which I am per- 
 swaded shal in due tyme be accompHshed: that as the 
 
524 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 goodly buildings of the Abbayes, Monasteries, & Nunries, 
 are already destroyed, & made barnes, stables, swine- 
 styes, Jakes, so shal it be done with al the Idol Temples 
 when the howre of their visitation shal come : & whereas 
 you obje6t 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 Chm-ch, & 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 htle and 
 litle his false ministery. Worship, and Government, as 
 experience teacheth he hath done: For a true Chiirch 
 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 leroboams Preists were appointed for Devils, 
 2. Chron. 11. 15. & if the Antichristian preists are the 
 Spirit of Devils, Revel. 16. 14. & the worship of Anti- 
 christians the worship of Devils, Revel. 9. 20. & the 
 Antichristian Churches the habitation of Devils, Revel. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 525 
 
 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 com- 
 maunded : & 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 
 therf or, & so to leave you to meditate vppon these things : 
 Seing the Gentils Sacrifice to Devils, seing the Anti- 
 christians worship Devils, seing leroboams preists were 
 appointed for Devils : & yet al these intended to worship 
 God even the true God: then it foUoweth 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 : & therf or are to be rased 
 downe & converted to the habitation of lim, & Zijm, 
 Satyres, Shrich owles, & Ravens as the Prophet speaketh 
 Esay. 34. 8-15. 
 
 The eighteenth Se6lion. 
 
 Your first point now commeth in the last place to be 
 considered, viz. 
 
 1. In seperating from al the reformed Churches: you 
 say we do il: Let vs consider what we hold: Surely we 
 say the Churches are of two sorts, false Churches such as 
 yours of worksop is, & al others of Hke fashion: 2. true 
 Churches, & those also of two sorts: pure, wherin no 
 open knowne sinne is suffered: corrupt, wherin some 
 one or more knowne sinne is tolerated: to the true 
 Churches which are pure wee may & wil joyne: to the 
 true Churches which are corrupt we cary our selves thus : 
 First, we labor to discover their faults vnto them, ad- 
 monishing them to reforme which wee are bound to doe, 
 bicause they are ovir brethren. Secondly, if they wil 
 not reforme after we have convinced their errors vnto 
 them, we depart from them lest wee should partake with 
 their sinnes: this is our judgment, & praftise: if you 
 can reprove it, let vs heer from you wee pray you. 
 
526 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 Paralleles, Censures, Observations, aperteyning 
 to the eighteenth Se6lion. 
 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 whatso- 
 ever, 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 seem reasonable, for we Seperate from 
 al Churches vppon several reasons, 1. From some (such 
 as are the English Churches) we Seperate for the False- 
 hood 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 per- 
 formed our dutyes vnto them: whe 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 nintenth Se6lion. 
 And now Mr. Bern, suffer me a litle to deale with you as 
 with one of whome I have thought so wel as I have done : 
 it greeveth my Soule for you to see you so straungely 
 seduced by Sathan, & so violently carryed in your 
 boysterous & robustious disposition against the truth, 
 & the professors therof : it hath greeved me heretofore 
 to see your arrogant, proud & ambitious cariage preferring 
 your self in place before men both more auncient, holy, 
 & learned then your self in the judgment of al that know 
 you & them : it hath greeved mee to hear such calumnies 
 as you have in the bitternes of your wrath vttered against 
 divers of vs which I could relate to your eternal infamy, 
 but I spare you: it hath greeved me to heare your 
 formahty that you are become an absolute conformitat 
 in judgment, & that you would be so in pradlise if some 
 persons hindered you not : it greeveth me exceedingly to 
 see some Letters of yours wherein you & your Disciples 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 527 
 
 lying at the advantage take all things in the evil part, 
 pervert & misconstrue mens writings manifesting therein 
 much perversnes of Spirit: it greeveth mee above all 
 that you should support the iSngdome of Antichrist, 
 by your writings against the truth, & by your vntruth 
 vlitered of mee & others. You have now two writings of 
 myne in your hands this & the other you know of, wherein 
 our cause is discovered, which I have especially dire6ted 
 to you for your good : I beeseech you in the name of the 
 L. look to your self & search into this truth, I wonder you 
 should not see it, it is clearer to mee then noone day, or 
 if you see it as it seemeth you once did by your confession, 
 then I wonder much more that you who seem so holye 
 as you doe, should dare to continue in your evil way. 
 if you have any thing to say in answer to this & the 
 other writing let vs heer from you : take heed of wresting 
 & misconstruing my writings: you shal gaine nothing 
 by it I assure you at my handes: set your conscience 
 vppon the wrack before the Lord, examine your hart 
 what hindereth you from the truth: know this that if 
 any sinister respe6t hinder you, you therein shal find 
 htle peace to your conscience, & declare lesse thankfulnes 
 to God: know it would bee the greatest honour ever 
 befel you to be one of the Lords witnesses, & it wilbe 
 the greatest disgrace that can possibhe light vppon you 
 to be found one of those that fight against the lamb 
 lesus Christ in resisting his truth, & the witnesses thereof : 
 assure your self Gods truth wil prevaile in despight of 
 al the gainsay ers: remember that our cause is the same 
 in a manner with the Puritane cause, onely they dare 
 not pra6tise as wee doe: remember that the Lord hath 
 had those that have spUt ther blood in this testimonie, 
 & ther blood & testimony hath stirred vs vp to this our 
 witnesse: consider that this truth prevayleth daily, & 
 shal prevayle : it was opposed in the Queenes dayes it 
 hath prevayled & standeth in despight of al the gainsayers : 
 consider that though the Prelates & you with your feUow 
 Preists oppose against it, yet it hath growne to this head 
 as you see? what are you Mr. Bern, to oppose against 
 it: you are a simple man in comparison of them that 
 have de[a]lt against it, & have taken the foyle. All the 
 
528 Paralleles, Censures, Observations. 
 
 Oxford Do6tors, Mr. Hildersha, Mr. lacob, Mr. Bredwel, 
 Mr. Giffard, could not with ther writings overthrow this 
 truth, & doe you think that you can batter it with your 
 mediocrity ? nay you are to[o] yong to deale against this 
 cause : al your rage & wrath, & choUer, & revendge shal 
 never bee able to daunt vs, or to diminish the credit of 
 Gods truth: you had need more then any ma I know 
 in your way to walk in this way with vs : For you have 
 so many vagaries to & froe, so many rebeUious courses, 
 so many distempered affedlions & speeches, that so long 
 as you are not vnder the L. yoke, & vnhampered by the 
 L. ordinances the censures of the Church, you shall find 
 litle rest to your Soule: wee for our part care not for 
 your help, for our gaine wilbe litle by you, if any thing 
 at aU, but wee respedl your own good: God hath no 
 need of you, you see he can work his work without you : 
 Let these things work vppon you, take heed you bee 
 not deceaved by the applause of the multitude, nor by 
 the Prelates fayre wordes, nor by his angels : Remember 
 that if you receave not the love of the truth God may 
 deliver you over justly to beleeve Hes to your owns 
 overthrow : think not, much that I write thus vnto you : 
 I doe it out of compassion and love to you, vnto whome 
 I wish so well : David was content to bee smitten by the 
 righteous, and flatterie I think overthroweth you: your 
 Parasites have robbed you of your wisdome: beleeve 
 mee I speak the truth : So requiring your answer to both 
 my writings I bid you farewell. 
 
 Heer endeth the letter which was written to Mr. B. 
 divided into 19 Se6tions, with the ParaUeles, Censiires, 
 & Observations, aperteyning to every particular Se6tion 
 therof. 
 
 Thus have I Mr. Bern, passed through the substantial 
 part of your book, which concerneth the cause it self: 
 which although you have placed in the last place, namely 
 from pag. 78. forward, yet I thought meet to make answer 
 to it in the first place, bicause it is the most material 
 part of your book : and heerin you have vsed a notable 
 peece of Sophistical Rhetorick, first to draw our persons 
 into dishke with your readers, and so to prejudicate & 
 forstal ther myndes against our cause: For so it falleth 
 
Censures, Observations. 529 
 
 out customably that the person being disliked the cause 
 cannot bee elitertayned : wherf or after you had colledted 
 al your superficial stuffe, al the accidental conjectures 
 which you heape vp in your book from pag. 21. to 78. 
 and had cast them in the Readers way, whereat he might 
 stumble: the you come from pag, 78. to the end, to 
 the matter, & varnish that also as wel as you can, 
 therby thinking vtterly to pervert your Reader from 
 the truth: well Mr. Bern. I have through the mercy of 
 God answered al the substantial points of your book: 
 not omitting one to my knowledg that is worth answer: 
 but especially I have labored to manifest the mayne 
 cause of our Seperation, the first fo[u]ndacion & rock of 
 truth, which is, that Christs ministerial powre is given 
 to two or thre Faithful ones, who are the true seed of 
 Abraham, to whome the promises, the covenant of the 
 New Testament, Christ, & al the holy things are given: 
 For this is the groundwork & Foundacion of the L. truth : 
 & this I beseech al the land, al the faithful of the land 
 especialy to look vnto : & if they yeeld this ground they 
 must needes Seperate: if they deny this ground, then 
 ther is no footing for them but in Succession, & the 
 Popes chayre: So that heer is the controversy, heer is 
 the state of the Question, whither the holy things 
 with Christ be given originally to the body of the 
 Church to the Faithful: or whither the holy things 
 with Christ bee given to the Ministery originally, & that 
 the Church hath al from the ministery: & that is the 
 point of succession: I beseech you Mr. Bern. & all the 
 honest harted people of the Land to waygh & determine 
 this point in their owne harts, & then your book wilbe 
 found to be but froth : now having answered your mayne 
 matter: I come to answer your probabihties against 
 the Sep. schisme: From the pag. 21-44. you propound 
 7. Likelihoods that the way of the Seperation is not the 
 truth which probabihties may be framed into these 
 formes of reasoning. 
 
 The first Likelyhood against the Sep. is thus framed. 
 Novelty is not the truth : The Seperation is Novelty, 
 [er]go : not the truth : For answer to this argument : I ask, 
 
 w. n. 14 
 
530 Censures, Observations. 
 
 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 prescrip- 
 tion 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 : [er]go : the truth, the reason of this Argu- 
 ment is for that we approve the Do6tryne and pra6tise 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, [er]go : 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 jomi first 
 Likelyhood. 
 
 The second Likelyhood against the Sep. is thus framed. 
 
 They that in some things agree with auncient Here- 
 tiques & Schismatiques, are Heretiques & Schismatiques, 
 & their opiruons 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. 
 
Censures, Observations. 531 
 
 2. you should have set downe the particulars wherin we 
 agree with them : but you have done neither of them : & 
 therefore f ayle 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 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 pe6toris) the infahbihty of expounding 
 Scriptures, as the Apostles & Prophets had in writing 
 Scripture: & except you wil say that men have the 
 perfe6t & ful knowledg of the Scripture: but secondly 
 what are the Scriptiires 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 stufEe, & the Papists can take 
 it vp every whit against 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. 
 
 14—2 
 
532 Censures, Observations. 
 
 Ergo, The Seperation is not the truth. 
 
 I answer: That seing the Seperation have published 
 the confession of their Faith wherin 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 pubhshed, their sUence is therfore in 
 al equity to be accounted their consent: & Mr. lunius 
 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 seaven Churches of 
 Asia, the Mother Church of Jerusalem planted by Christ, 
 lohn Baptist, & the Apostles, all of them being of one 
 & the same primitive ApostoHque constitutid, if I say 
 the Seperation have the allowance & approbation of these 
 Apostohque Churches it shalbe sufficient for them: & 
 therein they shal rest contented by my consent. In the 
 meane season you forget 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 bmlders 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. WUlat, Mr. Alhson, Mr. Cartwright, Mr. lames, Mr. 
 Rogers, Mr. H. Smyth saith of the Seperation is true. 
 
 These f orsaid 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. 
 
 Whatsoever, Herod, Pontius Pilate, Annas, & Cay- 
 phas, the learned Scribes & Pharisees, Tertullus the 
 Oratour and all the Lerned men of the Church of the 
 lewes say is true, that is true. 
 
Censures, Observations. 533 
 
 These persons al of them with one consent say that 
 Christian Rehgion is Heresy and schisme, as you may 
 see in the History of the Gospel & a6ts. 
 
 Ergo, Christian Rehgion is Heresy & schisme. 
 
 If this argument be faulty then is yours faiilty much 
 more : but I wil reason thus for the Seperation & against 
 you : whatsoever Christ the Apostles the Holy Scripture 
 & the Primitive Apostohque Churches collected of the 
 lewes & Gentils do allow or disalow, is to be allowed or 
 disallowed : 
 
 The seperation is allowed, & the Church, ministery, 
 worship & Governmet of the Enghsh assembUes is dis- 
 allowed 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 Enghsh Protestants are prospered in their course. 
 
 Ergo, The Enghsh Protestants have the truth. 
 
 I answer : That this is false do6trine : For the wiseman 
 saith Eccles. 9. 1-3. That prosperity or adversity are 
 no signes of love or hatred, & lerem. 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, & over- 
 throw the whole truth of the Scriptm'es: 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 Vipers, were martyred by the persecuting 
 
534 Censures, Observations. 
 
 Prelates: if Mr. lohnson pronounced excommunication 
 against his brother: & if the Church excommunicated 
 the Father: if Mr. Burnet died of the Plague: if Mr. 
 Smyth was deUvered 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. lohnsons, 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 befalhng 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 : What is it good reasoning to say ? 
 
 ludas hanged himself, Christ was Crucified for blas- 
 phemy: Demas embraced the world: Nicholas the 
 Deacon proved an Heretique: PauH 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 ReUgion is heresy : if this 
 argument be false then is yours false: yet this is your 
 goodly reason : if this bee a good argument wher is your 
 Faith become [?] 
 
 But in this Likelyhood you have a fling at me in 
 particular Mr. Ber. charging me with divers vntruths, 
 which I wil manifest. 
 
 1. That I doubted 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 pubhque slaunderer. 
 
 2. Whereas you say I became satisfied at Coventree 
 after conference had with certayne Ministers, and here- 
 vppon 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 Wor- 
 ship, corrupted: Wherein I receaved no satisfa6tion. 
 
Censures, Observations. 535 
 
 but rather thought I had given instru6tion 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 hke 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 misconstrue 
 my meaning let them look vnto it. 
 
 3. Whereas you impute an absm-dity to mee as yet 
 vnanswered, viz: that I should affirme the spit whereon 
 the passeover 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 tel me which is the Likeliest 
 of the two? & if this be a reasonable speech that the 
 wooden crosse was the Altar whereon Christ was sacri- 
 fi[c]ed, why may not by as 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 asmuch 
 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 mtdtitude. 
 
 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 argu- 
 ment: & 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 yeeres? yet they say that is the truth 
 against the Presbytery: what increase hath puritanisme 
 gotten this 20. or 30. yeeres in England? yet they say 
 
536 Censures, Observations. 
 
 that is the truth against the Prelacy: is not the cause 
 of the Reformists abnost dead and buryed? but know 
 Mr. Bern, that the cause of the Seperation being the 
 same in the mayne groundes, and essential! parts with the 
 Reformed Churches, it hath had infinite increase ever 
 since Luthers tyme: and whereas you objedt heer that 
 wee leave our country without leave: I answer that 
 you know the Law of the Land doth banish vs aU : 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 ludah 
 from Babylon being deteyned by violence in captivity, 
 yet the Lord in working ther dehverance declareth that 
 he wiU have his people depart wher they may freely 
 prof esse it without let or disturbance: besides you doe 
 pervert the Prophet EzechieU his speech: Cap. 3. 6. 
 For was not lonas sent to Nineveh? were not the lewes 
 caryed into captivity? were not the Apostles sent to 
 al Nations? did al the Corinths speak with straunge 
 Tonges ? is it vnlawf ul to send men to convert the Pagans ? 
 but the meaning of EzechieU is that though the lewes 
 vnderstand his preaching yet they wil not beleeve: & 
 the straungers (viz: them of Tyrixs & Sidon as Christ 
 saith) would sooner beleeve him then the lewes, for a 
 Prophet is not without honor save in his owne country: 
 & so the place is misconstrued by you: Finally whereas 
 you obje6t 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 probabihtyes, wherby you confesse that your 
 7. Likelyhoods are of litle force, which I desire the reader 
 to take notice of, that the aUedging 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 
 
Censtires, Observations. 537 
 
 the constitution, ministery, worship, & Government of 
 the EngHsh assemblies Ecclesiastical! as false: & so in 
 respe6t thereof to seperate from them & al spiritual 
 communion with them: & to entertayne the true con- 
 stitution, ministery, worship, and Government of the 
 Apostohque 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 found 
 sound let it be intertayned, if not, foUow the truth what- 
 soever it be : & whereas you say heer that men in seperat- 
 ing from you must cast of the word which begat them, 
 I deny it, & you are a slaunderer herin: For we retaine 
 al truth that you have, & we reje6t only your Anti- 
 christianisme : & for acknowledging your Faith, repent- 
 ance, 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 objedtion 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 essential cor- 
 ruptions 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 pro- 
 fessors 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: 
 
538 Censures, Observations. 
 
 you know Mr. Bern, that this is but sophistry, & hereby 
 you might prove the Dodtrjme 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. 
 
 Wei: 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. Rayhng & 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 Englad our 
 mother that bare vs, in calHng her an harlot: I answer: 
 what truth the Lord hath wrought inwardly in vs we 
 do thankfully a[c]knowledg : & I for my part do professe 
 that in your assembhes 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 effedtual to my justification & salvatio in 
 Christ: but this was so invisibly judging according to 
 the inward feehng of my hart, not according to the 
 outward censiu-e of the word: For though I could truly 
 judg so of my self out of myne owne feehng, 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 
 thakfulnes to be due vnto you for it: neither do we 
 acknowledg the church of England our mother therin, 
 but we say she is barre & beareth no children vnto the 
 L. in respe6t thereof. 
 
 2. Sinne you impute to vs is spiritual vncharitablenes 
 ap[p]earing first in censuring 3. sorts of persons among you, 
 
Censures, Observations. 539 
 
 1. The ignorant as blinded by the God of the world, 2. 
 judging them that know the Seperation, & do not yeeld 
 vnto it as fearful! persons & worldlings, 3. such as tasting 
 of it & faUing 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 vncharit- 
 ablenes 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 ex- 
 tinguished among you & Egiptian darknes to come over 
 you rather the it should be preached by your false 
 ministery: I aswer 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 whither wee would that the word should 
 be vtterly extinguished, 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 com- 
 maundement, or allowance, or permission bee preached 
 throughout his dominions by men fitted therto: where- 
 fore 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 consti- 
 tuted: & 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 
 estabhshed into the new Testament of Christ: but you 
 have done & doe pra6tise the contrary: First, you 
 have estabhshed the into an Antichristian communion & 
 
640 Censures, Observations. 
 
 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 stU to hold 
 & retayne that Antichristian constitution, ministery 
 worship, & government, placed over them: & wholy to 
 reje6t any reformation offered : & in this your digression 
 you runne out into another calumny, viz: that some of 
 vs are so in disUke with yoxir 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 Enghsh assebhes 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 natiu-e & 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 West 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 yoiu" reformation, & the truth to 
 be pra6tised 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 ap[p]eareth (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 Formahst 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 obje6t that 
 the Seperation scoffe at your Rehgious exercises and your 
 conversion: I doe detest .scoffing, & if I my self have 
 at any tyme scoffed I doe proclayme my repentance for 
 
Censures, Observations. 541 
 
 it vnto you & the whole Land: yet know that scoffing 
 at Baals preists was lawfull in Ehas, 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 eironie vsed as a mock to disgrace 
 you, but as a meanes to reforme you as Elias his eironie 
 was: 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 repent- 
 ance: 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 vncharit- 
 ablenes 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, nejrther doe wee 
 excommunicate any man but for sinne 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 pra6tise your advertisement: 
 but if you wil have vs retaine in our communion any 
 sinner willfully impenitent and peevishly obstinate in 
 sinne, wee answer, that wee abhorre yoiu- 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 SpirituaU communion with Idols: 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 
 
542 Censures, Observations. 
 
 pray with them : if it bee vnlawf iil 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 Do6tryne, 1. Timoth. 6. 3-5. to reje6t an Heretique 
 after once and twise admonition: Tit. 3. 10. and not to 
 give entertaynment to the false teachers. 2. John. 10. 
 
 Heer I omit your gibe of the annoynting 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 Scriptiu-es, the Spirit of God, & 
 Christ lesus the mediator of the new Testament which 
 hath estabhshed 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 amog you who persecute one 
 another so hatefully as you do: as the Prelates & their 
 fa6ti6 do devoure the reformists & ther fa6lion: So as 
 it seemeth you are blind at home, though you can see 
 so dragon-hke 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 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 favor, if it bee my sinne I wil 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 
 
Censures, Observations. 543 
 
 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, & Govern- 
 ment is one with theirs : but wee are opposite vnto you 
 in all these. If it be no sinne 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 Scripture : & 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 hve 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 Scriptm-e phrases 
 whatsoever I doe approve, & justify them fitly to be 
 applyed to your false Church, Ministery, worship, & 
 Government: & tU 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, 
 Worship, and Government, I approve. Thirdly, that 
 Mr. Barrow eironically vpbraydeth the preaching and 
 
544 Censures, Observations. 
 
 Worship of the assemblies, following therein Elias his 
 example, I dare not censure that as an vngodly a6t of 
 his though I doubt not but you doe performe these 
 ReKgious 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 Uke the 
 Pharisees aptest to deceave. Finally, I wil not vnder- 
 take 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 Arppon the Lords prayer before I saw the Sepera- 
 tion, as a confutation or contradidtion to Mr. Barrow, 
 I say you may aswel alledg against St. Paul his Pharisaical 
 pra6tises, persecutions, & blasphemies befor he came to 
 the truth, as evidence to confute Christian Rehgion which 
 afterward he embraced. 
 
 6. Synne you lay vppon vs is our oppinions 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 your 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 I end my answer leaving your advertisements 
 & counsels of peace vntoucht as matters nothing per- 
 teyning to the cause of the Seperation: they being hke 
 Apollos Oracles apt to bee expounded eyther way: or 
 hke Delphos sword fit to be vsed for any purpose: for 
 they may fit, eyther Papist, Protestant, Reformist, or 
 the Seperation. 
 
 An advertisement to the Reader. 
 It may happily be thought that this treatise (by 
 reason of the tartnes of some speeches phrases, & censures, 
 passed vppon Mr. Be. the ministers, & Church of England) 
 may passe the bounds of Christian wisdom & charity: 
 especially considering that we of the Seperation cannot 
 be ignorant, what great offence ther is taken at Mr. 
 
Censures, Observations. 545 
 
 Barrowes bitternes in his discovery, & that we know how 
 greatly the forward preachers & professors of the land 
 desire to be mildly & gently handled, & to have a charitable 
 censure passe of them in respe6t of their Religious dispo- 
 sitions to the truth : wel : For Mr. Be. let him know for 
 his part that he is fallen into a deep pit of Apostacy from 
 his formerly seeming sincerity, & if men may be judged 
 by that which is visible, I see no reason why the forward 
 preachers & professors of the Land should not esteem of 
 him as they do of Mr. Merbury, sith Mr Be. is now fallen 
 to his gracious Lords aswel as the other: only Mr. Ber. 
 case is somthing better in this respe<5t, that he wanteth 
 some of Achitophels poUicy, & Rabsakeh his rayling, & 
 of Tertullus Rhetorick to oppose the truth: in respe6t 
 whereof ther is hope that Mr. Be. suming through infirmity, 
 simphcity, weaknes of judgment, & violence of affe6tion 
 may by some sharpe efEe6tual ingredients, having vomited 
 vp al his choler, & purged out al his evil humors, be 
 reduced eyther to as good, or to a better constitution 
 then wherin he formerly was: & to this purpose is al 
 the sharpe phisick administred vppon him in this pre- 
 script: and so the Author doth intreath Mr. Ber. in his 
 best love to interpret it: & to remember what Nathan 
 said vnto David: thou art that man: & what David 
 answered Nathan: I have sinned: & what comfort 
 Nathan presently annexed: The Lord hath put away 
 thy sinne: This condition we vnfeynedly wish to Mr. 
 Be. our old & kind frend: & for the forward preachers 
 & professors of the Land, they must vnderstand, that 
 our censure must be & is only according to that which 
 is visible in their communion : now in that respe6t seing 
 the Church, Ministery, Worship, and Government, of 
 the Enghsh Ecclesiastical assemblies is judged & proved 
 false, & Antichristian : how is it possible that wee should 
 speake otherwise of them as they are ministers and 
 members of that Antichristian body then as of false 
 ministers & false Christians? what would they have vs 
 speak as the false Prophets did. Peace, Peace, where 
 ther is no peace? would they have vs proclayme. The 
 Temple of the Lord: The Temple of the Lord: to the 
 Synagogues of Antichrist? this were to deceave them, 
 
 w. n. 15 
 
546 Censures, Observations, 
 
 & to daube the wal with vntempered mortar: but if the 
 forward preachers & professors of the Land do imagine 
 that we condemne them, as persons voyd of grace, as 
 excluded from salvation by Christ or the hke censures: 
 we give them to vnderstand that the Scripture teacheth 
 vs no such thing, but rather forbiddeth such censures, 
 for we are not to judg before the tyme: & therfor con- 
 cerning this particular we absolutely leave them to the 
 Lord, not doubting but he hath his thousands among 
 them : desiring them to remember that it is one thing to 
 apply the Scripture, to lay the salve to the sore, to 
 denounce judgment against the sinne: another to pro- 
 nounce the sentence of absolution & condemnation which 
 Christ lesus alone (into whose hands the Father hath 
 committed al judgment) shal do, & which for any man 
 to vsurp is to intrude into Christs throne & seate of 
 mercy & justice. 
 
 But if ther be any in the assembUes, either forward 
 preacher & professor that seeth this truth of the Sepera- 
 tion, & yeeldeth not in obedience to forsake that Anti- 
 christian way, & to walk in the truth, let him know, that 
 seing his hart codemneth him, God is greater then his 
 hart: & blessed is he that condemneth not himself in 
 that which he aUoweth : & thus humbly & hartUy desiring 
 the Lord to shew the light of his truth more & more 
 vppon the Land, & at the length vtterly to disperse al 
 that myst & darknes that overshad[o]weth & obscureth 
 the truth, I cease writing: wishing aU welfare to the 
 vpright hearted Reader. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
A Lettre written to Mr. A. S. 
 By lohn Smyth. 
 
 Aister S. beinge requested by Mr. H. your kind frend 
 M & myne, as also, out of myne owne inclination to 
 
 doe you good, whome I heare to be strongUe caried 
 out of the true way, & in respe6t of the auncient acquaint- 
 ance which I had with you in the vniversitie of Cam- 
 bridge, I thought good at this tyme in few hnes to salute 
 you, hoping that you wil interpret this which I doe in 
 good part. I desier you would communicate this my 
 writinge with Mr. B. our ould Prende, & with whome 
 soever els you shal see cause, that you al whome I take 
 to be the Lords people yet in BabUon, may come forth 
 of her, that ye be not pertaker of her sinnes, & that ye 
 receave not of her plagues : you wrote to Mr. H. certaine 
 reasons provinge your Church a true Church, & your 
 ministerie a true ministerie, this Letter Mr. H. hath lost, 
 & so the particulars ther of he cannot perfe6the remem- 
 ber: you wrote another Letter after vnto him, wherin 
 you triumphed before the vi6torie : I have advent [u]red in 
 this writinge to declare vnto you, both the insufi&ciencie 
 of such your reasons, for your Church & ministerie, as 
 Mr. H. remembreth, as also the substance of that truth 
 which we professe, & for the which wee suffer bonds, 
 losse of goods, banishment, & death, according as the 
 Lord allotteth to vs: Mr. S. I pray you be perswaded 
 that that which we do, we doe it not rashhe, nor vppon 
 discontentment, nor in pride, or vppon any sinister 
 respedt: no: we cal God to record to oiu:' soules that 
 the evidence of the truth workinge vppon our consciences 
 through the Lords vnspeakeable mercie, even contrarie 
 to our rebellious natwce, hath mightelye convinced & 
 violenthe caried vs to this truth we professe & pra6tise: 
 heare our groundes, & then give sentence, waigh al things 
 indifferently, cast prejudice into nether baUance, examine 
 what I say by the worde, & leane not to any mans opinion, 
 & I dare adventure my credit that then the hght of this 
 truth wil shine in your hart, & then I pray you put it 
 not away: so with this preface I beginne to lay downe 
 
 15—2 
 
548 [A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 
 
 the groundes of OTir cause which is also the Lords ever- 
 lastinge truth: the groundes are these. 
 
 1. The covenant, the promise, Christ, is given to 
 Abraham the Father of the faithful, & to al those that 
 are of the faith of Abraham, & to no other : as is plaine 
 by these Scriptures. Gen. 17. 7. Levit. 26. 9. 12. Luk. 1. 
 72. 74. Rom. 4. 10. 12. 23. 24. John. 8. 39. 44. Mat. 3. 9. 
 Gal. 3. 7. 9. 16. 
 
 2. This covenant is not Hmitted at the pleasure of 
 men, but it is absolute, no Prince nor State can either 
 ad to it, or take ought fro it, or alter the least part of it, 
 but God giveth whole Christ, al the promises, the whole 
 covenant on his behalf to the faithful: & the faithful 
 on the other side promise to be Gods people whoUy to 
 deny themselves & to obey God in every one of his 
 precepts, even the least, though it cost them their Hves, 
 Ge. 17. 1. Deut. 12. 32. Mat. 22. 32. Rom. 8. 22. 2. Cor. 
 
 1. 20. Mat. 10. 37-39. 
 
 3. Two or thre faithful men have this covenant, 
 promises, Christ, given vnto them immediathe from 
 heaven, & not by meanes of any State, Prince, Priest, 
 Prelate whatsoever: but whersoever two or thre faithful 
 people arise in the world, in what countrie or nation 
 soever, at what tyme soever, there & then, the covenant, 
 promises, & Christ is theirs, & with them, 2. Cor. 6. 
 17. 18. Mat. 18. 20. & 28. 20, Aa. 4. 12. Heb. 8. 10. 
 Apoc. 1. 11. & 14. 9. 12. 1. Pet. 1. 1 Aa. 2. 39. Apoc. 17. 
 13. 14. 
 
 4. These faithfull people whersoever they arise in 
 the World, must be Seperated from the VVorld, and 
 from all vncleanenes whatsoever : For the faithfull must 
 not draw the yoake with vnbeleevers, righteousnes can 
 have no fellowship with vnrighteousnes, Ught can have 
 no communion with darknes, Christ can have no concord 
 with Behall, that is, with a Societie that is without his 
 yoke, the beleever can have no part with the vnbeleever, 
 and the Temple of God can have no agreement with Idols. 
 
 2. Corinth. 6. 16. 18. Apoc. 14. 9-11. Deut. 22. 10. & 
 7. 2. 3. 6. A6t. 19. 9. Ephe. 5. 7. 11. 
 
 5. A few faithfull people standing in confusion with 
 vnbeleevers, vnseperated from them, being one bodie 
 
[A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 549 
 
 with them, in that estate standing are not a true church 
 of Christ, which I prove by divers reasons. 
 
 1. The faithful have the* Spirit of Christ, the 
 vnbeleevers have the Spirit of satan, how can these two 
 contrarie Spirits, these two contrarie sorts of persons 
 combyne together, 2. Cor. 6. 14. 15. 16. 
 
 2. Ther is enmity put betwixt these two sortes of 
 persons, ergo: they cannot combine together, see Gen. 
 
 3. 15. 
 
 3. The covenant, promises, Christ, is the faithfuls 
 only: how can vnbeleevers have any part in them. 
 
 6. Seing the faithfuU being but few, have the cove- 
 nant, promises, Christ, therefore they have powre to aU 
 the meanes whereby they shall enjoy Christ as the word, 
 scales of the covenant, the ministerie, the powre of 
 binding and losing, for all these are parts of the covenant, 
 they are the promises, they are the meanes of pertaking 
 Christ. Roman. 3. 2. and 4. 11. A61. 6. 5. and 14. 23. 
 Math. 18. 18. 20. 1. Cor. 3. 21. 22. 2. Pet. 1. 3. 4. 1. Tim. 
 
 4. 8. 
 
 7. As they have the powre of all these things, so 
 they are commaunded to vse al these helpes, and are 
 boimd to obey the Lord in usinge aU these meanes for 
 enjojdng Christ, therefore they are bound to vse the word, 
 the scales of the covenant, the ministerie, the censures 
 for their owne mutuall good. Deuter. 5. 31. 32. 33. and 
 6. 17. and 12. 32. 1. Corint. 14. 37. 1. Tim. 5. 21. & 6. 13. 14. 
 Gal. 3. 15. lam. 1. 19-22. 1. Cor. 11. 24. 25. A6t. 6. 3. 
 Heb. 13. 17. Mat. 18. 15. 17. 
 
 8. The faithfull must be Seperated from the wicked 
 and vnbeleevers, 2. Corinth. 6. 17. They must Seperate 
 wicked men from among them by the censures, 1. Corinth, 
 
 5. 13. Math. 18. 15. 17. 2. Thessa 3. 6. 14. They must 
 chose, aprove & ordeine their owne Elders & Deacons, 
 Aa. 6. 3. & 14. 23. 1. Tim, 3. 10 & 6. 13. 14. As wel as 
 vse the word and scales of the covenant. 
 
 9. If the faithfull either doe not Seperate themselves 
 from the wicked, or not Seperate the vnbeleevers from 
 them: if they still mingle with them they forfeite the 
 covenant, they consent to aU the sinne of the vnbeleevers, 
 to all their prophanation of the Holy things : seing God 
 
550 [A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 
 
 hath given them power to reforme themselves, and to 
 keepe all wicked persons from among their communion 
 by the censures of admonition and excommimication, 
 Apoc. 18. 4 Eph. 5. 3. 11. 1. Cor. 5. 6. Mat. 13. 33. 
 1. Cor. 12. 17. 22. Levit. 19. 17. Mat. 22. 39. Mat. 18. 15. 17. 
 
 10. If Kings and States forbid the faithful! to vse 
 any of these helps and meanes which God hath given 
 and commaunded them to vse, they are to lose their lives 
 rather then to forbeare, bicause they are bound to obey 
 God rather then men, A6t. 4. 19. Deut. 12. 32. 
 
 11. If Princes and States commaund the Chiu"ch 
 and faithfull to entertaine any other ordinances, then 
 these before rehearsed, they are not to obey, but rather 
 to leese their Hves, 1. Tim. 6. 13. 14. Mat. 16. 24. 25. 
 Apoc. 22. 18. 19. 
 
 Mr. S. these are the very grounds and principles of 
 our cause, which is the Lords truth, there are divers 
 other particulars which I thincke not fitt to relate vnto 
 you: They may be after discovered vnto you vppon 
 occasion: Now I come to answere yoiu* reasons for your 
 Church and ministerie: First, you say you have a true 
 church, your reason is, for that you have the word truly 
 preached, and the Sacraments duely administred. 
 
 I confesse that wheresoever these thinges are found 
 there is a true Church, but I denie the word to bee truly 
 Preached, and the Sacraments duely administred in any 
 parish Church of England, which I manifest vnto you 
 after this manner. 
 
 1. First, the people pertakinge in the scales of the 
 covenante in prayer, and in the communion of Holy 
 thinges : are not a people Seperated from all the vnbelee- 
 vers, open sinners of the Land, but stand stiU in confusion 
 with them, submittinge to aU the false Government of 
 the Prelates, &c. Such a people so standinge have no 
 title to the covenant, to Christ, to the promises, see the 
 first ground: supra. 
 
 2. Secondly, this people so mingled with the wicked 
 of the Land, cannot be a true Church, seinge it is impos- 
 sible for them to be conjoyned & combyned together 
 into one bodie, as the true Church is. For as two dis- 
 parate seeds, viz: of an horse and an asse, doe not 
 
[A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 551 
 
 produce either an Horse or an Asse, but a mule. Genes. 
 36. 24. So of the two contrarie seeds of the Woman and 
 of the Serpent, Genes 3. 15. can not proceede a true 
 Church, but some thing of another nature, viz: a false 
 Church : Wherefore in the false Chttrch cannot the word 
 be truly preached, & the Sacraments duely administred. 
 
 3. Thirdly, there is one only true forme of a visible 
 Church. Ephes. 4. 4. One bodie, which bodie is called 
 Christ, 1. Corinth. 12. 12. Galat. 3. 16. This one body 
 hath one Spirit, Ephes. 4. 4. This one body guided by 
 this one Spirit, hath one Lord. Ephes. 4. 5. Which 
 Lord is Christ the onely Lawgiver : It hath also one faith, 
 which is the faith expressed in the writings of the Apostles, 
 it hath also one Baptisme whereby men are admitted into 
 this faith, submitted vnto this Lord, baptized into this 
 Spirit, incorporated into this bodie: and so have one 
 God and Father : one hope of hf e everlastinge, to whome 
 the promises and covenant is given : Now in the assembhes 
 of England there are divers Faythes, one of the Puritanes 
 so miscalled, another of the Prelates, a third of the 
 Papistes that come to Churche, a fourth of the ignorant 
 persons. So, they cannot be one, & they denye themselves 
 to be of the same body with Papists, Atheists, Prelates, 
 witches conjurers, theves, murtherers, blasphemers, 
 drunckerds, vsurers, &c. Therfor they are not the 
 true body of Christ, the true Church of God, therfore 
 aU the holy things are profaned, when they are ther 
 administred, how then can they be said, as you plead 
 to be truly administred in the assembhes of England. 
 
 4. Add herevnto that the most forward Preachers 
 & Professors of the Land do not pradtize according to 
 that which they know the Lord requireth to be pra6tised, 
 viz : in admitting of al to the Holy things, good & bad, 
 in negle6ting the censures vtterly: in fetching the 
 Ministers calling from the prelates whome they hold 
 Antichristia : in submitting to their Ecclesiastical juris- 
 didlion which is vnlawful: therby yealding their con- 
 sciences to other Lawgivers then Christ ; For their cannos 
 & Christs lawes are contrary : how can we say that they 
 that thus doe, sinning against their consciences, in this 
 manner, are Seperated from al sinne, touch no vncleane 
 
552 [A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 
 
 thing, & so how can they be said in that constitution the 
 true Church, & so how can the word be said truly preached 
 & the Sacraments duely administred in that estate? 
 
 Thus Mr. S. you see your Church is proved not to 
 be true, & your signes of a true church therfore not to 
 be fotuid in yoxir assembUes. Your second point foloweth, 
 viz: that your ministerie is a true ministerie: I pray 
 you how can ther be a true ministerie, where is a false 
 Church? doth not the true ministerie arise out of the 
 true Church? can there be a true ministerie & a false 
 Church ? I know not how these things can stand together. 
 
 But let vs heare your argimients, to prove your true 
 ministerie. 
 
 First, you say ther is a true ministerie bicause men 
 are converted thereby: I answere conversion is no signe 
 of a true ministerie: For Prophets, Preists, Apostles, 
 Evangehsts, ordinary Prophets, Pastors, private men, 
 private women have converted, lohn. 4. 39 PhiUip. 1. 
 14. 15. 1. Cor. 14. 24. 31. A6t. 9. 1. & 11. 19. 21. Ergo: 
 conversion apertaineth not only to ministers: n[e]ither 
 is it a proper effe6t or adjun6t of a true ministerie. 
 
 Secondly, let your argument be framed after a true 
 forme: it wilbe this: whosoever converteth soules is a 
 true Pastor: The ministers of the church of England 
 convert soules [Er]go, they are true Pastors. 
 
 I make another argument: whosoever converteth 
 soules is an Apostle, 1. Cor. 9. 2. The ministers of 
 England convert soules, [Er]go : they are Apostles : The 
 hke arguments may be made to prove the ministers of 
 England, Priests, extraordinary Prophets, evangeUstes, 
 yea Christ himselfe, Mat. 11. 5. Ier[e]m. 23. 22. Malach. 4. 6. 
 A6t. 8. 12. Now Mr. S. judge whither your Argument 
 be good, to prove a true ministerie, yea or nay. 
 
 Thirdly I would know whither you thinke that the 
 Ministers of the Romish Chxirch are true Ministers, yea 
 or nay : but it is manifest, Apoc. 18, 4. that Gods people 
 are in Rome how came they thyther? ther they are 
 converted: how was Luther, Husse, lerom of Prage 
 the waldenses converted? how were they converted in 
 King Henrie the 8. tyme? answere this if you can I 
 pray you. 
 
[A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 553 
 
 Fourthly it is not the worke of the Officers of the 
 Church to convert soules, but to fade & edifie them being 
 converted: a Pastor doth not make shepe, but fedeth, 
 guideth, & tendeth his shepe: the members of the true 
 Church are al Saints, now Saints are converted akeady : 
 and the Officers of the Church are conversant about the 
 Saints converted, not about the profane vnconverted, 
 you know a shepherd & a flock are convertible : therf ore 
 the place Ephe. 4. 12, doth not signifie as it is translated 
 gathering or converting the Saints. But it signifieth the 
 joyning of them as you may see. Gal. 6. 1. & the mending 
 of any thinge, Mat. 4. 21. 
 
 Lastly, how can you or any man prove to me out of 
 the word that you convert soules by your ministerie? 
 men that are converted, are converted to the true faith, 
 which is one, which true faith is only in the true Church, 
 which is the body Christ, which is but one, Eph. 4. 4. 6. 6. 
 But your Church is not true, therfor your faith is not true, 
 therfor you convert none to the true faith which Gods 
 word doth declare vnto vs: I confesse that ther are 
 thousands which I am perswaded aperteyne to the Lords 
 ele6tion, but which they be in particular I certainly know 
 not : I hope wel of you & manie more that I know. 
 
 Now that your faith is not true I prove thus: They 
 which beleve not Christ to be their King, or if they know 
 him to be ther King, do not submit to his Kingdom have 
 not the true faith, Luk. 19. 27. But none of you in your 
 assemblies beleeve Christ to be yoiu" King, or if ye do 
 yeeld not to his Kingdome, which is his visible Church, & 
 the ordinances therof, seing you mingle with al the 
 profane in the Land, reje6l his Officers, submit to the 
 Prelates vnlawful authoritie Ecclesiastical, negledl his 
 lawes, statutes & Judgements, viz: the censures of 
 admonition & excommunication. 
 
 Secondly, you say you have a true ministerie, 1. 
 bicause God hath sent you, bicause he hath given you 
 giftes, 2. you are allowed to exercise your gifts by some 
 approved there vnto, & 3. your gifts are approved by 
 your people among whom you administer, this is the 
 some of your reason, where vnto I answere many thinges, 
 first to your first point. 
 
554 [A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 
 
 1. That God sendeth none ordinarily, but those 
 whome the true Church sendeth, but yours is not the 
 true Church as is proved: therfor God sendeth you not, 
 seing you are not sent by the true Church, which you 
 have not: againe it doth not follow that bicause you 
 have giftes, that therfor you are sent, for ther be among 
 the Popish Preists men that have excellent gifts, & yet 
 you wil not say they are sent : so among the common & 
 civiU lawyers, ther are men that have giftes, yet you 
 cannot say, they are sent : Lastly, if you be sent of God, 
 how is it that contrarie to the L. commaundement you 
 keepe sUence when the Prelates sUence you? For if 
 God hath sent you, who can forbid you? 
 
 2. To your second point I answere thus: viz: 
 
 1. that the allowance you have, is not sufficient for the 
 true Church must & doth & can only give sufficient 
 allowance or powre to her Officers, which you have not. 
 
 2. The Prelates which are in vnlawful Ecclesiastical 
 authoritie, can give no sufficient authoritie or allowance 
 to true Ministers, for can good come from evill? 3. if 
 you say you have your authoritie from the civil State, 
 I answere, the civil State can not give Ecclesiastical 
 authoritie, 4. if you chalenge your powre from some 
 Presbyterie of Ministers: I answer they must shew that 
 they have powre to give you authoritie. 
 
 3. I say as before, that every particular visible 
 Church, which is a communion of Saints and faithful 
 people, hath al powre Ecclesiastical with in it selfe, 
 which your parishes can not have, bicause they are con- 
 fused rowtes, mingle mangles of al sortes, cages to hold 
 every vncleane and hateful bird, Apoc. 18. 2. contrarie 
 to Deut. 14. 2. 3. 11. 12. vnequally yoaked contrarie to 
 the Type. Deuter. 22. 10. And contrarie to the truth, 
 1. Corinth. 6. 14. and therefore it is impossible that you 
 should have a true calhnge, from them who have no 
 powre of Christ given them to enjoy the covenant, 
 promises, Christ, or any meanes to partake Christ as is 
 already proved vnto you, & so your third point aU so 
 falleth to the ground. 
 
 Breefly therefore to discover vnto you the true caUinge 
 which is onely one, for there is onely one true way for 
 
[A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 555 
 
 Officers to enter into Office, viz: that way whicli is 
 taught by Christ, for he is the dore into the Shepefold, 
 and whosoever cUmeth vp any other way (Christ saith) 
 is a thefe and a robber, lohn. 10. 1. 7. 9, the true caUing 
 is this. 1. A company of faithful people, 2. must be 
 Seperate from all wicked men, 3. joyned together into 
 covenant to enjoy all Gods ordinances. 4. assembled 
 with fasting, and prayer, 5. must chose out from among 
 themselves, one or more able persons, 6. must be approved 
 according to the rules: mentioned by the Apostle, 
 1. Timoth. 3. and afterward, 7. charged & commaunded 
 to administer faithfully that this is so, these places 
 witnes, Roman. 1. 7. 1. Corinth. 1. 2. Ephes. 1. 4. Apocal. 
 17. 14. and 15. 3. Apocal. 18. 4. 2. Corinth. 6. 17. Ephes. 
 5. 7. Deuter, 29. 9. 13. losua. 24. 25. Aa. 3. 25. Heb. 8. 10. 
 A61. 13. 2. 3. and 14. 23. & 6. 5. 1. Tim. 3. 10. Tit. 1. 6. 9. 
 1. Tim. 6. 3. 14. Aa. 20. 28. 1. Pet, 5. 1. 3. 4. 
 
 Now Mr. S. shew mee such a Church, and such a 
 Ministerie, in any parish Church in England, and I wiU 
 acknowledg it a true Church, and that ministerie, a true 
 ministerie: but if you cannot shew it, give vs leave to 
 doe as wee doe accordinge to that which wee have shewed 
 you warrant for out of the word. 
 
 And now I pray you examine these things carefully, 
 and thinke it not labour lost to search and weigh seriously 
 the Scriptures by mee quoted in every point. Know 
 that the Lord will not be served with halves, he wiU 
 have aU or none : I confesse you have much good doarine 
 among you : yea you have the doarine of Christs Preist- 
 hood pure in his Sacrifice and intercession, but you have 
 vtterly cast off his Kingdome, which is the true constitu- 
 tion of the visible Church in the true causes essentiall 
 thereof, viz: 1. the true matter which are only Saints, 
 2 the true forme which is the covenant to walke in al 
 Gods wayes. 3. The true essential properties which is the 
 powre of our Lord lesus Christ especially in binding 
 and losing, without which it is impossible for the Church 
 to continue a Holy communion among themselves : al this 
 you want, and therefore you in the assemblies deny 
 Christ the King to reigne over you, you have rejeaed 
 Christs Testament, for his Testament is that which he 
 
556 [A Lettre written to Mr. A. S.] 
 
 hath purchased with his blood : as you may see, 1. Corinth. 
 1 1. 25. Heb. 10. 29. For the Old Testament was aboHshed 
 by the blood of his crosse, and the new Testament succeded 
 & is estabhshed in stead thereof by his blood: for Christ 
 by his Preisthood obteyned his Kingdome, & now in his 
 Kingdom dispenceth the vertue of his Preisthood to his 
 subje6ts: Mr. S. I pray you consider carefully these 
 things, I know they are the vndoubted & most cleare & 
 evident truth of Gods, word: & that wil I adventvire 
 further to prove before any witnesses, vppon the hazard 
 of my hf e if I may have audience : do not you now as you 
 have once done in your Letter to Mr. H. take it granted 
 that nether he nor his leaders, as you speak, can answere 
 your arguments, you see it is otherwise : I pray you doe 
 not oppose against this truth in your pulpits tiU you have 
 throughly scanned all thinges, & til you have had further 
 passages with mee about it : I did thinke that I ought to 
 doe many things against this way, but it pleased the 
 Lord at the length to reveale his truth vnto me, for the 
 which I blesse my God for ever: I know if you once 
 interest your selfe in opposition against the cause pub- 
 hquely, it wiU be very hard for you afterwards to deny 
 your doinges, & to pul downe that which you have built : 
 Therefore be advised: raise vp your hart to enter into 
 the cause, & be not afrayd of it, deny al, even wife & 
 children, & hfe also: els you are not capable of this 
 truth. 
 
 I pray you commend mee to Mr. B. and to your 
 selfe most kindly : The Lord of his mercy vouch- 
 safe to enlighten you with the evident brightnes 
 of his truth : and the Lord open your hart to 
 entertayne it in love : and the Lord guide 
 your f eete into the way of peace : so in 
 all kindnes I take leave of you 
 bidding you most hartely 
 farewell. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
 [The Printer adds eight lines of errata, incorporated 
 in this edition.] 
 
A Lettre written to certaine brethren in S. 
 By lohn Smyth. 
 
 Mercie and peace be multipHed vnto you. 
 
 Rethre: I am excedingly rejoyced in my soule 
 B hearing of the grace of God bestowed vppon you: 
 
 & although you are but few in nomber, yet con- 
 sidering that the Kingdome of heaven is as a graine of 
 mustard seed smal in the beginning : I do not doubt but 
 you may in tyme grow vp to a multitude, and be as it 
 weere a great tree full of Fruitful branches which I 
 vnfeignedlie desire, brethren, in your behalf at the 
 Lords handes. 
 
 I have receaved your lettre long since, & I had set 
 you answer ere this if I had had a covenient messenger, 
 but now having fit opportunity ojBEered I doe wilhngly 
 & of duty to you my brethren, to the L. lesus, & his 
 truth, make answer to your motion: & whereas Mr. K. 
 is a man famous in the Churches of England for learning 
 & sincerity being now growen aged in them both, it 
 might therfor be thought boldnes in mee to deale with 
 him, yet being provoked therevnto by you & by himself, 
 & by my place which I susteyne in the Church of Christ, 
 I durst not refuse, but choose rather to incure the vnde- 
 served suspitio of arrogacie (if any man dare so deem it) 
 by manifesting the truth, then the deserved reproach 
 of the denyal of the truth, which is committed when 
 the truth is not defended vppon due caUing thervnto: 
 F[i]rst therfor I doe prof esse before al men that the truth 
 wee professe is manifested already sufficiently (to all 
 that wil but open there eyes) in the writings of those 
 worthy witnesses of lesus Christ, who have gone before 
 vs in the Testimonie of this truth wee hold out to the 
 world: & therfor I shal by this my writing, only doe 
 that which is already done: & therfor this my labor 
 might wel have been spared: Secondly, neverthelesse 
 bicause things may be further expla[i]ned & manifested by 
 special gifts: I thought it not amisse to shew myne 
 opinion also : The rather being called thervnto, by your 
 
558 [A Lettre to brethren in S.] 
 
 selves as also by Mr. EL breefly therefore to come to 
 the matter the two points to be proved are these. 
 
 First, that such matters as are excepted against in the 
 Church of England, are contrary to the word of God. 
 
 Secondly : That they are in such sort opposite there- 
 vnto as thereby it is become no Church meet for any 
 good Christian to Remaine in and to communicate with. 
 
 These two points shalbe manifestly proved by these 
 Scriptures following. 
 
 1. First, your Church is not of the ApostoKque 
 constitution, but framed according to the invention of 
 man, which is proved thus. Deut. 14. 2. compared with 
 1. Pet. 2. 9. Roman. 1. 7. 
 
 1. The Churches of the Apostolique constitution 
 consisted of Saints only. 
 
 The Churches of England consist not of Saints only. 
 
 Therfor the Chiu-ches of England are not of the 
 ApostoHque constitution, & therfor are framed according 
 to the invention of man. 
 
 The major is proved by the former Scriptures, for 
 Moses calleth the lewes an Holy people ceremonially 
 typing that the people of the new Testament should 
 be truely holy as Peter doth expound it, and Paiill 
 exempHfie it to the Romanes and in aU his Epistles. 
 
 The minor is manifest: for aU sorts of persons, 
 Atheists, Papists, adulterers, theeves, &c & who not? are 
 compelled to be & are members of the English Churches. 
 Ergo. 
 
 2. Againe from that Church which is not of the 
 Apostohque constitution, but of mans invention, al the 
 faithful must make Seperation, 2, Chron. 13. 5-13. & 
 30. 5-12. compared with Revel. 14. 9. 10. & 18. 4. 5. 
 
 The Churches of England are not of the ApostoKque 
 constitution, but of mans invention. 
 
 Therfor the faithful must make Seperation from the 
 Churches of England. 
 
 The major is proved thus: as Ezechiah perswadeth 
 the Israelites to Seperate from the Church of leroboams 
 invention to joyne to the true Church of ludah which 
 was of Moses constitution, so lohn by vision is com- 
 maunded to pronounce a woe to them that give homage 
 
[A Lettre to brethren in S.] 559 
 
 to Antichrists ordinances, and to perswade all the faithf nil 
 to Seperate from Babylon, which is by interpretation a 
 confusion: Now all mens inventions are Antichristian, 
 seing that as Christ & Antichrist are opposite, so are 
 Christian & Antichristians, if therfor the constitution 
 of the Churches of England be not of Christs, that is 
 of the ApostoUque primitive frame, it is of man, of 
 Antichrist, & so woe be to them that doe not Seperate 
 from it. 
 
 2. Secondly, your ministerie is not of the Apostohque 
 primitive institution, but framed according to mans 
 invention which is proved thus, Heb. 5. 4. 5. Levit. 8. 
 compared with Esay. 66. 20. 21. A6t. 6. 3-6. & Aa. 14. 23. 
 
 1. The true ministerie of the Apostohque institution 
 was by ele6tion, approbation, & ordination of that 
 partictdar holy people wherto they did administer. 
 
 The ministery of the assemblies of England is not so, 
 but after the invention of man. 
 
 Therfor the ministerie of the assembhes is not the 
 true minister[i]e of the Apostohque institution, but 
 devised by man. 
 
 The major is proved by the former scriptures, for 
 as that only was the true preisthood which Moses by 
 the comaundemet of the L. apointed in the old testamet : 
 & therfor that of leroboams was false, 1. King. 12. 31. 
 & 2. Chron. 13. 9. So in the new Testament that is 
 only the true ministerie which is of the Apostohque 
 institution, viz : by eledtion, ordination, approbation, of 
 that faithful & holy people wherto they administer. 
 
 The minor is evident : For the ministerie of England, 
 viz : the Prelacie, Preisthood, & Deaconry, hke thre 
 vncleane Spirits proceed out of the mouth of the beast, 
 that is are by the Authority of the Romane Empjrre 
 estabhshed: Revel. 16. 15. out of the mouth of the 
 false Prophet, that is are by Authority of the Pope of 
 Rome estabhshed: & out of the mouth of the Dragon, 
 that is are by the Authority of Sathan himself estabhshed : 
 For ther is not a minister in England Ele6ted by that 
 faithful people wher he administreth, but is chosen by 
 a profane mixt people, if he be chosen, & law doth 
 not allow such ele6tion: he is approved & ordeyned by 
 
560 [A Lettre to brethren in S.] 
 
 Antichrist himself, comming out of the mouth of the false 
 Prophets the Prelates of the Land. 
 
 2. Againe, from that ministerie which is not of the 
 ApostoHque institution, but of mans invention must all 
 the good Christians make Seperation, Deut. 13. 3. Math. 
 7. 15. 2. Timoth. 3. 5. Revel. 14. 9. 2. Corinth. 11. 13-15. 
 Revel. 2. 2. 
 
 The Ministerie of England is not of the ApostoHque 
 institution, but of mans invention. 
 
 Therefore all good Christians must make Seperation 
 from the Ministerie of England. 
 
 The Major is proved thus: as in the old Testament 
 Moses commaundeth not to harke to false Prophets, 
 Ezechiah endevoreth to draw the people from leroboams 
 Preists, So in the new Testament Christ wiUeth to take 
 heed of false Prophets, PauU willeth to turne away from 
 such, & a woe is threatned by lohn to al that receave 
 the beasts mark from his Ministers. 
 
 Thirdly, your worship is not of the ApostoKque 
 primitive institution, but is invented by man & so is 
 Antichristian : as may be proved thus, A(5t. 2. 4. 11. 42. 
 & 10. 46. & 19. 6. Rom. 8. 26. 1. Cor. 12. 7. & 14. 15. 26. 
 
 1. The true worship of the ApostoKque institution 
 proceeded meerly from the Spirit having no outward 
 help of devised formes of prayers, exhortations, psalmes, 
 & Ceremonies. 
 
 The worship of the EngUsh assembhes proceedeth 
 out of the Servicebook in devised formes of prayers, 
 exhortations, & psahnes, & other Ceremonies. 
 
 Therfor the worship of the Enghsh assembhes is not 
 the true worship of the ApostoHque institution, but is 
 invented by man. 
 
 The major is manifest by the places aUedged: For 
 vppon the day of Pentecost the Apostles had the holy 
 Ghost given them in the shape of fiery & cloven tonges, 
 & thervppon they spake as the holy Ghost gave them 
 vtterance, manifesting the Spirit to the hearers, & so 
 was it with the GentUs afterward when the holy Ghost 
 came vppon them, & since that tyme aU the chm-ches 
 of the ApostoHque institutio worshipped afther the same 
 manner, for al Churches worshipped after one manner, 
 
[A Letter to brethren in S.] 561 
 
 1. Cor. 16. 1. & 14. 36. 37. & 11. 2 16. wher note that 
 if devised formes of prayers, psalmes, exhortations, were 
 Gods ordinaces, the Apostles would have dehvered them 
 to the Churches, & they should have receaved vppon 
 the day of Pentecost fiery bookes aswel as fiery tongs. 
 
 The minor is evident & needeth no proof. Ergo. 
 
 2. Againe : From that worship which is invented by 
 man, & not of the ApostoHque institution must al the 
 good Christians Seperate, Col. 2. 20-23. Mat. 16. 9. 
 Levit. 10. 1. 2. compared with A6t. 2. 3. 
 
 The worship of the EngHsh assemblies is invented by 
 man, & not of the ApostoUque institution. 
 
 Therfor from the worship of the Enghsh assemblies 
 ought al good Christians to Seperate. 
 
 The major is proved thus: For seing the worship of 
 the assebhes is wil-worship, vaine-worship, devised by 
 man, not kindled with the true living fire which came 
 downe from heaven vppon the primitive Church, but with 
 such a straunge fire as Nadab and Abihu offered withal, 
 therfor it is idolatry & so to be Seperated from. 
 
 4. Fourthly, the Government of the assembhes is 
 Antichristian by the confessio of theselves, & therin can 
 no good Christian ]ojne, except it be lawful for a good 
 Christian which is or ought to be a subjedt of Christs 
 Kingdom which is his visible Church, to submit to the 
 vtter enemie of Chr. & to his authority, which what is 
 it els but to bee a traytor against the L. lesus? yet for 
 further proof I reason thus from these places, A6t. 14. 23. 
 & 20. 28. PhiUip. 1. 1. 1. Pet. 5. 1^. 
 
 1. The Government of the primitive ApostoHque 
 institution was by a CoUedge of pastors, or presbytery. 
 
 The Government of the EngHsh assembhes is by an 
 Antichristian prelate & his Officers. 
 
 Therfor the Government of the EngHsh assembhes is 
 not the primitive ApostoHque Government. 
 
 The major is evident thus : For the Apostles instituted 
 Elders by the ele6tion of the Saints to oversee the Church 
 & feed the Flock of one particular visible Church only; 
 as is manifest among the Ephesians, PhiHppians, Hebrues, 
 & al Churches. 
 
 The minor is evident : For the Prelates & ther officers 
 
 w. II. 16 
 
562 [A Letter to brethren in S.] 
 
 are not those Christian Bishops of the ApostoHque 
 institution, ele6ted by & placed over one particular 
 Church of the Saynts, but are a devised Tyrannical 
 Lordship ruling hundreths of parishes by ther owne 
 devised Canons. Ergo. 
 
 2. Againe: From the Government which is devised 
 by man in the Church, & so is Antichristian, & which is 
 not of the ApostoHque institution must al good Christians 
 Seperate. Luk. 19. 27. 1. Cor. 7. 23. Revel. 14. 9. 
 
 The Government of the Enghsh assembhes is not of 
 the ApostoUque institution, but is devised by man & 
 Antichristian. 
 
 Therfor, from the Government of the Enghsh assem- 
 bhes must al good Christians Seperate. 
 
 The major is manifest by the places aUedged, for 
 seing Christ lesus only must reigne in the harts of the 
 faythful by his owne officers & lawes: therfor good 
 Christians must only submit to his officers, & if they 
 submit to any new officers devised by man, Christ saith 
 he wil have the slayne, they are the Servants of men, & 
 obeying the Antichristian beast have a woe threatned 
 against them. 
 
 Thus brethren have I written vnto you according to 
 your request, & Mr. K. his dire6lion proofes of those two 
 points which you expe6t: & that in 4. mayne trans- 
 gressions in the Enghsh assembhes, viz: in the consti- 
 tution, ministerie, worship, & Government of them: 
 I pray you brethren keep the copie I send you safe, & 
 let Mr. K. have a transcript of it, & if it please him to 
 answer, I wiU be ready to explane matters more fuUy if 
 ther be any ambiguity, & to confirme matters doubtful 
 & that especialy for your establishment in the truth: 
 which now blessed be the Lord is so evident that al the 
 men vppon earth with ther learning can never be able 
 to obsciu-e it: Brethren I beseech you grow in grace & 
 in the knowledg of our Lord lesus Christ, to whome bee 
 praise in his Church throughout all generations, Amen. 
 
 Your Brother in the Fayth 
 John Smyth. 
 
THE CHARACTER OF THE BEAST 
 
 OR 
 THE FALSE CONSTITVTION OF THE CHVRCH. 
 
 Discovered 
 
 IN CERTAYNE PASSAGES BETWIXT Mr. R. CLIFTON 
 
 & John Smyth, concerning true Christian baptisme of New Creatures, 
 
 or New borne Babes in Christ : and false Baptisme of Infants 
 
 borne after the Flesh. 
 
 Referred to two Propositions, 
 
 1. That infants are not to bee Baptized. 
 
 2. That Antichristians converted are to bee admitted into the true 
 
 Church by baptisme. 
 
 Revelat. 13. 16. And he made all both small & great, rich & poore, free and 
 bond, to receave a mark in their right hand or in their foreheads. 
 
 Revelat. 14. 9. 10. If any man receave the mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 
 the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God. 
 
 Revelat. 21.5. And he that sate vppon the Throne said : Behold : I make 
 all things new. 
 
 Printed. 1609. 
 
 16—2 
 
TO EVERY ONE THAT LOVETH THE 
 
 Truth in sincerity Salutations. 
 
 It may be thought most straung, that a man should 
 oft tymes chandg his Religio : & it cannot be accounted 
 a commendable quality in any man to make many 
 alterations & chandges in such weighty matters, as are 
 the cases of conscience : but if constancy be commedable 
 in any thing, it is most comendable in the best things 
 which is Religion: & if inconstancy be worthy reproof 
 in matters of inferior estimation, it is much more blameable 
 in matters of Salvatio: In respe6l wherof the wisest & 
 most ReHgious men have been alwayes most constant in 
 ther profession & faith: & inconstant persons cannot 
 escape the deserved imputatio of folly or weaknes of 
 judgment therein. 
 
 This must needs be true, (& we confesse it) if one 
 condition be admitted, that the Religion which a man 
 chandgeth be the truth: For otherwise to chandge a 
 false Religion is commendable, & to retaine a false 
 Religion is damnable. For a man of a Turk to become 
 a lew, of a lew to become a Papist, of a Papist to become 
 a Protestant are al commendable chandges though they 
 al of them befal one & the same person in one yeere, nay, 
 if it were in one month : So that not to chandg Religion 
 is evil simply: & therfor that we should fal from the 
 profession of Puritanisme to Brownisme, & from Brown- 
 isme to true Christian baptisme, is not simply evil or 
 reprovable in it self, except it be proved that we have 
 fallen from true Religion: If wee therfor being formerly 
 deceaved in the way of Pedobaptistry, now doe embrace 
 the truth in the true Christian Apostolique baptisme: 
 Then let no ma impute this as a fault vnto vs: This 
 therfor is the question: whither the baptisme of infants 
 be lawful, yea or nay : & whither persons baptized being 
 infants must not renounce that false baptisme, & assume 
 the true baptisme of Chr: which is to be administred 
 vppon persons confessing their faith & their sinnes: 
 This being the controversy. now betwixt vs, & the Sepera- 
 tion commonly called Brownists: For the glory of God, 
 
The Epistle to the Reader. 565 
 
 the manifesting of the truth to our own nation, & the 
 destru6tion of the man of sinne, wee have thought good 
 to pubUsh this present treatise, wherin the whole cause 
 is handled : Let the indifferent reader judg of the whole 
 & give sentence without partiality: & I doubt not but 
 he shalbe constrayned to give glory to God in acknowledg- 
 ing the error of baptising infants, to have been a cheef 
 point of Antichristianisme, & the very essence & con- 
 stitution of the false Church, as is cleerly discovered in 
 this treatise: Now happily some man wil wish that the 
 controversy had been with the Rabbyes of the Seperation, 
 & not with Mr. Clifton whom thy caluniate to be a weake 
 man, vnable to deale in so great a controversy : wel, let the 
 Reader take notice, that although it be Mr. Chftons pen, 
 yet it is not only Mr. Cliftons cause & defence, but his 
 allegations & reasons are the best plea of the greatest 
 Rabbyes themselves: & if they think that they can say 
 better they may now speake, for by publishing answer 
 to their reasons: we do challendg al the Seperation in 
 special to the combat. Be it knowne therfor to aU the 
 Seperation that we account them in respedl of their 
 constitution to bee as very an harlot as either her Mother 
 England, or her grandmother Rome is, out of whose 
 loynes she came: & although once in our ignorance we 
 have acknowledged her a true Chu. yet now being better 
 informed we revoke that our erroneous judgment & 
 protest against her, aswel for her false constitution, as for 
 her false ministery, worship, & government: The true 
 constitution of the Chu. is of a new creature baptized 
 into the Father, the Sonne, & the holy Ghost : The false 
 constitution is of infants baptized: we professe therfor 
 that al those Churches that baptise infants are of the 
 same false constitution : & al those Chu. that baptize the 
 new creature, those that are made Disciples by teaching, 
 men confessing their faith & their sinnes, are of one true 
 constitution: & therfor the Chu. of the Seperation being 
 of the same constitution with England & Rome, is a most 
 vnnatural daughter to her mother England, & her grand- 
 mother Rome, who being of the seK same genealogie & 
 generation, (that of the prophet being true of her, as is 
 the Mother so is the daughter) she dare notwithstanding 
 
566 The Epistle to the Reader. 
 
 most impudently wipe her own mouth, & cal her mother 
 & grandmother adulteresses. Heerin therfor we do 
 acknowledg our error, that we retayning the baptisme 
 of England which gave vs our constitution, did cal our 
 mother England an harlot, & vppon a false ground made 
 our Seperation from her: For although it be necessary 
 that we Seperate from England, yet no man can Seperate 
 from England as from a false Chu. except he also do 
 Seperate from the baptisme of England, which giveth 
 England her constitution: & whosoever doth retaine the 
 baptisme of England doth withal retaine the constitution 
 of England, & cannot without sinne cal England an 
 harlot as we have done: & this we desire may be wel 
 minded of al that Seperate fro England: For if they 
 retaine the baptisme of England, viz: the baptisme of 
 infants as true baptisme, they cannot Seperate from 
 England as from a false Chu. though they may Seperate 
 for corruptions. & whosoever doth Seperate from England 
 as from a false Church, must needs Seperate from the 
 baptisme of England, as from false baptisme: For the 
 baptisme of England cannot be true & to be retayned, 
 & the Chu. of England false & to be rejedted: neither 
 can the Chu. of England possibly be false except the 
 baptisme be false, vnlesse a true constitution could be in 
 a false Chu. which is as impossible as for light to have 
 felowship with darknes: It is impossible that contraryes 
 or contradi6tions should be both true : & so it is impossible 
 that a false Chur. should have a true constitution or a 
 true baptisme : To say thus : 
 
 England hath a false constitution. 
 
 England hath a true baptisme, is as much as to say 
 thus. 
 
 England hath a false constitution. 
 
 England hath a true constitution, which is to con- 
 tradi6t : 
 But the Seperation they say England hath a false 
 constitution, & is a false Chu. & to be Seperated from: 
 & yet they say also : England hath a true baptisme (that 
 is a true constitution) which is not to be Seperated from : 
 For a true constitution & true baptisme are one & the 
 same: So is a false constitution & a false baptisme: So 
 
The Epistle to the Reader. 567 
 
 that the speeches & adtions of the Seperation are cotra- 
 didtory in this particular. Finaly, they that defend the 
 baptisme of infants cannot with any truth or good con- 
 science Seperate from England as from a false Chu. 
 though they may seperate for coruptions. & they that do 
 Seperate from England as from a false Chu. must of 
 necessity Seperate from the baptisme of England, & 
 account the baptisme of England false, & so account 
 the baptisme of infants false baptisme: Therfor the 
 Seperation must either goe back to England, or go 
 forward to true baptisme : & al that shal in tyme to come 
 Seperate from England must Seperate from the baptisme 
 of England, & if they wil not Seperate from the baptisme 
 of England their is no reason why they should seperate 
 from England as from a false Church : & this is more at 
 large proved in the second question of this discourse, 
 whither the Reader is to be referred. Now concerning 
 this point of baptising infants we do professe before the 
 L. & before al men in sincerity & truth that it semeth 
 vnto vs the most vnreasonable heresy of al Antichristian- 
 isme: for considering what baptisme is, an infat is no 
 more capable of baptisme then is any vnreasonable or 
 insensible creature: For baptisme is not washing with 
 water : but it is the baptisme of the Spirit, the confession 
 of the mouth, & the washing with water: how then can 
 any ma without great folly wash with water which is the 
 least & last of baptisme, one that is not baptized with 
 the Spirit, & cannot conf esse with the mouth : or how is 
 it baptisme if one be so washed: Now that an infant 
 cannot be baptized with the Spirit is plaine, 1. Pet. 3: 21. 
 wher the Apostle saith that the baptisme of the Spirit is 
 the question of a good conscience into God, & Heb. 10. 22. 
 wher the baptisme which is inward is caled the sprinkling 
 of the hart from an evil consciece : seing therfor infants 
 neither have an evil conscience, nor the question of a 
 good conscience, nor the purging of the hart, for al these 
 are proper to adlual sinners: hence it foUoweth that 
 infants baptisme is folly & nothing. Againe: lohns 
 baptisme was the baptisme of repentance: infants have 
 not repentance: & therfor cannot have the baptisme of 
 repentance. That infants cannot have repentance is 
 
568 The Epistle to the Reader. 
 
 evident, seing repentace is knowledg of sinne by the Law, 
 sorrow for sinne by the gospel, mortification of sin & 
 new obedience, al which are asmuch in the basen of 
 water, as in the infant baptized. Now I confesse the 
 Pedobaptists have many showes of reason for the main- 
 tenance of their heresy, & one man shapeth them into 
 one forme, another man into an other, as every mans wit 
 & learning teacheth him, but indeed they are al built 
 vpon the self same sandy fondacions, the wresting of 
 some places of Scripture: al which (in a manner) are 
 discovered in some measin?e in this treatise: whereby 
 the reader may perceave the manifest perverting of the 
 scriptures from their true sense: Now bicause men cal 
 for antiquity, & except they see antiquity they wil not 
 beleve, though the Scriptures be the most auncient, 
 I have thought good therefore to propound two pregnant 
 testimonyes of Antiquity (besides that which is aUedged 
 in the pag. 30. & 31. of this treatise) against baptisme of 
 infants: that men may know that this truth also hath 
 her footsteps among the Fathers. 
 
 Tertullianus lib. de baptismo adversus Quintillam 
 hath these wordes: 
 Then which nothing is more playne. 
 
 Itaque pro cujusque personse conditione, dispositione, 
 etiam setate cun6latio baptismi vtilior est precipue tamen 
 circa parvulos : Quid enim necesse est, si non tam necesse, 
 sponsores etiam periculo ingeri? qui & ipsi per mortali- 
 tatem destituere promissiones suas possunt, & proventu 
 malse indolis f alii. Ait quidem dominus. Nolite iUos pro- 
 hibere ad me venire: veniant ergo dum adolescunt: 
 veniant, dum discunt, dum quo veniant docentur : Fiant 
 Christiani cum Christum nosse potuerint. Quid festinat 
 innocens setas ad remissione peccatoru. Cautius agitur in 
 secularibus vt cui substantia terrena non creditiu-, divina 
 credatur. Norint petere salutem, vt petenti dedisse 
 videaris. 
 
 That is to say in English. 
 
 Therfor to defere & not to hasten baptisme is more 
 profitable for the condition, disposition, & age of every 
 
The Epistle to the Reader. 569 
 
 person: but especialy as concerning yong children: For 
 what necessity is ther to bring suertyes into daunger for 
 the baptising of infants, if ther be no such necessity of 
 hastning the baptising of infants: Seing the suerties 
 ofttjnues are disabled to performe their promise both by 
 reason of mortality, & of the evil disposition of some 
 children, whe they come to yeres, for whome they pro- 
 mised in baptisme. Indeed the L. saith, forbid them not 
 to come vnto me : Therfor let them come to Chr. but let 
 them come when they are growne, when they learne, & 
 when they are taught to what they come. Let them by 
 baptisme be made Christians when they can know Chr. 
 by instru6tion : why doth the innocent age hasten to the 
 remission of sinnes: we deale more safely in worldly 
 matters: Shal we commit heavenly things to yong 
 children vnto whome we dare not commit our earthly 
 substance? let the first know how to ask salvation that 
 so we may seem to give to him that asketh. 
 
 Euseb. Ecclesi. Hist. Lib. 10. Chap. 15. 
 
 Athanasius his baptising of children in sport that 
 answered according to the custome of the Catechumeni, 
 is aproved by Alex. Bb. of Alexa. & his Clerks : whence 
 it is to be noted that these children baptized by Athanasius 
 were vnbaptized, & yet knew the manner of baptisme, as 
 being children borne in the Chu. So that by this place 
 & al other places of the Eclesi. Hist, wher like mention 
 is made of the childre of Christians first Catechized & then 
 baptized, it may easily be discerned that baptisme of 
 infants was not yet vniversaly receaved, but by litle & 
 litle prevailed, as other Antich. heresies have done: in 
 respe6l wherof Origen, August. Ciprian, & al the Papists 
 with one consent acknowledg it a tradition of the Church. 
 
 And thus much for the Testimonyes of Antiquity 
 which hereafter shalbe produced more plentifully vpon 
 further occasion offered: if the Seperation or any other 
 dare adventure the tryal of the matter out of Antiquity: 
 but ther is one, & indeed but one argument which the 
 seperation principaly stand vpon, & that is the covenat 
 which say they if it be aswered they must ne[e]ds yeeld vnto 
 the truth: now although this Argument be answered in 
 
570 The Epistle to the Reader. 
 
 this writing even to the satisfa6tion of every indifferently 
 mynded man that loveth & seketh the knowledg of the 
 truth more then the defence & justification of error : yet 
 seing many things are variably aUedged concerning the 
 covenants made with Abrah. & his seeds, & concerning 
 Abrah. Fatherhood & concerning circumcision which is 
 called a seale of the righteousnes of Faith : I have thought 
 good to referre these particulars to a more ful discourse 
 intertained vpon occasion with another of the Mrs. of 
 the seperation, not doubting but very shortly through 
 Gods goodnesse that treatise also shalbe published, 
 wherin the reader shal find larger instru6lion & satisf a6lion 
 concerning the forsaid particulars of the covenants or 
 Test. & other matters therto aperteyning. In the meane 
 tyme I desire the reader to make vse of this writing, 
 & to reade without prejudice or partiality, & I doubt 
 not but that through Gods mercy much light of truth shal 
 shine in his hart even by this present discourse: & for 
 the seperation who are the stiffest & most obstinate 
 adversaries of this truth of the L. I could wish as the 
 Tyrant wished concerning the people of Rome, that al 
 their heads were joyned into one, & al their strength 
 comprised into one writing, that with the sword of the 
 Spirit it might bee smiten of [f] at once, that so we might 
 have an end of this controversy, & that we might not be 
 troubled & charged with the writing & printing of many 
 books: Howsoever it be, wee prof esse our readinesse to 
 imploy our time & cost for the manifestation of the truth, 
 & we desire the Sep. that they wil not in craftines with- 
 draw from the combat, as hitherto they have done in the 
 mater of the translation, wors. & the Presbitery: but 
 we require them in the feare of the L. that seing they 
 have suffered so much for so much truth as they pro- 
 fesse, they would not now subtily (being guilty in their 
 consciences of their dishability to defend their errors) 
 draw back, & pretend excuses as they do : but we require 
 them, nay we chardg them, yea we chaUendg them to 
 the defence of their errors : Loe : we protest against the, 
 to be a false Chu. falsely constituted in the bap. of infants, 
 & their owne vnbaptized estate: we protest against 
 them to have a false wors. of reading books: we protest 
 
The Epistle to the Reader. 571 
 
 against them to have a false govern, of a triformed 
 Presbytery: we protest against them to have a false 
 Minist. of Do6t. or Teachers : Finally, wee protest against 
 them that seing their constitution is false, therf or ther is no 
 one ordinance of the L. true among them : These things 
 wee have pubhshed, & of these things we require answer. 
 For we proclaime against them as they proclaime against 
 their owne mother England: That the Seperation the 
 yongest & the fayrest daughter of Rome, is an harlot: 
 For as is the mother so is the daughter : Now furthermore 
 we desire the Sepera. & al men that they would not 
 impute vnto vs vntruths, & condemne the innocent 
 without cause: For we disclayme the errors commonly, 
 but most slaunderously imputed vnto vs : we are indeed 
 traduced by the world as Atheists by denpng the old 
 Testament & the Lords day: as Trayters to Magistrates 
 in denjdng Magistracy: & as Heretiques in denying the 
 humanity of Christ: Be it knowne therefore to al men, 
 first that we deny not the Scriptures of the Old Testament, 
 but with the Apo : acknowledg them to bee inspired of 
 God: & that wee have a sure worde of the Prophets 
 wherevnto wee ought to atend as vnto a light shining in 
 a dark place : & that whatsoever is written af oretyme is 
 written for our instru6lion, that wee through patience 
 & comfort of the Scriptures might have hope: & that 
 wee ought as Christ counselleth to search the Scriptures 
 of the Old Testament, as the men of Bersea did, bicause 
 that in them wee may find everlasting fife, & that they 
 do testifie of Christ : This wee beleeve according to these 
 Scriptures. lohn. 5. 39. A6t. 17. 11. Roman. 15. 4. 
 2. Timoth. 3. 16. 2. Pet. 1. 19. yet neverthelesse wee 
 affirme all the ordinances of the Old Testament, viz : The 
 Chiu-ch, Ministery, Worship, & Government of the Old 
 Testament, to bee aboHshed al which were Types & 
 shadowes of Gods things to come, but the body is in 
 Christ. Col. 2. 14-17. 20. 
 
 Secondly we acknowledg that according to the pre- 
 sident of Ch. Disciples & the primitive Churches, the 
 Saints ought vpon the first day of the weeke which is 
 caled the Lords day. Revel. 1. 10. to assemble together 
 to pray, prophecy, praise God, & break bread, and 
 
572 The Epistle to the Reader. 
 
 performe other parts of Spiritual Communion for the 
 worship of God, ther owne mutual edification, & the 
 preservation of true Religion & piety in the Church: 
 & that we might be better enabled to the forsaid dutyes 
 we ought to Seperate our selves from the labom-s of our 
 callings which might hinder vs therto, & that according 
 to these Scriptures, loh. 20. 19. Aa. 2. 1. 41. 42. & 20. 
 7. 1. Cor. 16. 1. 
 
 Thirdly, concerning Magistrates, we acknowledg them 
 to be the ordinance of the L. that every soule ought to 
 be subje6t vnto the: that they are the ministers of God 
 for our wealth: that we ought to be subje6t vnto them 
 for conscience sake: that they are the ministers of God 
 to take vengeance on them that do evil: that we ought 
 to pray for the that are in authority: that we ought not 
 to speake evil of the that are in dignity: nor to despise 
 government : but to pay tribute, tol, custome, &c. & that 
 acording to these Scriptures, Rom. 13. 1-7. 1. Tim. 2. 2. 
 1. Pet. 2. 13-15. 2. Pet. 2. 10. lud. vs. 8. but of Magis- 
 trates converted to the Faith & admitted into the Chu. 
 by baptisme, ther may many questions be made, which 
 to answer neither wil we if we could, neither can we if 
 we would: when such things fal out, the L. we doubt 
 not wiU dire6t vs into the truth concerning that mater, 
 in the meane tyme we are assvired acording to the Scrip, 
 that the Kings of the Earth shal at the length bring their 
 glory & honor to the visible Church, Revel. 21, 24. 
 
 Finally, concerning the Flesh of Chr. we do beleve 
 that Chr. is the seed of Abrah. Isaac, & lacob, & of David, 
 according to the Prophecyes of the Scriptures, & that he 
 is the Sonne of Mary his Mother, made of her substance, 
 the holy Ghost overshadowing her: So have other 
 children ther bodyly substance from their parents : also 
 that Chr. is one person in two distin6t natures, the God- 
 head & manhood, & we detest the cotrary errors: our 
 grounds of Scripture are these: Gen. 22. 18. & 26. 4. 
 & 28. 14. Psal. 132. 11. compared with Aa. 2. 30. Rom. 
 1. 3. 4. Heb. 1. 8.-10. & 2. 11. 14. 16 
 
 Breefly to conclude let the Seperation be advertized: 
 That wheras they do so confidently through their self love 
 & self conceipt, fil ther mouths with heresy & heretiques, 
 
The Epistle to the Reader. 573 
 
 as if therby they would feare babes: That herein they 
 tread in the steps of all the Antichristians their prede- 
 cessors : do not the Papists cal the Protestants heretiques, 
 & cal for fire & fagot? do not the Protestants proclaime 
 the Seperation Schismatiques & Heretiques, & judg them 
 worthy the gibbet? not the affirmation of me without 
 proof, but the evidence of wilful obstinacy in error 
 maketh men heretiques: And let them take heed that 
 they notwithstanding their Syrenes songs prove not cages 
 full of most ougly & deformed Antichristian Heretiques : 
 Thus desiring the Seperation not to be wise in their owne 
 eyes through pride, but to become fooles that they may 
 be made wise through humiUty, & desiring the forwardest 
 preachers & professors of the English nation wel to weigh 
 what is the true constitution of the Church, & what is the 
 subje6t of true Christian baptisme, & accordingly to 
 measure a true & a false Church, I cease: wishing the 
 light & love of the truth to every one that Readeth. 
 
 lOHN SMYTH. 
 
574 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 CERTAYNE REASONS PROPOVNDED TO Mr. 
 
 Rich. Clifton : concerning the two propositions following. 
 
 1. That infants are not to bee baptized. 
 
 1. Bicause ther is neyther precept nor example in the 
 new Testament of any infants that were baptized, by 
 lohn or Christs Disciples : Only they that did conf esse 
 their sinnes, & confesse their Fajrth were baptized. 
 Marc. 1. 4. 5. Aa. 8. 37. 
 
 2. Bicause Christ commaundeth to make Disciples by 
 teaching them : & then to baptize them : Mat. 28, 19. 
 loh, 4. 1. but infants cannot by do6lryne become 
 Christs Disciples : & so cannot by the rule of Christ 
 be baptized. 
 
 3. Bicause if infants be baptized, the carnal seed is 
 baptized : & so the seale of the covenant is administred 
 to them vnto whom the covenat aperteyneth not. 
 Rom. 9. 8. which is a profanation. 
 
 2. That Antichristians converted are to be admitted 
 into the true Church by Baptisme. 
 
 1. Bicause Churches are so to be constituted now after 
 the defe6lion of Antichrist, as they were first ere6ted 
 by the Apostles : But in the constitution of Churches 
 the Apostles receaved in the members by baptisme: 
 go: So must wee doe now. 
 
 2. Bicause true baptisme is but one: but the baptisme 
 of Antichrist is not true baptisme, & so not that one 
 baptisme of Christ : but all members of Christ must 
 have true baptisme. 
 
 3. Bicause as the false Church is reje6led & the true 
 ere6led : the false ministery forsaken, & the true re- 
 ceaved : So false worship, (& by consequent baptisme) 
 must be renounced, & the true baptisme assumed. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 575 
 
 Mr. Rich. CUfton. 
 
 A^ ANSWERE TO TWO ANABAPTISTICAL 
 opinions : viz. 
 
 1. That Infants are not to be baptised. 
 
 2. That Antichristians converted are to be 
 
 admitted into the true Church by baptisme. 
 
 Lthough with great sorrow I am forced to vnder- 
 A take this busines against him that was deere vnto 
 
 me : yet being therevnto provoked by the sending 
 to me these two positions with certayne reasons annexed 
 vnder the Authors owne hand: I thought it my part 
 (although the vnablest of many) to contend for the 
 maintenance of the faith which was once given to the 
 Saints. lud. 3. And by the help of God to put a brieffe 
 answere to these opinions, which by the Churches in al 
 ages have bene & are condemned for heretical: the 
 pra6tise whereof I could wishe might never have befallen 
 to any of myne owne country, especially to them that 
 were partakers with me of the affli6tions of Christ for the 
 witnessing of his truth. And cheefly vnto him, to whose 
 charge both I & divers others had once purposed to have 
 committed our soules had he not besydes these broached 
 some former opinions, both erronious & offensive, whereby 
 the truth (for which we suSer) is hke to be the more 
 blasphemed of the wicked & many hindered in our owne 
 country, that shall heare thereof, of whom wee had great 
 hope that they would have walked in the same fayth 
 with vs. Notwithstanding for as much as I am informed, 
 that the author hath promised vpon the sight of his errors 
 to confesse the same, I do the more willingly take vpon 
 me this labour, praying the Lord to give a good issue, to 
 his glory, for his mercyes sake Amen. Now I wil come 
 to answere the positions with the reasons thereof, & first 
 concerning the former, which is this. 
 
576 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 lohn. Smyth. 
 
 A REPLY MADE IN DEFENCE OF TWO 
 
 truths, viz: 
 
 1. That infants are not to be baptised. 
 
 2. That Antichristians coverted are to be ad- 
 
 mitted into the true church by baptisme. 
 
 These two truthes are by you, Sir, in your answer 
 intituled Anabaptistical, which reproach I do no more 
 account of the you doe of the imputatio of Brownisme, 
 nor then Paul did of Heresy: but rather as Paul pro- 
 fessed himself joyful in susteyning that blasphemy for the 
 truth, & you re Joyce in that you for the truthes you 
 professe, are calumniated with such vndeserved imputa- 
 tions: even so doe I blesse God that I am accounted 
 worthy to suffer rebuke for Christ his truth: but know 
 you. Sir, for your humiliation that your reproach shal 
 hght vppon your owne head, & that Christ & his truth 
 are by you evil spoken of. 
 
 In your preface you avouch that you are provoked to 
 write, I mervayle you should so speak: seing your 
 conscience teUeth you, that you did make the first request 
 or motion to Mrs. Bywater : & I could doe no lesse then 
 I did, for if I had refused the motion, it would have bene 
 thought that I distrusted the cause: & whereas you 
 alledg, lud. 3. for justifjdng your course in answering, 
 I say you pervert the Scripture : for although you are to 
 contend for the mayntenance of the faith which was once 
 given to the Saynts, yet you are nejrther to plead for 
 Baal, but to lett him plead for himself, neyther are you 
 to contend for defence of Antichristian errors, but rather 
 as you have in a very good degree rased the Temple of 
 Antichrist, even so you should now proceed to vndermine 
 the very foundation, & to blow it whoUy vp at once: 
 which is done by entertajming the baptisme of Christ to 
 be administred vppon persons confessing their sinnes, 
 & confessing their faith : neyther will it help you to say 
 that these two truths have bene condemned for heresy 
 by the churches in al ages, for if the Apostles age aford 
 contrary to the succeeding ages, I say that which is most 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 577 
 
 auncient is the truth: & you know that many of your 
 truths wherto you are come, have bene condemned for 
 hereticall in as many ages as these truths which I defend. 
 Againe, whereas you affirme that by the broaching of 
 these opinions & some former erroneous & offensive, the 
 truth is Bke more to be blasphemed, & therfore you could 
 wish that wee your countrymen & frends had never fallen 
 into them: I answer, that although I shal not re Joyce 
 that any truth be evil spoken of, yet if it shall fal out by 
 occasion of publishing the truth that wicked men blas- 
 pheme, let them know that Christ is a rock of offence, 
 & a stone to stumble at: & if any be hindered from the 
 truth by pubhshing the truth, it wilbe their corruption 
 & sin, & the truth or the pubhshing of the truth is not in 
 fault: but if you feare hereby that your Antichristian 
 Church wil fal to the ground, I say, it is that which is 
 appointed to perdition, & to perdition let it goe. I wil 
 never vse meanes to support it. Finally although I have 
 professed my readines publiquely & privately, to forsake 
 my errors vppon their discovery. (& as I have already 
 pra6tised for the which I am reproached among your 
 brethren) yet I never professed my readines to bee per- 
 verted from the truth, which you cal heresy : & therfore 
 if you did vndertake to write vppon this ground, you 
 might wel have spared your paynes, & saved your self 
 from so greevous a sinne as you are fallen into by pleading 
 for Antichristian corruptions, & by praying the Lord to 
 overthrow his own truth, by blessing your labours in 
 opugning it: & this breefly shal suffice for your preface 
 general. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 
 1. That infants are not to bee Baptised. 
 
 Answere. 
 
 Touching this first position, that Infants are not to 
 be baptised, I read that Auxentius one of the Arrians 
 se6t with his adherents was one of the first that denyed 
 the baptisme of Infants, & next after him Pelagius the 
 heretike, against whom Augustine & others of the auncient 
 Fathers have opposed & condemned for heresy, & that 
 according to the Scriptures, which by Gods grace we shal 
 
 w. II. 17 
 
578 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 together with them also further manifest, & prove by- 
 sound reasons out of the word the lawfulnes of baptising 
 infants, which first I will vndertake, & then answere the 
 reasons to the contrary. 
 
 Gen. 17. 10. God made his covenant to Abraham 
 & to his seed: from whence I reason thus. 
 
 1. That covenant which God made with Abraham he 
 commaunded to bee sealed to him & to al his seede, yea 
 even to infants. 
 
 But the covenant that we vnder the gospel doe receive 
 is the very same that was made to Abraham, &c. 
 
 Therefor that is commaunded to be sealed to vs & to 
 our seede, yea even to our infants, for so was that to 
 Abrahams. 
 
 The Major can not be denyed, see Gen. 17. 10. 11. 12. 
 
 The Minor is likewise as true, for the Apostle speaking 
 of this covenant, A6t. 2. 39 sayth, the promise is made to 
 you & to your children, & to al that are a farre of, as 
 many as the Lord our God shal cal. In which words it 
 plainly appeareth that this is the very same covenant 
 & promisse that was made to Abraham, which they that 
 were a far of, that is the Gentiles beleeving, doe receive 
 & were baptised into. And therefor is Abraham called the 
 Father of many nations. Gen. 17. 4. also Gal. 3. 13. 4. 
 Christ is said to redeem vs from the curse of the Law, 
 that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles 
 through les. Chr. that wee might receive the promise of 
 the Spirit, see vers. 8. 9. Now then if wee bee partakers 
 of the same covenant (for otherwise Abrahams covenant 
 should not be an everlasting covenant. Gen. 17. 7. seing 
 his posterity after the flesh is cut of for a tyme, Rom. 11, 
 15. 17. 20.) it must follow that the same must be sealed 
 to vs, & to our infants, (els is it not the same) & that by 
 the commaundement of God. For the abolishing of 
 circumcision, & the bringing in of baptisme vnder the 
 gospel, doth not abrogate or disanuUe the commaunde- 
 ment of sealing the covenant to the beleeving parents 
 with their infants, which was once commaunded to 
 Abraham, but onely sheweth a changing of the outward 
 signe. And therefore as the covenant belongs to the 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 579 
 
 Gentiles beleeving so doth the seal thereof to them & to 
 their seede, as that did to Abraham & to his seede : The 
 outward ceremonie onely changed. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Now in the next place you make a special preface to 
 the first point, affirming that baptisme of infants was 
 denyed by Auxentius the Arrian, & by Pelagius whom 
 Augustine & others refuted & condemned for heresy, 
 & that by Scripture : I say that one heretique condemned 
 another contrary to the Scriptures for the truths sake: 
 & whereas you bring in the Fathers in this particular 
 point in your 6. pag. I answere I can prove that Augustine, 
 CyriU, Ciprian, Origen, Nazianzen, Ambrose, & many 
 others were almost as grosse hefetiques (if he be an 
 heretique that holdeth an heresy) as Auxentius & Pelagius, 
 & you your selves account the aU Antichristians : & 
 therfor the auncient pra6tise of pedobaptistry in auncient 
 antichristian Churches is no more to be respe6ted then 
 the auncient pra6lise of the Prelacy & read prayer in the 
 same: but these are but Florishes: let vs heare your 
 arguments from the Scripture proving. 
 
 1. That infants are to be baptised. 
 
 Your first argument is taken from Gen. 17. 10 & is 
 framed thus: 
 
 That covenant which God made with Abraham, he 
 commaunded to be sealed to him, & to al his seed, yea 
 even to infants. 
 
 But the covenant that we vnder the gospel do receave 
 is the very same that was made to Abraham, &c. 
 
 Therfor it is commaunded to be sealed to vs, & to our 
 seed, yea eve to oiu- infats for so was it to Abrahams. 
 
 To this argument I make answer thus: first distin- 
 guishing the two covenants or testaments (for a covenant 
 & testament is al one in the originals though the English 
 words are two) : one covenant was made with Abraham 
 & his carnal seed & of that covenant was circumcision 
 a seale: another covenant made with Abraha & his 
 Spiritual seed, & of that covenant the holy Spirit of 
 promise is the seale: for the carnaU covenant had a 
 
 17—2 
 
580 Passages betwixt Mr; 
 
 carnal seale yppon the carnal seed : the Spiritual covenant 
 had a Spiritual seale vppon the Spiritual seed: For 
 things must be made proportionable, & circumcision 
 which was a carnal seale, could not seale vp the Spiritual 
 covenant to the Spiritual seed, for to say so, is to leap 
 over the hedg, & to make a disproportion betwixt the 
 type & the truth. 
 
 These things being thus distinguished let the bee 
 remembred & applyed orderly & the argument wil 
 appeare of no value: for the major is thus to be vnder- 
 stood if it be true : that the carnal covenant which God 
 made with Abraha & his carnal seed, was to be sealed 
 vp to his infants with a carnal seale, viz : circumcision : 
 if it be not so vnderstood it is false : Now the minor, if it 
 be assumed out of the major, (as it must be, els it is 
 a Sophisme) is very false & flatly contradi6tory to the 
 Scripture: for we vnder the gospel do not receave that 
 carnal covenant which was made to Abraham & his carnal 
 seed, whereof circumcision was the carnal seale : but that 
 carnal covenant & seale together with the subje6l of that 
 seale, viz : a male of 8. dayes old is taken away by Christs 
 crosse: & in the rome thereof we have the Spiritual 
 covenant typed by that carnal covenant, & the Spiritual 
 seale viz : the holy Spirit of promise signified by that 
 carnal seale, & the Spiritual infant, viz: a new borne 
 babe in Christ, in whom Christ typed by the male is 
 newly formed, signified by that carnal infant. 
 
 That al these particulars are so: I prove vnto you 
 plainly by these places of Scripture. 
 
 1. There are two Testaments made with Abraham, 
 Gal. 4. 24. For Agar that is the old Testament, & Sara 
 that is the new Testament, were both maryed to Abraha, 
 & Abraham had them both. 
 
 2. There are two seedes: Ismaell (of Abraham & 
 Hagar) who typed the carnall seed borne after the Flesh : 
 & Isaac (of Abraham & Sara) who typed the Spiritual 
 seed borne by promise vers. 23. 
 
 [3.] There are two scales: Circumcision a seale of the 
 carnal covenant vppon the carnal children: Gen. 17. 11. 
 & the Holy Spirit of promise a seale of the Spirituall 
 covenant vppon the Spiritual seed, 2. Cor. 1. 22. Eph. 1. 
 
Rich. CUfton & lohn Smyth. 581 
 
 13. '& as circumcision was a scale from God to the carnal 
 seed of the promise & from the carnall seed to God in 
 obedience: So the Spirit of promise is a scale from God 
 to the Spiritual seed of the promise, & from the Spiritual 
 seed to the Lord in obedience, Eph. 1. 13. loh. 3. 33. 
 these things are evident: but now you, I am perswaded 
 of mere ignorance, mistaking the covenant, doe make 
 circumcision a seale of the everlasting Spiritual covenant, 
 which is an error, & therevppon you build all your false 
 building of pedobaptistry which is as a howse buUt vppon 
 the sand by the foohsh buUders. 
 
 Now for your places of Scripture I expound them in 
 order. 
 
 Gen. 17. 10. 11. 12. this place proveth that circum- 
 cision was a seale of the carnaU covenant made with the 
 carnall seed, & not a seale of the Spiritual! covenant made 
 with the Faithful : For the Spirit is the seale thereof, who 
 is therfor called the Spirit of promise, & the seale. Eph. 
 1. 13. & if the place of the Rom. 4. 11. be obje6ted to 
 prove that circumcision sealed the righteousnes of Faith 
 to Abraham : I answer, that is not the scope of the place : 
 but this: viz: that circumcision had one specialty in 
 Abraham differing from al other, tha,t by circumcision 
 he was sealed vp to be the Father of al the Faithful 
 as cocerning the matter of their justificatio, namely, 
 that as he was justifyed by his adlual Faith so should 
 all the beleevers bee justifyed by their a6tuaU Fayth 
 whither they beleeved in their vncircumcision or in their 
 circumcision. 
 
 A6t. 2. 39. the promise is offered to the impenitent 
 lewes, & to their posterity, & to the Gentils a far of: 
 & it was exhibited only to so many as yeelded obedience 
 to the Fayth: & whereas in rehearsing the Apostles 
 speech, you say, the promise is made I say, therein you 
 ad to the text. For if you intend that the promise of the 
 Spirit was exhibited to al the lewes & their infants, & to 
 the Gentils beleeving & their infants & that this place 
 af ordeth it, I say the place doth not intend any such thing, 
 but only an offer of the Spiritual covenant, to the carnal 
 lewes & their children, according to the Flesh, & also the 
 Gentils : but a true conferring or exhibiting of it to so 
 
582 Passages betwixt Mr, 
 
 many as should be ejBfe6tually called by the oflfer of it in 
 the preaching of the Gospel. 
 
 Further whereas you seem to assume that seing the 
 covenant was made to Abraham & his infants, it is therfor 
 made to vs & our infants. I deny that ever the covenant 
 Spiritual was made that is conferred to al Abrahams 
 infants according to the Flesh : neyther therfor is it made 
 that is conferred to al our infants : this you should prove, 
 but it is vndone: I confesse the promise was offered to 
 aU Abrahams carnall seed vnder that carnal covenant of 
 the Old Testament, & so it is offered now to all our carnal 
 children by the preaching of the gospel in the new Testa- 
 ment: but as the Spiritual covenant was only exhibited 
 to the Faithful, the true seed of Abraham, so is it now 
 only exhibited to the Faithful which are the only true 
 seed of Abraham, who is the Father of vs al, & wee al 
 his children, & justified by a6lual Faith as he was: in 
 respedt whereof infants wanting a6lual Fayth cannot bee 
 truely said the Children of Abraham, but are that they 
 are in secreat to the Lord whatsoever they are. 
 
 Thus much for the Scriptures by you alledged in jovr 
 first argument : From that which I have answered I reason 
 against pedobaptistry thus. 
 
 1. As it was with Abraham the Father of the Faith- 
 ful, so must it be with the Children of Abraham, Rom. 
 4. 11. 
 
 But Abraham the Father of the Faithful, first beleeved 
 actually, & being sealed with the Spirit of promise, after- 
 ward receaved the signe of circumcision. 
 
 Ergo : The Children of Abraham the beleeving GentUs, 
 must first beleeve actually, & be sealed with the Spirit of 
 promise, & then receave the baptisme of water. 
 
 2. As in the Old Testament, the carnal children were 
 carnally circumcised & so admitted into that Church of 
 the Old Testament. So in the New Testament the 
 spiritual children must be Spiritually circumcised, that is 
 in hart, & then be admitted by baptisme into the Church 
 of the New Testament. 
 
 But the first was signified by type : Ergo the second 
 is verified in the truth. 
 
 3. As in the Old Testament carnal infants were 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 583 
 
 carnally begotten & borne by the mortal seed of genera- 
 tion by their carnal parents, & then were carnally circum- 
 cised, & receaved into the carnal covenant. So in the 
 new Testament Spiritual inf ats new borne babes in Christ, 
 must be Spiritually begotten & borne by the immortal 
 seed of regeneration, by the Spiritual parents, & then 
 being Spiritually circumcised they shal by baptisme with 
 water be receaved into the New Testament. 
 
 But the first was signified by type: Ergo the second 
 is verified in the truth. 
 
 4. If the carnal infants in the Old Testament were 
 circumcised, then the carnal infants in the New Testament 
 must not be baptized: bicause that as circumcision is 
 abolished which was the signe or scale, so the infant is 
 abolished which is the subject of that signe or seale, 
 & a proportionable infant introduced: which is one 
 regenerate by the Spirit & the word. 
 
 But the carnal infants in the old Testament were 
 circumcised.- 
 
 Ergo the carnal infants are not now in the New 
 Testament to be baptised. 
 
 5. As in the Old Testament when the male appeared 
 the 8. day, ther was a painful circumcising & mortifying 
 of the superfluous forskinne when the party was receaved 
 into the covenant a6tually: So in the new Testament 
 when the Lord les. Ch. (t3rped by the male) appeareth: 
 & when ther is a painful circumcising & mortifying of the 
 superfluous forskinne of the hart, the party so qualified 
 shalbe by baptisme receaved into the new Testament 
 a6tually. 
 
 But the first was signified by type: Ergo the second 
 is verified in truth. 
 
 And this shal suffice for answer to your first argument. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Qifton. 
 
 Col. 2. 11. 12. 
 
 [2.] If circumcision belonged to Faithful Abraham 
 & his seed, yea to such as were but infants, then doth 
 baptisme also appertajme to al beleevers & to their seede 
 being infants. 
 
584 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 But the first is true, Gen. 17. 10. Ergo the second. 
 
 The consequent wil follow, seing baptisme cometh in 
 place of circumcision sealing vp vnto vs & to our seed the 
 same promises that circumcision did to Abraham & to 
 his seede, CoU. 2. 11. 12. & that in as large & ample 
 manner (if not more ample) then to the Israelits, for of 
 them only were the males circumcised, but by baptisme 
 are both males & females sealed. And this must foUow 
 necessarily, or els the covenant by the coming of le. Chr. 
 should be more restrayned, then it was vnder the law, 
 who came to ratify & confirme that whoUy, as the Apostle 
 saith, 2 Cor. 1. 20. The promises of God are in him, yea 
 & Amen, &c. For God gave it with the seale thereof, to 
 Abraham & his infants. & if Christ should give it vnto 
 vs onely & not to our infants, this were to lessen & infringe 
 the covenant, & not to confirme aU, but to take away 
 part of that which God before had given. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Your second argument followeth: from Coll. 2. 11. 12. 
 which is framed thus. 
 
 If circumcision belonged to Faythful Abraham & 
 
 his seed, yea to such as were but infants: then 
 
 doth baptisme also aperteyne to all beleevers & to 
 
 their seed being infants. 
 
 But the first is true, G«n. 17. 10. Ergo the second. 
 
 The reason of the consequent is double: 1. for that 
 
 baptisme cometh in place of circumcision as a seale of the 
 
 same promises to vs & our seed: Col. 2. 11. 12. 2. For 
 
 that the covenant must be as largely sealed vp to vs as 
 
 to the, therfor to our females as wel as males, & infants 
 
 as wel as persons of yeeres : For the covenant in Christ 
 
 is not lessened but of as larg extent now as then : 2. Cor. 
 
 1. 20. Seing in Christ all the promises of God are yea 
 
 & amen. 
 
 I answer that this argument is built vppon the same 
 false ground with the former a meer mistaking of the 
 covenant, & seale, & seed: & their is manifest violence 
 committed vppon the Scripture by perverting & wresting 
 it to false consequents: first therfor I deny the conse- 
 quence. & I give reasons of my deniall. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 586 
 
 1. Bicause circumcision did not aperteyne to Abra- 
 ham & his infants as a scale of the everlasting covenant 
 of life & Salvation, but of the external temporary covenant 
 of the land of Canaan, & of obedience to the Law of Moses : 
 & therfor though circumcision aperteyned to Abraham 
 & his carnal infants as a seale of the external covenant 
 yet it doth not follow that baptisme belongs to the 
 Fajrthful & their carnal infants as a seale of the Spiritual 
 covenant of the New Testament made in respe6t of 
 Christ. 
 
 2. Secondly bicause the beleevers do not occupy 
 Abrahams place in the covenant of the New Testament, 
 bicause Abraham is the Father of aU the FaythfuU, but 
 no man though never so Holy hath that prerogative to 
 bee the Father of the Fajrthfull: Therefore Abraham 
 receaveth the Faj^hfull into his bosome. Luk. 16. 23. 
 
 3. Thirdly, bicause the infants of the faithful do not 
 possesse the place of the true children of Abraham the 
 Father of the Faithful: but possesse the place of the 
 typical children of Abraham according to the Fleshe, 
 & therfor the disproportion being in al these particulars 
 the consequence of the argument is weake & insufficient. 
 
 But if you wil make true consequents you must reason 
 fro the type to the truth proportionably, & not from the 
 type to the type as this argument importeth: neyther 
 must you confound the covenants & scales as you do: 
 but must make al things distin6t & proportionable the 
 one to the other, as thus. 
 
 Abraham the Father of the carnal infants : Abraham 
 the Father of the Faithful : Carnal Abraham & his carnal 
 seed, carnally circumcised: So Faithful Abraham & his 
 Faithful Children, Spiritually circumcised. The carnal 
 infants of the old Testament carnally circumcised: The 
 Spiritual infats of the new Testament, that is, men 
 regenerate baptized. 
 
 Thus you se the disproportion of your argument, & 
 the true proportion that you ought to have made if your 
 argument had been good. 
 
 But let vs see the reasons of your consequence, & the 
 Scriptures you do produce for the confirmation of them: 
 you say that baptisme cometh in the rome of circucision 
 
586 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 as a seale of the same promises to vs & our seed : I vtterly 
 deny it: & I prove the contrary vnto you: Seing that 
 the circumcisio of the hart succeedeth in the place of 
 circumcising the flesh: Ro. 2. 29. & circumcision made 
 without hands cometh in the place of circumcision made 
 with hands, Col. 2. 11. compared with Eph. 2. 11. & 
 circumcision the seale of the flesh, hath the H. Spirit of 
 promise which is the SpirituaU seale to succeed in place 
 therof, Eph. 1. 13. 14. which seale of the Spirit is the 
 earnest of our inheritance, as circucision of the flesh was 
 an earnest of the inheritance of the land of Canaan to the 
 carnal Israelites: & I desire to be enformed in al the 
 Scriptures where baptisme is called a seale, for I deny 
 that the baptisme of water is the seale of the new Testa- 
 ment, though I cannot deny that the baptisme of the holy 
 ghost is the seale. 
 
 I say therfor that the seale of the Spirit must go bef or 
 the baptisme of water : & as al the ordinances of the new 
 Testament are Spiritual, & yet visible, so is the seale of 
 the new Testament Spiritual, & yet visible : & thervppon 
 men being visibly sealed with the Spirit as Cornelius 
 company was. A6t. 10. 47. may chaUendg the baptisme 
 with water, as Peter there teacheth : this visible seale of 
 the new Testament is confession : as in the old Testament 
 circumcision was their confessio: & baptisme is not a 
 seale but a manifestation of the seale. You see therfor 
 that baptisme is not the seale of the new Testament, 
 & that circumcision did not seale vp the everlasting 
 covenant to Abraham, & al his carnal seed: now the 
 place of Col. 2. 11. 12. which you produce to prove that 
 baptisme cometh in the rome of circumcision, is not so 
 to be construed, but the Apostle teacheth the vertue of 
 Chr. circumcisio & baptisme, which is mortifying & 
 burying of sinne & resure6tion from sinne : & the Apost. 
 doth not intend to teach that in the new Testament 
 baptisme succeedeth for circumcision: but hee teacheth 
 the vertue of Ch. circumcision & baptisme in the Faithful : 
 so that seing circumcision was a seale of the promises of 
 the old Testament to the carnal seed, & that the Spirit 
 is the seale of the promises of the new Testament to the 
 faithful seed of Abraha, therfor neither doth baptisme 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 587 
 
 of water succeed circumcision, neither doth baptisme with 
 water seale vp any promises to the Faithfull, but onely 
 doth visibly declare what promises they already are 
 partakers of, viz : of the Spirit of promise. 
 
 Againe: in your second reason you would insinuate 
 a restraynt in the new Testament, if baptisme be not due 
 to infants seing circumcision was due to infants in the 
 Old Testament: I answer many wayes: 1. Seing that 
 baptisme doth not succeede circumcision, this alegation 
 is nothing to the purpose : 2. Seing baptisme is both to 
 male & female it is larger then circumcision which was 
 only vppon the male : 3. seing that baptisme is both to 
 lew & Gentil, therfor more larg then circumcision: but 
 these things are almost nothing to the purpose : Therfor 
 I say more pertinently. That the covenant made with 
 Abraham in respect of Christ is now as larg as ever it was : 
 For that was never made with Abraham & al his carnal 
 children, but only with Abraham & the Faythful, & so 
 it continueth in the same tenor stil : & it is enlarged now 
 since Christs comming only in respe6t of the cleerer, & 
 more vniversal pubhcation of it: for then the covenant 
 made with Abraham in respedt of Christ was shadowed 
 out darkly in types, now since Christ it is preached plainly : 
 then it was only to the lewes, now to al nations. Mat. 28. 
 19. besides I affirme that circumcision was never a seale 
 of that covenant that God made with Abraham in respe6t 
 of Christ, for the Holy Spirit of promise is the seale of 
 it: but circumcision only was a seale of the external 
 covenant : & the seale of the Spirit is as large as the seale 
 of the Flesh: For all the carnal Israelites were carnally 
 sealed, al the true beleevers are sealed by the Spirit: al 
 the males were carnally sealed, al that have the male 
 Christ formed in them (whither men or weomen) are 
 sealed by the Spirit: For in Christ ther is neyther male 
 nor female : Gal. 3. 28. al the carnal seed were carnally 
 sealed whither yong or old, so all the Spiritual seed are 
 Spiritually sealed whither new borne babes in Christ, or 
 perfe6t men that are come to the measure of the age of 
 the fulnes of Christ: & so the covenant is not lessened, 
 taking things in their due proportion, & not perverting 
 them. & whereas you say in Christ all the promises of 
 
588 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 God are yea & amen, 2. Cor. 1. 20. thei-by insinuating 
 that in the new Testament the covenant must be as large 
 as in the old, I confesse it to be as larg, but this place is 
 strayned to the proving thereof : For the meaning of it is 
 that vnto the Faythful all the Lords promises are verefied, 
 but his promise was never that al their carnal seed should 
 have baptisme as a seale of life & salvation, but that al 
 the beleevers should have the Spirit of promise which is 
 the new Testaments seale. 
 
 From that which I have answered to your second 
 argument I reason thus. 
 
 1. If al the carnal infants of Abraham were never 
 adluaUy vnder the everlasting covenant in fespedt of the 
 a6tuaU possession of it, then they never had title to the 
 seale of the everlasting covenant. 
 
 But al the carnal infants of Abraham were never 
 a6tuaUy vnder the everlasting covenant in respe6t of the 
 actual possession of it: Seing that Abrahams children 
 according to his a6tual Fajiih were only vnder it, 
 Rom. 4 11. 
 
 Ergo: al the carnal infants of Abraham never had 
 title to the seale of the everlasting covenant, & therfor 
 not to baptisme. 
 
 2. If baptisme doth not succeede circumcision, then 
 baptisme doth not pertaine to carnal infants though 
 circumcision perteyned to carnal infants. 
 
 But baptisme doth not succeede circumcision, bicause 
 the seale of the Spirit is correspondent to the typical seale 
 of the Flesh, & baptisme with water is only the manifesta- 
 tion of the seale. 
 
 Ergo, baptisme doth not aperteyne to the carnal infants. 
 
 3. If circumcision did not seale vp the everlasting 
 covenant to Abraham & al his carnal infants: then (by 
 your proportion) baptisme doth not seale vp the ever- 
 lasting covenant to the Faithful & their carnal infants. 
 
 But circumcision did not seale vp the everlastirlg 
 covenant to Abraham & all his carnal infants. 
 
 Ergo: (by your proportion) baptisme doth not seale 
 vp the everlasting covenant to the Faithful & their 
 carnal infants. 
 
 4. If beleeving parents do not stand in Abrahams 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 589 
 
 rome to eonveigh the covenat to their infants, then though 
 they be baptized themselves, yet their children shal not. 
 
 But the beleevers do not stand in Abrahams rome, to 
 eonveigh the covenant to their infants: For no man is 
 the Father of the Faythfull as Abraham was, & he did 
 never eonveigh the everlasting covenant to his carnal 
 infants. 
 
 Ergo: though beleeving parents be baptized them- 
 selves, yet ther infants shall not be baptized. 
 
 5. If infants of the Faythful do not occupy the place 
 of the true children of Abraham, but only occupy the 
 place of the carnal children : then though the true children 
 of Abraham, the adtual beleevers be baptized, yet the 
 infants shal not which cannot adtuaUy beleeve. 
 
 But the infants of the Faithful do not occupy the place 
 of the true children of Abraham, seing the children of 
 Abraham do the workes of Abraham, loh. 8. 34. which 
 infants cannot doe. 
 
 Ergo though adtual beleevers be baptized, yet infants 
 shal not. 
 
 And thus much may suffice for answer of this second 
 argument which you see is as weake as the first being 
 bmlt vppon the same sand, 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 Marc. 10. 13. 14. & Mat. 19. 13. 14. 
 
 3. They that are of the Kingdome of God have right 
 & title to aU the Holy things therto belonging, & may 
 perticipate of so many of them as they are capable to 
 receave. 
 
 But the infants of beleeving parents are of the King- 
 dome of God. 
 
 Therfor the infants of beleeving parents have right 
 & title to al the holy things therto belonging, & may 
 participate of so many of them, &c. And consequently 
 of baptisme, seing they are capable of that. 
 
 The major proposition I thinke wil not be denyed, it 
 is written 1. Cor. 3. 21. 22. Al things are yours, &c. 
 Rom. 9. 4. 
 
 The assumption is Mat. 19, 13-17. For of such is 
 the Kingdome of God, meaning that this Kingdome 
 
590 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 stood not only of such as being of yeeres that beleeved, 
 but also of their infants. And this he declareth not only 
 in this saing, but also by his displeasure against his 
 Disciples for hindering their comming vnto him: by 
 commaunding to suffer them to come, & by putting his 
 hands vppon them, & blessing them. Mat. 19. 13. 14. 15. 
 For would Christ have blessed them that were not of his 
 Kingdome? or do not the blessings apperteyne only to 
 the children of the Kingdom, even to the seed of Abraham, 
 Gal. 3. 8. 18. 
 
 If it be objedled that children are not capable of 
 baptisme. I answere, they are as capable thereof as the 
 infants of Israel were of circumcision, being both pertakers 
 of the same promises with them, & in al respe6ts as capable 
 of the outward scales of the covenant, as they were. 
 And therefore the infants of beleevers are to bee baptized. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Your third argument foUoweth, from Marc. 10. 13. 14. 
 Mat. 19. 13. 14. 
 
 They that are of the Kingdome of God, have right 
 
 & title to al the holy things therto belonging, 
 
 & may participate of so many of them as they 
 
 are capable to receave. 
 
 But the infants of beleeving parents are of the 
 
 Kingdom of God. 
 Ergo, the infants of beleeving parents have right 
 & title to al the holy things therto belonging, 
 & may participate of so many of them &c. & 
 consequetly of baptisme, seing they are capable 
 of it. 
 The major you say is written, 1. Cor, 3. 21. 22. Rom. 
 9. 4. 
 
 The assumption is proved Mat. 19. 13. 14, 
 To this argument of yours I make answer diversly: 
 first you have not proved that the visible Chur, & al the 
 ordinances therof perteyne to infants of the faithful: 
 For the infants of the lewes that were presented to Chr. 
 were not infants of belevers for ought that I see : neither 
 can it be proved that they were infants of the lewes, but 
 their is some likelyhood to the cotrary : seing the disciples 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 691 
 
 repelled the that brought the: it may be they were the 
 children of some of the Romane soldiers, or some Cana- 
 nitish persons: but suppose they were children of the 
 lewes, how is it proved that their parets were belevers? 
 seing that the people of the lewes were for the most part 
 stifnecked & vncircumcised in hart, & if they had bee 
 the childre of beleving lewes that were baptized by loh. 
 or Chr. disciples (by your do6tryne the infants were 
 already baptized) what need was ther to bring the to 
 Chr. except it were for popish confirmation ? & so hence 
 you cannot conclude baptisme. I avouch constatly 
 against you that either they were not the children of 
 lewes: or that they were not the infants of beleving 
 lewes: or if their parents beleved, yet it foUoweth not 
 that therfor these infants were of the Kingdom of God, 
 or to be baptized: for Chr. doth not say, of these, but, 
 of such is the Klingdom of God: & so he doth expound 
 himself Mat. 18 3-6. besides how can you prove that by 
 the Kingdome of God Chr. vnderstandeth the visible 
 church of the new Test ? or how can you prove that Chr. 
 blesseth none but members of the visible Chur? or how 
 can you prove that the blessing of Abraham aperteyneth 
 only to the members of the visible church ? or that from 
 this particular of Chr. praying for infants Mat. 18. 13. 
 baptising of infants f olloweth ? or how ca you prove that 
 Christ obteyned for them, & prayed for remission of 
 sinnes, the H, ghost, faith, everlasting life? for many 
 were brought to Chr. for releef of bodily infirmityes. 
 
 Secondly : I deny that, bicause Christ blessed some of 
 the infants of the lewes or Gentils vppon special intreaty, 
 therefore it may hence be concluded that generaly the 
 covenant & scales of the covenant (as you cal baptisme) 
 doth aperteyne to them : for ther is not the same reason 
 of al infants, as of some specialy blessed: as of lohn 
 Baptist, leremy, Sampson. 
 
 Thirdly if baptisme doth aperteyne to infants bicause 
 Chr. blesseth some particular infants, & bicause Chr. 
 saith the Kingdom of God doth aperteyne to such, then 
 the L. supper also : for if you say, they are not capable 
 of the L. supper in two resp[e]6ls : 1. for that they cannot 
 eate it, 2. for that they cannot examine themselves: 
 
592 Passages betwixt Mr, 
 
 I answer they must have it as soone as they can eate it : 
 & they cannot confesse their sinnes & faith, & so cannot 
 be baptized. 
 
 Fourthly: I would know why the Apo. put infants 
 back, & why Chr. did not commaund them to be baptized : 
 Surely, if they had been the infants of belevers, or if the 
 Apo. had known Chr. mynd for baptisme of infants he 
 having so fit an opportunity would have put it in pra6tise : 
 but the deep silence of baptisme in this place where ther 
 is so just an occasion doth instru6t vs evidently that Chr. 
 either did not deale faithfully which to say were blas- 
 phemy, or that he never purposed the baptisme of infants. 
 
 You see therfor by that which hath bee answered that 
 both your major & minor are weak & the Scriptures 
 aUedged by you do not confirme them: for the place 
 1. Cor. 3. 21. 22. declareth that al things are yours: that 
 is theirs that a6lually beleeve & are baptized: & al the 
 ordinances of the visible church are theirs both in title 
 vse & possession: So that hence you must nedes prove 
 if your arg. be good that infants must have the vse of 
 al: only your caution helpeth you, viz: that they may 
 pertake so many meanes as they are capable of: but 
 wher is this caution expressed in al the scriptures do you 
 think that the members of the Church are not capable of 
 al the meanes of salvation? but I avouch vnto you 
 that this place perteyneth only to baptised persons 
 not to persons vnbaptized, & therfor it fitteth not your 
 purpose. 
 
 Rom. 9. 4. The covenants & promises perteyne to 
 the Israelites: I deny the word aperteyneth, it is put 
 into the Text, & perverteth the meaning of the Apo. 
 For Pardl intendeth not to prove that the carnal IsraeUtes 
 were al a6lually within the covenat of grace & salvation 
 by Chr. being reaUy possessed of it, but that vnder the 
 outward covenant & promise wherof they were really 
 seased, the Spiritual covenant & promise was offered & 
 presented vnto them, the one preaching the other, the 
 law being a scholemr. to Christ. 
 
 Lastly, wheras in the answer of an obje6tion you in- 
 timate that infants noware as capable of baptisme as infants 
 were of circumcision, being both equaly capable of the 
 
Rich. CHfton & lohn Smyth 593 
 
 covenant & scales, I answer: that baptisme is not the 
 scale of the covenant of the new Test, as circumcision 
 was the seale of the old Test. & that infants of the old 
 Testa, were capable of circumcision absolutely seing that 
 to be circumcised ther was nothing required but a fore- 
 skinne apt to be cut of: but to baptisme in the new 
 Test, ther is required adlual faith & repentance confessed 
 by the mouth, Mat. 3. 6. A61. 4. 37. & 10. 47. 
 
 From this answer T coUe6l arguments against pedo- 
 baptistry thus. 
 
 1. They that are not members of the visible 
 
 Church, have no title to the holy things of God, 
 & therfor are vncapable of them: & so of 
 baptisme. 
 Infants of the Faythful are not a6luaUy members of 
 the visible Church: For these places. Marc. 10. 
 13. 14. Mat. 19. 13. 14. do not prove that the 
 parents of these infants were beleeving lewes, or 
 if they were beleevers their infants were already 
 baptized with their parents according to your 
 do6tryne, & so Christ cannot intend baptisme 
 to aperteyne to them, but the rest of the 
 ordinances. 
 Ergo : Infants of the Faythf ull have no title to the 
 Holy things of God, & so are vncapable of them, 
 and by consequent vncapable off Baptisme. 
 
 2. If the Apostles by putting back infants presented 
 
 to Christ declare plainly that infants were not to 
 bee brought to bee baptized of Christ: then 
 infants were not baptized by Christ, nor com- 
 maunded to bee baptized by him. 
 
 But the first is true: that the Disciples put back 
 infants presented to Chr. &c. 
 
 Ergo: The latter is true: that infants were not 
 baptized or commaunded to be baptized by 
 Christ. 
 
 3. If the persons presenting infants to Christ to be 
 
 blessed & prayed for : do not desire baptisme for 
 them : then they knew no such custome vsed by 
 Christ to baptize them. 
 But the first is true : that persons presenting infants 
 
 w. II. 18 
 
594 Passages betwixt Mr, 
 
 to Christ to be blessed & prayed for, do not desire 
 baptisme for them. 
 Ergo: they knew no such custome vsed by Chr. of 
 baptising infants. 
 
 4. If Christ receaving infants, praying for them, 
 
 blessing them, doth neither baptize them, nor 
 commaund his Disciples to baptize them: then 
 eyther Christs pleasure was they should not be 
 baptized, or els hee forgatt his duty, in not 
 Teaching baptisme ofiE infants vppon so just an 
 occasion. 
 
 But Christ receaving infants, praying for them, 
 blessing them, doth neyther baptize them, nor 
 commaund his Disciples to baptize them : neyther 
 did forgett his duty in not teaching baptisme of 
 infants occasioned. 
 
 Ergo: Christs pleasure was (and is) that infants 
 should not be baptized. 
 
 5. They that are not a6tualy possessed of the pro- 
 
 mises or covenant, are not a6lually to be invested 
 with baptisme. 
 
 Infants are not a6tuaUy possessed with the covenant : 
 Seing they perf orme not the condition, viz : con- 
 fession of their sinnes & their Fayth a6tuaUy. 
 
 Ergo : infants are not to be invested with baptisme. 
 This shal suffice for answer of your third argument. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Chfton. 
 I. Corinth. 7. 14. 
 
 [4.] Iff the children of beleeving parents be holy, then 
 are they within the covenant ofE Abraham, and so con- 
 sequently have ryght to the scale thereoff. 
 
 But the first is true, 1. Cor. 7. 14. Ergo the second. 
 
 Touching the former proposition. I take it, that none 
 wil affirme holines in any that are not of the covenant, for 
 in that respe6t, Israel was called a holy nation. Exo. 
 19. 6. 1. Pet. 2. 9. & al others vncleane, A6t. 11. 3. & 10. 15. 
 that were without. Iff infants be within the covenant, 
 then can not the seal be denyed to such, seing the Lo. 
 hath joyned the promise & scale together, Gen. 17. 10. 
 which no man may or ought to Seperate, Mat. 19. 6. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohii Smyth. 595 
 
 What can be obje6ted against the assumption, I see 
 not, seing the Apostle plainly affirmes, but now are your 
 children holy. Vnlesse it may be said, as of some I have 
 heard, that as the vnbeleeving wyfe is sandtified to the 
 husband, so are the children viz: to the vse of their 
 Father: but this to affirme is a great abusing of the 
 Scripture. For the Apostle in that place answering an 
 obje6tion that the Faithful is defiled by the society of the 
 vnfaithful: proveth that the faithful husbad may with 
 good conscience vse the vessel of his vnfaithful wife, by 
 an argument from the efEe6ls, namely bicause their 
 children, which are borne of them, are accounted holy or 
 within the promise, God having said to al the Faithful, 
 I wil be thy God, & the God of thy seed. As for that 
 other straunge exposition, that the Children of a beleeving 
 Father are no otherwise san6tified then the vnbeleeving 
 wife is vnto her husband, viz : to their Fathers vse only, 
 that cannot stand with the meaning & purpose of the 
 Apost. For so much may be said of an vnbeleeving 
 servat, that he is for the vse of his master to do him 
 service: if children be no more holy then so, then have 
 they no prerogative in being the children of a beleeving 
 Father, neither is the obje6tion removed by this answer. 
 
 If it bee further pressed that the vnbeleving wife is 
 said to be holy, as wel as the children, yet is she not 
 within the covenant. I answer, that she indeed is not 
 holy, as be her children, for she being an infidel is without 
 Gods covenant, & therfor she is said to be sandtified in 
 her husband, the Apostle respe6ting their mariage, which 
 though it was contra6ted before either party beleeved, 
 yet stands firme & not dissolved when either of them is 
 called to the Faith, so that the beleeving husband may 
 lawfully vse her as his wife, if she be content to dwel with 
 him, 1. Cor. 7. 12. Now the children cannot be san6tified 
 or Seperate to such vse to their Father, as the wife is to 
 her husband. And therfor are the children called holy, 
 bicause they are the seed of a beleeving Father. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Your fourth argument is from 1. Cor. 7. 14. thus. 
 If the Children of beleeving parents be holy: then 
 
 18—2 
 
596 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 are they within the covenat of Abraham, & so 
 
 consequently have right to the seale thereof. 
 But the first is true : 1. Cor- 7. 14. Ergo the second. 
 I answer: First denjring your majors consequent: 
 Seing that al the nation of the lewes were holy, & yet 
 not within the covenant of Abraham, I meane as you do 
 of the everlasting covenant in respect of Christ : that they 
 were not al within that covenant is plaine, Rom. 9. 6. al 
 they are not Israel which are of Israel: vs. 7. neyther 
 are they al Children bicause they are the seed of Abraham, 
 vs. 12. God revealed, that the Elder should serve the 
 yonger, A61. 7. 51. yee have alwayes resisted the holy 
 ghost, as your foreFathers have done so do you: if it be 
 obje6led that the place of the Romanes is spoken in 
 respe6t of Gods secreat eledlion, & not of mans knowledg, 
 I answer, the vs. 12. is plaine of that which was revealed 
 vnto the Church, & yet Esaw was holy & circumcized 
 when he was borne, being not vnder the covenant of 
 Abraham in respe6l of Christ: & for proof of this point 
 that the whole Church of the lewes was not vnder the 
 possession of the everlasting covenant made with Abraham 
 in respedt of Christ : but only vnder the offer of it, I vse 
 these reasons. 
 
 1. First: The condition or obedience of the matter 
 
 or members of the New Testament is not the 
 
 condition or obedience of the matter or members 
 
 oflf the old Testament. 
 Faith & repentance is the condition & obedience of 
 
 the matter or members of the new Testament, 
 
 Marc. 1. 15. 
 Ergo: Faith & repentance is not the condition or 
 
 obedience of the matter or members of the old 
 
 Testament. 
 The reason of the major is evident, seing that as the 
 ministery, worship, & government of the Church of the 
 old Testament was of another nature then the ministery 
 worship, & government of the new Testament is, so the 
 constitution, viz: the matter & Forme of the Church of 
 the old Testament was of another nature, then the consti- 
 tution that is the matter & forme of the new Testament is : 
 Seing therfor that the ministery, worship, & government 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 597 
 
 of the old Testament was carnal, the constitutio must 
 also be carnal: Therfor the matter & forme must be 
 carnal: Therfor Faith & repentance was not required 
 to the matter of the old Testament, but only a carnal 
 hoUnes, viz : The circumcision of the f oreskinne, whereby 
 the carnal forme, that is the carnal covenant or com- 
 maundement was induced vpon them, & wherto they 
 were tyed in obedience, Heb. 7. 16. Gal. 6. 3. 
 
 2. Secondly. The type, shadow, figure, simiUtude of 
 a thing is not the truth, the substance, the thing 
 it self: True is nature & reason. 
 
 The constitution, viz: the matter & forme of the 
 Church of the old Testament is the type, &c. The 
 constitution or the matter & forme of the church 
 of the new Testament is the truth, &c. Heb. 10. 1. 
 & 9. 19. 23. 
 
 Ergo: The constitution, viz: the matter & forme 
 of the Chiu-ch of the old Testament, (that is the 
 members, & covenant) is not the truth: that is 
 the members are not truly holy, but ceremonialy 
 holy, the covenant is not the everlasting covenant, 
 but the typical carnal covenant or commaunde- 
 ment : & so true hohnes that is Faith & repentance 
 was not required to the mebers or matter of the 
 Church of the old Testament. 
 
 3. Thirdly, that which was not nor could not be 
 accomphshed, performed, effedted or produced by 
 the walking or communion of the Church off the 
 old Testament, was not required, or exa6ted, or 
 presupposed to the constitution of the Church of 
 the Old Testament. 
 
 lustification & Faith, Sandlification & repentance, 
 were not effe6ted, performed, accomphshed, or 
 produced by the walking or communion of the 
 Church of the Old Testament, Heb. 9. 9. Gal. 2. 
 15. 16. 
 
 Ergo : justification & Faith, San6tification & repent- 
 ance were not required to the constitution of the 
 Church of the old Testament : & so by consequent, 
 the members of the Church of the Old Testament 
 were not truly holy in their constitution. 
 
698 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 4. That which broijght not perfe6tion & life to the 
 members, presupposed not Fayth & repentance 
 to the members : and so not reall or true holynes. 
 
 But the Old Testament, the Law, & the obedience 
 of the Law brought not perfe6tion & life to the 
 members of the Church of the old Testament, 
 Heb. 7. 19. Gal. 3. 2L 
 
 Ergo: The Old Testament, or the Law, or the 
 Church of the old Testament did not presuppose, 
 Fayth, Repentance, or true Holynes in the 
 members. 
 
 5. That which was a Schoolmr. only to teach Christ, 
 did not presuppose that the SchoUers had already 
 learned Christ or put on Christ, which is only 
 done by Faith & repentance. 
 
 The law or old Testament was a Schoolmr. only to 
 teach Chr. Gal. 3. 14. Rom. 10. 3. 4. 
 
 Ergo, The Law or Old Testament did not presuppose 
 that the SchoUers had learned Christ or put on 
 Christ, which is only done by Fa3rth and Repent- 
 ance. 
 
 6. That which was hidden, kept secreat was a 
 Mystery & not revealed, the members of the 
 Church of the old Testament, in their constitution 
 were not indued withal. 
 
 Faith, or obedience to the gospel was a mistery, & 
 not revealed, but kept secreat from the beginning. 
 Gal. 3. 23. Rom. 16. 25. 
 
 Ergo, The members of the Church of the Old 
 Testament were not indued with Fayth or obedi- 
 ence to the gospel in their constitution. 
 
 7. Ther is no condemnation to them that are in 
 Christ, Rom. 8. 1. 
 
 Ther is condemnation to them that are vnder the 
 Law, Gal. 3. 10. For it is the Ministery of death 
 or condemnation, 2. Cor 3. 7. 
 
 Ergo: The Law or old Testament doth not pre- 
 suppose Christ : or they that are vnder the Law 
 are not in Christ : & so the members of the church 
 of the old Testament were not truly holy. 
 Finally, the whole disputation of Paul to the Romanes 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 599 
 
 & Galatians concerning justification by Faith in Christ 
 without the workes of the Law doth evidently confirme 
 this excellent truth. Teaching that seing the vtmost 
 obedience of the Law did not e£Ee6t or produce justifica- 
 tion, therfor of necessity it followeth that the Law or old 
 Testament did not presuppose it, or true holines in the 
 members therof : For it had been a vanity to have given 
 them a Law which should not or could not preserve & 
 produce that which was in them in ther first constitution : 
 wherfor I doe bouldly defend against all men, that the 
 Church of the Old Testament in the matter or constitu- 
 tion of it was not really Holy, but only Typically: & 
 therfor the members therof admitted in by circumcision 
 were not truly holy or san6tified, or in a6lual possession 
 of that everlasting covenant which God made with 
 Abraham in respe6t of Christ: but only vnder the offer 
 of it in that typical Testament given to Abraham, & 
 afterward assumed written & amphfied by Moses, loh, 
 7. 19-23. compared with Heb. 8. 8. 9. 
 
 HaAdng sufficiently confirmed this truth, I retiu-ne in 
 particular to answer your obje6tions saying stil that the 
 nation of the lewes was holy, not truly but typically 
 & that their hohnes was this, that by that external 
 covenant whereinto they were by circumcision admitted, 
 they were trayned vp, or Schooled to Christ, being by all 
 the ceremonial law & old Testament, or carnal com- 
 maundement, as it were by so many meanes consecrated 
 or dedicated to that holy end & purpose, which was tiped 
 & shadowed by those figures & simiUtudes of heavenly 
 things. Therfor as the word sanitifjdng or hallowing 
 is vsually taken in the old Testamet for the setting of any 
 thing apart to a holy vse: so were the people of Israel 
 holy: even an holy natio above al the nations of the 
 Earth, See: Exod. 19. 10. 14. 15. lob. 1. 5. Deu. 14. 1-4. 
 compared with A6t. 21. 28. & for the place which you 
 aledg, Ex. 19. 6. to prove the Israelites an holy nation, 
 I say, that either the meaning is that they were typically, 
 holy, trayned vp to hoUnes, or that they by attayning 
 the end of the law should attayne true hohnes in Christ : 
 So that this place is nothing to your purpose of the hohnes 
 of the eternal covenant which God made with Abraham : 
 
600 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 So that though infants be vnder offer of the covenant 
 made with Abraham in respe6l of Christ, yet shal not 
 baptisme be administred vppon them, as yom" consequent 
 doth import, bicause that in the old Testament none were 
 circumcised but those that were a6lually seased vppon 
 that external covenant: & therefore none in the New 
 Testament shalbe baptized but those that are actually 
 possessed of the covenant of the New Testament: but 
 the adtual possession of the promise is by obedience to 
 the Faith: For by Faith (saith the Apostle. Gal. 3. 14.) 
 we receave the promise of the Spirit, & we receave the 
 Spirit by the hearing of Faith preached, Gal. 3. 2. & Faith 
 Cometh by hearing of the word preached, Rom. 10. 17. 
 
 Secondly, I answer concerning the consequent of your 
 Majors consequent that it shal not follow that bicause 
 children are vnder the covenant (as you suppose, but we 
 deny), that therfor they shal have the outward signe or 
 scale therof: for you know vnder the law the females 
 were adtuaUy vnder the covenant of the old Testamet, 
 & yet were not signed with the scale: & before the law 
 was given al that were adtualy vnder the covenant vntil 
 the tyme of Abraham had no external signe or seale therof. 
 if you say in opposition to the circumcision of the female 
 that she was vncapable of it : I answer the L. had abun- 
 dance of Spirit, & if it had been his wil that al vnder the 
 covenant should be pertakers of the signe or the seale 
 therof, he could in wisdom & would vndoubtedly have 
 appointed such an external signe or seale that might have 
 bene administred vppon al vnder the covenant, but seing 
 the L. chose out the male only for circumcision, therby 
 he purposed to teach in a type that only the male (that 
 is, one that is in Christ) shalbe sealed with the Spirit of 
 promise vnder the new Test : But if you say in op[p]osition 
 to that before the Law, that ther was no seale or signe 
 appointed by God for them vnder the covenant, bicause 
 the L. thought it not meet or needful: I say that herby 
 it apeareth that, to be vnder the covenat, was not the 
 cause of title to the seale, but the particular expresse 
 commaundement or wil of God : & so the insufficiency of 
 your consequent appeareth, which importeth that to bee 
 vnder the covenant is reason sufficient to prove a partie 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 601 
 
 to be intitled to the seale or signe of the covenant: & 
 this excellent truth herby is manifested, that if it should 
 be granted that infants were a6lualy vnder the covenant 
 yet it could not follow thervppon that therfor they should 
 have the signe or seale of the covenat, which you say is 
 baptisme, except it could be proved by expresse com- 
 maundement otherwise: for this argument you see 
 proveth it not: Hence therfor apeareth the weaknes of 
 your argument, viz : that if infants were holy, & so vnder 
 the covenant, yet it doth not follow that therefor they 
 shall have the signe or seale of the covenant which (you 
 say, but we deny) is baptisme. 
 
 But I passe vnto your assumption : which you say is 
 evidet, 1. cor. 7. 14. but now are yoiu" children holy: you 
 affirme that infants of one of the parents Faithful are 
 holy : I except many things here : first : I desire that you 
 expound vnto me what this hoHnes is which the Ap. here 
 mentioneth: happily you wil say it is to be vnder the 
 covenant, then I demaund what it is to be vnder the 
 covenant? perhaps you wil say (though this be to runne 
 in a circle) it is to be justified by imputation of Chr. 
 righteo[u]snes. The I demaund which of these three, viz. 
 to be holy, to be vnder the covenat, to have Ch. righteous- 
 nes imputed, is first in nature? happily you wil say: 
 First, they are vnder the covenant. Secondly, they are 
 justified by the imputed righteousnes of Chr. Thirdly 
 they are san6tified or holy: Then I proceed, & demaund 
 when do infants come vnder the covenant: when they 
 are conceaved: or when they are borne? or when the 
 parets are converted being already borne? It wilbe 
 answered: That these infants that are begotten of 
 Faithful parents come vnder the covenant in their con- 
 ception: & these infants that are already borne come 
 vnder the covenant when their parents are regenerate: 
 hereby then it appeareth that the covenant is conveighed 
 to the children from the parents by generation, & by 
 filial relation: herevnto add that if it be true that some 
 say, that children vnder the government of the faithful 
 also are vnder the covenant, that the covenant is con- 
 veighed also by pupilship or adoption: & if bondslaves 
 or servants being infants be vnder the covenant bicause 
 
602 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 of their beleving Mrs. then servitude is also a meanes or 
 instrument of conveighing the covenant from Mr. to 
 Servants: this being propounded then as the truth you 
 hold, that plead for Pedobaptisme, then you maintayne, 
 that seing generation, fihal relation, pupilship, adoptio 
 & servitude are meanes to bring infants vnder the cove- 
 nant, then they are meanes to bring infants vnder justifica- 
 tion, & vnder san6tification : So that it followeth that 
 we must account al the infants of beleeving parents that 
 are childre by nature & by adoption, al infants of beleeving 
 Mrs. that are borne in slavery or servitude to be justified 
 & San6lified, bicause the covenant is communicated vnto 
 them by the foresaid relation : Then I proceed & demaund 
 why may not all the infants borne vnder one King, if his 
 subje6ts, bee aU his Servants & Vassals (as they say) bee 
 by that relation brought vnder the covenant, & so be 
 accounted justified & san6lified: For relation of a King 
 & a subje6t borne so is as neer as the relation of a Mr, 
 & Servant, or an adopted Child: And then I demaund, 
 seing the relation of a ma & a wife is neerer a great deale 
 then any relation of adoption or servitude, why the wife 
 shal not be vnder the covenant for the relation of mariage : 
 happily it wiU bee said the wife being of yeeres cannot 
 bee admitted bicause of her vnbeleefe: & I say that 
 infants of parents & Mrs. cannot bee admitted, bicause 
 of their want of Faith being vnder yeeres: but it wilbee 
 said that the covenant with Abraham was with him & his 
 seed only: I say, that it was made (by your confession) 
 with him and his adopted infants, with him & his pupils 
 being infants, with him & his Servants being infants: 
 & therf or not only with him & his seed : & seing some not 
 of his seed may be admitted into the covenant, & those 
 that are further of, why shall not those that are neerer 
 as his wife : but you wil say bicause infants do not refuse 
 the covenat, they may be admitted to baptisme, though 
 adopted childre, though pupils, though Servants: but 
 wives refusing the covenant may not: I further insist 
 that as infants do not resist, so they do not consent: 
 & that al the Children, Servants, & Wives, that do not 
 resist, may bee admitted, though they cannot make 
 declaration of their Fayth & repentance : if you say : not 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 603 
 
 so : bicause that in them that are of yeers Faith & repent- 
 ance is required, but of infants no such thing is required : 
 I answer, first shew that by Scripture, & then I say ther 
 is no reason why Faith & repentance should bee required 
 of one to make him capable of the covenant of justifica- 
 tion, & Sandtification more then of another, except you 
 wil say that God is accepter of persons: & further the 
 covenant is only with Abraham & his seed, not with his 
 adopted Children, not with his pupils, not with his 
 Servants, & therfor in the Faith and repentance must 
 necessarily be had, & so they cannot bee baptized til they 
 shew their Faith & repentance which is contrary to your 
 do6tryne: besides you cannot shew in al the Scriptures 
 that persons may be said to be partakers of the covenant 
 a6tually, except a6tuaUy they fulfil the condition of the 
 covenant: & if you say that infants being vnder the 
 covenant, justified, & sanctified, therfor they have Fayth & 
 the graces of God in them, I say that is contrary to the 
 Scriptures which say that Faith commeth by hearing : & 
 that the word is the immortal seed of regeneration, wherby 
 new borne babes vnder the gospel are regenerate : & if it 
 be said that infants have a kind of Faith wrought in them 
 invisibly, & after an hidde manner: I say what God 
 worketh invisibly, & secreatly we dispute not nor regard, 
 but what he worketh visibly & to oiu* knowledg, & by 
 the meanes appointed for the communion of the Church : 
 For ther is but one Faith, which is the common Faith 
 of the members of the Church, which is visibly seen by 
 speaking & confession, according as is written I beleeved 
 & therfor I speake. Tit. 1. 4. & if it be obje6ted that 
 then wee doe condemne al infants dying before they be 
 converted : I say No : wee pronounce nothing of infants, 
 but leave the secreat of them to the Lord, who hath 
 reserved secreat things to himself : Hence then I conclude 
 that seing you cannot declare what this holines is which 
 infants have, seing they cannot have a6tuall holynes: 
 Seing you cannot declare that they have Faith or justifica- 
 tion, seing they cannot have adluall Fayth : Therfor you 
 cannot declare that they are a6tually vnder the covenant, 
 by a6tuaU Faith and holines : & so if they bee not a6tually 
 vnder it, but vnder the offer of it onely, that is it which 
 
604 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 wee affirme, & which wil help you nothing to baptisme 
 of infants. 
 
 Secondly, I desire that you would prove vnto me by 
 Scripture, that in this place. 1. Cor. 7. 14. Holines 
 signifieth true san6tification, or to be a6tually vnder the 
 covenant, having it really invested vppon them. You 
 endevour to declare it out of the text : For you say Paul 
 answereth an obje6tion, viz, that the faithful are defiled 
 with the Society of the vnfaithful, & proveth that the 
 Faithfiil husband may vse the vessel of his vnfaithful wife 
 with a good conscience by an argument drawne from the 
 effe6ts, namely, bicause their Children are holy, & vnder 
 the covenant : God having said to the Faithful I wilbe thy 
 God, & the God of thy seed. Wei, let vs see the force of 
 your reason : your fourth argument was this. 
 
 If infants be holy then are they vnder the covenant. 
 Infants are holy: Ergo infants are vnder the 
 covenant. 
 Your proof that infants are holy is this. 
 
 If infants be vnder the covenant, then infants are 
 
 holy. 
 Infants are vnder the covenant. Ergo infants are 
 holy. 
 I ask you Sir, in good sooth, is this circular reasoning 
 sound : you say infants are Holy, bicause they are vnder 
 the covenant, & you say they are vnder the covenant 
 bicause they are holy : Let al men judg whither you have 
 proved infants Holy or not. 
 
 Thirdly I answer that (Holy) doth not so signify as 
 you expound, neither is the argument taken from the 
 effedts, but from the greater to the lesse after this 
 manner. 
 
 If your children (in your owne judgment) be holy, 
 & you do not put them away when you are con- 
 verted to the faith, but vse the stil as your 
 Children to al those vses wherto children are 
 apointed, the relation natural of Father & sonne 
 remayning, though you beleve : then much more 
 the relation of ma & wife remayneth, & you may 
 vse your wives, they being of a neerer natural 
 bond then your children. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 605 
 
 But the first is true by your owne confession, & by 
 the hght of nature. 
 Ergo the second is true by the light of nature much 
 more. 
 
 And whereas you say that by this exposition an 
 vnbeleving servant is in as good an estate, & as holy as 
 children in respe6l of the covenant, I confesse it to be 
 so: & you that plead for pedobaptisme say so likewise, 
 seing that you wil have servants vnder the covenant by 
 their Mrs. Faith : but I would know whither the Apostle 
 speaketh only of infants or of al Children generally: if 
 generally of al Children, then all the Children of the 
 Faithful are holy, yea even those that are vnbeleevers 
 & then would I know how vnbeleeving children can be 
 holy, if not as the vnbeleving wife is holy : that is to the 
 vse of their parents in the relative dutyes of children & 
 parents. If the Apostle speaketh only of infants, then he 
 speaketh not so generally as God speake to Abraham 
 saying I wilbe thy God, & the God of thy seed, for in 
 that speech you say al the seed is comprehended whither 
 of yeeres or vnder yeeres, yea servants, pupils, children 
 by adoption, &c. So that expound it as you wil, it 
 cannot be vnderstood of holines in respedt of the covenant 
 as you pretend : but you wil say they are to bee esteemed 
 Holy & vnder the covenant til they manifest the contrary : 
 & I say, that they must manifest that they are Holy 
 before they can bee esteemed Holy: & that you cannot 
 prove that assertion from the Scripture : & the people of 
 the lewes Abrahams carnall Children were Holy when 
 they declared the contrary by their sinnes, Exo. 19. 6. 
 compared with Exod. 32. 9. & 33. 3. 5. so are the children 
 of the Faithful holy though they be vnbeleevers as the 
 wife is holy though an vnbeleever. 
 
 Finally you say: God hath said to aU the Faithful, 
 I wilbe thy God & the God of thy seed : I deny it vtterly : 
 God said that only to Abraham, Genes. 17. 7. & whither 
 you expound it fiteraUy, or Spiritually, I avouch con- 
 fidently against you & al men that the meaning of it is 
 not, that God made his covenant with the faythfuU man, 
 or the Faythful woman & their infants begotten of their 
 Bodyes: but that hteraUy the meaning is, I wiUbe God 
 
606 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 vnto thee Abraham & thy seed according to the Flesh to 
 give them the Land of Canaan: & so it is expounded 
 Genes. 17. 8. Or Spiritually the meaning is, I wil give 
 vnto Abraham the Father of the Faithful, & al that are 
 his Spiritual seed, everlasting life, which is the true Land 
 of Canaan: The latter which is the truth being signified 
 by the former which is the type : & shew mee in all the 
 Scriptures that God said to every Faithful man & woman 
 (for you must prove it spoken of women aswel as men) 
 that he wiUbe God vnto them & their seed : For I would 
 fayne know why the covenant should passe vnto the 
 infants of the Faithful: it wilbe said bicause of the 
 Fathers Faith: this is false do6lryne: For the Prophet 
 teacheth that every man shal live by his owne faith 
 & that one mans faith canot conveigh the covenat of 
 justificatio to another neither can one mans sin cut of 
 another from the covenant as this do6trine importeth: 
 but the soule that sinneth it shal dye. 
 
 Neither wil it avayle to plead that the covenant made 
 with Abraham was an everlasting covenant: For berith 
 gnolam in the original doth not import a covenant of 
 everlasting continuance, but a covenant that doth con- 
 tinue his proper tyme : For gnolam signifieth any hidden 
 tyme, or any set tyme of any length, as 50. yeeres the 
 tyme of the jubile: But let it be graunted that the cove- 
 nant made with Abraham, Gen. 17. 7. was the everlasting 
 covenant made with Abraham in respe6l of Christ, 
 (which yet I do not see proved) what then ? shal it foUow 
 that bicause it was with Abraham & the Faithfull whither 
 lewes or Gentils beleeving a6tually as Abraham the Father 
 did : Therf or it is made with the Faithful men who is the 
 child of Abraham: & with his children begotten of his 
 body which have not Abrahams adluall Faith, & so are 
 not the children of Abraham ? I deny it vtterly : For the 
 Apostle saith the seed is but one to whome the promises 
 were made, viz: Christ or the a6lual beleevers: For 
 Christ dweUeth in the harts of men by Faith onely. Gal. 
 3. 16. Eph. 3. 17. But if it bee made with the Faithful 
 who beleeve a6tualy which is one seed whither lew or 
 Gentil, & the infants of the Faithful carnally begotten of 
 their body, which is another seed, (for they are not 
 
Rich. Glifton & lohn Smyth. 607 
 
 begotten of the immortall seed of regeneration:) then the 
 covenant is made with the seedes which are many: & 
 that is diredtly contrary the Apostles wordes, Gall, 3. 16. 
 Therefore the one seed is persons a6tuaUy beleeving, & 
 adlually justified by the righteousnes of Fayth, as Abra- 
 ham the Father of al the Faithful was, Roman. 4. 11. 
 whence this Argument may bee framed. 
 
 Abraham is the Father of al them that a6tually 
 
 beleeve. 
 Infants do not a6tually beleeve. 
 Ergo, Abraham is not the Father of infants: & so 
 infants are not vnder the covenant of Abraham. 
 Againe. Abrahams covenant was only to Abrahams 
 one seed, that is only to the beleevers. 
 Infants are not a6tuall beleevers. 
 Ergo Abrahams covenant is not to infants: & so 
 infants are not vnder the everlasting covenant of 
 Abraham. 
 Againe. They that are the children of Abraham, do 
 the workes of Abraham. 
 Infants cannot do the workes of Abraham. 
 Ergo infants are not the children of Abraham : & so 
 not vnder the covenant of Abraham. 
 Againe. I reason thus : They that are not vnder the 
 everlasting covenant made with Abraham shal 
 not be baptized. 
 Infants are not vnder the everlasting covenant of 
 
 Abraham. 
 Ergo : infants are not to be baptized. 
 These & many other such Arguments may be col[l]e6ted 
 out of the answer to this fourth Argument of yours : but 
 these shal suffice. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 1. Corinth. 10. 1. 2. 
 
 [5.] If the infants of the Israelites were baptized in 
 the cloud & in the sea, aswell as their parents, what letteth 
 the infants of beleeving parents vnder the gospel, to bee 
 Hkewise partakers of baptisme aswel as they? 
 
 The former the Apostle affirmes, 1. Cor. 10. 1. 2. & 
 
608 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 therefore good warrant must bee shewed, that our infants 
 are cut of from this priviledg that the lewes Children had. 
 And if the former Baptisme of the lewes was a Type of 
 our Baptisme, then must there bee an agreement betweene 
 the Type, & the thing Tjrped, which is not, if our Children 
 bee not baptized, as well as theirs. 
 
 The depriving of our Children of the Sacrament, is to 
 shorten the Lords bounty towards his people of the New 
 Testament, that being denyed to their children, which 
 God gave to his people, & to their infants vnder the Law, 
 is to deny them (in regard of their seed) the like assurance 
 & comfort, which the Israelites had of theirs. And so 
 to make our estate worse & more vncomfortable then 
 theirs was: & yet the Prophets prophecyed of the grace 
 that should come to vs, & did inquire & sea[r]ch after the 
 same. 1, Pet. 1. 10. 
 
 Glad tydings were preached to Abraham & his seed 
 to infants of eight dayes old Gal. 3, 8. And this before 
 Christ came in the Flesh, therefore much more he being 
 come, is joyful tydings brought vnto vs & our infants. & 
 so are we to beleve that the grace of God is not lessened 
 either towards vs or our children, but inlarged by his 
 comming. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Your 5. argument is taken from 1. Cor. 10. 1. 2, 
 framed thus. 
 
 If the infats of the Israelites were baptized in the 
 cloud & in the sea, aswel as their parents, what letteth 
 the infants of beleving parents vnder the gospel to be 
 likewise partakers of baptisme aswel as they? 
 
 The former the Apostle affirmeth, 1. Cor, 10. 1. 2, & 
 therfor good warant must be shewed that our infants are 
 cut of from this priviledg that the lewes children had: 
 that baptisme being a type of our baptisme. 
 
 To this argument I make answer : by framing the hke 
 argument. 
 
 If their infants did eate the same Spiritual meate & 
 drink which the parents did eate : then why may not our 
 infants being able to eate & drinck, eate & drinck the 
 Lords Supper ? 
 
Rich. CUfton & lohn Smyth. 609 
 
 The former the Apostle affirmeth, 1. Cor. 10. 1. 2. 
 & therfor good warrant must be shewed that our infants 
 are cut of from that priviledg: & those sacramets were 
 types of our Sacraments. 
 
 Againe, I answer more properly thus : That ther shalbe 
 a proportion betwixt the Type & the truth, that baptisme 
 of the cloud & sea, & our baptisme, viz : that as yong & 
 old carnal Israelites were baptized in the cloud & sea, so 
 yong & old Spiritual true Israelites shalbe baptized by 
 the baptisme of repetance : & as the carnal parents with 
 their carnal children were baptized in type : So Spiritual 
 parents with their Spiritual children, that is such as are 
 regenerate by the word & Spirit, shall bee baptized with 
 the baptisme of repentance for the remission of sinnes, 
 which is baptisme in truth. 
 
 Further I say : That our infants shal have a priviledg 
 farr greater then the infants of the Israelites had in that 
 typical baptisme: For they by it were only baptized 
 into Moses & the Law: That by it they might learne 
 Moses, & in Moses the truth in Chr. as it were vnder a 
 vele: but our infants vnder the gospel shal have the 
 dayly institution & education of Faithful parents, which 
 is infinitely superior to that darke pedagogical baptisme, 
 & al the baptismes & ordinances of the old Testament: 
 Seing that with open face they may in the preaching of 
 the gospel see Christ lesus, & not vnder the vele of Moses. 
 
 Moreover I deny that the baptisme of the cloud & sea 
 was a type of the external baptisme of the new Testament, 
 in the abstra6t : but it was a type of our baptisme in the 
 concrete: that is the baptisme of the cloud did Type 
 out our baptisme in the 3. parts therof, viz: 1. The 
 baptisme of the Spirit, 2. The declaration of Faith & 
 repentance the antecedent of baptisme with water, 3. 
 The outward washing with water a manifestation of the 
 foresaid particulars: & all these to bee conferred vppon 
 infants proportionable to those infants, that is. New borne 
 babes in Christ. 
 
 And whereas you further alledg that if your infants 
 bee not baptized, the Lords bounty is shortned to vs & 
 our infants : our conf ort is diminished in respe6t of our 
 infants which they had in respe6t of theirs : & the gospel 
 
 ■ w. II. 19 
 
610 Pajpsages betwixt Mr. 
 
 is not preached to our infants as it was to theirs : I answer 
 that Gods bounty, our confort in respe6t of our infants, 
 & the preaching of the glad tydings of the gospel is as 
 large & ample every way to our infants as to theirs: 
 For Gods bounty of the a6tual ejhiibiting and sealing the 
 everlasting covenant to Abraham & al his carnaU infants 
 was never extant in the Old Testament: Neither were 
 the parents in circumcising their infants comforted in the 
 assured conferring of it vppon their infants: & circum- 
 cision did not so plainly preach Christ then as he is 
 preached now to infants: but what could the preaching 
 of Christ profit infants either then in types or now in 
 truth? Neyther doe I think that the Lord ever in- 
 tended to teach the infant any thing at that instant, 
 but afterward hee was to learne that which the Schoolemr. 
 circumcision vppon his Flesh taught him: viz: the 
 circumcision of the hart: & if you say that so infants 
 baptized are to be instru6ted, I answer, that in the New 
 Testament by baptisme wee manifest what wee have, 
 namely, the inward baptisme, whereas in the Old Testa- 
 ment by circumcision they learned what they had not 
 but ought to have, viz : The inward circumcision of the 
 hart, & mortification of the sinnefull Flesh. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 Mat. 28. 19. 
 
 [6.] If Christ gave a commaundement for the pubhshing 
 of his covenant & administring of baptisme the seale 
 therof to al nations : then are the beleving Getils & their 
 infants to receave the same. 
 
 But the first is true. Mat. 28. 19, Ergo the latter also 
 is true, ASt. 13. 48. & 16. 14. 15. 32. 33. 
 
 It wil be objected against the Major, that it followes 
 not, that the infants are any more bound to receave 
 baptisme, then they are bound whylest they are infants 
 to receave the word, but the word they cannot receave, 
 ergo. I answere, that the commaundement is general to 
 al nations, & therfor as Abraham if he should not have 
 obeyed to the Lord commaunding him to circumcise him- 
 selfe, & al his family, yea the infants, he should grevously 
 have rebelled against God: So whosoever of the Gentils 
 
Rich. CUfton & lohn Smyth. 611 
 
 shal not beleve & be baptized both himselfe & his seed, 
 shall have no part nor portion in the inheritance of Christ : 
 Seing he cuts himselfe of & his seed from the covenant 
 of God, Gen. 17. 14. 
 
 And though infants bee not capable of the preaching 
 of the covenant, (which notwithstanding they are bound 
 vnto, as they shall come to yeres of discretion) yet are 
 they capable of the scale, as before is shewed, & therefore 
 by vertue of this generaU commaundement. Mat. 28. 19. 
 are to bee Baptized. 
 
 John Smyth. 
 
 Your 6. Argument from Mat. 28. 19. is framed thus. 
 
 If Christ gave a commaundement for the pubUshing 
 
 of his covenant & administring of baptisme the 
 
 seale thereof to al nations : then are the beleeving 
 
 gentUs & their infants to receave the same. 
 
 But the first is true : Mat. 28. 19. Ergo the latter 
 
 also is true, Aa. 13. 48. & 16. 14. 15. 32. 33. 
 
 The errors of this argument I wil discover in order: 
 
 First I deny that baptisme is the seale of the covenant 
 
 of the new Testament : Secondly I deny that circumcision 
 
 was the seale of that everlasting covenant that was made 
 
 with Abraham in respe6t of Christ: Thirdly, baptisme 
 
 therfor doth not succeed in the place of circumcision, ther 
 
 being only a chandg of the ceremony (as you pretend) the 
 
 covenant being the same, these thre particulars are 
 
 already proved. Fourthly I deny, that though Abraham 
 
 who had a special commaundement, did circumcise his 
 
 male infants, therefore Christians vppon this general 
 
 commaundement, Mat. 28. 19. shal baptise their infants. 
 
 Fifthly, I say rather the contrary is hence proved, bicause 
 
 Christ commaundeth to baptise only those that are by 
 
 teaching made Disciples (for so the word matheteusate 
 
 signifieth) theffor infants are by expresse prohibition 
 
 excluded, & it is as if Chr. should say, I wil have you 
 
 make them Disciples & baptise them that are made 
 
 Disciples by teaching & no other: & so Christ expresly 
 
 excludeth infants. Lastly, I deny that infants are capable 
 
 of baptisme, for they cannot confesse their faith & their 
 
 sinnes, neither declare that they are baptized inwardly 
 
 19—2 
 
612 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 with the Spirit, & so cannot outwardly by the baptisme 
 with water declare the same, but are in every respedt 
 vnable therto, & vncapable thereof. 
 
 Hence therfor I reason against baptising infants. 
 
 1. They only are to be baptized that are made Disciples 
 
 by teaching. 
 Infants cannot be made Disciples by teaching. 
 Ergo, Infants are not to be baptized. Secondly I 
 
 reason thus. 
 
 2. Every precept affirmative conteyneth a negative 
 
 vnder it. 
 Make Disciples by teaching & baptise them, is an 
 
 affirmative conteyning vnder it, baptize not those 
 
 that are not made Disciples by teaching. 
 Ergo, those that are not by teaching made Disciples, 
 
 are by Christ forbidden to be baptized: & so 
 
 infants are not to be baptized. 
 
 3. Thirdly I reason thus. 
 
 They that are vncapable of baptisme are not to be 
 baptized. 
 
 Infants are vncapable of baptisme: Seing baptisme 
 consisting of the inward baptisme of the Spirit, 
 expressed by confession in word, & washing with 
 water in a6tion: infants are vncapable of the two 
 former parts of baptisme. 
 
 Ergo infants are not to be baptized with water which 
 is the latter. 
 
 4. If the new Testament be as cleer & perspicuous as 
 the old, & Christ the Mediator of the new Testament as 
 faithfull as Moses the Mediator of the old Testament: 
 then the persons to be baptised, & the conditio of bap- 
 tisme, & the tyme of baptisme are as cleerly & faithfully 
 described in the institutio of baptisme, as the person, 
 condition & tyme of circumcision. 
 
 But for pedobaptisme, ther is no expresse description 
 of the person, condition, or tyme of their baptisme: & 
 for true baptisme: ther is most evidently, & faithfully 
 set downe the persons, condition, & tyme of administring 
 it, viz : persons confessing their sinnes. Mat. 3. 6. wheras 
 persons impenitent were put by. Mat. 3. 7-12. compared 
 with Luk. 7. vs, 29-30. Persons beleeving. A6t. 8. 12. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 613 
 
 13. & vs. 36-38. persons that had receaved the holy 
 Ghost, & expressed the same by prophecying, A6t. 10. 
 46-48 persons penitent, A61. 2. 38. persons that are by 
 teaching made Disciples, Mat. 28. 19. loh. 4. 1. persons 
 borne againe. loh. 3. 3. 
 
 Therfor such persons are to bee baptized who are 
 thus particularly described, wherein the new Testament 
 is as cleer as the Old, & Christ the Mediator as FaythfuU 
 as Moses : & no other but these : For if others bee, then 
 is not the New Testament so cleer as the Old, nor Christ 
 as Faithful as Moses, which to say is to blaspheme. 
 
 Mr. Rich. CUfton. 
 
 [7.] Lastly, the Apostles pra6tise is our instru6tion, but 
 they baptized not onely the master of the family which 
 beleeved, but al his howsehold. A6t. 16. 15. 33. Therefore 
 now also the like is to be done: & so consequently the 
 infants are to be baptized, for they are a part of the 
 family. & that infants are of the family, see Gen. 45. 18. 
 where loseph bad his brethren, take their Father, & their 
 howsehoolds, & come to him, now in chap. 46. 5. 7. it is 
 said they caried their Children & wives in charets, nothing 
 hereby, that children were of the howsehold, els had they 
 no commaundement to have caried them into Egj^t, see 
 also vs. 27. & Exo. 1. 21. it is said, bicause the Midwyves 
 feared God, therefore he made them howses, in 1. Tim. 
 5. 8. the Apostle saith, he that provideth not for his owne, 
 & namely for them of his houshold, he denyeth the faith, 
 &c. Now I would aske if childre be exempted from the 
 howshold in any of these places, or in any other where 
 is mention made of a particular howshold. Therefore this 
 argument wil prove that children were baptized, vnles it 
 can bee shewed that they were specially exempted. & if 
 the holy ghost have not exempted them, who dare do 
 it against a general commaundement of baptising al 
 nations. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Your 7. argument is taken from A6t. 16. 15. 33. 
 framed thus. 
 The Apostles pra6tise is our instru6lion. 
 
614 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 But they baptized not only the Mx. of the Family 
 which beleved, but al his howshold : A6t. 16, 15. 33. 
 
 Therfor now also the like is to be done: & so conse- 
 quently infants are to be baptized, for they are a part 
 of the family. 
 
 I make answer to this argument confessing it wholy, 
 but yet denying the consequent of your conclusion: For 
 it doth not foUow bicause al the howshold of Lydia & the 
 Gaylor were baptized, that therfor infants were baptized : 
 you shal see what exceptions I take. 
 
 First, I say though infants are a part of the family 
 when the family hath infants in it, yet it doth not foUow 
 that whersoever ther is mention made of a Family, that 
 therefore that Family had infants in it : except therefore 
 it bee proved that the family of Lydia, & the family of 
 the Gaylor had infants in it, this aUegatid is nothing. 
 
 Secondly, by this reason you might prove that Lydias 
 Husband, & the Gaylors wife, & their children of 40 
 yeeres old, & their Servants of 60. yeeres old, were 
 baptized: For al these are parts of a Family, yet I sup[p]ose 
 you wil not say they were al of them baptized, except 
 you can prove, that Lydia had a Husband, or the Gaylor 
 had a wife, or children of 40. & servants of 60. yeeres old : 
 your argumet therfor is weak presupposing the thing that 
 is in question. 
 
 Thirdly, if it were yeelded that ther were infants in 
 Lydias Family, & in the Gaylors, doth it therfor follow 
 that they were baptized? nothing lesse: & that I wiU 
 declare thus. 
 
 1. You say that to the baptising of the Gaylors wife, 
 & children of yeeres of discretion ther was necessarily 
 required Faith & repentance, or els they were not baptized : 
 So say I that bicause infants cannot beleeve & repent, 
 though they were in the Family yet shal they not be 
 baptized : For ther is one conditid required for al persons 
 to be baptized. 
 
 2. I say: that although it be said that al that 
 perteyned to the Gaylor were baptized, yet it is also said 
 vs. 32. That the word was preached to all that were in 
 his howse: & vs. 34. That al his howsehold beleeved, 
 & how came their faith but by the word preached vs. 32. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 615 
 
 Seing therfor that al that were baptized in the Gaylors 
 hows beleeved by the preaching of the word : infants that 
 could not beleeve by the preaching of the word, were not 
 baptized if he had any: besides it was a mervailous 
 distempered tyme at midnight to wake children, & to 
 bring them before the Apostles for baptisme. 
 
 3. I say: That for Lydias Family it is not said that 
 all her howsehold was baptized : or if it had been so said, 
 yet it f olloweth not that every particular person off her 
 Family was baptized. For Mat. 3, 5. 6. it is said that 
 al ludea went out to lohn & were baptized of him, con- 
 fessing their sinnes: yet hence it cannot bee concluded 
 that all & every one that went out were baptized: or 
 that all & every one went out to bee baptized: no more 
 can it bee proved that bicause it is said that Lydias 
 Family was baptized, that therefore all & every particular 
 person was baptized, but as Mat. 3. 6. only they that 
 confessed ther sinnes: & as A6t. 16. 32-34. onley they 
 that beleeved by the word preached were baptized, so 
 was it with them of Lydias Family that were baptized: 
 For the Apostles I doubt not kept one order, & required 
 the same conditions in al that they baptized : So that by 
 that which hath been said the vanity of this argument is 
 manifested : & it is proved plainly that none were baptised 
 in the Gaylors Family, but only they that beleved after 
 the word preached: & so infants specially are exempted, 
 if he had any in his family which yet is not manifested. 
 
 Hence therfor I reason thus against baptising infants. 
 
 1. The Apostles pra6tise is our instru6lion. 
 
 But the Apostles in baptising howseholds, first 
 preached the word to al that were in the Family, 
 A61. 16. 32. & then the beleeving were baptized, 
 vs. 34. 33. 
 Ergo: They only that by the preaching of the word 
 were converted & beleeved were baptized. Againe 
 I reason thus. 
 
 2. That which the Apostles pra6tised in one Family, they 
 
 pra6lised in all Familyes that they baptized. 
 But in the Gaylors Family, according to Christs 
 commission. Mat. 28. 19. They first made them 
 Disciples by preaching the Word: A6t. 16. 32-34, 
 
616 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Ergo : So they pra6tised in al FamUyes : & therfor in 
 the Family of Lydia, of Crispus, A61. 18. 8. of the 
 Ruler: lohn, 4. 43. & so no infants were baptized. 
 
 And this shal suffice for answer to your arguments. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Chfton. 
 
 [8.] Herevnto I wil adjoyne some testimonyes of the 
 Fathers, not to prove that children ought to be baptized, 
 which is to be done, & is by the Scriptures already proved : 
 but to shew the pra6tise hereof in auncient Churches. 
 Augustine (as I find alledged) writing to Jerome, Epist. 28. 
 chap. 5. Saith Cyprian not making any new decree, but 
 firmely observing the Fayth of the Church, judged with 
 his fellow Bishops, that as sone as one was borne, he might 
 Lawfully bee baptized. See Cyprian Epist. to Fidus. 
 And writing against the Donatists, Lib. 4. Chap. 23. & 
 24. saith, that the baptisme of infants was not deryved 
 from the authority of man, neither of counsels, but from 
 the tradition or doctryne of the Apostles. Ciril: vppon 
 Lev: Chap. 8. approveth the baptisme off infants, & con- 
 demneth the iteration of baptisme. Origine vppon the 
 Roman: sayth, that the Church received baptisme of 
 infants from the Apostles. Nazianzenus in Orat. in 
 S. Lavacrum. 3. saith: That baptisme agreeth to every 
 age, to every condition of life, to all men, if thou hast an 
 infant, that is San6tifyed from his infancy, yea from the 
 finger ends it is consecrated. After hee saith : Some man 
 wil say, what sayest thou of infants which neither know 
 what grace is nor payne, what shal wee baptize those? 
 & he Answeres, yea verily. Amb: Lib. 2. de Abrah. 
 Chap. 11. Speaking of baptisme, saith, nether Old man 
 nor prosoHte, nor infant is to be excepted, bicause every 
 age is guilty of sinne, & therefore stands nede of the 
 Sacrament. These & many others of the Fathers doe beare 
 witnesse according to the Scriptures of the LawfuUnes of 
 the baptising of infants. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 And heerfor a conclusion you produce the Fathers: 
 I say that the producing of Fathers who al of them held 
 plenty of Antichristian heresies, shal avayle you nothing 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 617 
 
 in your cause : & you that deny the testimony of Fathers 
 contrary to the scriptures, how can you with any color 
 of equity produce Fathers against vs in a case cotrary to 
 the Scriptiu-e, is it not to set darknes against light? doe 
 not you know that al the Fathers even every one of them 
 brought his stone to the building of the Temple of Anti- 
 christ : but I know your drift in the producing of Fathers, 
 viz : First to set a gloze vppon your Antichristian heresy 
 of baptising infants. Secondly to draw the world into 
 dislike of the L. truth: but if a ma should produce 
 testimonyes of Fathers against our Seperation, against 
 you in the case of Prelacy, Preisthood, & Deaconry, read 
 prayer, & other parts of your cause, what would you 
 answer ? would not you say, that they were testimonyes 
 of men living in cor[r]upt tymes, contrary to the Scriptures, 
 &c. Even so say I to you : but you say that you do not 
 bring testimony of the Fathers, to prove any thing : wel 
 then : you conf esse they prove nothing : remember that, 
 & let al men take notice that you produce testimonyes 
 that you say prove nothing: but why do you produce 
 testimonyes of the Fathers: Forsooth, to shew the 
 pra6tise of auncient Churches : but al those Churches were 
 Antichristian by your owne confession: & what doth 
 antiquity Antichristian, or vniversality antichristian help 
 you against the truth ? Therf or I say : The truth needeth 
 not the testimony of Antichrist: & old vniversal anti- 
 christian errors shal not prevayle against the truth : I have 
 shewed you that from the beginning it was not thus: 
 [er]go : baptisme of infants is a Novelty : but let vs shew 
 you some footsteps of the bringing in of baptising infants, 
 & that out of the Fathers. 
 
 Henricus Pantaleon : Chronolog. fol. 16. saith: Vi6tor 
 Apher in the yeer 193. ordeyned : that at Easter baptisme 
 should be indifferently administred to al: hence then it 
 f oUoweth that before his tyme only such as were Catechised 
 in the Faith were baptized : For he would not decree that 
 heathen should be baptized. 
 
 Eusebius. Eccles. Histor. Lib. 7, Chap. 8. saith that 
 Novatus rejedted the Holy baptisme, & overthrew the 
 Fayth & confession which was accustomed before bap- 
 tisme: whereby it appeareth that Fayth & confession 
 
618 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 were required before baptisme, and therefore the rudiments 
 thereoff still remayne, that in Baptising of infants, a 
 confession of sinne, and Fayth is required of the suretyes 
 or parents. 
 
 The same Euseb. Lib. 10. Chap. 16. reporteth the story 
 of Athanasius baptising children in sport : which baptisme 
 was approved (though done in sport) by Alexander Bb, 
 of Alexandria, after that he by examination had found 
 that the children had questioned & answered according 
 to the manner of the Catechumeni in baptisme : wherby it 
 appeareth that then only persons by confession of their 
 Faith & sins were admitted to baptisme in Alexandria. 
 
 Hosius : Petricoviensi confess, de fide. chap. 27. saith 
 that these two are Apost[ol]ical traditids, which the 
 Scripture teacheth not : viz : that ther are 3. persons & one 
 God : & that Dionisius & Origen doe testifie baptisme of 
 infants to be anApost[ol]ical tradition : Nowyou knowthat 
 their Apost[ol]icall traditions were antichristian inventions. 
 
 Polydor. Virg. Lib. 4. Chap. 4 de inventoribus reru. 
 saith thus : It was in vse with the auncients, that persons 
 of yeeres (sere) in a manner should be baptized clad with 
 whyte garments : La6lantius. 
 
 Candidus egreditur nitidis exercitus vndis: 
 Atque vetus vitium purgat in amne novo. 
 
 And this was performed at Easter & whitsontide except 
 in necessity: in the meane tyme til the Feasts of Easter 
 & whitsontyde came they were catechised : this testimony 
 is of good instru6lion. 
 
 Ludovicus Vives, writing vppon the first book of 
 August: de Civitate dei, chap. 27. saith : that in auncient 
 tymes no man was baptized but persons of yeeres, who 
 could vnderstand what the mystical water signified, & 
 required baptisme ofter then once: & therfor now the 
 infant to be baptized is demaunded three tymes, if hee 
 wil be baptized, for whome the suertyes answer, yea. 
 
 Erasmus Rotrodamus in his annotations vppon the 
 fifth of the Roman, saith, that in Paulls tyme it was not 
 receaved, that infants should bee Baptized. 
 
 Thus have I thought good to shew you testimonyes 
 of men: & so by setting ma against man, to lead you 
 & vs al from man to the holy Scriptures, which is the 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 619 
 
 rock wherevppon we may safely build : which as you have 
 heard flatly forbiddeth the baptising of infants, who 
 cannot bee made Disciples by teaching. Mat, 28. 19. 
 lohn. 4. 1. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 
 Now let vs come to consider of the reasons alledged 
 to the contrary, [page 574 :] the first of them is this. 
 
 1. Bicause there is neither precept nor example in 
 the New Testament of any infants that were Baptized 
 by lohn, or Christs Disciples, onely they that did confesse 
 theire sinnes, & confesse theire Faith, were baptized, 
 Marc. 1. 4. 5. Aa. 8. 37. 
 
 Answere. 
 
 First, this reason being brought into forme, wil be- 
 wray the weakenes of it: For suppose that should be 
 graunted that there were nether a special commaunde- 
 ment or example in the pra6tise of lohn or Chr. Disciples, 
 for the baptising of infants, yet may it notwithstanding 
 be lawful to baptize them, namely, if by some consequece 
 it may be gathered out of the Scripture. And this may 
 be done by good warrant from the example of our Saviour 
 Christ, Mat. 22. 31. 32. wher reasoning against the Saduces 
 concerning the resurre6tion, proves it by an argument 
 necessarily drawen from Exo. 3. 6. where no such thing 
 was expressely mentioned. And thus he taught vsually 
 & refuted his adversaries, as the History of the Gospel 
 witnesseth. After the same manner doth Paul in his 
 Epist. to the Romanes & Gal. prove justification by Faith 
 onely without works of the law : this he did not prove by 
 alledging any place in al the old Testament in plaine 
 termes affirming so much, but by conclusions of necessary 
 consequence from the Scriptures. & to this purpose might 
 divers other instances be aledged. So likewise if we 
 prove the baptising of infants by vnanswerable arguments 
 out of the Old & New Testament (though we cannot shew 
 any playne precept or example,) yet may we vppon 
 warrant thereof, not feare to baptise them. For the 
 author of this reason him selfe cannot deny, that both 
 he & we must beleve diverse things which wee gather out 
 
620 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 of the Scriptures by necessary consequence, that wee 
 shall not find in expresse words. As that there bee three 
 persons in one Godhead, that the sonne is Homousios, 
 that is of the same substance with the Father : Now such 
 expresse words cannot bee shewed in the Scripture, & 
 many such like. 
 
 2. Secondly, also if this argument be sufficient to 
 barre children from the Sacrament of baptisme, then is 
 it as sufficient to kepe back women from the Lords 
 Supper, for there is no speciall precept, nor yet example 
 that Women should pertake of the Lords Supper, but 
 the Lawfullnes thereof is onely proved by consequence, 
 bicause they are within the covenant, & are pertakers of 
 the Sacrament of baptisme, thus the weakenes of this 
 reason being manifested, I will thirdly answere vnto it. 
 
 3. Thirdly, that ther is both precept by Christ & 
 example by his Disciples for the baptising of infants as 
 hath bene proved by my two last reasons alledged to 
 prove the Lawfullnes of baptising of infants : Commaunde- 
 ment, I say. Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach al natids, baptising 
 them, where is no exception of the children of faithful 
 parents: & therfor ther being a Law once given, that 
 the covenant should be sealed to the infants aswel as to 
 the beleeving parents, the same Law of sealing the 
 covenant must stand stil in force to the parties (though 
 the outward signe be chaged) except the Lawmaker do 
 repeale it, or have set downe some ground for the repeale 
 therof which must be shewed: or els this commaunde- 
 ment doth bind vs & our infants to receave this scale of 
 the covenant. And as for examples we read that the 
 Apostle baptized Lydia & her howshold. A6t. 16. 15, 
 & the Keper, & al that belonged vnto him, vs. 33. both 
 which seming to be great Families, it is not likely that 
 they were without children, though the Evang: mention 
 them not. 
 
 But the exception is that only such as did confesse 
 their sinnes, & confesse their Faith, were baptized. I 
 desire that to be proved that only such & no others were 
 to be baptized. Cocerning lohn, indeed he was sent to 
 cal the people to repetance, & so to prepare the way of 
 the L. Mat. 3. 3. & so many as did repent & confesse their 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 621 
 
 sinnes he baptized, but did lohn refuse their children if they 
 brought them to him ? but it wil be said, ther is no mentio 
 made that he did baptise the, no more say I, is ther that 
 they were offered vnto him. Ther is no mention that the 
 Disciples of Chr. were baptized, & yet it were t[o]o bold a 
 part, & no doubt very false to aifirme that they were not 
 baptized : Not al things that lohn did, nor yet that Chr. 
 did, in the particulars, are written loh. 20. 30. but the 
 stime therof : & therfor to gather an argument fro hence, 
 bicause ther is no mention that children were baptized 
 by lohn, therfor they ought not to be baptized is a larger 
 conclusion, then the premisse wil beare. & so the reason 
 taken from the baptising of the Evnuch, (Philip baptized 
 no childre, when he baptized the Evnuch) is of no waight, 
 to prove that therfor childre ought not to be baptized. 
 Was not the Evnuch a strager far from his country, now 
 in jorney homeward & therfor not likely that he should 
 have children with him specially in such a tedious jorney, 
 & not knowing of this accident. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Now in the next place you proceed to make answer 
 to my three arguments against baptising of infants: In 
 answer to the first argument you say that if it bee brought 
 into forme it will bewray the weakenes of it: Wei I will 
 bring it into forme, & then let vs strengthen it where it 
 is weake : as thus 
 
 That which hath neither precept nor example, is 
 
 not to be done. 
 Baptising of infants hath neither precept nor 
 
 example. 
 Ergo, baptisme of infants is not to be done. 
 Againe another part of my Argument may bee brought 
 into forme thus. 
 
 That which hath precept & example must be 
 
 pra6tized. 
 
 Baptising of persons confessing ther sinnes & their 
 
 Faith is commaunded, & was pra6lised by Christ, 
 
 lohn, & the Apostles. 
 
 Ergo, those persons are the persons to be baptized. 
 
 My argument therefore consisting of an affirmative 
 
622 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 which includeth a negative is as I take it a forcible 
 Argument: Let vs see your answer & exceptions. 
 
 First, you say that a consequence necessarily drawne 
 from the Scripture is sufficient to prove the baptising of 
 infants, though ther were no special commaundement or 
 example as Christ proveth the resurre6tion. Mat. 22. 31. 
 32, out of Exod. 3. 6. by necessary consequent: & as 
 Paul in the Epistles to the Rom. & Gal. proveth justifica- 
 tion by Faith only without workes, by necessary conse- 
 quents : & wee beleeve many things that are not expressed 
 in words: as 3. persons in one Godhead, & that Christ 
 is coessential or consubstantial to the Father : this is your 
 answer or exception: wherto I reply thus. 
 
 Although a necessary consequence in al cases shal 
 prevayle, yet I say the Lord can not leave vs in this 
 particular to necessary consequence he dealing plainly & 
 Faythf uUy with vs : For seing the new Testament is more 
 manifest then the old, the Gospel being with open face, 
 the Law being hid vnder the vele: & seing Christ is as 
 Faithful, yea much more faithful then al men, & therfor 
 is called Amen, the Faythf ul & true witnesse : & so hath 
 as faithfully prescribed al the ordinances of the new 
 Testament as Moses did the ordinances of the old Testa- 
 ment: & seing Moses hath set downe distin6tly & most 
 plainly, the persons with their qualifications to bee 
 circumcised, & the circumstance of the tyme when 
 circumcision was to be administred: either Christ hath 
 as plainly & fully set downe these particulars in the new 
 Testament, or else the new Testament is not so plaine as 
 the old, & Christ is not as Faythf ul as Moses : For it had 
 been easily said, goe teach, make Disciples, & baptise 
 them, & if they have any infants baptise them without 
 teaching them : or thus : baptise me of yeeres when they 
 confesse their sinnes & their faith, but baptise al the 
 infants of the faithful, though they cannot confesse at al 
 their sins & faith, or it had bee easily said : lohn baptized 
 them that confesse their sinnes & ther yong children also : 
 but to say that Christ, lohn, & the Apostles leaveth 
 dire6lion for this maine ma[t]ter, only by darke obscure, 
 far fetcht, probable conje6tures & consequents from the 
 old Testament which was only tj^^jical, & is abolished in 
 
Rich. CUfton & lohn Smyth. 623 
 
 respedl of the Types, & that hee hath not left evident 
 & vndeniable ground for it distindtly & expresly in al 
 the foresaid particulars, is to say that Christ is not 
 so plaine & Faithful in his office prophetical, as Moses 
 was, who hath taught al these particulars so distin6tly as 
 nothing is more plaine : & therf or though I must needes 
 yeeld that necessary consequents are true, yet I deny that 
 in this case the Lord hath left vs to consequents, & it is 
 against his truth, his Faythfulnes, & the evidence of the 
 new Testament, so to do. 
 
 Moreover seing that the new Testament was wrapt vp 
 & preached obscurely in the old Testament, & the types 
 therof, it was necessary that Christ should out of the old 
 Testament prove the resurre6tio, & Paul out of the old 
 Testamet prove justification by faith without works : for 
 the lewes would not beleeve any thing contrary to the 
 law or without warrant of the law : & the Gentils, namely 
 the Galatians especially, being seduced by them of the 
 circumcision, A61. 15. 1. must needes have their mouths 
 stopt by the law: & ther were no Scriptures but the 
 old Testament, & the ordinances of the new Testament 
 could not be so plainly drawne out of the old Testament 
 without consequents : but now the new Testament being 
 written, & al the ordinances therof plainly taught by 
 Christ & his Apostles : why shal wee bee sent to obscuri- 
 tyes, & conje6tural consequents, seing that wee may with 
 open face look into the glory of Christ, as it were into a 
 glasse, & therein see al the beauty of the new Jerusalem 
 as cleer as Christal, Revel. 21. 11. 2. Cor. 3. 18. & whereas 
 you would fetch arguments from the old Testament to 
 prove the baptisme of infants, we having the cleer Hght 
 of the new Testament, you therin set vs to Schoole to 
 the rudiments of the world, & put aside the light of the 
 sunne at noone, & set vp a candle as the Papists do in 
 their funerals: for although it be meet that we attend 
 vnto the Prophets as vnto a light shining in a dark place, 
 yet seing the day star is come, & the sunne of righteousnes 
 is risen vppon vs, let vs walk in this cleer light, & vse the 
 other when we want light as with the lewes who deny 
 the new Testament: & in other like occasions. 
 
 Besides the trinity of persons, & vnity of essence in 
 
624 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 the Godhead is proved by playne words, 1. lohn. 5. 7. 
 & hereby the Homoiousia of Arrius is confuted : as also : 
 Phil. 2. 6. & for the word person it is, Heb. 1. 3. & the 
 word Godhead is Roman. 1. 20. So that hereby you gett 
 nothing: but I say still that whatsoever cannot bee 
 playnly shewed in the New Testament, is not needfuU for 
 vs to know in the New Testament, if it bee an ordinance 
 of the New Testament as baptisme is : but the trinity & 
 vnity is no part of the New Testament more then of the 
 Old Testament, & being common to both may be sought 
 out of both, & so any other common truth. 
 
 Finally, I say shew mee any necessary consequence for 
 baptizing infants, eyther out of the Old Testament or 
 New Testament, & I yeeld: but I desire it may wel bee 
 observed, first, that you are driven to consequents for 
 this matter, & therein simple witted people may easily 
 bee mislead by a Logician : Secondly, that the Gospel of 
 Christ is for babes: Mat. 11. 25. & therefore the most 
 simple person is capable of it: & so ther shal need no 
 obscure consequents out of it: for they are not able to 
 comprehend them: & lastly, that the consequents that 
 are brought I avouch to be meer hallucinations & 
 sophismes, as I have already declared & shal doe hereafter 
 more fully as they shalbe produced. 
 
 Your second answer & exception is, that if want of 
 Special precept & example, barre infants from baptisme, 
 it shal also barre weomen from the Lords Supper : I deny 
 it, for in playne termes it is said: 1. Corinth. 11. 28. Let 
 Anthropos, viz : eyther man or woman eate after examina- 
 tion: & Gal. 3. 28. Ther is neither male nor female in 
 Christ lesus, but al are one, & 1. Corinth. 10. 17. wee that 
 are many are one bread, & one body, being al pertakers 
 of one bread, & 1. Corinth. 12. 13. whee have been al 
 made to drink into one Spirit, & Dorcas is a Disciple: 
 A6t. 9. 36. & the Disciples meet together to break bread, 
 A6t. 20. 7. & the Disciples continued in breaking bread: 
 Aa. 2. 41. 42. being first 3000. then 5000. amongst whom 
 ther was Sapphyra, & the VVidowes of the Grecians, 
 A6t. 2. 41. & 5. 1. & 6. 1. & so this exception is nothing to 
 the purpose. 
 
 Your third answer & exception f oUoweth, wherein you 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 625 
 
 doe affirme that there is both precept & example for 
 baptising infants, the Comhiaundement is, Mat. 28. 19. 
 The example is of the infants of Lydia, & the Keper of 
 the prison: A6t. 16. 15. 33. To these I have akeady 
 given answer in the 6. & 7. reasdns going before, & there- 
 fore hold it needles to repeat it heer againe: onely one 
 thing is heer to bee answered that you obje6l. viz : That 
 the Law once given of sealing the infants aswel as parents, 
 must bee retayned, except a repeale can bee shewed: 
 I answer, (besides that baptisme is not the seale of the 
 New Testament, but the Spirit : & that circumcision was 
 not a seale of the everlasting covenant made with Abraham 
 in respe6l of Christ but of the Old Testament) that when 
 Princes & common wealths make Lawes to endure but for 
 a tyme, when the tyme is expired then they are repealed 
 if they be not reestabUshed : So, though it were graunted 
 that infants of the Old Testament were by circumcision 
 sealed to the covenant made in respe6t of Chr. which I 
 peremptorily deny, yet seing the tyme of circumcision is 
 exspired therfor infants are not now to be sealed (as you 
 say) by baptisme: for the exspiring of the tyme is the 
 repealing of the Law: therfor vntU you can shew that 
 baptisme of infants male & female is in the new Testament 
 established : I wil defend that they are not to be baptized 
 especialy the female infants which were never appointed 
 to be circumcised: but I count these but slender excep- 
 tions. 
 
 In the last place you require proof that only persons 
 that confessed their sinnes & their faith were to be 
 baptized: I prove it vnto you thus. 
 
 1. They only were to be baptized that Christ com- 
 maunded to be baptized. 
 Persons made Disciples by teaching, were only 
 commaunded to bee baptized by Christ, Mat. 28. 
 19. 
 Ergo : persons made Disciples by teaching, were only 
 to be baptized. 
 
 The minor of this argument is evident. Mat. 28, 19. 
 wher this being the affirmative you shal make them 
 Disciples by teaching them, & then baptise the: this 
 must needes be the negative, you shal not baptise them 
 
 w. II. 20 
 
626 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 til you have made them Disciples by teaching: & so 
 persons taught were baptizec^ & they only. 
 
 2. Againe : considering that in every affirmative ther 
 is included a negative : therf or whersoever an example is 
 that persons cofessing tJieir sinnes and their faith were 
 baptized, ther is signified that those that did not confesse 
 their sins & their Faith, were not baptized : For wee must 
 know that the body is one : & the Fayth is one, & the Spirit 
 one, & the baptisme one, & the seed one : & that there is 
 not two in Christ but one : For in the new Testament they 
 know God from the least vnto the greatest, Heb. 8. 11. & 
 they are al taught of God, loh. 6. 45. & the least in the 
 Kingdom of heaven is greater then lohn. Mat. 11. 11. & this 
 do I take to be a plaine proof of the point which you desire* 
 
 You say further that the reason why lohn baptized 
 no children, is for that they offered them not. wel : I say 
 that his preaching was such as peremptorily excluded 
 infants: For it was the baptisme of repentance for the 
 remission of sinnes : Marc. 1. 4. & he required confession 
 of sinnes, & repentance of them that he baptized, Mat. 3. 
 6-11 compared with Luk 7. 29. 30. otherwise he would 
 not baptise them: & therfor Chr do6lryne is the same 
 with Johns, Mar. 1. 15. both therby signified vnto their 
 hearers, that whosoever would be baptized & enter into 
 the Kingdome of God, must repent & beleeve the gospel. 
 For being not regenerate (though they were lewes, & 
 begotten of Faithful parents) yet they could not enter into 
 the Kingdome of God, loh. 3. 3. 5. & heer it would bee 
 considered vnto whome Christ & lohn Baptist preached : 
 did he not preach vnto the lewes the Lords owne holy 
 people : & yet he said repent & beleeve : & required of them 
 amendement of life : Now if they had been truly regenerate 
 in their com[m]union as is pleaded, lohn needed not thus 
 have preached, nor Christ have required such conditions 
 of them, but onely they might in few words have said: 
 come you Faithful & beleeving lewes, you & all your 
 infants be baptized at once : For baptisme is for circum- 
 cision: but John saith, think not to say you have 
 Abraham to your Father : & Christ saith, you are of your 
 Father the Devil: & lohn saith the Lord wil purge his 
 floore: wherby it is evident that the lewes were not 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 627 
 
 Faithful in their communion: & that they perceaved 
 plainly that seing repentailce & Faith were required by 
 lohn & Christ particularly, which must bee declared by 
 confession, therefore it was in vayne for them to offer 
 their infants whom they knew lohn & Christ would not 
 baptise, but excluded from baptisme by their do6tryne. 
 
 Againe, wheras you say ther is no mention made that 
 Christs Disciples were baptized, & yet it were boldnes to 
 affirme they were not baptized: & so al Christs & lohns 
 a6tions are not written but only the summe: & therfor 
 though it be not mentioned that infants were baptized, 
 yet in the summe it may be coUe6ted they were: I 
 answere, for the Disciples of Christ it is plaine they were 
 baptized, loh. 4. 1. & loh. 1. 35. 40. & for the summing 
 & particularizing of al lohn Baptists or Christs a6lions, 
 I say it was not needfull to set downe the particulars but 
 the kinds: & if ther had been any commaundement or 
 example of baptizing any one infant, it had been sufficient, 
 though it had not been mentioned how many particular 
 infants: but as it fel out in circumcision that one par- 
 ticular precept was sufficient, though it were not written 
 how many thowsand were circumcised, so likewise of 
 baptisme. 
 
 Finaly, for that you say of the Evnuch, though I 
 intend it not as you answere it, me thinks that some 
 mention should bee made of PhiUp to the Evnuch or of 
 the Evnuch to Phihp, his infants or children being at 
 home far of concerning infants: or at least of some 
 other that had infants, or did baptise persons that had 
 infants, & that after this manner: What have you any 
 infants ? let them bee brought to baptisme aswel as your 
 selvs: For they have title to it through your Faith, or 
 thus, I have infants I pray you let them be baptized aswel 
 as my self : or thus, do you repent & you shalbe baptized 
 & your infants : but the deep silence of infants baptisme, 
 yea the exclusive condition of beleeving & repenting 
 necessary to the Kingdom of God, yea & the confession 
 of sinnes & confession of Faith performed by persons 
 baptized, yea & Christs commaundement of making 
 Disciples before baptisme, all these & many mo are strong 
 pro[o]fes vnanswerable against baptisme of infants. 
 
 20—2 
 
628 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Mr, Rich. Clifton. 
 
 The next reason is this. 
 2, Bicause Christ commaunded to make Disciples by 
 teaching them & then t6 baptise them, Matth. 28. 19. 
 lohn. 4. 1. But infants can not by Do6tryiie become 
 Christs Disciples. And so can not by the rule of Christ 
 bee baptized. 
 
 Answere. 
 
 1. The Apostles were indeed commaunded to make 
 Disciples, & to cal vnto the Faith & fellowship of the 
 Gospel, not onely the lewes, but the Gentils through out 
 the world. Mat. 28, 19. & gave them power to preach the 
 Gospel, which before had been preached to Abraham, Gal. 
 3. 8. & to baptise al that did receive it : & thus we graunt 
 that faith must go before baptisme, in al such as are to 
 be made Disciples, & brought into the covenant of God: 
 So went Faith before circumcision, Abraham first beleeved, 
 & after was circumcised, & likewise must al they which 
 with Abraha enter into Gods covenant, first beleeve & 
 then be baptized as the Evnuch, A6t. 8. 37. Lydia. A6t. 
 16. 13. & the Keper of the prison, A61. 16. 33. But when 
 such have received the Faith, then are their infants & 
 howshold capable also of baptisme as Abrahams Family 
 was of circumcision, he beleeving the promises. Gen. 17. 
 & therfor it is written, that when God opened the hart 
 of Lydia, that she did atend to the VVord that Paul 
 preached, & beleeved, not only she her selfe, but al her 
 howshold were baptized, & yet is ther no mention of the 
 Faith of any of them, save of Lydias onely: & so the Kep 
 beleeving al his received baptisme, & this is proportionable 
 to the example of Abraham, whose Faith we find sufficient 
 to interest al his seed in the covenant, & make them 
 capable of the scale. 
 
 2. Secondly, Christ taketh the same course (in giving 
 out this commission to his Disciples, Mat. 28. 19.) in 
 bringing the Gentils into Gods covenant, that the L. 
 tooke with Abraham, for making his covenant with him, 
 that he should be the Father of many nations, &c. He 
 did not first commaund him to be circumcised, but 
 preached to him the gospel or covenant. Gen. 17. 1-8. 
 
Rich. CHfton & lohn Smyth. 629 
 
 & he beleeving was circumcised & his howshold : So here 
 is a commaundement, first, for the publishing of the 
 Gospel to them that were not in Christ, & then for 
 baptising such as beleeved with theire Familyes, for that 
 is included in this Commaundement, els had not the 
 Apostle baptized the Familyes of Lydia, & of the Kep. 
 as before hath been noted. 
 
 3. Thirdly, if children shalbe excluded from baptisme 
 bicause they cannot be made Disciples by teaching, & so 
 beleeve, then by as good reason may they be excluded 
 from salvation, for he that saith, he that beleeveth & is 
 baptized, shalbe saved, saith also, he that beleeveth not 
 shalbe damned. Mar. 16. 16. if therfor want of faith be 
 sufficient to exclude infants from baptisme : then likewise 
 the want of Fayth is sufficient to exclude them from 
 Salvation, for if the former be held to be the meaning 
 of Christ, then must the latter also bee graunted, a thought 
 whereof is to bee abhord. 
 
 Lastly, general rules must bee taken with theire sence 
 & meaning. It is a generall rule given by the Apostle: 
 2. Thess. 3. 19. That if any would not worke hee should 
 not eate: yet if any should gather from hence, that the 
 impotent & infants should not eate, bicause they doe not 
 worke, this were to offer violence, & to wrest the Apostles 
 dodlryne : So Christ giving a general rule for the making 
 of Disciples, & baptising them, now to deprive the infants 
 of beleeving parents of baptisme, bicause they cannot 
 receive instru6tion, which is intended onely of them that 
 bee capable thereof & vnconverted, is to diminishe the 
 commaundement of Christ, even like as hee that should 
 say, infants cannot beleeve, & therfor cannot be saved. 
 
 Againe, that can never be the true meaning of a 
 Scripture whe it is expounded so as it contradi6teth other 
 Scriptures, or any sound conclusion gathered out of the 
 Scriptures, as this exposition of the Anabaptists vppon 
 this place of Mat. 28. 19. doth, as my former reasons for 
 the baptising of infants, doe playnly manifest. 
 
630 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Next followeth your Answere to my second reason: 
 which reason of myne is framed thus. 
 
 They that cannot by Teaching bee made Christs 
 
 Disciples, ought [not] to be baptized. 
 Infants by teaching cannot be made Chr. Disciples, 
 
 Mat. 28. 19. loh. 4. 1. 
 Ergo infants ought not to be baptized. 
 
 Your answer to this argument of myne consisteth in 
 4. particulars. 
 
 First, you say, that as Abraham first beleeved, & then 
 was circumcised, & then al his houshold receaved circum- 
 cision with him : So al the beleving gentils must first be 
 baptized, & then through ther faith al ther howshold 
 must bee baptized as in the example of Lydia, & the 
 Gaylors family : of whose faith ther is no mention made, 
 as neither of the faith of Abrahams family. 
 
 To this first particular of your answer I say, that you 
 erre mistaking the Scriptures. For Abrahams faith did not 
 go before his circumcision as a necessary antecedent to 
 establish him a member of the Church of the old Testa- 
 ment, but as a necessary president, example, type, or 
 paterne of justification: & circumcision in Abraham was 
 not a seale of his justification, or of the everlasting 
 covenant God made with him in respedt of Christ, therby 
 to establish him into Christ, (for he was in Christ & sealed 
 in Christ many yeres before, by the seale of the Spirit:) 
 but Abrahams justification in vncircumcision, was a type 
 of the justification of the GentUs who are vncircumcised : 
 & Abrahams circumcision after his justification sealed 
 him vp to bee the Father of all the beleevers circumcised : 
 & so circumcision had a triple vse in Abraham one generall 
 & two special! & particular: the two speciall are these: 
 
 First circumcision sealed vp Abrah. forme of justifica- 
 tion to be a paterne to al the beleevers in vncircumcision : 
 that the beleeving gentils should be al justified by a6tual 
 faith, as he was. 
 
 Secondly, circumcision sealed vp Abrah. forme of 
 justification to bee a paterne to al the beleevers in 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 631 
 
 circumcision, that the beleving lewes should be al justified 
 by a6tual faith as he was. 
 
 The general vse of Abrah. circumcision was common 
 with him to Ismael & al the persons of his family. & al 
 the carnal Israelites, viz : to seale him vp to the old Testa- 
 ment, & to the observation of the whole Law, wherby Chr. 
 in that vele of the old Testament was preached vnto the 
 lewes, it being ther Schoolmr. to teach them Christ. 
 
 Now for the place. Rom. 4. 11. which I am assured 
 you wil ground your assertio vppon, I say, it is both 
 falsely translated, & expounded : for (tes en te acrobustia) 
 is vsuaUy translated which Abrah. had when he was 
 vncircumcized : & this I say is a false translation: For 
 this is the true translation, viz: which (is or was or 
 shalbe) in the vncircumcision : meaning that circumcision 
 vppon Abrah. the Father of al the beleving GentUs was 
 a seale of justification to al the vncircumcision that 
 beleeve : & the end of his circumcision is his Fatherhood 
 of the Faithful : & the righteousnes of faith is not sealed 
 vp to Abrah. particular person, but to the vnctrcumcised 
 that beleve: & that which was sealed vp in special to 
 Abrah. was his Fatherhood or presidentship of justifica- 
 tion: So that circumcision in Abrah. was to establish 
 him the Father of the Faithful Gentils, & his circumcision 
 doth teach the Gentils that if they wil partake Chr. they 
 must by their a6tual faith apprehend Christs righteousnes, 
 as Abrah. their Father did, otherwise they cannot be 
 justified, & so Pauls intent is plainly proved, namely, 
 that al men must be justified by faith without the works 
 of the law : & this do I confidently affirme to be the true 
 translation & exposition, & that the common acceptation 
 & translation of the place is the mother of this heresy of 
 pedobaptistry. 
 
 Againe, al the persons of Abrah. Family were not 
 circumcised, bicause of Abrah. faith, but the males, al 
 & only the males, were circumcised bicause of the special 
 comaundement of God: Gen. 17. 10. the males being 
 assumed as types for to teach the figuratively the male 
 Ch. & circumcision of the hart by him. & the females 
 were vncircumcised as they were also put out from being 
 the matter of the burnt-offring (for the males only were 
 
632 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 offered in burnt-offring) to signifie that those that had 
 not the male Chr. in them were not fit eyther to be 
 members of the chtirch of the new Testament, or to be 
 sacrificed vnto the L. Mai. 1. 14. but if Ch. the male 
 were in the whither male or female in Chr. it was nothing : 
 they were accepted, Gal. 3. 28. 
 
 Further you say that as it was with Abrah. & his 
 family in circumcision, so was it with Lydia & the Gaylor, 
 & their f amilyes in baptisme : that is not so : I shew the 
 difference in divers partictdar. 
 
 1. They of Abrahams Family were circumcised vppon 
 particular precept in obedience of the Commaundement : 
 Genes. 17. 23. You cannot prove that the infants of Lydias 
 & the Gaylors family were baptized vpon particular 
 precept, but only you say it, & indevour to justifie it by 
 the example of Abra. family: but if Abra. family be an 
 example then you must bring a particular precept (as he 
 had) for baptising infants. 
 
 2. They that were males only were circumcised, but 
 you wil have both males & females baptized : this is 
 another difference. 
 
 3. They that were circumcised of Abrah. Family, 
 were al the males being of yeres, though they were never 
 so lewd & wicked persons : So were not al the persons of 
 Lydias & the Gaylors family, but only the beleevers being 
 of yeeres according to your opinion. 
 
 4. As Faith did not intitle the female to circumcision, 
 & as infidelity did not deprive the male of circumcision 
 in Abrahams Family: So faith did intitle the female to 
 baptisme in the Family of the Gaylor & Lydia: & 
 infidelity in the male did exclude him from baptisme: 
 you see therfor that the proportion is not alike betwixt 
 baptisme & circumcision. 
 
 The second particular in your Answer to this Arg. is, 
 that the same order is kept in Chr. comission. Mat. 28. 19. 
 in bringing the gentils into Gods covenant, as was kept 
 with Abrah: he & al his Family were brought in by 
 circucision, after the gospel preached to him. Genes. 17. 
 1-8. so Lydia & the Gaylor were brought into the 
 covenant with all ther Family, & were baptized after the 
 Gospell preached to them. 
 
Rich. CKfton & lohn Smyth. 633 
 
 I answer, that in this particular there are differences 
 betwixt the one a6t of Abrah. & the other of Lydia & the 
 Gay lor, according to the commission of Chr. Mat. 28. 19. 
 
 First, Abrah. & al his family by the Lords commaunde- 
 ment, came vnder the covenant of the Old Testament 
 a6tually, & the males only were circumcised: but Chr. 
 doth not commaund all persons of a Family in the New 
 Testament to be baptized, but only such as are made 
 Disciples, & al them though they bee weomen, as Lydia 
 was. 
 
 Secondly: The gospel was only preached to Abrah. 
 owne person by the L. but in the Gaylors case Paul 
 preached the gospel to al that were in his howse. A6t. 16. 
 32. & so Chr. commaundeth to make them Disciples by 
 preaching: So were not Abrah. Family, who being first 
 circumcised afterward were taught the Law being a 
 SchooLmr to teach Christ. 
 
 Thirdly, the gospel was not preached to Abrah, therby 
 to prepare him to circumcision, as if therby it should 
 follow that circumcision was a seale of the Gospel or New 
 Testament : for it is not so as I have already manifested : 
 but Chr. in the new Testament commaundeth the gospel 
 to be preached to every creature, that is to every particular 
 person, that is to be admitted into the Church by baptisme, 
 & so Paul did to the Gaylors Family, & this is another 
 difference. 
 
 The third particular in your answer to this argument 
 is, if infants be excluded from baptisme for want of faith 
 by hearing the word, then they shal also be excluded from 
 salvation by that reason: Marc. 16. 16. I deny it vtterly : 
 For Christ speaketh only of such as to whom the gospel 
 may be preached, which only are men of yeeres For when 
 he saith go preach the Gospel to every creature, he doth 
 not bid them preach to beasts, byrds. Fishes, or infants, 
 which have no eares to heare, but he biddeth them preach 
 the Gospel to every creature that hath an eare to heare, 
 that is, to al that are of a docible age & nature: & then 
 he addeth, whosoever (of them that have eares to heare) 
 do beleeve, & vppon their faith be baptized shalbe saved, 
 whosoever (of me that have eares to heare) do not beleve 
 (though they be baptized) shalbe damned: now I pray 
 
634 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 you Sir, how doth this sentence include infants to bap- 
 tisme, or exclude them from Salvation ? or how doth your 
 consequent follow: & for infants I say that either they 
 are al saved, though they cannot come to faith by hearing, 
 or that they are one of the L. secrets, & so not to be 
 searched into: & that the Scriptiu-e doth speak only to 
 & of the that have eares to heare, & of things visible 
 & known, & not of things invisible & secreat : therf or this 
 particular of your answer is vaine. 
 
 Your last particular in the answer to my arg. is, that 
 general rules must bee taken with ther sence : as 2. Thes. 
 3. 10. that as infats or impotent persons though they 
 canot work yet may eate, bicause that speech is not 
 dire6ted to infants, &c. so Mat. 28 19. though infants 
 cannot be made Disciples, yet they may be baptized, 
 seing that speech is not dire6ted for infants: & such an 
 exposition of that place must bee given as doth not 
 contradi6l other Scriptures or necessary consequents from 
 Scriptures. 
 
 Wei Sir: I answer you, that first you confesse heer 
 that this place of Mat. 28. 19. is not vttered of Christ in 
 respe6t of infants that they should be taught, & then 
 I say he never intended that by this place you should 
 gather that they should be baptized as you have done 
 in your 6. arg. & heer you do evidently contradi6t your 
 self as you see: & let that be remembred of you wel. 
 
 Next I say, that general rules shalbe expounded with 
 ther sences: & as impotent persons & infants shal eate 
 though they cannot work seing that is spoken of these 
 that are able to work: so infants shalbe saved though 
 they cannot be baptized, seing they cannot by teaching 
 be made disciples : & this is not to diminish the comaunde- 
 ment of Christ or wrest it fro the sence : but to make the 
 comaundemet of baptising larger then the c5maundement 
 of teaching (as you do that wil have the infants baptized 
 that cannot be taught) is to seperate those things that 
 Chr. hath joyned, & to wrack the c5maund: of Chr. out 
 of joynt, & to break the in peeces: & woe be to the that 
 so do without repetace. Finally, I confesse that it is not 
 the true sence of a place that contradi6teth either Scripture 
 or true consequet: but this truth of the L. which you 
 
Rich. Clifton & lolin Smyth. 635 
 
 blaspheme with yom- title of Anabaptistry, doth not 
 contradidt either Scriptm-e or sound conclusion fro 
 Scripture : but is agreable to the constant & most evidet 
 pra6tise of loh. Chr. & the Apo. (for you cannot produce an 
 instace of an infant baptised by any of them) & most 
 agreable to al the precepts of the Ap Chr. & loh. for 
 baptising persons confessing their faith & their sinns: 
 & you are driven to most miserable shifts, & most narrow 
 straights for your pedobaptistry, which you see cannot 
 stand without scraping together al the wrestings & per- 
 vertings of Scriptures which you have heaped together 
 in yoiu- answ: your principal foundation being a sandy 
 molehil fetcht from the old Test; even a false ground, 
 that circumcision was a scale of the new Testament, & 
 that the covenant made with Abrah. in respedt of Chr. 
 was made with al his carnal infants, who were al in Chr. 
 lesus visibly in their byrth & conception by vertue of 
 the covenant: which I have proved to bee manifest 
 vntruths, & so you see your building tottereth & wil 
 never be able to endure the storme. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 
 Now followes the third reason. 
 3. Bicause if infants be baptized, the carnal seed is 
 baptized, & so the seal of the covenant is administred to 
 them, vnto whom the covenant aperteyneth not, Rom. 9. 
 8. which is a profanation. 
 
 Answere. 
 
 1. This reason semeth to imply, that the seed of the 
 faithful is part carnal, & part Spiritual, (for I cannot 
 imagine that the Author holdeth al the seed of the faithful 
 to be carnal, & that the covenant aperteynes not vnto 
 any of them, seing so to affirme contradidts A61. 2. 39.) 
 & therfor bicause the Spiritual seed is not discerned vntil 
 it manifest it selfe by outward profession, therefore may 
 not be baptized, lest in baptising them, the seal should 
 be set also vpon the carnal seed, vnto whom belogs not 
 the covenant. To aflfirme this first is to deny that which 
 is due to the seed to whom the promise belongs, for the 
 
636 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 wickeds sake, & so to injurie them. Secondly, this reason 
 also serves as wel against the circumcision of the infants 
 of the Israelites, seing at eight dayes of Age they could 
 not be discerned, whether they were of the carnal or 
 Spiritual seed, & so the seale of the covenat not to be 
 administred to the, to whom the covenant did not belong. 
 But as then the not discerning hereof, did nothing hinder 
 circumcision to bee administred to al the infants of the 
 Israelites, no more now can the not knowing of the Spiritual 
 seed from the carnaH, hinder baptisme. 
 
 2. Touching the seed of the faithful, thus I conceive 
 therof that it is carnall & Spiritual in divers respe6ts, 
 carnal as they do naturally descend of their parents, so 
 are they al alike in sinne, Psal. 51. 3. Spiritual, in respe6t 
 of the covenant wherein they are comprehended with 
 their parents. Gen. 17. 7. A6t. 2. 39. in which regard 
 also, al the children of the Faithful are said to be holy, 
 1 Cor. 7. 14. & thus considered I deny the children of the 
 faithful to be carnal seed, & do affirme that to such 
 belongs the covenant & the seale therof. & though some 
 of them in the sight of God be known for none of his, 
 yet to vs it sufiEiceth for the administration of baptisme, 
 that they be the seed of the faithful: & therfor as the 
 Israelites circumcised aU their children, (though some of 
 them proved to be carnal afterward, as Ismael, Esau, 
 &c.) so are wee to baptise al our infants, leaving secreete 
 things to God, Deuteron. 29. 29. 
 
 3. If this be sufficient to cleere vs from profaning of 
 the Sacrament if wee baptise them that make confession 
 of their faith, bicause they so doe, though they bee not 
 the children of God, as S. Magus, A61. 8, 13. then it is 
 not simply a profaning of baptisme, to administer it to 
 them vnto whome belongs not the covenant, but to doe 
 it to them which plainly appeare to vs to bee without: 
 Therfore, if no man dare take vpon him to say this or 
 that infant is carnall & without the covenant of grace, 
 it shalbe no profanation of the Sacramet, if it be adminis- 
 tred vnto such, seing we ought to hold the seed of the 
 faithful, holy, 1. cor. 7. 14. If it be obje6ted (as some 
 have done to me, that al the seed of the faithful are carnal, 
 & so to be held vntil they beleeve & make confession of 
 
Rich. CUfton & lohn Smyth. 637 
 
 their faith, I answer, first, if they take carnal, as it is 
 opposed to the children of promise in Rom. 9. 8. I vterly 
 deny it, for the children of the Flesh can never be the 
 children of promise, Rom. 9. 8. 13. These two seeds are 
 made so opposite by the Apostle, as that the one can 
 never be the other. Secondly, if by carnal they meane 
 nothing els, but that natural corruption wherein we are 
 borne : That hinders infants no more from baptisme, then 
 it doth those that can give an account of their faith, seing 
 natural corruption remaineth stU in the purest professor, 
 Rom. 7. 23 & if it be replyed, that their natural corruption 
 is not imputed to them that beleeve, no more (say I) is 
 it to infants, els Christ dyed not for them, neither could 
 they be saved, dying whilst they be yong. 
 
 Lastly, if Abrah. knowing that God would establish 
 his covenant to Isaac Genes. 17, 19. yet circumcised 
 Ismael, vs. 24. & Isaac knowing that God had chosen his 
 yonger sonne, Gen. 25. 23. with 27. 33. yet circucised Esau 
 aswel as lacob, & in so doing neither of them profaned 
 the Sacrament: much lesse is baptisme profaned, when 
 it is administred to the seed of the faithful to whom be- 
 longeth the promise, A6t. 2. 39. And thus having shewed 
 the weaknes of these 3. reasons against the baptising of 
 infants, let vs come to the second position, which is this. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 In the next place foUoweth your answer to my third 
 Argum: which Aigum: of myne may be framed into this 
 forme. 
 
 The carnaU seed is not to bee baptized: For the 
 
 covenant perteyneth not to them. 
 Infants are the carnal seed, Rom. 9. 8. 
 Ergo infants are not to be baptized. 
 To this Argument you make Answer also in 4. par- 
 ticulars. 
 
 First, you expound my meaning, but I can expound 
 myne owne words best: & therfor by the carnal seed I 
 vnderstand al children borne by carnal generatio whatso- 
 ever, though they afterward do beleeve: For they are 
 carnal visibly to mee whosoever they bee that doe not 
 shew their Fajrth by their workes, that doe not the 
 
638 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 workes of Abrah. yea though they dye in their infancy, 
 & are saved with the Lord: For I must judg according 
 to that which I see, & which is manifested: & I call 
 them carnal as Paul caUeth himself carnal, Rom, 7. 14. 
 & the Corinthians carnal, 1. Cor. 3 1. 3. & as in opposition 
 to the Spiritual seed, that one seed of Abrah. vnto whome 
 the promise was made : Gal. 3. 16. & the Phrase is taken 
 from Rom. 9. 8. where the children of the lewes are called 
 the children of the Flesh : & Gal. 4. 23. wher Ismael is 
 said to bee borne after the Flesh, & Heb. 7. 16. the com- 
 maundement is called carnal: So children borne of their 
 parents naturally are carnal, such were al the lewes 
 infants, who were after the manner of Ismael : Gal. 4. 23. 
 Such are al our infants, for our infants are in no better 
 estate then the infants of the lewes : They were al borne 
 according to the Flesh (except Isaac, who was in type 
 borne after the Spirit) Gal. 4. 24. 25. 28. & I say that 
 the covenant made with Abraham in respe6t of Christ 
 did not a6tuaUy sease vppon any infant of the lewes in 
 deed & truth : & the place A6t. 2. 39. doth not prove that 
 it did : For that place is to be vnderstood of the ofier of 
 Christ & the New Testament to al the carnal lewes & 
 their children, but of the real exhibiting it to al that are 
 called only: & therefore I say that to baptise infants is 
 to baptize the carnal seed, for al infants are carnal, being 
 conceaved & borne in sinne, being the Children of wrath, 
 vntUl the Lord work his work in them, which when he 
 doth I know not : when I see it wrought in them by the 
 fruites according as it is written, shew mee thy Faith by 
 thy workes, then dare I pronounce them the Spirituall 
 seed of Abrah, for they that are of Faith, are blessed with 
 Faythf uU Abraham : Therefore I affirme that infants are 
 not to bee esteemed a6tually vnder the possession of the 
 new Testament, which new Testament is visible in the 
 visible ordinances therof : why then they are damned you 
 wil say : God forbid : doe you condemne al the men that 
 are not of your Faith : & yet they are neerer condemnation 
 in the judgment of the Scripture to you then infants : for 
 Chr. saith that he that beleveth not (speaking of them that 
 heare the gospel & do not beleve) shalbe condemned, but 
 the Scripture teacheth vs nothing concerning the final 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 639 
 
 estate of infants, except it be the salvation of them al: 
 This is my exposition. 
 
 Now according to your exposition, I should intend 
 that bicause it is not discerned which children are Spiritual 
 seed which the carnal, therefor both of them must be 
 deprived of baptisme, lest by giving baptisme (which you 
 falsely cal a scale, & I therin speak according to your 
 opinion) to al, it should bee profaned by the carnall 
 seed : wel suppose that this were my meaning : what then : 
 you except against this exposition two things: one that 
 the Spiritual seed should be injuried by denying baptisme 
 to it for the carnal seeds sake: & I reply by giving 
 baptisme to all indifferently, wee should injury Ijaptisme 
 that is to bee administred only vppon them that confesse 
 their Faith & sinnes, & that are made Disciples by 
 teaching: another thing you except is that this reason 
 should avayle against circumcision seing the males of 
 8. dayes could not be discerned to be the Spiritual seed: 
 & I insist that it was not then needfxil that they should be 
 discerned to be the Spiritual seed for that carnal scale of 
 the carnal covenant : it was enough for investing of them 
 with that carnal & typical scale, that they were the carnal 
 & typical seed, & that they were male Israelites or 
 Proselytes: & shew me in al the old Testament, but 
 especially in the institution of circumcision that the Lord 
 required any thing of any person to be circumcised, but 
 to be a male : but now in the new Testament we having 
 the truths of those types, it is plainly taught vnto vs, 
 first that Christ the male must bee in vs, & 2. that ther 
 must bee circumcision of the hart, & mortification of the 
 Flesh, & 3. wee must attayne to & learne all that the 
 Schoolmr. of the Old Testament could teach vs: before 
 wee can bee baptized, for lohn & Chr. expresly require^ 
 Faith & repentance in them that are to be baptized : & I 
 do infinitely wonder at you & at my self, & at the whole 
 Earth, that wee should not see so evident a truth all thi^ 
 tyme. 
 
 The second particular you bring in answer to my 
 reason is a distin6tion of the respe6ts of the seed of the 
 Faithful : For you say as they are borne of their parents 
 they are carnal & sindful: Psal. 51. 5. as they are vnder 
 
640 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 the covenant they are Spiritual, Gen. 17. 7. & are called 
 Holy, 1 Cor. 7. 14. & so are not the carnal seed : & so 
 they may be baptized aswel as the lewes infants were 
 circumcised though some of them prove wicked after- 
 ward, as Ismael & Esaw, &c. I answer: First, your 
 distin6tion is without warrant of Scripture: & I deny 
 that infants of the Faithful are to be considered in these 
 two respe6ts : & whereas you bring two places Gen. 17. 7. 
 «& 1. Cor. 7. 14. to prove the latter part of the distin6tion 
 I have answered these two places already shewing your 
 false exposition of them, & that the infants of Abraham 
 were not in their byrth vnder the a6lual possession of the 
 everlasting covena[n]t made in respe6t of Chr. but only 
 vnder the offer of it, & that the infants & al the childre 
 of the faithful are holy only as the wife that is an 
 vnbeleever is holy: & so this exception of yours is 
 frivolous. 
 
 The third particular you bring in answer to my reason, 
 is, that it is not simply a profaning of the covenant to 
 administer the scale of it to them to whom it belongeth 
 not: as to Simon Magus, A61. 8. 13. but it is then pro- 
 faned when it is administred to them that are wicked, 
 &c: I answer, the Sacrament of baptisme is profaned 
 when it is administred vppon a wrong subje6t whatsoever 
 it bee: as to give the Lords Supper to an infant of two 
 yeer old: So to baptise an infant is a profanation: For 
 as profession & confession of Fayth shall intitle any man 
 to all the ordinances of the Chur. & first to baptisme: 
 So absence of confession of Faith shall debarre every one 
 from all the ordinances of the Church in communion: 
 & although I will not say that Children are damned, yet 
 I dare say that they are borne & dead in trespasses & 
 sinnes, & that they doe not nor cannot shew any sparke 
 of grace to mee, & therfor although I dare not say this 
 or that infant is not vnder the election of God, yet I dare 
 say that never an infant in the Earth is a6tuaUy seased 
 of the New Testament which is onely atteyned by con- 
 fession of sinne & Faith: For so saith Christ: the tyme 
 is fulfilled, the Kingdome of God is at hand: repent & 
 beleeve the gospel: Marc. 1. 15. & except a man bee 
 borne againe hee cannot see the Kingdome of God. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 641 
 
 lohn, 3. 3. & Christ dwelleth in our harts by Fayth, 
 Eph. 3. 17. & as I cannot deny but that many infants 
 are ele6ted, yet I cannot say which infants shal beleeve 
 & cortfesse their sinnes & Fayth, & so I know not vppon 
 which to administer baptisme : & I must be assured that 
 they do beleve before I can baptise them, for whatsoever 
 is not of Faith is sinne, & to know nothing to the contrary, 
 but that they do beleeve[,] is not sufficient warrant for 
 baptisme: yea & I doe know certainly that seing Faith 
 Cometh by hearing, therfor they do not beleve to me, 
 yea though they could heer & did beleeve that is nothing 
 to mee except they can shew mee their Faith by their 
 confession. I say therfor that al infants are carnal to 
 me. Rom. 9. 8. For the Apost: vs. 5. saith plainly that 
 to be borne of Abrah. acording to the Flesh is not to be 
 borne according to promise, or to be as you say Spiritual, 
 for your distin6tion before was that every infant of 
 Abrah. & so of the faithful was borne Spiritual aswel as 
 carnal: but heer the Apostle saith dire6lly contrary to 
 your assertion that they are not all Children of the promise 
 & covenant, bicause they are the Children that lineaUy 
 descend of Abrah. & you say peremptorily that al that 
 lineaUy descend of Abrah. & the Faithful man are children 
 of the promise & covenant, & so to be baptized : I desire 
 you with al your knowledg reconcile these contradi6tions : 
 & whereas you say the Children of the Flesh are so opposed, 
 that they can never bee the Children of the promise, & 
 that therfor the Children of the Faithful cannot bee so 
 called carnal : I answer that al the children of the lewes 
 Church were borne according to the Flesh, Gal. 4. 23-25. 
 & so were carnal, & so are the Children of the faithful : & 
 yet as many of the lewes were afterward regenerate, 
 & children of the promise though al at the first children of 
 the Flesh, so many of the infants of the Faithful may 
 prove Children of the promise by Faith, though at the 
 first al are the children of the Flesh that is carnal: but 
 I confesse indeed that Esaw can never be Jacob : & one 
 so carnal can never be Spiritual : & whereas you say, that 
 carnal corruption doth not hinder infants from baptisme, 
 no more then men of yeeres that make confession of their 
 Faith, I answer yes: For men of yeeres confessing their 
 
 w. II. 21 
 
642 Passages betwixt Mx. 
 
 sinnes & their Faith, declare the mortification of sinne & 
 regeneration by the Spirit, infants being borne in sinne, 
 cannot nor doe not declare their regeneration at al to vs : 
 & so with them wee have nothing to doe : & whereas you 
 say natm'al corruption is not imputed to infants no more 
 then to men beleeving, let it bee so, & yet you cannot 
 defend that without the opinion of vniversal redemption, 
 & then I say, that if the infants of the Faithful being 
 dehvered from their natural corruption may therfore bee 
 baptized, then al infants shal be baptized who are per- 
 takers of the same benefit, eve the infants of Turkes: if 
 you say no: Seing the infants of the Faithful are only 
 redeemed & vnder the covenant, then you condemne al 
 the infants that dye who are not borne of Faithful parents : 
 & yet you cannot prove that the infants of the FaithfuU 
 are vnder the a6tual possession of the covenant, which is 
 only by Faith, & so the scruple stil remaineth vnlosed. 
 
 The fourth particular you bring in answer to my reason, 
 is, that Abrah. circumcised Ismael, & Isaac circumcised 
 Esaw, & yet they knew that the Lord would estabhsh 
 his covenant with neither of them: much more may 
 infants bee baptized to whom the covenant belongeth, 
 A6t. 2, 39. I answer: that the external scale of that 
 external covenant was particularly injoyned by God to 
 every male, & the knowledg of the reprobation of Esaw 
 & Ismael did not hinder that carnal scale: nor disanul 
 the precedent expresse commaundement of circumcising 
 every male of 8, dayes old: but now seing wee have no 
 expresse commaundement for baptising infants, but an 
 expresse commaundement & many examples to the 
 contrary, that only persons made Disciples by teaching, 
 confessing their Faith & their sinnes, are to be baptized: 
 & considering that infants borne of Faithful parents are 
 the children of the Flesh, Rom. 9. 7. Gal. 4. 23. & are 
 not aftually vnder the possession of the everlasting New 
 Testament, therefore baptisme which you call the seale, 
 can not bee administred vppon them, & the place A6t. 2. 
 39. hath off tymes receeved Answere. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 643 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 The Second Position. 
 2. That Antichristians converted are to be admitted 
 into the true Church by baptisme. 
 
 Answere. 
 
 As the former position denyed the baptising of infants, 
 so doth this annihillate that baptisme which wee have 
 received in the Apostate Church, & establisheth re- 
 baptisation. & this also I wil shew to be an error by 
 proving the contrary, & then answere the reasons herevnto 
 annexed. 
 
 That the baptisme administred in the Apostate 
 Churches of Antichrist, is baptisme not to be reiterated, 
 thus I prove it. 
 
 If the Apostacy of Israel did not so poUute circum- 
 cision that it ceased to bee the scale of Gods covenant to 
 so many of them as repented : no more doth the Apostacy 
 of our fore-Elders, so poUute baptisme that it ceaseth to 
 be a Sacrament to so many of them as repented. 
 
 But the first is true, 2. Chron. 30. 11. 18. 21. els could 
 not so many of Israel as came to lerushalem have eaten the 
 Passeover, seing no vncircumcised might eate therof. 
 
 Ergo, the second. 
 
 If it be obje6ted that the Apostacy is not alike, then 
 let it be shewed, that the Apostacy vnder Antichrist did 
 make a nullity of baptisme, & not the Apostacy of Israeli 
 of circumcision : For Israeli played the harlot soo deepely, 
 that the Lord denyed her to bee his wife, or him selfe to 
 bee her Husband : Hos. 2. 2. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 And thus having shewed the vanity of your answeres 
 to my reasons against pedobaptistery, let vs come to 
 your answer made to my second position: which is this. 
 
 2. That Antichristians converted are to be admitted 
 into the true Church by baptisme. 
 The first thing that in your Answer you intend to 
 prove, is, that the baptisme administred in the Apostate 
 Churches of Antichrist is not to be reiterated. 
 
 And for this purpose you produce 6. Arguments. 
 
 21—2 
 
644 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Your first Argument is framed thus. 
 
 If the Apostacy of Israel did not so pollute circum- 
 cision that it ceased to bee the scale of Gods covenant 
 to so many of them as repented: no more doth the 
 Apostacy of our forefathers so pollute baptisme that it 
 ceaseth to be a Sacrament to so many of them as repented. 
 
 But the first is true, 2. Chron. 30. 11. 18. 21. Ergo 
 the second. 
 
 I Answer that the Apostacy of Antichrist is deeper 
 then the Apostacy of Israeli, for first Antichristians are 
 not called Israelites, but Babylonias, Egyptians, Sodom- 
 ites Gentils in the Revelation, wherby the holy Spirit 
 of wisdom giveth vs to conceave that he doth account 
 the Apostacy of Antichrist equal to Paganisme it self: 
 yea to the very worst kind of Paganisme. 
 
 Secondly, I declare plainly the differences betwixt the 
 Apostacy of Antichrist & Israel, in this, that Israels 
 Apostacy did not destroy the true constitution of the 
 chur: But Antichrists Apostacy did rase the true Apo- 
 stolique constitution: For the true constitution of the 
 Church of the old Testament was of carnal Israelites or 
 Prosehtes circumcised: Gen. 17. 10-14. Exod. 12. 48. 49. 
 & so long as they retayned circumcision in the Land of 
 Canaan, they retayned a true constitution, though their 
 Apostacy was never so great in the worship, ministery, 
 & Government, as is to be seen Hos. 4. 6. 8. 12. therfor 
 Abijah doth not chardg the Israelites with a false con- 
 stitution, but declareth vnto them their false Government, 
 2. Chron. 13. vs. 8. Their false ministery vs. 9. Their 
 false worship, vs. 8. & declareth the true government, 
 ministery, & worship of ludah. But it is manifest that 
 Antichrist hath not only set vp a false Government of 
 Prelacy, a false ministery of Priesthood, & a false worship 
 of reading, but also hath set vp a false constitution of 
 the Church: For whereas the true Apostolique constitu- 
 tion was of baptized Disciples that confessed their Faith 
 & their sinns[,] he hath foysted in a false matter of the 
 Church, viz : infants : & persons vnbaptized : & so a false 
 forme : for infants are no more capable of baptisme then 
 is a f oole or mad man or Pagan : neither can they expresse 
 
Rich. CUfton & lohn Smyth. 645 
 
 any more repentance or Faith then such persons doe: 
 & seing the true forme of the Church is a covenant betwixt 
 God & the Faithful made in baptisme in which Christ is 
 visibly put on : & that infants cannot receave the covenant 
 which is only done by a6lual visible Faith, nor cannot scale 
 back vnto the Lord that hee is true, loh. 3. 33. as God 
 sealeth vnto them his truth by his Spirit, Eph. 1. 13. 
 For the covenant is this, I wilbe their God : 2. Cor. 6. 16. 
 & they shalbe al taught of God, loh. 6. 45. & shal al 
 know God from the least vnto the greatest: Heb. 8. 11. 
 & the covenant is this: I wilbe their Father, 2. Cor. 6: 18. 
 & wee shalbe his sonnes calling him Father by the Spirit, 
 wherby we are sealed. Gal. 4. 6. Hence it foUoweth that 
 the Church of Antichrist being constituted of a false 
 matter, viz: infants vncapable of baptisme, & of a false 
 forme, viz: infants vnable to enter into the New Testa- 
 ment by seahng back the covenant vnto the Lord, & con- 
 senting vnto the contra6l, therefore they can have no 
 title to Christ or any of his ordinances, but are as pagans 
 or GentUs in the Lords account. Circumcision therfor in 
 the Israehtes Apostacy was true circumcision, bicause it 
 was performed vppon carnal Israelites or Proselytes the 
 eig[h]th day: but baptisme in Popery is false baptisme, 
 & so in the Lords account no better then Pagan washing, 
 being administred vppon infants a subje6t that God never 
 appointed to baptisme : a subjedt that is as vncapable of 
 baptisme as an infidel, a mad man, a naturaU foole, or 
 any other subje6t that cannot confesse their Faith or 
 sinnes, or be made Disciples by instru6tion. 
 
 Thirdly I declare that Israel was the true Church of 
 God, or a member or part of the true Church of God 
 though infinitely corrupt aswel as ludah in the dayes of 
 her Apostacy, see Ezechiel 8. toto. & Ezech. 16. toto: & 
 Ezech. 20. 28-31. & therfor if ludah retayned true 
 circumcision in her Apostacy when the L. caUeth her 
 a harlot Ezech. 16. 35. & the Apostacy of ludah is worse 
 in the L. account then that of Israel Ezech. 16. 47-53. 
 Surely the circumcision of Israel was also true, & Israel 
 a true part of the Church aswel as ludah: & for the bil 
 of divorce which some plead was given to Israel by 
 Hosea: Hos. 2. 2. I say that was after the passeover 
 
646 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 of Hezechiah which was in the first yeer of his raigne, 
 2. Chron. 29. 3. 17. & 30. 2. & the bil of divorce was 
 given the sixth yeer of his raigne, 2. King. 17. 23. com- 
 pared with 2. King. 18. 10. yet neverthelesse Hosea calleth 
 Israel the Lords people after he had prophesied of the 
 bil of divorce to be given, Hos. 4. 6. 8. 12. & when the 
 bil of divorce was given, divers of Israel I doubt not, kept 
 themselves pure from Samaritanisme, & retained circum- 
 cision, & came vp yeerly to lerusalem even til the dayes 
 of losiah, 2. Chron. 35. 18. compared with 2. Chron. 34. 
 6. 7. 3-33. So that hereby it is most manifest that no 
 manner of sinne made the Church of the old Testament 
 a false Church, so long as they retayned circumcision in 
 the Land of Canaan, yea if they retayned circumcision 
 though in Babylo, wherevppo I am perswaded that if the 
 Papacy, or England, or the Greek Churches did only 
 baptise men confessing their Faith & their sinnes into 
 Chr, the Sonne of God, or into the Trinity, though they 
 retayned their false ministery, worship & Government, 
 & other ther abhominations yet the baptisme was true 
 & not to be repeated: as their circumcision was good 
 notwithstanding al their abhominations & horrible Idol- 
 atryes, & fearful Apostacy in Israel. 
 
 Mr. Eich. Chfton. 
 
 Babylon in Chaldea (which was a type of Spiritual 
 Babylon, Apoc. 18. 2.) though they did abuse & prof an 
 the vessels of the L. Dan. 5. 3. yet did not that make 
 a nuUity of them that they ceased any more to be the 
 vessels of the house of the Lor. but were brought vp 
 with them of the captivity that came vp from Babel to 
 lerusalem Ezra. 1. 11. Even so although Spiritual 
 Babylon have profaned the Holy things of God, as 
 baptisme & the rest, yet remaine they stil Gods ordinances 
 to al them that come out of her, Apoc. 18. 4. & returne to 
 the celestial lerusalem. & as these vessels of the howse 
 of the L. need not to be new cast, bicause of Babels 
 polluting them : no more is baptisme to be reiterated to 
 the people of God, bicause it passed thorow the polluted 
 hands of the Papists. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 647 
 
 If it bee obje6led, that they that administred baptisme 
 in Babylon, were Idolaters, & had no calUng therto. 
 
 I answere: That they which circumcised in the 
 Apostacy of Israel were Idolaters, & so standing in that 
 estate could not be fit Ministers of Gods holy ordinances. 
 & that the wanting of a lawful calling to administer the 
 Sacrament makes not a nullity therof , the circumcising of 
 Moses Sonne by his mother Zippora, Exod. 4. 25. doth 
 plainly teach. For as the Lord makes effe6lual his word 
 to his people, though comming vnto them, by the hands 
 of a false ministery, so doth he baptisme to al that bee 
 his, though administred by them that have not a Lawful 
 calling thervnto. The sin of the minister makes not 
 a nullity either of the word or Sacraments, els should the 
 efficacy of the word & Sacraments, depend vpon him that 
 aimirdstreth the, which is not so, for both have their 
 effe6t from the Lord. 
 
 If againe it be obje6led, that baptisme was not 
 administred in the Apostate Chur. of Antichrist to a fit 
 subje6t. I answer that the children in the Apostacy were 
 as fit subje6ts to receave baptisme, as the infants of 
 Israeli in the dayes of leroboam & Ahab, were to receave 
 circumcision: Seing the covenant of Abraham (after the 
 comming of Christ) belonged as properly to the Gentils, 
 Gal. 3. 14. as before it did to the Israelites. 
 
 lohn Smjrth. 
 
 Your second argument foUoweth which is this in 
 effea. 
 
 As the Babilonians abuse of the vessels of the L. 
 howse did not make a nullity of them, but they were vsed 
 after the captivity, Ezra. 1. 11. so the Antichristian abuse 
 of baptisme cannot disanul it, but it may bee retayned 
 when men come to the Fayth: & it needeth not to be 
 reiterated, no more then the vessels of the howse of the 
 Lord be new cast. 
 
 I answer many things : First, this arg. is an excellent 
 arg. for the retayning of idoU Temples, the worship, 
 government, ministery of the ecclesiastical assemblies of 
 England : if it be said they were never apointed by God, 
 
648 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 so say I, that baptisms of theirs was never apointed by 
 God: but is the devise of Antichrist. 
 
 Secondly, I answer, that the vessels of the Lords howse 
 were his owne ordinaces, & therfor need not to be new 
 cast: but the baptisme of Antichr. is not the L. owne 
 ordinance: who never ordeyned it: for you raust dis- 
 tinguish them thus: The vessels of the L. howse were 
 substances framed by art into particular shapes at the 
 L. apointement but the baptisme of the L. is a compound 
 or concrete ordinance or a6tion limited in certaine essential 
 particulars: not being a substance but an accident in 
 definition : now if Antic, had retained the essential parts 
 of baptisme, I confesse it needed not to be repeated, no 
 more then the vessels of the L, house need to be new 
 cast after the abuse of the BabUonians : but seing baptisme 
 in popery & Antichristianisme, is not the L. ordinance in 
 the definition of it, but Antich. invention: Therefor 
 though the vessels of the L. howse may be retayned, yet 
 baptisme may not: That baptisme is Antichr. invention 
 in the definition of it, I manifest thus: The matter of 
 baptisme, & the forme of baptisme is invented by Antich. 
 go : it is an invention of antichrist in the definition : The 
 matter of antichristian baptisme is a carnal infant: The 
 forme is, washing one into the covenant that cannot 
 consent to the covenant : or baptising without a contract 
 & sealing the covenats on both parts for the L. doth not 
 scale to the infant, and the infant cannot scale to the 
 Lord : As I have manifested already in the answer to the 
 former argum. of yours: Therefore the baptisme of 
 antichr. is in the definition of it the meer devise of antichr. 
 For the Scripture describeth true baptisme which is the 
 Lords owne ordinance thus: The matter must bee one 
 that confesseth his Payth & his sinnes, one that is 
 regenerate & borne againe : The forme must bee a volun- 
 tary delivering vp of the party baptized into the Name 
 of the Father, Sonne, & Holy Spirit, by washing with 
 water. Mat. 28. 19. Mat. 3. 6. lohn. 4. 1. Aa. 2. 41. & 8. 
 36. 37. compared with Roman. 6. 17. & Mat. 28. 20. & 18. 
 20. & Gal. 3. 27. & Roman. 6. 2-6. Wherein ther 
 must be a mutual consent of both persons contra6ting 
 together : & that this is so, the forme of baptisme retayned 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 649 
 
 in popery yet, teacheth plainly : wher they say. Credis ? 
 Credo: Abrenuntias? abrenuntio: which other persons 
 speak for the infant that cannot speak, therby declaring 
 that ther must needs bee a mutual contra6t of both the 
 parties contradting: This ordinance of the L. therfor is 
 aboUshed both in the matter & forme, & an other straunge 
 invention of man is in the rome therof substituted, which 
 is not the L. & therfor a nullity, & as if the Babylonians 
 should have framed a Temple altar, arck, or candlestick, 
 after their devise, & given them to the people of the 
 lewes, they could not have retayned them & vsed them 
 to Worship God withaU: So cannot true Christians 
 retayne Antichristian baptisme which is devised in the 
 definition of it. 
 
 Thirdly, I answer, that if the Antichristians had 
 baptized persons confessing their sinnes & their Faith 
 into the name of the Sonne of God, & the Trinity, it had 
 then been true baptisme though in the hands of the 
 Antichristians, as the vessels of the L. howse, in the 
 hands of the Caldees, & therfor needed no repetition, as 
 these vessels needed no new casting : Therfor we keep the 
 Scriptures stiU though they abuse them, & the Church, 
 ministery, worship, & government taught in the Scriptures 
 though they have poluted the: but their devised word, 
 that is their Apocr3rpha writings & false do6trine, & their 
 devised church consisting of carnal infants & persons 
 vnbaptized, & their devised worship of the masse, & their 
 devised ministery of the sacrificing Preisthood, & their 
 devised government of the Prelacy we abhorre, & vtterly 
 reject, as the very devised Idols of antic. & we wil no 
 more retaine the the the Shrines of Diana, then the lews 
 would the wedg of Acha : so say we of his baptisme. 
 
 And heer you answer two obje6lions. 
 
 First, that though the Antichristians that administer 
 baptisme bee Idolaters, yet it may bee true baptisme 
 aswel as circumcision true by the Israelites that were 
 Idolaters : & that the efficacy of the word & Sacraments 
 dependeth not vpon the worth of the minister : as circum- 
 cision by Zipporah declareth, Exod. 4. 25. I answer: 
 First, what say you to Ciprian the auncient Father, 
 & all the counsel of lea[r]ned Bbs. who concluded that 
 
650 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 the baptisme of Heretiques was a nullity & decreed 
 rebaptising. 
 
 Secondly I say that the Israelites circumcision was in 
 a true church & antich. baptisme is in a false Church: 
 & that is a dissimilitude. 
 
 Thirdly, I know nothing to the contrary, but Zipporah 
 might circumcise her Sonne, her husband commaunding 
 her (for where is it said in al the Old Testament that 
 a woman shal not circumcise) for Moses indeed did 
 circumcise though Zipporah was the hand of Moses in the 
 a6tion, as it is the Kings adtion, if the L. Chauncellor or 
 the judg of an assise do it. Fourthly I yeeld that the 
 Minister shal not prejudice baptisme : if the baptisme bee 
 the Lords owne ordinance, that is, if a person bee invested 
 with baptisme true in the definition: & yet you know 
 that the baptisme of weomen is strongly questioned, & 
 I beleeve it would trouble you to satisfie a doubt made 
 of a midwifes baptisme in England, that it ought not to 
 bee repeated, or of a Child baptising others as Athanasius 
 did in sport, (which Alexander Bb. of Alexandria with 
 his Clerkes did approve) whither it ought to bee repeated 
 yea or nay : but I leave this point as being but off small 
 importance. 
 
 The second obje6tion you answer is, that although 
 baptisme be administred in a false Church of Antichrist 
 vppon an vnfit subje6t, yet it shal not be repeated, no 
 more then circumcision in the dayes of leroboam & Ahab, 
 it being administred vppon an vnfit subje6t: I say, as 
 I have said divers tymes, that the Israelites infants in 
 their defe6tion were the subje6t that God commaunded 
 to be circumcised, viz: the seed of Abrah. males of 8. 
 dayes age: So are not the infants in Antichristianisme, 
 both for that they are 1. infants, 2. members of a false 
 Church, 3. The seed of vnbelevers which by your owne 
 confession have no title to baptisme : & whereas you say 
 that the covenant of Abrah. in respe6t of Chr. did as 
 truly belong to the Gentils after the comming of Chr. as 
 it did to the Israelites though both in defe6tion: I deny 
 it : For the carnal covenant belonged to the Israelites the 
 carnal seed of Abrah. even in their parents Apostacy, 
 & the Spiritual covenant made with Abrah. in respe6t of 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 651 
 
 Chr. did never aperteyne to the 1. Apostate parents, 
 
 2. much lesse to the infants of them in their Apostacy, 
 
 3. no nor to the infants of the faithful as I have already 
 proved, & Gal. 3. 14. is not to be vnderstood of the blessing 
 of Abrah. to come vpon any of the Gentils in their 
 Apostacy, but only being in Christ, as the words are, also 
 vs. 7. & 9. but the external! Covenant was made with 
 Abraham & the carnall Israelites onely vppon the con- 
 dition of circumcision carnally vppon the males of eig[h]t 
 dayes old, Gen. 17. 10. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 
 If the word of God passing through the false ministery 
 of Antichrist, was of force to convert Gods ele6t in Babylon, 
 the is baptisme passing likewise thorow their false 
 ministery of force to scale vp Gods covenant vnto them, 
 & so consequently not to be reiterated. 
 
 But the first is true Apoc. 18. 4. For in Babylon were 
 Gods people converted, other ordinary Ministery was ther 
 none, but that false Ministery of the Papists: & therfor 
 it is apparent that God made thereby his word efEe6tuaU 
 to all them that beleeve. 
 
 Ergo &c. 
 
 If it be obje6ted, that if God should convert his people 
 by an Antichristian ministery, it were to give approbation 
 to a false ministery, & to teach that men might lawfully 
 vse it, which is absurd: I answer, for vs to vse a false 
 Ministery is vnlawfull, but it is no more absurd or yet 
 any approbation of a false ministery, for God to worke 
 therby the good of his owne people, then it was his 
 approving of the evill service of losephs brethren selling 
 him into Egypt, bicause he vsed theire Ministery, for the 
 saving of lacob & his houshold, for God can worke good 
 by an eviU instrument. 
 
 If it bee stiU vrged, that the Antichristian Ministers 
 had no calling to baptise, I say no more had the lewes 
 to put Christ to death, yet was his suffering avayleable 
 to save all that beleeve : & so is the Sacrament to al Gods 
 people avayleable to scale vp salvation vnto them. 
 
652 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Your third Argument followeth which is this in 
 effecft. 
 
 The word in the false Ministery of Antichrist is avayle- 
 able to convert : Ergo : The baptisme is also avayleable 
 to seale vp the covenant to the converted, & so need not 
 be repeated. 
 
 I answer: First the word converteth none visibly to 
 me particularly known: So ca baptisme seale vp none 
 visibly to me: what they do both in secreat the L. 
 knoweth & what the word doth generally I know by that 
 place Rev. 18. 4. Also what the baptisme doth specially 
 I know, for God saith plainly whosoever receaveth the 
 mark of the beast in his forehead shal perish. Rev. 14. 
 9-11. this mark is vndoubtedly baptisme wherby they 
 are initiated into Antichrist, & receave his mark, as 
 Christs Servants in baptisme receave his seale vppon 
 them : (remember I cal baptisme a seale in the concrete, or 
 according to your opinion. For otherwise I deny it to be 
 a seale) so that Antichristian Baptisme is rather a seale of 
 perdition to the Antichristians, then of the covenant of 
 Salvation by Christ: & therfor it is to be renounced. 
 
 Secondly, Antichrists baptisme false (as I have said) 
 in the difinitio is none of Gods ordinance no not in the 
 hands of the most faithful minister of the world: but 
 Gods word is the Lords ordinance, though in the mouth 
 of the most vile ludas or Antichristian in the world, yea 
 though it be in the mixture of a 1000. heresies : So that 
 in this respe6t also it followeth not that though Gods 
 word may convert in popery, therfor Antichrists baptisme 
 may seale : but stil you build vppon a false f ondacion as 
 you see, assuming that which is the question, viz : That 
 baptisme in popery is the Lords. 
 
 Thirdly, I answer againe, that if Antichrist had 
 reteyned the L. true baptisme, as I have described true 
 I say in the difinition, viz : That he had baptized persons 
 confessing their sinnes & faith into the Trinity, or into 
 lesus Christ, it should not have been repeated : but seing 
 he intendeth in baptisme, to set an indelible chara6ler 
 vpon them which is the mark of the beast, to conferre 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 653 
 
 grace ex opere operate to the infants which he washeth, 
 another promising & answering for them Credo & Abre- 
 nuntio which the party baptized should himself performe, 
 hence I conclude that he hath set vp his owne idol of 
 abhomination, & cast the L. holy ordinance away, having 
 essentialy destroyed the primitive Apostolique baptisme : 
 [er]go his baptisme is a nulhty or rather a scale of per- 
 dition to them that retaine it. 
 
 The amplification which you bring to this Argument 
 I omit as a thing not denyed, but yeelded vnto that God 
 can work by a false Ministery, evil instruments, & bad 
 meanes, but hence it wil not follow that we may retaine 
 the mark of the beast, no more then we may retaine the \ 
 ministery of Antichrist, the Church of Antichrist, the. 
 Government of Antichrist. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 
 Those Holy things which God by his mercifull pro- 
 vidence hath preserved for his people through the hands 
 of profane persons, are not to be rejedled for the Authors 
 sake, Ezra. 1. 11. 
 
 But the Scriptures & baptisme hath God preserved in 
 the popish assemblies for the benefit of his people. 
 
 Therfor not to be reje6led for the Authors sake. 
 
 If it be objedled against the minor, it is not true 
 baptisme but false, that is administred in the assemblies 
 of Antichr. I answer, though it may be said to be false, 
 in regard of some humane devises vsed in the administra- 
 tion thereof: yet is it true baptisme in respe6t of the 
 matter, forme, & Author therof, which causeth it to have 
 a true being. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Yom: fourth Argument foUoweth, which is this. 
 
 These Holy things which God by his merciful pro- 
 vidence hath preserved for his people, though the hands 
 of profane persons, are not to be rejedted for the Authors 
 sake, Ezra. 1. 11. 
 
 But the Scriptiures & baptisme hath God preserved in 
 the popish assemblies for the benefit of his people. 
 
 Therfor not to be reje6led for the Authors sake. 
 
654 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 The minor you prove thus, saying the baptisme though 
 false in respe6l of humane devises vsed in the ministration 
 therof , yet is true in respe6t of the matter, forme & Author 
 therof: & in your answer to my second Arg. you say: 
 the author of baptisme in the Kingdom of Antichr. is Chr. 
 the matter water : the forme washing with water into the 
 Trinity. 
 
 I answer dire6lely, that if it could bee proved that 
 baptisme in the Kingdome of Antichrist is appointed by 
 Christ, & that water is the true matter of baptisme, & the 
 true forme is washing into the Trinity, I would yeeld vnto 
 you: but this you have not proved, & I have already 
 proved the contrary: but yet to deale somthing more 
 fully in this point which is the mayne pillar & cheef cornet 
 Stone of the fondacion, I say : 1. VVater is not the matter 
 of baptisme, but onely the instrument of baptisme : For 
 as fire is the instrument of burning, so is VVater of 
 washing: the matter of burning is the fewel that is 
 burnt. So the matter of washing is the party washed: 
 For as wee say accidentis esse est inesse: & the subjedl 
 is al the matter of an accident: & as the matter of the 
 Church are the Disciples or Sayntes : The matter of the 
 Ministery are the Prophets, so the matter of baptisme is 
 the persons, vppon whome baptisme is conferred, & on 
 whome it is. It is false therfor which you affirme that 
 water is the matter of baptisme. 2. I say that washing 
 into the Name of the Father, Sonne & Holy Ghost, is 
 not the forme of Baptisme: For to wash a Turk, lew, 
 Foole, mad Man, or infant into the Trinity is not true 
 baptisme: but it were so, if simply to baptize into the 
 Trinity were the forme of baptisme: Therefore to bap- 
 tise the true matter into the true Fayth, or into Christ, 
 or the New Testament, or the Trinity, or into the true 
 body, is the true forme of baptisme: So that the true 
 matter of baptisme is a new creature: one regenerate: 
 a confessor. As the true matter of circumcision was a 
 (male of eig[h]t dayes old eyther lineally descending of 
 I Abraham, or a Proselite : So the true matter of baptisme 
 lis a person that is of the Fayth of Abraham, one that 
 ihath the male Christ formed in him : The true forme of 
 'baptisme cosisteth in three things, (1.) washing with 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 655 
 
 water, (2.) a new Creature, (3.) into the Name of Chr. or 
 into the Trinity, for I think wee are not tyed to forme of 
 words. & so if antichr. hath washed any, I say, I wil 
 never consent that they shalbe rebaptized, but holdj 
 that Anabaptistery true heresy. 
 
 But if an infant that is not the matter of baptisme, 
 or a wicked man, mad man, foole, Turk, or lew, or any 
 Pagan bee washed with water into the Trinity, I say ther 
 is neyther true matter nor forme of baptisme, & Christ 
 is not the author thereof: & therfor the baptisme of 
 antichrist is not Christs, but his owne, & so all infants 
 baptized by antichrist are eyther vnbaptized or have the 
 marke of the beast, & so are to renounce it, & to receave 
 Christs marke of baptisme, or els woe bee to them: & 
 when they shall manifest a new creature, & Christ the 
 male is formed in them, & they confesse with their mouth 
 & then be baptized into the Trinity, this is not anabap- 
 tistery, but the true primitive Apostolique Baptisme, & 
 so Christ, lohn, Christs Apostles were anabaptists with 
 you Sir: For they baptized men that had been washed 
 before a thousand tymes with the lewes baptismes, 
 Heb. 9. 10. which baptismes were also into the Messias 
 (no doubt) in those that saw the end off those Figures: 
 But if it bee blasphemy to say that Christ, lohn, & the 
 Apostles were Anabaptists, though they were oftymes 
 some of them baptized into the Messiah in Type, bicause 
 they were onely once baptized truly & indeed: So shal 
 it bee blasphemy in all them that call the true Christians 
 anabaptists, that baptize new Creatures once onely into 
 Christ, though baptized before by antichrist in their 
 infancy when they knew not the right hand from the 
 left, or what a new creature, or the New Testament, or 
 Christ, or Baptisme, or any thing els was : hence therefore 
 I conclude vndenyably that seing Popish baptisme hath 
 a false matter, & a false forme, therefore it is antichrists 
 Idoll asmuch as a false Ministery, & a false Church is: 
 & so the Lord is not the author of it : & therevppon though 
 the Scriptures & Gods word bee retayned by Gods pro- 
 vidence & in the word all the Holy things of God, through 
 Popery: yet in the Popish Churches ther is no true 
 Chiu-ch, Ministery, Worship, or Government, nor true 
 
656 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Baptisme, but all false and Antichristian : and so to bee 
 reje6ted, and the truth to bee assumed out of the 
 Scriptures: and so this argument off yours is answered. 
 
 Mr. Kich. Clifton. 
 
 If antichrist be not the author of baptisme, but of 
 some humane devises annexed, vnto in the administration 
 thereof: then are wee not to plucke vp the wheate with 
 the tares. Mat. 13. 29. And to cast away that which is 
 Christs with Antichr. but to Seperate from that which is 
 mans invention, & stil to retayne that which is of God. 
 
 But to baptise with water into the name of the Father, 
 & of the Sonne, & of the holy Ghost, Mat. 28. 19. is from 
 heaven, & not from Antichrist. 
 
 Ergo, we ought not to cast it away, but those traditions 
 wherewith Antichrist hath polluted it: as for exaple, 
 King losias & before him K. Ezechias, when both the 
 Land & Temple were poluted) 2. King. 21. 7. & 23. 7. 
 did not pul downe the Temple but appointed the Priests 
 to dense it, who did so, & brought out al the vncleanes 
 that they had found in the howse of God, 2. Chro. 29. 16. 
 17. 18. & 34. 8. For in reformacion of things, difference 
 must be put betwene those things, wherof God is the 
 Author, & such as are devised by man : The former is to 
 be purged from aU profanation, & the things still to bee 
 retayned, the other to bee quyte abolished. This rule in 
 all reformation off Religion ought to bee followed. 
 
 John Smyth. 
 
 The fifth Argument foUoweth, which is this in 
 effea. 
 
 We must not pluck vp the wheate with the tares, 
 Mat. 13. 29. nor cast away that which is Christs, when we 
 cast away that which is Antichrists. 
 
 But to Baptize with Water into the Name of the 
 Trinity is Christs & not Antichrists. 
 
 Ergo, wee ought not to cast that away, but only the 
 traditions of Antichrist. 
 
 So did losiah & Hezechiah, 2. King. 21. 7. & 23. 4. 
 & 2. Chron. 29. 16-18. & 34. 8. not pul downe the Temple, 
 but dense it, &c. that wherof God is the Author must 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 657 
 
 be kept, & the corruption or pollution put away: that 
 wherof man is the Author, is quite to be abolished : This 
 is your reason. 
 
 I answer : That as when the Babylonians had vtterly 
 destroyed the Temple, the lewes built it againe : So when 
 Antichrist hath vtterly destroyed the true Temple, the 
 true Church, then must we build it vp againe, & when 
 Antichrist hath destroyed the true baptisme, then must 
 we reare it vp againe: Wherfor seing as is shewed befor 
 Antichrist hath abolished the true baptisme of Chr. in the 
 definition or in the matter & forme therof, & hath reared 
 a baptisme of his owne, it must therfor be abolished: 
 & as when we do renounce the false Church or Ministery, 
 wee do not renounce that which is true in the false Church 
 or Ministery, but onely the falsehood so in reje6ting the 
 false baptisme of Antichr. we do not renounce that which 
 is true in it as to wash with water into the Name of the 
 Father, Sonne & Holy Ghost: but onely the falsehood: 
 And yet as when wee retayne the truth in a false Church, 
 or Ministery, wee reje6t the Falsehood in them both, 
 & ere6t both a new true Church & Ministery : So when wee 
 retayne the truth of a false baptisme, wee reje6t the 
 Falsehood & ere6t a true new baptisme : & this is evident 
 if you consider it wel. 
 
 Againe, seing in the false baptisme, church, & 
 ministery, the corruptions are essential, & the truth only 
 accidental: & truth & falsehood are so intermingled as 
 we can not divide them asunder, assuming the one & 
 leaving the other, but we must needes in renouncing the 
 essential corruptions reserve the accidental truths & 
 iterate or repeate the accidental truthes if we wil have the 
 essential truth which Antichrist had abolished: Therfor 
 necessarily we must for having true baptisme repeate 
 washing in to the name of the Father, Sonne, & Holy 
 Ghost, which are but accidentals (for a Turck so washed 
 is not baptized) & once onely wash a new borne babe in 
 Christ, into the truth which is true essentiall baptisme 
 which Antichrist had abolished, & which wee onely restore 
 & nothing els: & so your argument is answered. 
 
 w. II. 22 
 
658 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 
 As God hath made an everlasting covenant with 
 Abraham & his seed, Gen. 17. 7 which through the mahce 
 of Sathan & al his instruments shal never be cut of: so 
 hath he preserved, both in the Apostacy vnder the Law 
 & gospel, the scales thereof, for the comfort of the Faithful. 
 
 And therfor the Anabaptists in reje6ting that baptisme 
 of Christ, whereof they were pertakers in the Apostate 
 Church: & devising a new, do bring in a new covenant 
 & a new gospel, taking vppon them to baptize themselves 
 without warrant from the word : For I am sure it cannot 
 be shewed, that any did ever baptize himself without 
 special commaundement from God, as Abrah. had for 
 circumcision. Gen. 17. 9. or lohn for baptisme, Marc. 1. 3. 
 nor yet any others without ordinary or extraordinary 
 caUing. loh. 4. 2. Mat. 3. 6. A6t. 8. 38. & 9. 18. & 10. 48. 
 
 If it be sayd the tymes bee extraordinary. I answere, 
 the Lord hath [not] left eyther example or rule, or ground 
 of rule, whereby wee may in extraordinary tymes have a 
 sure warrant out of the word, to informe vs in any thing 
 that wee ought to doe. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 Your 6. argument is thus much in ejBfe6t. 
 
 That seing the covenant made with Abraham in 
 respe6t of Christ, is everlasting: Genes. 17. 7. & cannot 
 by the malice of Sathan bee cut of: no more can the 
 malice of Sathan abolish the seales of that covenant vnder 
 the Law or gospel, viz : circumcision & baptisme. 
 
 I answer by an argument of like nature, from Mat. 16. 
 18. framed thus. 
 
 If the gates of Hel shal never prevaile against the 
 Church then ther hath alwayes been a true Church, & 
 Antichrist could never make the church false : & so you 
 of the Seperation have sinned most shamefully in calling 
 the Church of Antichrist false: Verum primum. Ergo 
 secundum. 
 
 If my argument be not good against you of the 
 Seperation for eredting a new Church, no more is yours 
 good against vs for eredling new baptisme: This is to 
 
Rich. CUfton & lohn Smyth. 659 
 
 answer as they say regerendo: But I answer more 
 properly solvendo thus : That the covenant is said to be 
 everlasting not in respe6t of the visible real existence in 
 the world in an established Church, but in respe6t of the 
 stability & firmenes of it in regard of Sathans malice 
 which should not so abolish it, that it should never bee 
 recovered againe: For otherwise the Church went into 
 the wildernes. Revel. 12. 14. & al natids were made 
 drunck with the cup of the fornication of the whore of 
 Babylon, Revel. 18. 3. & ther was no true Church in the 
 depth of Antichristianisme, & so no true baptisme, for 
 can any thing be true in a false Church, but the Scriptures 
 & the truthes conteyned therein ? I deny therfor, that the ; 
 covenant. Church or baptisme was visible alwayes: For; 
 it was invisible when the Church went into the wildernes : 
 & therfor as you when ther was not a true Church in the 
 world, took vppon you to set vp a true Church (as you 
 say, but wee say a false Church) renouncing the Church 
 of Antichr. & yet wil not bee said to bring in a new 
 covenant & a new Gospel (for you in your false con- 
 ceitednes wil reje6t them for heretiques, if ther bee any 
 that dare say so of you forsooth) : So the anabaptists (as 
 you cal them) doe not set vp a new covenant & Gospel,^ 
 though they set vp a new or rather the old Apostolique 
 baptisme which Antichrist had overthrowne: & whereas 
 you say they have no warrant to baptisme themselves, 
 I say, asmuch as you have to set vp a true Church, yea 
 fuUy asmuch: For if a true Church may bee erecfted 
 which is the most noble ordinance of the New Testament, 
 then much more baptisme: & if a true Church can not 
 bee ere6ted without baptisme, for baptisme is the visible 
 forme of the Church, as Disciples are the matter : Mat. 28. 
 19. lohn. 4. 1. Then seing you confesse that a true 
 Church may bee ere6led, you cannot deny (though you 
 doe deny it in opposing the truth) that baptisme may also 
 bee recovered : & seing when all Christs visible ordinances 
 are lost, eyther men must recover them againe, or must 
 let them alone: if they let them alone til extraordinary 
 men come with miracles & tongs, as the Apostles did, 
 then men are famelists (for that is their opinion) or if they 
 must recover them, men must beginne so to doe, & then 
 
 22—2 
 
660 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 two men joyning together may make a Church (as you 
 say) : Why may they not baptize seing they cannot 
 conjoyne into Christ but by baptisme, Mat. 28. 19. 
 compared with Mat. 18. 10. Gallat. 3. 27. but it is evident 
 that all Christs Commaundements must bee obeyed, Ergo, 
 this commaundement of having & vsing the communion 
 of the Church, Ministery, Worship & Gouernment, those 
 Holy meanes of Salvation which the Lord of his mercy 
 hath given vs with his covenant, & commaunded vs to 
 vse : & therefore if all the commaundements of God must 
 bee obeyed, then this of baptisme, & this warrant is 
 sufficient for assuming baptisme: Now for baptising a 
 mans self ther is as good warrant, as for a man Churching 
 himself: For two men singly are no Church, joyntly they 
 are a Church, & they both of them put a Church vppon 
 themselves, so may two men put baptisme vppon them- 
 selves: For as both those persons vnchurched, yet have 
 powre to assume the Church each of them for himseK with 
 others in communion: So each of them vnbaptized hath 
 powre to assume baptisme for himself with others in 
 communion: And as Abraham & John Baptist, & all the 
 Prosehtes after Abrahams example, Exod. 12. 48. did 
 administer the Sacrament vppon themselves : So may any 
 man raised vp after the Apostacy of Antichrist, in the 
 recovering of the Church by baptisme, administer it vppon 
 himself in communion with others : So wee see the Lords 
 Supper is administred to a mans self in communion with 
 others, so is Prayer, Prophesy, Praysing of God vttered 
 for a mans self aswel as for others. And as in the Old 
 Testament: every man that was vncleane washed him- 
 self: every Preist going to Sacrifice washed himself e in 
 the Laver at the dore of the Tabernacle of the congrega- 
 tion: which was a type of baptisme, the dore of the 
 Church, Tit. 2. 5. Every Mr. of a Family administred 
 the Passeover to himself & all of his Family : The Preist 
 dayly Sacrificed for himself and others: a man cannot 
 baptise others into the Church, himself being out of the 
 Church: Therefore it is LawfuU for a man to baptize 
 himself together with others in communion, & this 
 warrant is a plerophory for the pra6tise of that which is 
 done by vs : Thus are your 6. weake reasons answered. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 661 
 
 Mr. Rich. CUfton. 
 
 Thus having set downe some reasons to prove that 
 Apostates or Antichristians converted are not to be 
 rebaptized, let vs come to the examination of the reasons 
 aUedged to the contrary, the first wherof is this. 
 
 1. Bicause Churches are to bee constituted now after 
 the defection of Antichrist, as they were first ere6ted by 
 the Apostles: But in the constitution off Churches the 
 Apostles receaved in the members by baptisme. Ergo, 
 so must wee doe now. 
 
 Answere. 
 
 1. The estate & condition of people now is not alike ; 
 to the estate of the Gentiles or lewes in the Apostles tymes, ' 
 they differ in divers respe6ts: First, all the people then 
 both of lewes & Gentiles never had bene themselves, nor 
 were ever of the posterity of those that had bene members 
 of the Church of Christ vnder the gospel, seing then was 
 the first planting of Evangelical Churches : but we are now 
 the posterity of such parents as were members of the Chu. 
 planted by the Apo. els could we not have Apostated. 
 
 Secondly, that people, which the Apo. gathered into 
 Churches were never baptized, & baptisme comming in 
 the steed of circumcision, & being a seale of our entring 
 into Gods covenant, it was fit, that they which beleved 
 & became the seed of Abraha should so enter into the 
 covenat, they & their seed, as he & his seed entred, that 
 is, as he & his were receaved in by circumcision : So they 
 & thers should be receved in by baptisme, A61. 2. 38. 41, 
 & 8. 38. but we are a people that are already baptized, 
 & the seed of the that wer baptized, & had receved the 
 gospel, & (although through Antichr. deceaveablenes, both 
 we & they were tainted with many corruptions) yet had 
 they or might have in that Apostacy, (& so we also) so 
 much faith, as thereby both we & they might become the 
 people of God, Apoc. 18. 4. 
 
 And concerning the constitution of the Churches, here 
 it is to be noted, that the constitution of Churches set 
 downe by the Apostles was by the immediate dire6lio of 
 the Holy Ghost, & so serveth for a continual rule of 
 
662 Passages betwixt Mr, 
 
 establishing Churches to the end of the world, which 
 forme or frame layed downe by them, no man hath power 
 to alter or change, 1. Cor. 4. 14. 1. Tim. 3. 11. But the 
 constituting of Chur. now after the defe6tion of Antich. 
 may more properly be called a repayring, then a con- 
 stituting of Churches, which through Apostacy have bene 
 ruinated, or a gathering together of the dispersed shepe 
 of Israeli into such formes or shapes of visible Churches 
 (the paterne whereof is shewed vnto vs in the word) for 
 (as before hath bene noted) our state is not as theirs was 
 that were the first constituted Churches, & so it wil not 
 follow (as it is alledged) that the receiving in of members 
 into our Churches necessarily must be by baptisme, as in 
 the primitive tyme it was, except onely of such persons 
 as have not bene baptized before. 
 
 And herein I take it, lyeth the deceyte of this arg. 
 that it putteth no difference between the people of God 
 comming out of Babylon, & them that came to the faith 
 from amongst the Gentils, equaHsing Antichristianisme 
 with Gentilisme, the one being an Apostate Church, the 
 other no Church : The one partaker of the word & Sacram: 
 (though with much coruptid) the other partaker of neither 
 at all, the one professing Christ & Teaching many truths 
 of God, & so many as the ele6t therby might come to 
 faith, Apoc. 18. 4. The other neither professing Christ, 
 nor teaching any truth of God, wherby any might be 
 converted to Christ, & become Gods people in the estate 
 of Gentilisme. 
 
 And thus having made plaine the different estate of 
 the first planted Churches & ours in Apostacy, I answere 
 first : That Churches now are to be constituted (if repairing 
 be not a fitter speach) as in the Apostles tymes, & that 
 al such as are receaved in as members, being vnbaptized, 
 must be receaved in by baptisme, but for such as were 
 baptized in Apostate Churches, their repentance is 
 sufficient without rebaptisatio, as it was to the Apostate 
 Israelites, who vppon their repentance & returning to 
 lerusalem were receaved of the Church without any new 
 circumcision, & therfore to adde a second baptisme, with 
 the Anabaptists, is to Apostate from Chr. & not to enter 
 into his covenant. 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 663 
 
 And in that the Apostles receaved in members by 
 baptisme, they could doe no otherwise, seing the whole 
 world was vnbaptized, but if they had met with any that 
 before had bene baptized into the name of Chr. as they 
 that receaved the baptisme of lohn, & as we are, I make no 
 question, they did not, nor would not have rebaptized them, 
 & therf or the conclusion wil not follow, that we are now to 
 receave in by baptisme, them that are already baptized. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 The next thing in your answer is a solution of the 
 arguments brought by mee to prove the truth: viz. 
 
 That Antichristians converted are to bee ad- 
 mitted into the true Church by baptisme. 
 This truth of the Lords I have proved vnto you by 
 three reasons : The first whereof may bee framed thus. 
 So are Churches to be restored or constituted after 
 the defe6tion of Antichr. as they were ere6ted by 
 the Apostles at the first. 
 But the Churches were at the first ere6ted by 
 baptisme in their primitive institution by lohn, 
 Chr. & the Apostles. 
 Ergo: so are they now to be restored: & therf or 
 the members are to be receaved in by baptisme as 
 they were then. 
 As in the former point for baptising of infants you 
 were compelled to runne to the old Testament, & from 
 thence to fetch the cheef corner stone of your building 
 viz from circumcision: So in this second point you 
 vtterly forsake the new Testam. of Chr. & the true con- 
 stitution Apostolique of the Church of the new Testament, 
 & set vs againe to Schoole to Moses, as if Chr. had not 
 bee faithful enough to teach vs his new Test, but we must 
 go learne the new Test, of the old Testament: Chr. of 
 Moses : The Gospel of the Law. 
 
 And first I would know why we may not aswel with 
 the Papists & Prelates goe fetch one high Preist from 
 Moses, a sacrificing Preisthood from Moses, succession in 
 the ministery from Moses, & a succession in the Church 
 from Moses, as a succession in baptisme from Moses: 
 & in efie6t you do fetch a succession of the Church from 
 
664 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Rome: For in fetching a succession of baptisme from 
 Rome which is the forme of the Church: & in fetching 
 a succession of the matter of the Church which is the 
 seed of the parents baptized you of necessity make the 
 Church of Rome a true Church: For if infants of the 
 "Church of Rorne have true title to baptisme by reason of 
 the Faith of some of their auncesters or forfathers that 
 were Faithful, then are they the true visible matter of 
 the -Church : & if by reason of that title to baptisme, they 
 receave true baptisme in substance as you say in the 
 Church of Rome then they have the true visible forme of 
 the Church, for they that have the true matter & forme 
 of a true Church vppon them are the true Church : & so 
 are the infants of the Church of Rome a true visible 
 Church in the constitution & essential causes therof: 
 & so as in the old Testament the Church came by succes- 
 sion of genealogie in respe6l wherof they made so much 
 account of genealogies carnal, Philip. 3. 3-5. 1. Timoth. 
 1. 4. So in the New Testament the Church commeth by 
 succession of carnal Genealogie through the Church of 
 Rome to our dayes : & then as the matter of the Church, 
 viz infants descending of baptized parents is by Genealogie, 
 & the forme of the church viz : baptisme vppon these 
 infants is by descent : & therf or the Church is by succes- 
 sion: I demaund why may not the ministery be by 
 descent & succession aswel as the Church? & then why 
 is not the Church of Rome or England a true Church, 
 the ministery of the Church of Rome or England a true 
 Ministery? & so why may not you returne back againe 
 into England, & take vp your former ministery, & renounce 
 your Schisme which you have made? & so I heare that 
 some are mynded to doe : & truly for my part I hold it 
 as lawful to retaine the Church & Ministery of England, 
 as to retaine the baptisme: & when I shal yeeld to the 
 truth of the baptisme of Englad I wil yeeld to the truth 
 of the Church & ministery of England : & I wil confesse 
 I have been a Schismatique, & returne & acknowledg my 
 error: but bicause I know the ministery & Church of 
 England is false, therfor it must needes be that the 
 baptisme which is the forme of the Church is false 
 essentially: & therefore having Seperated justly from the 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 665 
 
 Church & Ministery of England for the falsehood of them, 
 I must needes also Seperate from the baptisme which is 
 false, for the Church is false bicause baptisme the forme 
 of the Church is false: & if baptisme the forme of the 
 Church of England be true, the Church of England is true, 
 also: You are to know therefore (& so I wish you & all- 
 the Seperation to mynd it well, & the Lord give you eyes 
 to see, & harts to vnderstand) that all the old Testament 
 was carnal taken from the Elementes of the World, 
 thereby to type out & to teach them heavenly things: 
 & therefore their Church was carnal to type to vs in the 
 New Testament a Spiritual Church : The matter of their 
 Church was a carnall Israehte : the matter of the Church 
 of the New Testament is a true Israelite in whom ther is 
 no guile : The forme of their Church was carnall circum- 
 cision a carnal scale. Genes. 17. 10-14. The forme of 
 the Church of the New Testament is the circumcision of 
 the hart, a new Creature, the Holy Spirit of promise 
 whereby wee are sealed, which is manifested by confession 
 & baptisme in water: A61. 10. 47. Ephes. 1. 13. Gallat. 3. 
 27. & 6. 15. lohn. 3. 5. Matth. 3. 6. Roman. 10. 9. Aft. 8. 
 36. 37. Their carnaU Church in the matter & forme came 
 by carnaU Genealogie, & so they aU of them were gendred 
 vnto bondage vnder the rudimentes off the World vnder 
 the carnal Testament or covenant : Gallat. 4. 24. 25. our 
 Spiritual! Church in the matter & forme thereof is by 
 Spiritual! Genealogie, that is the Genealogie of the Fayth 
 of Abraham the Father of vs all vnder the Spiritual! New 
 Testament, Gallat. 3. 7. 9. 14. Roman. 4. 16. 11. Their 
 parents in the carnall Church was carnall Abraham & 
 carnall Hagar, & all their carnall parents who according 
 to the Flesh with carnaU seed begate carnall Ismaell the 
 type of the carnal Israelites : our parents in our Spiritual 
 Church is Abrah. Spiritual, (& al our Spiritual parents) 
 who by the word of God & by faith begat Spiritual Isaac 
 the type of the children of promise after whose manner 
 we are, Gal. 4. 22-28. Rom. 4. 19-21. Heb. 11. 11. 12. 
 1. Pet. 1. 23. Their ministery was a carnal ministery by 
 carnal genealogie of the line of Aaron Sacrificing Preists : 
 our ministery is by Spiritual genealogie of the ele6tion of 
 the true Church that is Spiritual. 
 
666 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Thus if you would compare the Type & the Truth 
 together, you should easily discerne the sandy Fondation 
 of your false Church ruinated & your false baptisme quite 
 abandoned: who continue a Church by succession of a 
 carnall line, & a baptisme by succession vppon the carnall 
 Line through Popery : Whereas the true Church is onely 
 by the Spirituall Line of Fayth, & true baptisme by the 
 SpirituaU succession vppon that Spirituall Line of Fayth- 
 full men confessing their Fayth & their sinnes, which was 
 typed by that carnal Line of the Old Testament: you 
 therefore that introduce a carnal Line into the Church to 
 bee baptized, viz: all your Children according to the 
 Flesh & that by succession fetch baptisme vppon that 
 carnal Line through the Chxu'ch of Rome into your Church 
 (following the president of the Old Testament in that 
 carnal circumcision by succession of Genealogie) doe 
 therein vnawares make Rome a true Church, your selves 
 Schismatiques, & set vp ludaisme in the New Testament, 
 & so are fallen from Christ, & are become a new second 
 3 mage of the Beast never heard of before in the World : 
 For such are you of the Seperation. 
 
 This being premised as a ground which I earnestly in- 
 treat you (even in my best love vnto you) & al the 
 Seperation, especialy the leaders of them, well to weigh 
 & ponder, & not to be ashamed to learne of their 
 inferiors & juniors: I come to aswer the exceptions 
 which you take at my first Argument. 
 
 The summe of your exception is this : That seing wee 
 are the posterity of baptized persons, & the lewes & 
 Gentiles in the Apostles tymes were not so: Therefore 
 wee need not assume baptisme in our entrance into the 
 Church, which wee had in our Apostacy, but wee may 
 enter into the Church without rebaptizing as the Apostate 
 Israelites did without recircumcising : & so we must not 
 in the new Test, be framed according to the paterne 
 taught in the new Test, in entering in by baptisme, but 
 according to the paterne of the old Testam. & the Apostate 
 Israelites therein, &c. 
 
 I answer divers things: First, I say that the New 
 Testament is as sufficient for the dire6tion of al the affaires 
 & occasions that befall in the tyme of the New Testament, 
 
Ricli. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 667 
 
 as the Old Testament was for the occurrences that befell 
 vnder the Old Testament : Seing Christ is as Faythful as 
 Moses: & the New Testament as perfe6t as the Old. 
 Gal. 3. 15. & therefore if the Lord had intended to put 
 a difference betwixt the Apostolique constitution of 
 Churches, & our constituting of them in respe6t of the 
 persons to be admitted into the Church, & in respe6l of 
 baptising & not baptising or rebaptising of them he could 
 & would have done it : but seing it is not done in the 
 New Testament, but left in silence: & seing the New 
 Testament of Chr. is perfe6t & sealed with his blood, you 
 that put this difference add to the new Testament, & 
 bring in a new Christ, a new covenant, a new Gospel, 
 a new Church, & new baptisme : & wo be to them that 
 ad to the word, Rev. 22. 18. & as they were accursed that 
 added to the old Test. Deut. 4. 2. & 12. 32. So much more 
 shal they be subje6l to the curse that add to the new Test. 
 of Chr. Heb. 12. 25. in this respe6t ther for your answer 
 is insufficient. 
 
 Secondly, I aflfirme that (as the Holy Ghost saith) the 
 Antichristians are in condition equall to Pagans, & there- 
 fore as I have said they are not called Israelites or 
 Samaritanes, but Babylonians, Egyptians, Sodomites, 
 GentiUs: but the Holy Ghost knoweth what & how to 
 speak: And therefore as the Babylonians, Egyptians, 
 Sodomites, Gentils washings were nothing, no more is 
 the baptisme of Antichristians any thing: For the Holy 
 Ghost foreseeing that the Antichristians would abolish 
 the true baptisme of Christ by baptising infants, & so by 
 admitting into the Church the carnal seed of the Flesh, 
 would disanul that Holy ordinance of baptisme, & so 
 abolish the true constitution of the Church, in heavenly 
 wisdom for oiu- instrudtion calleth persons Apostating 
 from the true constitution of the Church Babylonians, 
 Egyptians, Sodomites, Gentils, therby teaching vs that he 
 esteemeth no otherwise of their Church or baptisme, then 
 of the Synagogues of Babylon, then of the washings of 
 Egypt, then of the worship of Sodom & the Pagans: 
 & these comparisons wiU fit you well against the assemblies 
 & Temples of Antichrist, and I know no reason that they 
 should not fitt vs aswell against your Babylonish, 
 
668 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Egyptians, Sodomitish, and Paganish washings of infants 
 which though it bee done into the name of Chr. yet is no 
 more avayleable in the Holy Ghosts testimony then 
 washing of Pagans, Babylonians, Egyptians, Sodomites 
 Children. 
 
 Thirdly, wheras you say that repayring the Church 
 now after the Apostacy of Antichr. is a fitter speech then 
 constituting : herein do you both taxe your selves off the 
 vse of that word constitution : & plainly signifie that you 
 incline to maintain the Churches of England & Rome to 
 be true Churches, wherin whither you doe not forsake your 
 first faith, & turne with the dog to the vomit look you 
 vnto it, & let al indifferent men judg: but your writings 
 are against you sufficient witnesses in this case. 
 
 Fourthly, I say that the lewes that were converted to 
 the Faith & new Testament of Chr. by Chr. lohn, & the 
 Apostles in your account were in a far better estate the 
 Antichr. For they (as you say) were of the same body 
 with the Church of the New Testament, & their circum- 
 cision was a scale of the new Testament (as you say) 
 & they were in Chr. lesus (as you say) & were washed 
 I doubt not many of them into the Messias whose blood 
 they typically saw in their manifold baptismes & purifica- 
 tions with water; & al of the had been partakers of the 
 word & Sacraments in the Chur. of the lewes, & why 
 might not they by Christ, lohn, or the Apo. be admitted 
 into the Church without baptisme: if therfor Chr. lohn 
 & the Apo. would needes baptize them, & so by baptisme 
 constitute them into the new Testament that had all 
 these p[r]erogatives in your judgment, much more wil 
 they have vs to constitute Antichr. converted into the true 
 Church by baptisme: neither can you say without great 
 indignity to the L. ordinances in the old Test, that they 
 were inferior to the baptisme of Antichrist. 
 
 Againe you wil needes have this to be a great priviledg 
 to the antichr. to be the carnal seed of them that hath 
 somtyme been members of the Church of Chr. in the new 
 Testament, & therfor you say that in ther parents or 
 auncestors they had title to baptisme: I deny that ever 
 the English nation or any one of our predecessors were of 
 the Faith of Chr. shew it if you can: but we came of a 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 669 
 
 Pagan race til Rome the mother came & put vppon vs 
 her false baptisme : & therf or although the Roma, might 
 plead this, yet England cannot plead it: & so your 
 dissimilitude cannot hold in that thing: & our case is 
 simply Paganish. 
 
 Further, you say that the repentance of Apostate 
 Churches is sufficient for their admittance into the true 
 Church without rebaptization, as repentance was for 
 Israel without recircumcision : I deny it, for the Churches 
 of Antichr, are false, & the Church of the Israelites was 
 not false: The Churches of Antichr. were false bicause 
 they consisted of the carnal seed baptized which was not 
 that one seed vnto which the promise was made, that is 
 the Faithful: The Church of the Israelites was true 
 bicause it did consist of the carnal seed carnally circum- 
 cised, which was the true constitution of the Church of 
 the old Testament : For otherwise if Israel had been false 
 bicause of their Apostacy & Idolatry then ludah was as 
 false who had in wickednes justified Samaria & Sodom, 
 Ezech. 16. 51. but indeed they were neither of them false 
 so long as they circumcised the males of 8. dayes old, 
 but the Churches of Antichr. growing false by baptising 
 the carnal seed (which was not the true seed of Abrahams 
 faith) therefore are to bee baptized when they come to 
 the truth, & cannot have Israels Apostacy for ther 
 president : wherefore an Edomite or Israelite comming to 
 bee a prosehte of the lewes Church that had omitted 
 circumcision is a true President of the Antichristian 
 Apostacy: For as they omitting the circumcision of the 
 males though of the Posterity of Abraham, yet being 
 Proselites were entered into the lewes Church by circum- 
 cision: So is it in the Apostacy of Antichrist, with the 
 Proselytes of Antichristianisme : for so I take it the 
 Proselytes were types of Antichristians, converted to the 
 Faith, & admitted into the true Church : & the Israelites 
 were not so. 
 
 Moreover whereas you say that if the Apostles had 
 met with such as we are they would have receaved vs 
 into the Church vppon repentance without baptisme: I 
 answer, if such an example had been left vs wee would 
 then have rested satisfied, but seing the Apo. have left! 
 
670 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 no such example nor precept therfor you are yet in your 
 Apostacy, & having not repented of nor forsaken your 
 Egyptian baptisme are stil vnseperated, do stil retaine 
 the mark of the beast, & are subje6t to the woe that the 
 aungel threatneth to persons so marked. 
 
 Mr. Kich. Clifton. 
 
 Now let vs come to the second reason which is this. 
 
 2. Bicause true baptisme is but one, but the 
 
 baptisme of Antichrist is not true baptisme, & so not 
 
 that one baptisme of Chr. but al the members of Chr. 
 
 must have true Baptisme. 
 
 Answere. 
 
 , 2. Ther is but one Faith & one baptisme, Eph. 4. 4. 
 
 ' & therefore is it sufficient to bee once baptized, as it was 
 to bee once circumcised : Secondly, That the baptisme 
 of Antichrist is not true baptisme I graunt, & doe also 
 affirme that al members of Christ must have true baptisme, 
 & what then must it follow that now such as are baptized 
 must bee rebaptized, els cannot bee members of a visible 
 Church: I deny it & doe further answere, 1. That the 
 baptisme which wee receaved in the Apostate Church is 
 no more Antichrists then the word that wee receaved 
 therein: For Antichrist did never ordaine a new kynd of 
 baptisme, but did onely pollute (with his inventions) the 
 Holy ordinance of Chr: & therfore if this baptisme that 
 wee have receaved be called the baptisme of Antichr. that 
 is to affirme an vntruth, seing the institution thereof was 
 by lesus Chr. who commaunded his Apo. to baptize al 
 nations with water in the name of the Father & of the 
 Sonne, & of the Holy Ghost. & the same baptisme for 
 substance is stil retayned in the Apostate churches & 
 none other. Secondly, this baptisme may also in some 
 respe6t bee called true baptisme, as before I have noted 
 in my fift reason against rebaptization : For 1. it hath 
 Chr. for the Author, 2. it hath the true matter outward 
 signe or element which is water, 3. the true forme of 
 administring the same, which is, baptising into the name 
 of the Father, of the Sonne, & of the Holy Ghost, al 
 which is pra6tised in the Popish Church, neither is any 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 671 
 
 baptized into the name or faith of Antich. but vnto the 
 faith & possession of Christ & therfor our baptisme is the 
 baptisme of Chr. & to vs that repent true baptisme, & so 
 consequently not to be reiterated. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
 In the next place you make answer to my second arg. 
 which may be framed thus. 
 
 Al the members of Chr. must have that one true 
 
 baptisme of Chr. taught in the new Testament. 
 The baptisme of antich. is not that one true 
 
 baptisme, taught by Chr. in the new Testament. 
 Ergo: The members of Christ must not have the 
 
 baptisme of Antichrist, but must take the true 
 
 baptisme of Christ, when they come into the true 
 
 Church. 
 The summe of your answer is : That the baptisme we 
 receaved in the false Chur. is not Antichr. but Christs: 
 I make answer, that seing infants are baptized which is 
 the false matter of baptisme, & seing in them ther is not 
 the question of a good conscience vnto God, 1. Pet. 3. 21. 
 Nor the hart sprinckled from an evil conscience, Heb. 10. 
 22. which is the forme: Seing they cannot expresse 
 credis? Credo: Abrenuntias? Abrenuncio: which is 
 the forme of baptisme even the mutual contra6t betwixt 
 God & the party baptized expressed visibly in confession : 
 therfor the baptisme is not Chr. but Antichrists, not from 
 heaven but of man : & al that you obje6t in this particular 
 is already sufficiently taken away in answer to your 4. 
 reason : whither I translated that which is heer answered 
 by you vppon occasion ther intertayned. 
 
 Mr. Rich. Clifton. 
 
 The third reason. 
 
 Bicause as the false Church is reje6led & the true 
 ere6ted, the false ministery forsaken, & the true received : 
 so false worship (& by consequente baptisme) must be 
 renounced, & the true baptisme assumed. 
 
672 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 Answere. 
 
 First. I graunt, that we ought to Separate from al 
 false or apostate Chur. Apo. 18. 4 & to adjoyne our selves 
 to a true Chu. reformed according to the paterne of the 
 Apostles. 2. also every false ministery is to be forsaken, 
 Mat. 7. 15. 2. lo. 10. gal. 1. 8. & the true ministers of God 
 to be receaved, ler. 3. 14. 15. So did the faithful in Israel 
 forsake the false Preists set vp by leroboa, & returned to 
 the Preists of the L. to lerusale, 2. Chro. 30. 11. 3. it is 
 our duty likewise to renounce al false wor. 2. Cor. 6. 14-17. 
 Esa. 30. 22. & to worship the L, as he taught vs in his 
 word: & thus far do I approve of this reason, but the 
 Consequence I must deny, viz : that bicause false worship 
 is to be renounced, therfor baptisme also. For 1. we are 
 to consider in that baptisme receaved in apostate Churches 
 two things, first, that which is of God therin. 2. that 
 which is of man, that which is of God, is the substance 
 of baptisme, as before is observed, viz : the same matter 
 & forme that the L. instituted, & likewyse the same end 
 which is the profession of the faith of Christ, & this is not 
 false worship, & so consequently not to be renounced. 
 
 Againe, that which in the administration of baptisme 
 is devised by man, are those vnwarrantable ceremonies 
 of crossing, breathing, annoynting, &c. these are to bee 
 renounced as vaine worship, Mat. 15. 4. Now the 
 ordinances of God are to be purged from the pollutions 
 of men, & not with their pollutions to be renounced, for 
 if polution might warrant men to cast away with it, that 
 which is ordeyned of God, then might not the holy vessels 
 polluted in Babylon have bene brought againe to lerusa: 
 nor yet the Teple it selfe, that was so greatly profaned in 
 the dayes of the Idolatrous Kings have any more bene 
 vsed as a place of worsh. to the L. Secondly, I answer 
 that we have receaved a true baptisme in the apostate 
 Chu. as the people of God did circumcision amongst 
 the ten trybes: & therfor we may no more renounce it, 
 & assume a new, then they that returned to lerus. 2, Chro. 
 30. 11. might renounce theire circumcision, & be recircum- 
 cised. 
 
 It is obje6led of some, that this comparison houlds 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 673 
 
 not, for Israel was a true Chu. & therf or their circumcision 
 was true: but Apostate Churches have nothing true, 
 neither are the members therof capable either of the 
 covenant or scale in that standing, & it is not true 
 baptisme to such. 
 
 This objedtion in part I have answered before, & now 
 answer further, 1. that the Israelites in their Apostacy 
 were not a true Church, but false: seing they Seperated 
 from lerus. the true & only Chu. in the world, & ere6ted 
 a new Church & comunio amongst theselves, joyning 
 together in a false wor. & vnder a false ministery, 1. King. 
 12. 30-33. 20. & 18. 19-21. & so became an harlot, Hos. 
 2. 2. Secondly in the apostate Chur. ther be some things 
 true in the substance as the word & baptisme, though 
 corupted in the administration therof by false ministers, 
 & humane devises. Thirdly the members of an apostate 
 Chu. are to be considered two wayes, 1. as they stand 
 members of such a Chur. Secondly, as they are the seed 
 & posterity of their forfathers which receaved the covenant 
 for themselves & for their seed: & though in regard of 
 the former estate, they have nether right to baptisme or 
 the covenat (for the holy things of God belongs not 
 properly to false Chu. nor to the members therof con- 
 sidered in that estate) yet even to such members con- 
 sidered apart from such standing & as they are the seed 
 of their forfathers, so are they capable of the covenant 
 & Sacra. & the same is avayleable to them vppon their 
 repentance: For in apostate Chur[c]hes God hath his 
 people which are beloved for their Fathers sakes, Rom. 
 11. 28. & this apeareth in that he saith, come out of her 
 my people, Apo. 18. 4. & to such it cannot be denyed, but 
 that to them belongs the covenant, yea whyles they are 
 in Spiritual! Babylon, as it did to the lewes that were 
 in Babylon of Chaldea : bondage hinders not Gods grace. 
 
 But some may reply, that they whose Fathers were 
 Idolaters & vnbeleevers co[u]ld have no right to the 
 covenant to be baptized through the Faith of their Fathers. 
 I answer, the right that children have to Gods covenant 
 depends not only vpon their immediate parents, but title 
 therto descends vnto them, from their auncestors Exo. 20. 
 if wee respe6t herein Gods mercy, even as mens inheritance 
 
 w. II. 23 
 
674 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 doe from their former Fathers: neither do the members 
 of an Apostate Church cast of al profession of faith, for 
 such beleve the Scriptures, & in Ch. &c. though with al 
 they professe divers errors, & worship the true God in 
 a false manner. 
 
 If question be made how it can be proved that the 
 members of an Apostate Chu. had f orfathers that beleved. 
 I answere, it cannot be denyed, seing that an Apostate 
 Church ariseth not out of a company of infidels (for then 
 could it not be called Apostate: seing that to apostate 
 must be in regard of the truth) but is the ruines of a true 
 Church, & therf or it must needs f oUow that their f orfathers 
 were belevers, & had receaved the covenant. 
 
 And thus have I breifly answered these two Ana- 
 baptistical positions with theire reasons, as the Lor. hath 
 inabled me for the present, wishing this labour might 
 have bene taken in hand by such as could better performe 
 it. & further I do intreate, that the truth (which I 
 contend for), may not, through my weake defence, beare 
 any reproche, but that which is felt worthy, let it returne 
 vpon my head: & do also earnestly pray that he that 
 hath thus written, & both he & they that so pra6tise, may 
 seriously consider of that which is done, & glorify God 
 by their repentance. March. 14. 1608. 
 
 Rich. Clifton. 
 
 lohn Smjrth. 
 
 In the next place you make answer to my last argu- 
 ment, which may bee framed into this forme. 
 
 As the false Church & ministery are reje6ted, & the 
 
 contrary true Church & ministery assumed: So 
 
 the false worship, & so by consequent the false 
 
 baptisme must be renounced, & the true baptisme 
 
 assumed. 
 
 Verum primum. Ergo secundum. 
 
 The summe of yovir answer is, that we must renoxmee 
 
 indeed the false Church, ministery, & worship, & yet 
 
 may retaine the baptisme receaved in the false Church, 
 
 which (you say) is true in author, matter, fornie, & end: 
 
 Though corrupt in circumstance, as oyling, crossing. 
 
Rich. CUfton & lohn Smyth. 675 
 
 breathing, &o. repenting of those coruptions, & not casting 
 away the true substance with the corrupted circumstances 
 devised by man, & annexed therto, &c. 
 
 Although al that is mentioned heer is abeady taken 
 away in the former discourse yet it shal not be amisse 
 to annexe some thing for further cleering of the point. 
 
 First, I deny the popish baptisme to be true in the j 
 4. causes therof as you affirme : 1. The L. never instituted f 
 that infants should be baptized, 2. he never ordeyned that 
 Pagans should be baptized, 3. he never instituted that the 
 carnal seed of the faithfuU should be baptized: Therfor 
 seing infants that are not the seed of the faithful, but the 
 seed of Babylonians, are baptized by Antich. the matter 
 of baptisme is false, 1 the L. never appointed that the 
 party should be baptized without his owne confession & 
 conset to the contra6t that the L. maketh in baptisme: 
 & therfor the Apo. Peter saith that in baptisme ther is 
 the question of a good conscience into God: & PaiiU 
 saith that when the body is washed with pure water, the 
 hart must be sprinckled from an evil conscience, 1. Pet. 3. 
 21. Heb. 10. 22. therfor infants are baptized which cannot 
 Stipulate or contra6t themselves vnto the L. therfor the 
 L. doth not contra6l with them, for Chr. the husband of 
 the Church wil not contra6t in marriage with a bride or 
 a spowse that is vnder age, Gal. 4. 1-4. 3. the L. did 
 never appoint that baptisme should scale vp his new 
 Testament to infants, or that infants should by his 
 baptisme be admitted into the body of Antich. & into 
 the Church, ministery, worship, & government of Antich. 
 or that his baptisme should set a chara6ler indelible 
 vpon parties baptized, or should give grace ex opere 
 operato, al which or most of which are done in Antich. 
 baptisme : but the end of Chr. baptisme is to manifest 
 visibly that the partie confessing his faith & sinnes is 
 sealed by the Spirit vnto the day of redemption, that he 
 hath visibly put on Chr. that he is mortified, crucified, 
 dead, & buryed, risen againe, & ascended with Chr. 
 Rom. 6. 1-6. & Col. 2. 12. Gal. 3. 27. Col. 3. 1-5. these 
 are the true ends of baptisme instituted by Chr. Seing 
 therfor the matter, forme, & end of baptisme in the false 
 Church is from man even from Antich. therfor the L. is 
 
 23—2 
 
676 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 not the author of this baptisme, but the baptisme is antic, 
 wholy : & although he vseth the words, In nomine Patris, 
 Filij, & Sp. San6ti amen: as the papists do in sprinckling 
 holy water, in baptising their bels, & as conjurers do in 
 their charmes, yet this cannot make true baptisme, but 
 rather is a most notable profanatio of the holy Scripture, 
 even as it is profaned in ther Sermons & dayly worship 
 performed by them. I afiirme therfor againe & againe 
 that the baptisme receaved in the false Church is none of 
 the L. ordinance, but antichr. devise, essentially corrupted, 
 in matter, forme, & end or vse: & therfor whoUy to be 
 reje6ted with the [anjoynting, breathing, & crossing, &c. 
 
 Heer you endevour to prove that Israel was a false 
 Church, bicause it Seperated from ludah, & bicause they 
 joyned together in a new Church & communion, vnder 
 a false ministery & worship, & became a harlot : wherto 
 I answer that so was ludah a false Ch: when they 
 worshipped Idols vnder every gree tree, & in the high 
 places: & if you so vnderstand a false Church, viz: 
 meetings, or companyes of men assembled together in 
 a wrong place, & to a wrong worship, vnder a wrong 
 Preisthood, I yeeld Israel so to be a false Church, but I 
 deny that to be the true definition of a false Chu. for 
 a false Church is contrary to a true Church : now a true 
 Church is descerned in the true causes essential: & so 
 a false Church is known by the want of those true causes 
 essential : the true essential causes of the Chu. of the old 
 Test, was the posterity of Abrah. or proselytes circum- 
 cised: the want of these things only made a false Chur: 
 So long as the Israelites retained circumcision, they were 
 the true carnal constituted Church of the old Test: & 
 Israel & ludah are caUed harlots, not for that they were 
 a false Church, but for the worshipping of God in Idols, 
 as before the calves at Dan & Bethel, or the Idols in 
 ludah, this is plaine enough in the History. So that 
 I coclude against you that Israel was no false Church in 
 the constitutid, but had a true matter & forme, viz : 
 circticised IsraeHtes though vnder a false ministery, 
 worship, & government, as I have already shewed in the 
 former treatise. 
 
 Lastly, you bring vs in a double respe6t or considera- 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 677 
 
 tion of members of the Chur- of Antich. 1. as they are 
 members of those false Chu: 2. as they are the children 
 of [bejleving progenitors who receaved the covenant for 
 themselves & their posterity: in the first respe6t they 
 are not vnder the covenat or seale therof in the second 
 respe6t they are vnder both, for the Fathers sake Rom. 11. 
 28. & so their repentance shal serve their turne when 
 they come to the true Church without rebaptising. 
 
 I aswer divers things: first, I do not deny but that 
 me may be cosidered two waies visibly as members of 
 Antich. body, invisibly as aperteyxdng to the L. ele6tion, 
 & that is the meaning of the Ap. Rom. 11. 28. but I deny 
 that hence it foloweth, that when they come from their 
 invisible being in Ch. to a visible being in the true visible 
 Chu. they shal enter in any way but by the dore which 
 is baptisme: For wheras you intimate that a man being 
 invisibly ele6l & beloved of God, & invisibly having title 
 to the covenant & holy things of God, may therevppon 
 first visibly enter into the false Chu. by false baptisme, 
 & then vppon his repentance come to the true Chu. & 
 enter therinto not by baptisme, but that the dore of 
 Antich. Chur. shal open him the way into Chr. Church 
 long before he come into Chr. Church, wheras I say you 
 intimate vnto vs so much, you do herby teach contrary 
 to our Saviour Chr. who saith that we must goe in by the 
 dore, & not climb vp by the window, & that wee must 
 first bee taught & made Disc. & the baptized into Chr. 
 but you in the Kingdom of Antic, are first baptized falsely 
 & then made Disciples flat contrary to Christs com- 
 maundem[ent]. 
 
 Secondly I say that no man is vnder the covenant or\ 
 vnder baptisme for the parets sake: & that is not the 
 meaning of the Ap. Ro. 11. 28. but his meaning is that the,' 
 ele6t of the Israelites are beloved for the promise God 
 made to Abrah. Isaac, & lacob, in respe6t of Chr: not for 
 that the children shalbe pertakers of that covenant, 
 bicause of their parents faith, or bicause of Gods covenant 
 made with the parents & ther carnal infants, but bicause 
 the L. ele6ted them & predestinated them in Chr. to life 
 & salvation invisibly: & therfor I do confidently deny, 
 & you are never able to prove that the carnal infants are 
 
678 Passages betwixt Mr. 
 
 a6lually possessed of the everlasting covenant God made 
 with Abrah. for their parents sakes : do you indeed think 
 that God loveth any man for another mans sake? or do 
 you think that God loveth not al men of his meer mercy : 
 or for Chr. sake: neither is it the carnal line that is 
 beloved of God for his mercy sake or for Chr. sake: but 
 it is the Spiritual line of Abrah. the faithful onely & eledt 
 that are beloved for the Fathers, that is for the covenant 
 made with Abrah. Isaac, & lacob, our Fathers in the 
 faith: & so it is true that God loveth men in the false 
 Chu. of An. for Abrah. Isaac, & lacob, that is for his 
 merciful promise made to them : but what is this to prove 
 that Antic, are beloved, & vnder the covenant, for their 
 carnal line descending from a beleving auncestor? or if 
 that were granted how doth it foUow that the baptisme 
 visibly receaved in the Antich. false Chu. is true baptisme 
 seahng vp the covenant to them that the L. converteth 
 in the false Chu. No : we have already proved that the 
 baptisme is essentially false & none of Chr. & therfor it 
 is the chara6ter or mark of the beast, openly retained in 
 the forhead of al the subje6ts of Antic, who professing 
 themselves to be of that baptisme do professe theselves 
 to be of that body for of that body they are of whose 
 baptisme they are, & of that baptisme they are of whose 
 body they are, 1. Cor. 12. 13. Eph. 4. 4. Gal. 3. 27. & we 
 have also proved that the L. true baptisme doth not 
 aperteyne to the carnal line, but only to them that are 
 of Abrah. faith, that is a6tually beleeving to justification, 
 & shewing the faith of Abraham by the works of Abrah. 
 Lastly, where you fetch the title to the Covenant & to 
 baptisme, for infants in the false Chu. from some auncestor 
 beleving 40. generations happily before acording to that 
 Exo. 20 that the L. sheweth mercy to 1000. generations 
 of them that love him: I answer 3. things, 1. you must 
 prove that some off our predecessors had true aftual faith 
 & were members of [a] true Ch. & this you must prove 
 for every member you receave in without baptisme therby 
 to assure you that he had title to the covenat & to 
 baptisme by his carnal line: 2. you must by the same 
 reason receave by baptisme into the true Chu. (if you 
 can come by the) al the infants of the Thessalonians, 
 
Rich. Clifton & lohii Smyth. 679 
 
 the Ephesians, the Galatians, the Colossians, the 
 PhiUppians, & the Chu. of Asia that did somtime 
 beleve, 3. I deny that you expound the place Exo. 20. 
 truly: For the L. direcftly doth require that they vpon 
 whom hee sheweth mercy should feare him & keep his 
 commaundem: & I do vtterly deny that ever the fore- 
 Fathers of the English nation beleved, & you can never 
 prove it. For that which you say that seing we are 
 Apostates, therfor it followeth that somtyme we or our 
 auncesters had the truth, I wonder at you for so saying : 
 for we are departed fro the faith of the Scriptures, not 
 from the faith of our auncestors, who never a one of them 
 at any tyme beleved visibly in a true constituted Chu. 
 Thus through Gods providence & blessing I am come to 
 a happy end of answering your writing: wherin I praise 
 the L. for his mercy I have receved such assurance of the 
 truth as that you & al the earth shal never be able to 
 wring it out of my hart & hands, & therfor I desire you 
 Sir, & al the leaders of the Seperation to weigh seriously 
 even betwixt the L. & their own harts vpon their beds 
 this which is written, I doubt not but I may erre in par- 
 ticulars, & I have resolved to be vile befor men in 
 confessing my erors, but for the maine points in con- 
 troversy, & the cause I defend it is the most vndoubted 
 & most evident truth that ever was revealed to me: 
 & therfor as you love the L. & his truth, & the people 
 that depend vpon you, seek it out & embrace it, & resist 
 it not, but if we bee in error, shew it vnto vs, why ? shal 
 we perish through your default? wil not the L. reqiiire 
 our blood at your hand ? are we not your countrymen al 
 of vs? in exUe for the common truths, we hold out 
 against Antich. Answer we beseech you in the L: nay 
 we adjure you in the Lord: if we be in error it is igno- 
 rantly, & of a desire to see the truth & to feare the L: 
 Thus hoping speedUy either to heare an answer to this 
 writing, or to see you yeeld to the truth which I vn- 
 feynedly ask of the Lo: for you my countrymen, I end 
 writing this 24. of March. 1608. 
 
 lohn Smyth. 
 
680 Passages betwixt Mr. Ricii. Clifton & lohn Smyth. 
 
 Rich. Chfton. If you reply, shew your strength, that 
 we may make an end of these vncomfortable oppositions, 
 for if I see not weight in your reasons, I wil bestow no 
 more labour. 
 
 loh. Smyth. Sir: ther may be weight in my reasons, 
 & you happily either cannot through prejudice or wil not 
 through some sinister respe6t se the weight of them: 
 I pray you be not charmed by evil counsel, but either 
 shew me my error, or yeeld to the truth. I would be 
 glad to be an instrument of shewing you this truth also : 
 at least you by shewing vs our error shal discharg a good 
 conscience: If you do not answer among you al: I 
 proclayme you are subtUly bUnd, & lead the blind after 
 you into the ditch. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
681 
 
 [APPLICATION FOR UNION 
 
 WITH THE 
 
 WATERLANDER CHURCH IN AMSTERDAM] 
 
 Nomina Anglorum qui hunc errorem suum agnoscunt, 
 ejusque penitentiam agunt, viz: quod inceperint seipsos 
 baptisare, contra ordinem a Christo constitutum : quique 
 jam cupiunt liinc verae Christi ecclesiae vniri, ea qua 
 fieri possit expeditione. 
 
 Nomina virorum. 
 
 Hugh Bromhead. 
 Jervase Nevill. 
 John Smyth. 
 Thomas Canadyne. 
 Edward Hankin. 
 John Hardy. 
 Thomas Pygott. 
 Francis Pygott. 
 Robert Stavely. 
 Alexander Fleming. 
 Alexander Hodgkin. 
 John GrindaU. 
 Salomon Thomson. 
 SamueU Halton. 
 Thomas Dolphin. 
 
 feminarum. 
 Anne Bromhead. 
 Jane Southworth. 
 Mary Smyth. 
 Joane Halton. 
 Ales Arnefield. 
 IsabeU Thomson. 
 Margaret Stavely. 
 Mary GrindaU. 
 Mother Pygott. 
 Ales Pygott. 
 Margarett Pygott. 
 Betteris Dickenson. 
 Mary Dickenson. 
 EUyn Paynter. 
 Ales Parsons. 
 Joane Briggs. 
 Jane Organ. 
 
 Cupimus vnanimiter votum hoc nostrum ecclesiae 
 significari. 
 
682 
 
 [THE FIRST BAPTIST CONFESSION] 
 
 Corde credimus, et ore confitemur : 
 
 1. Unum esse Detim, optimum, maximum, glorio- 
 sissimum, creatorem et conservatorem omnium: qui est 
 Pater, Filius, et Spiritus sanctus. 
 
 2. Deum creasse et redemisse genus humanum ad 
 imaginem suam, omnesque homines (nemine reprobato) 
 ad vitam predestinasse. 
 
 3. Deum, nullam peccandi necessitatem cuiquam 
 imponere, sed hominem libere impulsu sathanae a deo 
 deficere. 
 
 4. Regulam vitae a deo primitus in observatione 
 legis positam; exinde ob infirmitatem carnis dei bene- 
 placito, per christi redemptionem in justitiam fidei 
 translatam esse: quam ob caussam, neminem deum 
 juste incusare, verum potius ex intimis visceribus ipsius 
 misericordiam revereri, admirari, et celebrare debere; 
 eum possibile homini reddideret Deus per gratiam, quod 
 prius homine lapso impossibile fuerat per naturam. 
 
 5. Nullum esse peccatum originis, verum omne 
 peccatum esse actuale et voluntarium viz: dictum 
 factum aut concupitum contra legem dei: ideoque 
 infantes esse sine peccato. 
 
 6. Jesum Christum esse verum Deum et verum 
 hominem: viz: filio dei assumente et sibi uniente 
 hominis veram et puram naturam ex vera anima rationali, 
 et vero corpore humano consistentem. 
 
 7. Jesum Christum, quod ad carnem attinet, per 
 spiritum sanctum in utero virginis Mariae conceptum 
 fuisse, postea — natum, circumcisum, baptisatum, tenta- 
 tum fuisse, etiam ipsum esurivisse, sitivisse, comedisse, 
 bibisse, crevisse, tum statura tum cognitione : def atigatum 
 fuisse, dormivisse : denique crucifixum, mortuum, sepultum 
 fuisse, resurrexisse, in coelum ascendisse : ipsique, iitpote 
 
[The First Baptist Confession] 683 
 
 soli Regi, Pontifici, et Prophetae Ecclesiae, omnem turn 
 eoelo turn in terra potestatem commissam esse. 
 
 8. Gratiam dei per Christi redemptionem impetratam 
 omnibus sine discrimine paratam et oblatam fore, idque 
 non ficte sed bona fide: partim per creaturas quae in- 
 visibilia dei declarant, partim per evangelij predica- 
 tionem. 
 
 9. Homines ex dei gratia per Christi redemptionem 
 posse (spiritu sancto per gratiam ipsos preveniente) 
 resipiscere, credere, ad deum convertere, et vitam eternam 
 adipisci: sicut e contra, posse ipsos spiritui sancto 
 resistere, a deo deficere, et in eternum perire. 
 
 10. Justificationem hominis coram dei tribunali (qui 
 est et justitiae et misericordiae thronus) subsistere, 
 partim ex imputatione justitiae Christi per fidem appre- 
 hensa partim ex justitia inherente in ipsis Sanctis per 
 operationem spiritus sancti quae Regeneratio sive sancti- 
 ficatio dicitur: si quidem Justus est qui facit justitiam. 
 
 11. Fidem, bonis operibus vacuam, mortuam esse: 
 veram autem et vivam fidem per bona opera dignosci. 
 
 12. Ecclesiam Christi esse coetum fidelium post 
 fidei et peccatorum confessionem baptizatorum, potestate 
 Christi praeditum. 
 
 13. Ecclesiam Christi habere potestatem sibi dele- 
 gatam, verbum anuntiandi, sacramenta administrandi, 
 ministros constituendi et abdicendi, denique excommuni- 
 candi: ultimam autem provocationem esse ad fratres, 
 sive corpus ecclesiae. 
 
 14. Baptismum esse externum symbolum remis- 
 sionis peccatorum mortificationis et vivificationis, ideoque 
 ad iniantes non pertinere. 
 
 15. Coenam Domini esse symbolum externum com- 
 munionis Christi et fidelium ad invicem per fidem et 
 charitatem. 
 
 16. Ministros ecclesiae esse, turn Episcopos quibus 
 facultas dispensandi, turn verbum tum sacramenta 
 commissa est: tum Diaconos, viros et viduas, qui res 
 pauperum et fratrum infirmorum curant. 
 
 17. Fratres post tertium gradum admonitionis in 
 peccatis sibi cognitis perseverantes excludendos esse e 
 communione sanctorum per excommunicationem. 
 
684 [The First Baptist Confession] 
 
 18. Excommunicates quod ad civile commercium 
 attinet non esse devitandos. 
 
 19. Mortuos (vivis momento mutatis) resurrecturos 
 ijsdem corporibus, non substantia, sed qualitatibus 
 mutatis. 
 
 20. Post resurrectionem omnes sistendos fore ad 
 Tribunal Christi Judicis, secundum opera judicandos: 
 Pios post sententiam absolutionis, vita eterna cum 
 Christo in coelis fruitiiros: Impios vero damnatos, in 
 Gehenna cum diabolo et angelis ejus eternis supplicijs 
 cruciandos. 
 
 John Smyth. 
 
685 
 
 [DEFENCE OF RIES' CONFESSION] 
 
 Articulus 4. 
 
 Omnes in Adamo lapsi, restatirati sunt a deo, adeo 
 ut e posteris Adae nemo, ob banc restaurationem, in 
 peccato aut reatu natus sit: utrumque fa[lsum] pro- 
 nuntiat censura: virum utrumque defendo: scripturae 
 margini aflfixae sunt. Gen. 12. 3. et 22: 18 et 26: 4. 
 Rom. 6: 18. Gen. 12 etc. Et benedicta erunt in te 
 omnes famibae terrae. Rom. 5: 18. Nempe igitur sicut 
 per unam offensam reatus venit in omnes bomines ad 
 condemnationem : ita per unam justificationem bene- 
 ficium redundavit in omnes bomines ad justificationem 
 vitae. 
 
 ExpUcatio scripturarum ut veritatis defensio ex iisdem 
 petita. Locus ille Geneseos 12 qui etiam 22 et 26 repe- 
 titur, est parallelaos primae illi promissioni Adae et 
 uxori ejus in paradyso a deo factae de conterendo capite 
 serpentis per semen illud benedictum: ergo quem- 
 admodum Cayn particeps factus est Adae peccati, ita 
 et beneficii cbristi: etenim hoc foedus factum est cum 
 Adamo ipsiusque bberis omnibus; idque secundum 
 vestram reformatam doctrinam qui foedus divinum cum 
 fideU ej usque bberis ictum vultis : hoc ipsum foedus deus 
 multis post annis renovat cum Abrahamo quod etiam 
 sese extendit ad omnes familias terrae. 
 
 Quaero ergo quae sit baec benedictio quam omnes 
 f amiliae terrae participant ? non est procul dubio speciale 
 iUud fidelium privilegium qui e morte in vitam translati 
 sunt: nam omnes famibae terrae id non participant, 
 sed est generalis quaedam benedictio qua omnes posteri 
 Adae ab ipsius peccato et peccati reatu liberantur, ea 
 ipsa scibcet cujus ipse Caijn in utero materno conceptus 
 
686 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 compos f actus est; si enim Caijn hoc beneficium de- 
 negetur, turn foedus non est ictum cum fideli ej usque 
 liberis: si concedatur Caijno quare non omni homini in 
 hunc mundum venienti : quare non iis etiam qui Christum 
 abnegant: Joh. 1, 2. Pet. 2. Si quisquam obijciat 
 Caynum postea decessisse de ecclesia omnesque ipsius 
 posteros hoc beneficio privasse : Respondeo : primo fides 
 Adami plus virium habebit ad posteros Caini in foedere 
 continendos quam infidehtas Caijni ad eosdem exter- 
 minandos Exod. 20: 5, 6. Secundo scriptura huic 
 sententiae adversatur cum affirmet fiHum non moriturum 
 ob peccatum parentum cum deus sit omnium animarum 
 parens Ezech [1. Sirach] 18: 4, enim creatur a deo quam 
 ipse corpori infundens puram, non pollmt ipse cum non 
 sit author peccati ; labem non contrahit a corpore anima, 
 cum corpus non sit peccati origo; non labitur anima a 
 deo pura creata, nisi quis veht infantem nuper con- 
 ceptum actuale peccatum perpetrare; necesse est ergo 
 omnem animam omni peccato vacuam nasci. Praeterea 
 quaero quomodo omnes famihae terrae benedictae erunt: 
 omnes inquam famihae ; Eludere soletis phrasim illam, 
 omnes homines; scihcet dictum fore id non de singulis 
 generum, sed de generibus singulorum, phrasis haec, 
 omnes famihae, ad eundem modum non eluditur: voluit 
 siquidem dominus per hasce phrases, omnes nationes; 
 omnes familias, omnes homines, commenta hominum 
 excludere, affirmando: quod omnis homo cuj usque 
 famihae, et unaquaeque familiae uniuscuj usque gentis 
 hanc benedictionem per Abrahamum participat. 
 
 Secundus ille locus ad Rom. 5. aperte significat ut 
 reatum sic ut beneficium in omnes conferri: si to omnes 
 in protasi refertur ad singula individua, non video quo- 
 modo quispiam bona conscientia to omnes in apodosi 
 posset referre ad singula genera: praesertim cum pro- 
 positum Apostolo sit gratiam Christi amplificare: voluit 
 enim spiritus sanctus Christi beneficium, Adami inoboe- 
 dientiam dignitate et amplitudine superare: Si Christus 
 quosdam homines solummodo redemit, non fregit caput 
 serpentis, sed caudam: nam summa potestas adhuc 
 manet quam nee voluit nee potuit Christus retundere: 
 ideoque Christi gratia infirmior est peccato Adami cum 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 687 
 
 hoc omnes homines perdidit, ilia perpaucos admodum ab 
 interitu vindicavit. 
 
 Praeterea cum omnes homines in Adamo ad salutem 
 condidit Deus, paucos vero e lapsu restituit. Exinde 
 gratia creationis tum amphor, turn illustrior redditur, 
 quam gratia redemptionis : deusque discessit a proprie- 
 tate sua in opere redemptionis quam retinuit in opere 
 creationis quod quam iniquum sit, viderint ipsi qui 
 hujusmodi dogmata effutiunt: nos cum prophet[is] 
 [cjantamus libri Dei misericordiam in omnia ipsius opera 
 extendi, deumque neminem deserere nisi qui deum primo 
 deseruit: ipsumque amare prosequi suos osores mor- 
 temque oppetere pro ipsius inimicis, Psal. 145: 9, 
 Rom. 5: 10, Ezech. 18: 31, 32. 
 
 Articulus 5. 
 
 Homo lapsus atque in malo positus, vires etiam 
 habuit bono provenienti, illi ab ipso domino oblato, 
 auscultare ipsumque sive assumere sive rejicere. Nam 
 sicut ante lapsum, malo prevenienti auscultans, ipsumque 
 assumens vires suas indicavit ad id assumendum : sic et 
 post lapsum bono prevenienti auscultans idque assumens, 
 vires suas declaravit ad id assumendum: Hac autem 
 vires, videlicet, dei prevenientem gratiam sive assumere 
 sive rejicere, per ipsius posteros ex gratia remanserunt: 
 falsum hie annotat censura: quaererem ego num haec 
 omnia falsa putat? Affirmantur hie quatuor: 1. homi- 
 nem ante lapsum vires habuisse gratiam prevenientem 
 recipere sive rejicere; 2. malum propositum assumere; 
 3. hominem lapsum vires habuisse bonum propositum 
 assume[re]; 4. has vires remanere apud ipsius posteros. 
 Credo censuram facile posse concedere, saltern verbis duo 
 haec prima fere verissima: Etenim ut falsa, falsi titulo 
 signat : Et quidem si verum sit quod illi acriter defendant, 
 deum innocentem creaturam ab eterno rejecisse atque 
 banc reprobationem Adami voluntatem ad malum pon- 
 derare (quod ut fateantur necesse est) tunc sine dubio 
 ante lapsum homo nullum sive ad bonum sive ad malum 
 liberum arbitrium habuit, sed fatali quadam calamitate a 
 bono ad malum abreptus est, nempe divini decreti 
 necessitate externa impellente cui resistere Adamo 
 
688 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 impossibile erat. Restant duo postrema discutienda, 
 nimirum post lapsum Adamum ej usque posteros vires 
 retinuisse ad bonum preveniens recipiendum: Itaque 
 omissis graecis et latinis vocibus utpote superbis nimis, 
 avre^ova-iov per liberum arbitrium, item distinctionibus 
 scolasticorum de merito congrui et condigni, de necessitate 
 consequentis et consequentia, quae simplicium ingenia 
 fatigare potius quam instruere solent, rem ipsam nudis 
 verbis et propinquo petitis simpliciter discutiamus. 
 
 Affirmamus ergo hominem post lapsum non esse sive 
 diabolum, sive brutum, multo minus truncum aut 
 stipitem ; sed totam naturam humanam integram restare, 
 ideoque naturales hasce vires intelligendi et volendi: 
 hominemque posse quod vis objectum propositum sive 
 bonum sive malum negligere, intelligere, velle nolle; 
 viresque has naturales non esse extinctas, sed solummodo 
 enervatas; quod ut facilius percipiatur quatuor jam 
 proposita argumenta repetantiu- si[n]gillatim : Homo non 
 est diabolus f actus post lapsum: impuri illi spiritus pro 
 seipsis nullam gratiam paratam inteUigunt ideoque eam ut 
 percipiant velintve impossibilis est : cum enim deus gratia 
 sua eos non prevenit, iisque misericordiam non ofiert, 
 non possunt illi quod non est sive cogitare sive desiderare : 
 Haec est spirituum impiorum conditio: iam vero vos 
 reformati maximam partem humani generis vel in banc 
 vel in ea[m] deteriorem conditionem praecipitem datis: 
 Illi enim impij spiritus gratiam ipsis paratam non in[te]Ili- 
 gunt nee volunt, quia nulla est: hi vero homines juxta 
 vestram doctrinam, ab eterno reprobi, gratiam et reve- 
 latam et in verbi ministerio summa cum efficacia oblatam 
 et persuasam nee percipere nee veUe possunt: apparet 
 ergo ex vostro dogmate reproborum conditionem ipsis 
 diabohs deteriorem esse: secundo brutorum est banc 
 conditionem posse ratione doceri vel suaderi, sive 
 docentem et suadentem intelligere et sequi: vestra 
 doctrina reformata id ipsum homini ascribit lapso non 
 solum reprobis, sed et electis: tertio homines lapsos vos 
 truncos et fustes facitis: nempe non posse hominem 
 lapsum evangelium sive intelligere sive velle magis quam 
 lapidem : potest deus ex lapidibus filios Abraho suscitare : 
 id ipsum agit deus in conversione hominum juxta vestram 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 689 
 
 reformatam opinionem. Denique creatam qualitatem 
 sive naturalem potentiam intelligendi et volendi a deo 
 in creatione homini inditam post lapsum perditam 
 strenue def enditis : lapsus ergo hominis ipsam creaturam 
 in nihilum redegit : hoc autem dico respectu gratiae sive 
 intelligendae sive expetendae: nos enervatam et dimi- 
 nutam dicimus naturalem illam potentiam et sive divino 
 auxUio inanem et inefficacem: vos respectu gratiae 
 penitus exstinctam defenditis, quid hoc ahud est quam 
 creaturam a deo conditam abolere : Hunc vero hominem 
 lapsum. adeo deformem, adeo mutilem vultis ut homines 
 inter et quadrupedem, immo diabolum, fungum, lapidem, 
 nihil interesse putes ? Ut hominem non hominem efficias ? 
 Absit: Pergamus porro: Hujus articuli quarta clausula^ 
 quod censura exagitat, affirmat vires gratiam. oblatam 
 rejiciendi et assumendi per Adae posteros ex gratia 
 re[man]sisse : dicit inquam, ex gratia remansisse: non 
 quod alii objiciunt hoc esse vires humanas supra modum 
 efferre; respondet articulus totum hoc deberi divinae 
 benignitati quod possit homo gratiam previam sequi: 
 non affirmat hoc esse gratiam, sed remansisse per gratiam : 
 hoc est generale Ulud beneficium quod humanum genus 
 per Christi redemptionem adeptum est : age, excutiantur 
 scripturae testimonia margini ascripta: Genes. 4: 6, 7. 
 sub te erit appetitus ejus et tu dominaberis ei: disertis 
 verbis affirmat spiritus sanctus peccati appetitum subjici 
 Cayno: et ejusdem dominium in ipsius potestate esse: 
 respondere soletis hoc de Habele, non de peccato inteUigi : 
 ego dico hoc nuUa ratione posse concedi: non nulla 
 mentio facta est HabeUs sive a Deo ipso ad Caynum, sive 
 a Cayno coram Deo. Ergo affixum i non potest referri 
 ad id quod in eadem sententia nequaquam precessit : sed 
 concedatur vobis dictum fore de Dominio Primogeniti in 
 fratres natu minores: quid tum postea hinc quod volo 
 nequicquam minus efficitur : nempe ut primogenitus regit 
 natu minores: sic ratio et voluntas iQuminationem et 
 suasum gratiae previae, cohibet appetitus peccatrices 
 ipsiusque imperii habenas injicit: nam appetitus ad 
 peccatum natu minores sunt. 
 
 Secundus Locus est Genes. 6: 2. 3. 12. Spiritus mens 
 non perpetuo litigabit cum Adamo : hie locus apte indicat 
 
 w, II. 24 
 
690 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 spiritum dei cum spiritu hominis contendere et litigare 
 quemadmodum pro tribunal! consuetum est inter actorem 
 et reum: est autem phrasis haec apposita satis ad rem 
 ipsam explicandam : nam non vi et impulsu violento agit 
 actor cum reo, sed ratione et argumentorum momentis 
 quae Dei advocatus diluere et repellere potest: potestas 
 rem ipsam definiendi penes judicem est: sic spiritus dei 
 agit cum homine qui peccati reus est, ratione non vi, 
 suasu non impulsu violento cui reus possit sive resistere 
 sive obsequi: rem ipsam definit judex ille summus cujus 
 imp[er]io omnia subjiciuntur : hoc ipsum facile etiam 
 apparet ex actis apostolorum Cap. 6: 2. 10 et cap. 7: 2. 51. 
 hie affirmat Stephanus judeos impios restitisse spiritui 
 sancto: ilUc ait Lucas judeos non potuisse resistere 
 spiritui per quern locutus est Stephanus: id est etiamsi 
 ipsorum conscientiis Veritas patefacta est, eidem tamen 
 non auscultarunt : vincit spiritus litigando cum impiorum 
 conscientias convincit; victus est spiritus sanctus, cum 
 impij spiritus suasui non obtemperant. Judicium tamen 
 penes deum ipsum est, hominumque conscientias qui 
 sunt avTOKara-KpiToi. Denique nulla est major vis 
 spiritus quam quae in prophetis, apostolis et Christo 
 edita est, Christus enim spiritum supra modum accepit; 
 prophetae autem, Apostoli et Christus omnem illam 
 sp[iritus] sancti virtutem exercebant in eorum doctrina 
 et miraculis quam habuerunt; hunc tamen spiritum 
 extinguebant impij : videmus enim judeos Prophetarum, 
 Apostolorum et Christi spiritui semper restitisse: nam 
 utpote perversi pueri sociis tibiis canentibus aut plan- 
 gentibus non obtemperabant. Matt. 22: 3. Apostolos, 
 prophetas, Christum populum congregare (satagantes) 
 occidebant et noluerunt audire. Christus voluit, illi 
 noluerunt : voluit autem Christus bona fide et ex animo, 
 non simulate non ficte conlacrimat misericors, mirum in 
 modum animi affectus exprimit Matt. 23: 37. Luc. 13: 
 34. neque est quod dicat quispiam voluit ut homo, noluit 
 ut deus : respondet ipse Deus, Esaie 5: 4. quid faciendum 
 vineae meae quod non f ecerim in ea. Hie voluntas Christi 
 et voluntas Dei in unum conspirant: facessant ergo 
 hujusmodi nugamenta. 
 
 Locus tertius est Deut. 11: 26. et 30: 19. hue referantur 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 691 
 
 et reliqui: sic Psal. 81: 13. 14. Esaij 1: 19. 20. et 42: 18-21. 
 Jerem. 8: 7 et 25: 4. Joan. 5: 34. 40. Haec omnia testi- 
 monia subministrant nobis hujusmodi argumenta: vel 
 penes homines est previam gratiam amplecti sive aversari, 
 vel vita et mors, benedicti et maledicti non est homini 
 proposita: verum aperte ait dominus Deut. 11: 26 et 30: 
 15. proposui vobis vitam et mortem, bonum et malum, id 
 est benedictionem et maledictionem : ergo penes homines 
 est gratiam previam sive amplecti, sive respuere : si enim 
 non potuit amplecti previam gratiam, vita, bonum, 
 benedictio non erat ipsi proposita: si non potuit non 
 respuere previam gratiam, mors, malum, maledictio ipsi 
 non erat proposita: cum ergo utrumque proponitur, 
 utrumque potuit, id est amplecti et aversari. Deinde: 
 quibus deus ex animo optat bonum, benedictionem et 
 vitam, et de quibus graviter conquestus est dominus 
 quibusque horrenda minatur ipsius gratiam recusantibus 
 penes eos est gratiam oblatam vel recusare vel recipere: 
 siquidem deus non sine causa non ficte, non simulate, 
 non frustra, non irrisorie optat, conqueritiir comminatur : 
 quae quidem fecisset, si homo est quasi diabolus, brutus, 
 truncus, fungus, lapis. At manifestum est ex psalmo, ex 
 Esaia, ex Hierimia deum vehementer optare bonum 
 Israelitarum, graviter conqueri, et horrendum in modum 
 comminari rebeUibus et perversis peccatoribus. Caussa 
 ergo penes ipsos est qui potuerunt gratiam previam 
 amplecti, [n]on penes Deum qui necessitatem mali agendi 
 imposuisset: si hoc fecisset deus, potuissent respondere 
 Israehtae: quid optat, quid conquestus est, qui com- 
 minatur deus : necessum est nos sic agere, reprobatio dei 
 eterna nos in peccata precipitat, nos ipsis diabolis dete- 
 riores facti sumus, bruta lapides sumus, non possumus 
 veUe noUe, inteUigere percipere oblatam gratiam: immo 
 gratia nobis non erat oblata, noluit deus nos salvos, coena 
 nobis non erat parata, non eramus nos ad nuptias fiHj 
 invitati, decepit nos deus, dixit se veUe nos salvos fore, 
 verum non erat illi in animo, ab eterno odit nos : deus nos 
 per ipsius predestinationem ciconiae, hirundini, palumbi, 
 grui postposuit, non ergo potest deus de nobis conqueri, sed 
 irridet nos miseros homunciones. Quero jam quid respon- 
 suri sunt, prophetae, Apostoli, Christus, ipse deus? 
 
 24—2 
 
692 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 Respondet Apostolus: tu quis es qui responsas deo? 
 Lutum figulo? Scilicet jubet propheta judeos judicare 
 caussam suam inter ipsum et vineam: Esaj. 5: 3. et 
 nolit hie Apostolus nos id ipsum agere ? minime gentium. 
 Non igitur recurrit Apostolus ad predestinationem 
 vestram reformatam, quam non agnovit, sed partim 
 retundit petulantiam carnis, et indignitatem responsantis, 
 partim divinae voluntatis equitatem indicat, cum obsti- 
 natos et pervicaces reprobat, quos appellat vasa ad iram 
 disposita: morigeros autem et in veritatem sequens 
 eligit utpote misericordiae vasa in honorem parata: 
 Rom. 9. Non reprobat creaturam innocentem, sed in 
 peccatis pervicacem: neque eligit quemlibet, sed iustum 
 et in justitia perse verantem in finem : de hac dei electione 
 et reprobatione nemo conqueri potest juste, de vestra iUa 
 reformata sententia conqueri possunt judei quos propheta 
 judices instituit inter deum et vineam. Esaj. 5: 3. Huic 
 reclamat ipsa conscientia : sed de predestinatione postea : 
 iam revertamur ad propositum. 
 
 Reliqua scripturae testimonia in superioribus proposita 
 et exposita sunt. 
 
 Articulus Septimus. 
 
 Ad hunc articulum quatuor annotantur: 1. affirmat 
 censura hominum spontaneam electionem tenebrarum 
 esse caussam proximam damnationis: Dextre admodum 
 juxta reformatam illam doctrinam: iUi enim primam 
 caussam sive originem damnationis designant dei volun- 
 tatem et reprobationem creaturae adhuc purae atque in 
 innocentia constitutae: ideoque annotatio secunda cen- 
 surae arguit eum imperitum qui affirmet deum neminem 
 predestinasse, disposuisse, sive creasse ut damnaretur: 
 deinde etiam annotatio tertia censurae incusat articulum 
 quod neget Dei electionem cum afferat deum disposuisse 
 sive creasse omnes homines in salutarem finem : Hie ergo 
 tria discutienda sunt: 1. quae sit origo damnationis. 
 2. an deus predestinavit, ordinavit sive creavit hominem 
 ad damnationem. 3. an sic et quid sit dei electio; 
 
 Quod ad primum attinet, non est dubium quin homo 
 sit caussa sui interitus: verum an sit prima caussa an 
 proxima queritur : Deum esse caussam cuj usque creaturae 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 693 
 
 certum est eamque primariam : damnationis ergo caussa 
 primaria est in quantum poena, sed in quantum damnatio 
 est culpa, nimirum impenitentiae, pervicacia in malo, 
 rebellio contra deum ejus nee author nee fautor est deus : 
 verum aiunt nostri hi praedestinatores deus voluit 
 peccatum quia permisit: Negatur: permittere non est 
 velle apud homines. Toleramus plurima quae nolumus: 
 sic David toleravit homicidium Joabi : hoccine verum est 
 inter homines, nonne verum est multo magis in Deo, ad 
 cujus imaginem homo conditus est? Hoc nobis mani- 
 festum erit in Sabbathi typo: postquam deus creasset 
 omnia opera sua dicitur die septimo desijsse, et requievisse : 
 hoc est non sive voluisse sive fecisse peccatum: quo 
 exemplo docet nos deus debere nos itidem ab operibus 
 nostris, id est peccatis, f eriari : Nova haec praedestinatio 
 Manicheorum deum malum introduxit, qui velit mala: 
 si enim deus origo sit sive prima caussa mali culpae, 
 malus est deus qui vult mala: est autem origo et radix 
 mali, si homines fatah necessitate in peccatum trudit: 
 si est caussa caussae et caussa caussati; Si hominis 
 voluntatem in malum propendere facit per ipsius inevita- 
 bUe et efficax decretum, ipsum malum agit efficaciter: 
 quod ut impium et blasphemum horret animus cogitare. 
 Cum ergo in damnatione duo sunt praeter malum damni 
 viz: culpa et poena, ciilpa id est origo poenae est ab 
 homine et Sathana: poena autem consequitiir culpam 
 quam creat Justus judex: ergo prima haec annotatio 
 inepta satis est si velit deum primam caussam damnationis 
 quod attinet ad culpam: si vero respectu poenae vult 
 deum esse primam caussam ne id quidem omni ex parte 
 verum est, nam peccata hominum impeUunt creatorem 
 qui Justus est, poenam instigare, quam ipse solus creat. 
 Quod attinet secundum: solutio pendet partim a 
 superioribus, partim ab iis quae sequuntur: Creaturam 
 condere, predestinare, ordinare ad interitum longissime 
 abest a natura divina: Deus natura pater est, judex 
 autem et vindex (ut ita dicam) ex accidenti sive ex 
 consequenti: Adam est filius dei Luc. 3. creavit ergo 
 Adamum ad salutem omnesque cum eo ipsius posteros : 
 deus cum sit animarum creator et pater, non creat eos 
 ad interitum: si non creat non ordinat nee predestinat 
 
694 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 ad interitum: nisi quis velit deo opera et proposita 
 contradictoria ascribere : quid quod nemo omnium nocta- 
 lium est qui sibi proponit filios gignere ad patibulum: 
 paternitas creaturarum oritur ex paternitate dei ej usque 
 quasi scintilla quaedam est; si homines vero amant 
 liberos suos ipsisque optima quaeque ex animo optant et 
 curant, qui possumus deum fingere patrem crudelissimum, 
 qui ideo cupit filios ut possit eos odisse, perdere, in 
 eternum flagellare: Nova haec predestinatio naturam 
 divinam ignorat quae deum fingit patrem truculentum et 
 homicidam: Homicidium prohibuit Deus: quare? quia 
 nolit quemquam sine caussa mori: hi fingunt deum 
 crudelissimum homicidam qui creaturas innumeras etiam 
 innocentissimas eternis cruciatibus destinavit: nonne 
 hoc est ipsius legem transgredi : Lex dei imago est divinae 
 naturae: lex inquam sive naturalis sive moralis: lex 
 naturae docet parentes amare liberos suos quod videmus 
 in brutis animalibus : Decalogus jubet nos amare proximos 
 ut nosipsos: Deus ergo vel amat suas creaturas vel legi 
 suae contrariatur : apage ergo Manicheorum ilium deum 
 truculentum tyrannum crudelissimum qui innumeras 
 creaturas creavit et predestinavit ad ruinam. Noster 
 deus est plenus misericordiae : paratissimus ad condo- 
 nandum: tardus ad iram: deus ille Manicheorum totus 
 est iratus, immisericors, preceps ad vindictam, immo 
 innumeras creaturas innocentes reprobat ab eterno nullo 
 ipsorum precedente merito : Manicheorum deus precipitat 
 homines in peccatum quia est judex: noster misericors 
 deus judicat homines quia ipsi se precipitant in peccata 
 ipsiusque misericordiam despiciunt : ille deserit suos prius 
 quam sui deserunt ipsum : noster deserit neminem nisi 
 qui ipsum primum deseruit. ille primo judex est, nusquam 
 pater reproborum: noster primo pater est, post judex: 
 ille primo contra innocentem sententiam mortis pronun- 
 tiat, deinde reum deridet ej usque caussam ludicro inquirit : 
 noster primo (sonti) ex animo cupit benefaeere, serio 
 rem tractat: tandem in peccatis perseverantem tardus 
 punit. Ille deus est reformatorum, hie noster deus est. 
 Tertium jam sequitur : an sit et quid sit electio : esse 
 nemo dubitat neque articulus hie electionem dei negat: 
 vestram reformatam electionem eternam reprobationi 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 695 
 
 vestrae oppositam inpugnat et respuit ut aequum est: 
 electio est in Christo : qui in Christo est et perseverat ille 
 electus est, etiam ante mundi jacta fundamenta; hanc 
 enim regulam electionis ab eterno proposuit deus et 
 prescivit omnes credentes et perseverantes : Reprobatio 
 extra Christum est qui in peccatis perseverant usque in 
 finem reprobi sunt, etiam ante mundi fundamenta, nam 
 constituit deus hanc reprobationis regulam ab eterno, et 
 precognovit omnes eos qui in infidelitate et impoenitentia 
 in finem perseverare vellent. Haec dei prescientia eterna 
 nullam necessitatem infert, verum quemadmodum in 
 rebus civihbus scientia dei non impedit liberam actionem 
 et voluntatem: sic nee in rebus spirituaHbus : ex aequo 
 utraque prescivit deus ab eterno, neutri necessitatem 
 intuUt, sed Hberam agendi et volendi potestatem reliquit. 
 Inscite ergo ne dicam imperite articulo huic ascrivit 
 censura divinae electionis abnegationem. 
 
 Restat jam ultimum ex iis quae censura animadvertit 
 in hoc articulo scilicet quod articulus numquam intellexit 
 doctrinam de predestinatione ; verum id quidem est si 
 ref ormatam vestram predestinationem velitis quam neque 
 scripturae agnoscit : earn non intelligit id est non approbat 
 verum tamen inteUigit id est percipit quid sit; nempe 
 quod error sit et naturae divinae (absona), satis super- 
 que agnoscit cum sacra scriptura articulus: Deinde 
 quod articulus restringit universale iUud beneficium quo 
 Christus dicitur omnes redemisse, ad paucos fideles vel 
 universalem electionem ad particularem electionem, agit 
 id quidem non sine caussa quamvis alias fortasse censurae 
 visum est: si proprie loqui velimus universale illud 
 beneficium unicuique communicatum quo possunt gratiam 
 oblatam recipere, non potest dici nee dicitur (opinor) 
 electio in sacris libris : illi proprie electi sunt qui vocationi 
 divinae obsecundant: propriissime vero illi sunt electi 
 qui in finem perseverant; non loquor de electione ad 
 munera ecclesiastica, sed de electione ad salutem: Hie 
 ergo non peccat articulus quod restringit generale. 
 
 Articulus octavus. 
 
 Articulus hie taxatur tripliciter : primo quod videatur 
 aliquibus e nostris contradicere : quero ego a censura num 
 
696 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 sui omnes cum ipso consentiant: si non: commune est 
 hoc vitium, ideoque nobis non imputandum: non debet 
 in nobis reprebendere id quod ipsi vitio verti possit. 
 Secundo ait censura hoc veritati non satisfacere quod 
 articulus affirmat Christum esse verum deum et verum 
 hominem, verum spiritum et verum carnem: quid ita? 
 rationem non affert, suspicor tamen nempe quod carnis 
 Christi materia non designatur : quid ? num necesse est in 
 fidei confessione breviuscula (qualis hoc est) etiam 
 minutissima quaeque proponere ? verum f ortasse censura 
 vult articulum hunc esse magni pretii et fundamentum 
 fidei: Hanc vero; et quare non expressit hoc ipsum 
 spiritus sanctus in sacris libris: credimus quaecumque 
 loquitur sacra scriptura; phrasin uUam materiam carnis 
 Christi indicantem non adhuc percipimus, sequelas et 
 consequentias vestras audimus, verba diserta non 
 videmus : mallem ergo in dubio relinquere quam de lana 
 caprina contendere: cupio ego carnem Christi aliam 
 cognoscere, illam scil[icet] quam exprimit apostolus Eph. 
 5: 30 membra sumus corporis ejus, ex carne ejus et 
 ex ossibus ejus : hanc Christi carnem manducare debemus 
 ad vitam, non illam externam visibilem carnem cujus 
 scientiam parum valere Apostolus testatur 2 Cor. 5: 16. 
 
 Tertio censura nobis exprobrat phrasin anabapti- 
 sticam: Christus est visibiliter, invisibiliter, interne 
 externe, verus filius viventis dei: phrasis haec declarat 
 Christum totum esse verum filium dei non duos fiHos; 
 neque quicquam esse in Christo quod a Deo non est 
 genitum : nam affirmamus deum patrem totum Christum 
 genuisse, mariam negamus Christum genuisse : conceptum 
 et natum ex muliere fatemur, genitum negamus: pater 
 siquidem eum genuit: quicquid ergo in Christo est ex 
 patre est, nisi quid habeas ad hoc. 
 
 Articulus decimus. 
 
 Affirmat censura articulum hunc imperite eliminare 
 magistratum ex ecclesia Christi: ego autem affirmo 
 Christum esse regem spiritualem ipsiusque ecclesiam esse 
 regnum spirituale omnesque ecclesiae ministros esse 
 ministros spirituales, arma esse spiritualia, leges spirituales, 
 poenas spirituales, praemia spiritualia, milites spirituales, 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 697 
 
 bellum spirituale: ideoque non video quomodo externa 
 ilia et carnalis politia ecclesiam Christi administrare 
 possit: secundo quero a vobis quis futurus sit magis- 
 tratus, quale regimen, eritne monarchia, an aristocratia, 
 an politia: preterea magistratus hi, an fiant electione, 
 jure hereditario, an victoria: deinde quibus legibus 
 utantur, politia Mosaica an alia quavis deinceps quos 
 non puniet ille magistratus, num qui poenitentiam agunt, 
 an impoenitentes, hereticos an maleficos: denique cum 
 Cbristus jussit nos inimicos nostros deligere, miror 
 quomodo magistratus Christianus possit vindictam 
 exercere contra ipsius hostes ? Haec omnia vellem mihi 
 ex novo testamento exponi: Postremo cum ecclesia 
 Christi temporibus apostolorum erat perfectissima, omni- 
 busque perfidiis munita ad ejus perfectionem et comple- 
 mentum, mirum est Christum noluisse magistratum in 
 ecclesiam introducere qui gladio, vi et vindicta subditos 
 in ecclesiam cogeret si intelligeret munus hoc ad ipsius 
 ecclesiam attinere, quin potius e contrario voluit ipse per 
 persecutiones, exilium, paupertatem, ignominiam, mortem 
 suum regnum spirituale instituere : perfectissima ilia primi- 
 tiva ecclesia non agnovit magistratus in ipsius gremio, 
 ea tamen omnibus subsidiis ad ipsius tutelam necessariis 
 f ulta est : ergo aut magistratus oflficium non est ecclesiae 
 idoneum, aut primitiva ecclesia non erat satis instructa 
 ad ipsius tutelam et defensionem: aut hisce nostris 
 tem^poribus feliciora secula visura est ecclesia Christi. 
 
 Articulus 13. 
 
 Dicit hie censura articulum hunc pugnare cum suis, 
 qua autem in re non inteUigo, ejus rei ergo pleniorem 
 exphcationem expecto. 
 
 Artictilus 19. 
 
 Swenckfeldianum est illud (inquit censura) quod 
 Christi opera in carne facta nos majora quaedam et 
 spirituaha docuit: est etiam scripturae et spiritus sancti 
 unde hoc et alia f ortasse verissima hausit Swenckf eldius : 
 enim vero quid conceptio, nativitas, circumcisio, baptis- 
 mus, tentatio, predicatio, miracula, mors, sepultura, 
 resurrectio, ascensio Christi, numquid haec propter se 
 
698 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 ipsa, aut propter aliud quiddam potius contigerunt: 
 Christo contigerunt haec omnia ut possit in gloriam suam 
 ingredi nobisque sptritum sanctum a Patre mittere: 
 Quemadmodum enim omnes figurae et ceremonia veteris 
 testamenti Christi personam ej usque accidentia adum- 
 brarunt : sic ipsa Christi persona, actiones et perpessiones 
 in humilitate gesta, umbra quaedam fuerunt suiipsius jam 
 gloria exaltati ad dextram dei pa[tris]: Hie incipit, 
 ipsius regnum, sacerdotium, prophetia. Non quod ilia 
 priora nihil ad regnum, sacerdotium, prophetiam pertinent, 
 sed quod respectu horum minora sunt et minoris momenti : 
 debuit siquidem Ch[ristum] priora ilia omnia perpeti 
 aliter non potuit in gloriam suam ingredi: siquidem per 
 hanc viam afflictionum et humiliationis, Princeps nostrae 
 salutis consecratur: Hebr. 2: 10. Et in omnibus 
 tentatus est ad similitudinem : Hebr: 4: 13, ut nobis 
 exemplum preberet nobisque auxiliaretur. Ideoque 
 scriptura de iis quae Christi sunt dupliciter loquitur, 
 quo[d] ad umbram et quod ad veritatem : exempli gratia : 
 Christi caro est naturalis ut ita dicam: Heb. 5: 7 et 
 spiritualis: Eph. 5: 30. Christi corpus est etiam vel 
 naturale (absit invidia verbo) Mat. 27: 58 vel spirituale 
 Eph. 5: 30. Ossa etiam naturalia Joh. 19: 36 et 
 spiritualia Eph. 5: 30. Christi afflictiones vel naturales 
 sunt Joh. 19: 37 vel spirituales Act. 9: 4. Christi 
 nativitas duplex: naturalis Mat. 1: l8. spiritualis Apoc. 
 12: 5. ejus conceptio duplex: naturalis Luk. 1: 31 et 
 spiritualis. Gal. 4: 19. Christi miracula duplicia : externa 
 Joh. 9: 6, 7. et interna, Joh. 9: 39. Atque hoc interna 
 miracula (ut ita dicam) jam agit Christus per spirit um et 
 acturus est usque ad consummationem seculi: haec 
 interna majora sunt quam ilia externa, Joh. 14: 12. 
 Ilia externa omnia et naturalia quae Christus perfecit et 
 sustinuit, erant quasi preludia ad haec interna et spirit- 
 ualia : Haec adeo manif esta sunt ut non opus sit pleniore 
 exphcatione aut probatione, solummodo hoc animad- 
 versione dignum est, externa haec Christi minima esse 
 respectu eorum quae interna sunt : quam vis ergo externa 
 ilia victima corporis Christi in cruce facta infinita efficacia 
 est, atque in eternum efficax ad peccatorum remissionem, 
 tamen minoris est momenti, quam victima ilia interna 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 699 
 
 qua cordis concupiscentiae et peccata crucifiguntur 
 quotidie, sepeliuntur et extinguntur: nam ilia prima 
 externa victima hujus posterioris et internae figura 
 quaedam et umbra fuit, suam in se tamen continens vim 
 et veritatem etsi posteriori minorem : nam Christi munera 
 eorumque opera sive effectus in gloria, multo illustriora 
 et nobiliora sunt quam quae in humilitate transegit: 
 regnum suum nactus est Christus, sacerdotium et 
 prophetiam post glorificationem, quamvis externa quae- 
 dam rudimenta eorundem et fundamenta fecit in humili- 
 atione: Haec si meminerit et intellexerit censura facilior 
 futura erit responsio ad reliqua quae postea objicit 
 Swenckfeldiana ut ipsi visum est loqui. 
 
 Articulus 21. 
 
 Duo hie animadvertit Censura: primam quod con- 
 fudit articulus justificationem et sanctificationem : immo 
 diceret sanctificationem potius hie ab articulo fieri partem 
 justificationis, quod ex superioribus Swenckfeldianis facile 
 apparet ipsissimam fore veritatem: deinde censura 
 taxat clausulam hanc ut falsam quod articulus afferat 
 justificationem ex fonte regenerationis fluere: haec ut 
 f acilius percipiantur a censura, paulo pleniore explicatione 
 indigent. Dicimus ergo novam creaturam esse fontem 
 justificationis, ejusque radicem, omnesque partes justifica- 
 tionis, viz : peccati mortificationem, novam oboedientiam 
 et peccatorum remissionem novae creaturae effectus esse 
 sive accidentia: haec nova creatura est nostra ut ita 
 dicam filiatio, per novam creaturam facti sumus filii dei; 
 hanc novam creaturam generat in nobis pater coelestis 
 per immortale semen verbi sui: per novam creaturam 
 admittimur in regnum dei; nova creatura est baptismus 
 ille Christi per quem in corpus Christi baptizati sumus ut 
 simus caro de carne ejus et os de ossibus ejus: quemad- 
 modum Christus f actus est filius dei cum pater ejus 
 eum genuit, sic et nos facti sumus filii dei cum Christus 
 in nobis genitus est: peccata nobis remittit pater quia 
 sumus filii ; non sumus filii ob remissionem peccatorum : 
 mortificamus peccata quod habeamus spiritum Christi: 
 fructus novae creaturae producimus quod novam 
 creaturam habemus: Christus postquam genitus, natus 
 
700 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 est et adolevit, mortuus est, sepultus et resurrexit; sic 
 cum Christus in nobis firmatus est per novam creaturam, 
 nos cum ipso morimur, sepelimur et reviviscimus. Et 
 quemadmodum per ipsius mortem peccatorum remis- 
 sionem pro nobis assecutus est ipse, sic et nos ad ipsius 
 exemplum per peccatorum mortificationem, sepulturam 
 et resurrectionem nostram spiritualem, remissionem 
 peccatorum pro nobis ab illo partam nanciscimur: adeo 
 ut mortificatio peccati, vitae novitas et peccat[orum] 
 remissio fructus potius quam arboris partes censendae 
 sunt: nova haec creatura est quasi anima Christiani 
 hominis, vitae novitas et peccatorum mortificatio sunt 
 ejusdem spiritualis animae actiones et effecta; remissio 
 peccatorum est quasi accidens inseparabile, vel proprium 
 Tia^o?. Audiamus scripturae testimonia: Gal. 3: 11. 
 Justus ex fide vivit: vs. 26. nam estis vos omnes filij dei 
 per fidem in Christo Jesu. Eph. 3: 17. ut Christus inhabitet 
 in cordibus vestris per fidem. 
 
 Hie apostolus attribuit fidei vitam nostram spiritualem: 
 fiUationem nostram; Christi presentiam sive inhabita- 
 tionem in nobis: fides est interna quaedam virtus per 
 charitatem efficax ipsa quasi novae creaturae essentia, 
 caro, corpus, anima: nova creatura non est quidquam 
 extra nos sed in nobis, non justitia nobis imputata, sed 
 justitia in nobis insita, vel potius dispositio quaedam 
 spiritualis ad justitiam quam usu et assidua exercitatione 
 assequimur, quam remissio peccatorum tanquam pedis- 
 sequa consequitur: Hie ego quererem a Censura num 
 ille putet peccata remitti iis qui adhuc novam creaturam 
 non habent: Credo ilium negaturum: quid ergo? num 
 simul habentur peccatorum remissio et nova creatura? 
 immo vero inquit: quero preterea, si sunt tempore simul 
 quod fateor, tamen natura alterum altero prius est, 
 utrum prius est inquam? credo ilium responsurum 
 remissionem peccatorum esse caussam novae creatm-ae: 
 ergo remittit peccata deus iis qui non sunt filij : et deus 
 fit actu pater post remissa peccata: haec quam absurda 
 sunt ipsa viderit censura, congruit tamen haec reformata 
 doctrina cum iUorum, de eterna stoica necessitate, 
 dogmate nam cum illi afl&rmant deum absoluto quodam 
 decreto predestinasse quorundam salutem, ipsos in remis- 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 701 
 
 sionem peccatorum et in novam creaturam deinceps 
 precipitat, ut voluit noluit, necessum sit ipsos hanc 
 remissionem participare, et novam creaturam induere, 
 nam specialis ille dei amor ab eternitate quo alios pre 
 ceteris complexus est, facit deum illorum patrem prius- 
 quam iUi facti sunt ipsius filij, quemadmodum ex ad verso 
 per decretum illud reprobationis creaturae infantis factus 
 est deus judex et vindex innocentum qui nihil adhuc 
 mail perpetraverint sive commeriti sunt. Sed de his supra. 
 
 Articulus 22. 
 
 Hie etiam censura duo annotat: 1. spiritum sanctum 
 esse efficientem caussam regenerationis, verbum esse 
 medium: cum articulus affirmat sp[iritum] sanctum esse 
 medium: 2. Nihil creatum esse medium regenerationis 
 censura affirmat Swenckf eldianum : examinentur utraque 
 atque ad incudem roborentur (quod aiunt). Quemad- 
 modum in Christi generatione sive conceptione in utero 
 materno pater fiKum genuit per spiritum sanctum, sic etiam 
 in nostra regeneratione qua simus filij dei, pater nos gignit 
 filios suos per spiritum sanctum: verbum autem est 
 spirituale illud semen quod effundit coelestis pater in 
 uterum quasi cordium nostrorum, spiritus sanctus est vis 
 plasmativa ut ita dicam in semine qua semen hoc cordibus 
 nostris e^^uo-iv id est insitum et implantatum fingit et 
 format in novam creaturam: adeo ut si propriae loqui 
 velimus, Deus pater est genitor, ipse semen hoc immortale 
 effundit in corda nostra : cor honestum est uterus 
 fecundus sive terra fertilis quae semen hoc amplectitur 
 et fovet: semen hoc est verbum dei quod proprie est 
 materia ex qua nova creatmra fingitur: semen hoc non 
 est sterile sed fecundum, non mortuum sed vivum, 
 siquidem deus vivens effudit: vita sive fecunditas 
 seminis est spiritus sanctus qui efficaciter vim suam 
 exerit in semine ad Christum in corde fideli configur- 
 andum : Nova creatura est ille dei filius qui in nobis geni- 
 tus est: non opus est scripturae testimonia hie iterum 
 referre quae partim in articulo referuntur, partim cuivis 
 ob via sunt: jam queritiu' num verbum sit medium; num 
 spiritus sit efficiens : num medium sit creatum quiddam. 
 Respondeat nobis bona conscientia Censura haec : Enim- 
 
702 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 vero, deus pater est efl&ciens: Jacob. 1: 18, Joh. 1: 13. 
 verbum est semen ex quo tanquam ex materia nova 
 creatura eflfingitur: 1 Pet. 1: 23. Spiritus sanctus est 
 verum et genuinum medium quo nova creatura producitur 
 et perficitur ex semine paterno: Joh. 3: 1, 5, 1 Cor. 12: 
 13. Si spiritus sanctus esset efficiens novae creaturae, 
 esset pater: nam pater et filius sunt correlativa et ad 
 seinvicem referuntur: hoc quam absurdum sit censura 
 viderit. Praeterea quod incusat censura articulum 
 Swenckfeldianiseum cum afferat medium nostrae regener- 
 ationis esse nihil creatum, oritur hoc ex eadem inscita 
 atque ex re male intellecta. Quamvis enim regeneratio 
 dicitur nova creatura, non tamen inde sequitur quod nova 
 haec creatura creatur: nam nova haec creatura gignitur 
 quemadmodum sacri libri plane et plene attestantur: 
 neque in novae creaturae productione sive generatione 
 adhibet pater aliquid instrumentum sive medium quod 
 creatum est, pater enim, verbum et spiritus sanctus 
 totum hoc opus perficiunt: non hie excluditur cor 
 honestum et verbi ministerium, quae media externa sunt : 
 eaque necessaria; siquidem articulus loquitur de opere 
 interno et de interna perficiendi ratione: Hinc fit quod 
 in novae creaturae formatione tria haec concurrunt, 
 pater, verbum et spiritus sanctus; ideoque in coelo, id 
 est in regno coelorum quod consistit ex novis creaturis, 
 tria haec testimonium perhibent, ut Johannes dicit: 
 cap. 5. Hoc credo censuram non facile negaturam. 
 
 Articulus 23. 
 
 Exagitat hie censura Rom. 5: 5. perinde ac si male 
 intellectum sit ab articulo : videamus quern pro se sensum 
 ferat: amor dei in sacris libris significat vel active vel 
 passive. Passive significat amorem ilium quo nos deus 
 diligit, active significat amorem ilium quo nos deum 
 diligemus: articulus interpretatur hunc locum de amore 
 active, censura f ortasse vult amorem passivum : audiamus 
 apostoli verba, Spes non pudefacit, ob amorem dei in 
 cordibus nostris effusum per spiritum sanctum qui nobis 
 datus est: passivus amor dei unicuique obvius est, nam 
 artiat deus ipsius inimicos, ideoque Christus docuit nos 
 inimicos nostros diligere, loquitur autem apostolus hoc 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 703 
 
 in loco de amore qui spem concomitatur, de amore qui 
 spiritum sanctum concomitatur, de amore qui effunditur 
 in corda nostra ; de amore qui est spiritus sancti donum : 
 huic hujusmodi argumenta colligi possunt. 
 Primo: Comes spei est amor activus: quia amat deus 
 eos qui sine spe sunt, ideoque amor passivus non est 
 comes spei. 
 
 Amor Rom. 5. est comes spei. 
 
 Ergo Amor Rom. 5. est amor activus. 
 Secundo: Comes spiritus est amor activus: quia amor 
 passivus est ubi non est spiritus, nam deus amat inimicos 
 qui spiritum non habent. 
 
 Amor Rom. 5. est comes spiritus. 
 
 Ergo. Amor Rom. 5. est amor actiyus. 
 Tertio: Amor effusus in corda fidelium est amor 
 activus: quia amor passivus non efEunditur, nee cor est 
 ejus subjectum: 
 
 Amor Rom. 6. est amor effusus in corda fidelium. 
 
 Ergo Amor Rom. 5. est amor activus. 
 Quarto: Amor qui est spiritus sancti donum est amor 
 activus: per se patet. 
 
 Amor Rom. 6. est spiritus sancti donum. 
 
 Ergo Amor Rom. 5. est amor activus. 
 
 Praeterea ipse contextus hoc satis indicat, non ab 
 initio versus secundi ad principium versus sexti interponit 
 Apostolus quasi parenthesi inclusa quadam, versu sexto 
 redit ad propositum et probat pacem nostram per Christi 
 redemptionem partam esse, et deinceps versu octavo 
 amorem dei passivum sive iUum quo nos diligit amplificat : 
 Hie dei amor quo nos diligimur et baec Christi redemptio 
 quae nobis impartitur, fide apprehenduntur a nobis, 
 unde pax apud deum et recessus ad deum, cum fiducia 
 ac gaudio, etiam inter aflflictiones, unde patientiam 
 discimus, magis magisque experti dei benignitatem et 
 auxilium in rebus anxiis, ideoque spem de futuro con- 
 cipimus quae nos numquam decipit sive pudefacit quia 
 amor dei verus fructus regenerationis et novae creaturae 
 per spiritum sanctum cordibus nostris effusus nos certiores 
 reddit deum nobis semper affuturum et auxiliaturum : 
 jam vos reformati phantasma quoddam confingitis; viz: 
 spiritus quoddam testimonium de amore dei passivo, quo 
 
704 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 vos scilicet certiores facti estis, tanquam divina, extra- 
 ordinaria et immediata inspiratione, quae potius 
 imaginaria est idea et inanis speculatio quam solidum 
 testimonium spiritus, quod exinde solum oritur quod 
 percipimus nos vere et ex animo deum diligere: de hoc 
 amore loquitur hoc in loco Apostolus: quomodo certior 
 f actus es quod te deus diligit? quia tu diligis deum: 
 quamvis enim amor dei ad te prior est quam amor tuus 
 ad deum, tamen amor tuus in deum faciUus et prius 
 percipitur in corde tuo quam amor dei erga te : a poste- 
 rioribus ratiocinamiir, non a prioribus: vos autem a 
 prioribus vel ab immediatis inspirationibus sive potius 
 phantasmatis. 
 
 Articulus 29. 
 
 Ad hunc articulum Censura unum taxat: quod 
 suspectum reddere conatur vetus testamentum (graeca 
 enim cum non scribantur non leguntur:) itane vero? 
 quid ita ? num vos honorem veteris testamenti diminuitis, 
 cum totam legem ceremonialem et paene judicialem 
 sublatam vultis e populo christiano: ea lege qua vos 
 multum, nos plurimum immo totum vetus testamentum e 
 medio toUimus cum Christus idem cruci suae affixit et 
 abolevit: libros vero veteris testamenti et legimus ut 
 decet homines Christianos, eosque exponimus ad normam 
 fidei in novo testamento ab Apostolis Christi traditam, 
 varum tamen quemadmodum vos, sacerdotium, templum, 
 altare, velum, arcam, propitiatorium, discrim[in]a dierjim, 
 ciborum, vestium, aliaque id genus sustulistis, ideoque 
 etiam ipsas scripturas et praecepta de hisce rebus quod 
 ad literam attinet completas et amotas vultis, sic et nos 
 de regno reliquisque ad regnum illud externum perti- 
 nantibus facimus, sic de circumcisione, de masculo et 
 femina, de primogenitura, et quaecumque ejusdem 
 fami[li]ae in vetere testamento inveniuntur : Litera enim 
 jam obiit, umbra preteriit, corpus et Veritas est Christus : 
 vos dicitis, Sacerdotes Levitici abierunt, veri spirituales 
 sacerdotes eorum vice substituuntur : templum illud 
 externum et lapides iUi terreni evanuerunt, cum jam 
 adsit spirituale templum ex vivis lapidibus constructum, 
 cujus lapis angularis est Christus, fundamentum reliquum 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 705 
 
 doctrina apostolorum et prophetarum de Christo : Eadem 
 omnino ratione infans nuper natus masculus cum circum- 
 cisione carnali ex novo testamento eijcitur ipsiusque 
 vicem supplet ille verus masculus in cujus corde Christus 
 configuratur qui est ipsa Veritas sive sit in masculo sive 
 in femina quorum nullum est discrimen in Jesu Christo: 
 Gal. 3: 28, Gal. 4: 19, Apoc. 12: 5. sic et regnum illud 
 temporarium externum ej usque appendices omnes quod 
 Christum ej usque regnum spirituale figurabant: eadem 
 enim ratione qua vos infantes baptizatis, et magistratus 
 authoritatem in ecclesia Christi retinetis, possumus nos 
 sacerdotium, altare et victimas ovium et boum reducere, 
 qua vos ratione haec eijcitis eadem et nos rehqua, hoc 
 autem velim vos animadvertere, si magistratum in 
 ecclesia constituitis necesse est vos invenire aliquem e 
 tribu juda et e famiha Davidis, qui sedeat in solio Davidis 
 patris ejus secundum dei ordinationem quod cum vobis 
 sit impossibile, valeat ergo externum illud regnum, 
 Christus solus est rex noster, per cujus adventum familiae 
 et domus Davidis genealogia cessavit. 
 
 Articulus 31. 
 
 Hie suggeritur a Censura falsa baptismi definitio : 
 rationem nullam audio: ex iis quo supra dicta sunt 
 abunde Uquet, praeterea etiam ex forma baptismi a 
 Christo prescripta: Mat. 28: 19. infantum baptismum 
 funditus eradicari: Cum enim baptismus Christi sit in 
 nomine patris, fiHj et spiritus sancti, post factos 
 discipulos: cum sit proprie nova creatura: cum nova 
 creatura genita sit a patre, ex verbo vitae, per spiritum 
 sanctum, cujus infantes non sunt compotes : cum infantes 
 omnes ut prius dictum et probatum est, sive peccatis aut 
 peccati culpa nati sunt innocentes : quid opus est baptis- 
 mate, utpote signo, cum deest (neque enim adesse opus 
 est), signatum nempe nova creatura, regeneratio: neque 
 est quod inculcetis eandem semper cantilenam de foedere 
 et foederatis, de sanctitate infantum, de circumcisione 
 masculorum, cum certum sit confederationem et sancti- 
 tatem infantum non esse novi testamenti, sed universalis 
 Christi gratia et redemptionis quae ex equo unicuique 
 mortalium communicatur, cumque certum sit circum- 
 
 w. n. 25 
 
706 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 cisioneni cum ipso masculo octiduo, per Christi crucem, 
 utpote umbras et figuras, e novi testamenti communione 
 excludi quae est novae creaturae solius communio et 
 foedus. ex ipso articulo sic concludo contra infantum 
 baptismum: Qui doctrinam Evangelij nee audiunt, nee 
 ei credunt, nee poenitentiam agunt, eos non iussit 
 Christus baptizari. 
 
 Infantes superiora ilia nee agunt nee agere possunt, 
 nee debent. 
 
 Ergo Christus non iussit infantes baptizari. 
 
 Articulus 34. 
 
 Hie rursus nobis objicit censura Swenckfeldianum 
 quiddam: quod etiam sacris scripturis adversari ait: 
 cum enim articulus affirmet Christum glorifieatum esse 
 vivificum animarum nostrarum panem, cibum et potum 
 dicit hoc contradicere verbis Christi qui ait: hoc est 
 corpus meum: Age rem ipsam penitius introspiciamus : 
 primo hue repetantur ea quae prius dicta sunt de carne 
 Christi naturali et spiritual!: Caro Christi naturalis est 
 ea quae in utero virginis concepta, quae postea cruce 
 pendens exanimata est et transfixa a militibus. Caro 
 autem Christi spirituaHs est ea quam fideles quotidie 
 comedimt, quae est ahus generis de qua Christus dicit 
 Joh. 6: 64, nisi comederitis carnem fiUj hominis et 
 biberitis sanguinem ejus non habetis vitam in vobis ipsis : 
 et vs. 58 : Caro mea vere cibus est et sanguis meus vere 
 potus est: et per hanc comestionem facti sumus caro de 
 carne ejus et os de ossibus ejus. Eph. 5: 30. atque ipsius 
 fratres fimus cum scilicet eandem carnem et sanguinem 
 spiritualem participamus : Heb. 2: 11, 14. quae autem 
 et qualis sit hoc caro spiritualis partim percipitur et 
 Christi ipsius verbis. Mat. 12: 50 is est f rater Christi 
 qui facit voluntatem patris sui coelestis: qui enim hoe 
 cum Christo commune habet ut dei mandata observet, 
 is frater est Christi, caro igitur spiritualis Christi est vel 
 oboedientia vera vel aliquid simile : plenius vero percipitur 
 hoc ex verbis Johannis 3: 34. deus dedit filio suo spiritum 
 non secundum mensuram et Joh. 1: 16. ex ipsius pleni- 
 tudine nos recepimus omnes: hinc filius dei appellatur 
 Messias sive Christus, id est unctus, hoc unguentum sive 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 707 
 
 oleum est spiritus, quo etiam uncti sunt fideles post 
 Christi ascensum : Hie spiritus est caro spiritualis Christi, 
 non ipse spiritus sanctus, sed spiritus sancti dona celestia 
 quae in corda fidelium effunduntur; haec caro Christi 
 cibus et potus est spiritualis animarum nostrarum, alia 
 iUa naturalis caro nrhU prodest, Joh. 6: 63. Spiritus 
 sive spiritualis caro vivificat : non quod iUa caro naturalis 
 nihU omnino prodest, sed nihil respective agit siquidem 
 iUa caro, erat enim victima pro peccatis nostris in humili- 
 tate neque pro nostris solum, sed pro peccatis totius 
 mundi : haec erat generalis gratia et beneficium commune : 
 speciaHs gratia, et beneficium, ecclesia sive corporis 
 Christi peculiare est caro haec spiritualis, quae veram 
 vitam prebet eam comedentibus. Jam quod attinet ad 
 verba scripturae hoc est corpus meum, duplex est ipsius 
 sive compositus sensus : Panis significat utramque utrius- 
 que corporis Christi carnem; Panis est figura corporis 
 naturalis : corpus naturale est figura corporis spiritualis : 
 naturalis ipsius caro confossa est et hasta transfixa, 
 spiritualis ipsius caro unicuique distribuitur secundum, 
 mensuram donatiords Christi, nam ab ipsius plenitudine 
 accepimus omnes, gratiam pro gratia: fracta est ipsius 
 caro naturalis in victimam et hostiam dece[r]ptam deo pro 
 peccatis nostris, distributa est ipsius caro spiritualis pro 
 vita et vivificatione nostra : nam omnes nos comedimus et 
 bibimus in eundem spiritum: Ne autem censura hoc a 
 nobis fingi opinetur, audiamus ipsius domini verba 
 disertissima Mat. 26: 29 non bibam ab hoc tempore, ex 
 hoc fructu vitis usque ad iUum diem quum ipsum bibam 
 vobiscum novum in regno patris mei. Quid hoc novum 
 est? nonne manu nos ducit ad novam coenam, quam 
 Christus glorificatus cum discipulis celebrabat, de qua 
 Apostolus sub Christi persona loquitur. Apoc. 3: 20. 
 cenabo cum eo et ipse mecum ? hoc cibo et potu spirituaH 
 nova creatura quotidie nutritur, crescit, seque extendit 
 in longum, latum, altum, profundum et adolescit in 
 perfectum virum, ad mensuram plenae staturae Christi: 
 hoc non fit per Christi justitiam imputatam quae secundum 
 vestram reformatam doctrinam nullum admittit incre- 
 mentum, nam justitia imputata non suscipit magis et 
 minus, necessum est ergo hoc fieri in vera iUa justitia 
 
 25—2 
 
708 [Defence of Ries' Confession] 
 
 quam per novae creaturae augmentum acquirimus : 
 Integra ergo coena perficitur fractione et comestura: 
 fractio figurat corporis naturalis victimam in peccatorum 
 remissione quam omnes vident etiam impij : ejus vero 
 ad oculos ponit novae creaturae cibationena et nutritionem 
 per carnem spiritualem quae vero cibus est, et quae in 
 novae creaturae essentiam transmutatur, ut ex ea fiant 
 fideles Christi fratres germani, per ejusdem spiritualis 
 carnis KOivcuviav, et ejusdem spiritualis sanguinis con- 
 sanguinitatem, sunt enim duo illi, id est Christus et 
 ecclesia in carnem unam per magnum hoc sacramentum 
 spiritualis hujus coniugis. Eph. 5: 31. 32. 30. Huic satis 
 superque constat, doctrinam hanc hujus articuli esse 
 verissimam et verae consolationis plenissimam, ut ne 
 dicam doctrinam vestram de corpore Christi naturali, 
 ej usque virtute in coena dominica, jejunam, frigidam et 
 insipidam esse, et carnali transubstanti[at]oni papisticae 
 quam proximam. 
 
 Articulus 36. 
 
 In articulo Mennonis judicium nobis obiicitur, perinde 
 ac si nos juramus in verba cujusvis magistri: verum 
 fortasse censura nostram hie repugnantiam et contra- 
 dictionem annotat: quid num vos reformati in omnibus 
 vestris dogmatibus unanimes estis? nonne apud vos, 
 quot capita tot sensus ? Licet nobis a Mennone discedere, 
 cum Menno discedit a veritate: rationem nostram 
 proferimus quare conjuges sive debita conjugalia vitanda 
 prohibemus ex Matt. 19: 9, ubi aperte ait dominus 
 uxorem non debere dimitti nisi ob adulterium : ergo 
 excommunicatio non dirimit conjugium: error hie de 
 vitandis conjugibus et debitis conjugalibus orta est ex 
 scripturae sinistra interpretatione : sit tibi ut ethnicus et 
 publicanus, id est ut judei non comedebant cibum com- 
 munem cum ethnicis, sic noli tu comedere coenam 
 domini cum impoenitentibus : sic et locus ille 1 Cor. 5 
 intelligi debet cum hujusmodi ne comedito, nempe 
 coenam domini. 
 
 Articulus 37. 
 
 Hie proverbium nobis exprobrat Censura, Pelliceam 
 vestem la vat, non madefacit, inquit, quid ita? magis- 
 
[Defence of Ries' Confession] 709 
 
 tratum reveretur, verum in ecclesiam non admittit: 
 credo facile ? Sic Paulus et Petrus volunt f [rjatres magis- 
 tratibus subjici qui ethnici erant: Nos magistratus qui 
 jam Christum profitentur equali dignamur honore cum 
 regibus et senioribus populi Israelitici sub vetere testa- 
 mento eosque posse eque deo placere credimus atque 
 magistratus ecclesiae judaicae: verum officium magis- 
 tratus sive usum gladii civilis non agnovit sive Christus 
 sive Apostoli, sive prima ilia et pura ecclesia: quid nos? 
 restat ut eorum vestigiis insistamus ne sanctiora et 
 saniora sapimus. 
 
 Articulus 39. 
 
 Denique in hoc articulo pre judicium falsum nobis 
 impingit censura; quale quaeso? quam non permittimus 
 fratres et sorores nostras extra ecclesiam dei cum impiis, 
 infideUbus et carnalibus connubio jungi: verba sunt 
 Apostoli pene. 1 Cor. 7: 39. Uxor post mortem viri 
 libera est ad cui veht nubendum, tantum in domino: 
 ideo sub vetere testamento prohibuit dominus ne judei 
 cum extraneis gentibus conjugio copularentur : Deut. 
 7: 3. siquidem peregrinae hae nuptiae plerumque 
 piis iUecebrae sunt ad impietatem: neque hie falso 
 prejudicamus omnes extra nostras ecclesias esse impios, 
 infideles carnales homines. Minime gentium: Possimus 
 nos salva conscientia quemadmodum nuper de magistratu 
 dictum est, omnes eos qui Christum profitentm" et honesti 
 vivunt, eodem statu et conditione habere cum ecclesia 
 judaica: Atque de his hactenus. 
 
 Finis. 
 
710 
 
 ARGUMENTA CONTRA BAPTISMUM 
 INFANTUM 
 
 1. Ad quos non pertinet ecclesiae doctrina, ad eos non 
 pertine[n]t ecclesiae sacramenta : ideoque non baptismus. 
 
 Ad infantes non pertinet ecclesiae doctrina. 
 
 Ergo, ad infantes non pertine[n]t ecclesiae Sacramenta 
 ideoque non baptismus. 
 
 Major propositio hoc nititur fundamento quod scilicet 
 omne sacramentum in se doctrinam complectitxir, signa 
 enim et symbola sunt quae seipsa et actione explicant ea, 
 qua verbis et oratione enarrantur ab episcopis ecclesiae[.] 
 Sacramenta sunt visibilis verbum: nam enim duo sunt 
 sensus disciplinae, auris et oculus; uterque instruitur a 
 domino; hie sacramentis, ilia doctrina ecclesiae; neque 
 sacramenta quicquam aliud edocent, quam quod prius 
 per ecclesiae doctrinam proponebatur. Cum ergo deus 
 duos hosce sensus homini dederit, oculum scilicet ad 
 videndum et aurem ad audiendum: ideo etiam et 
 duplice ecclesiam instruit, per verbum et per sacramenta : 
 Prov. 20, 12. vide. Exod. 13, 8. 14. 15. 16. 
 
 Minor propositio non eget explicatione : praeterea 
 Christus ipse: Mat. 13, 9. et Apoc. 2, 7. aperte monet 
 eos, qui habent aures ad audiendum, ut doctrinam ipsius 
 audiant: inde manifestum est Dominum distinguere 
 veUe in[ter] hos infantes et adultos qui rationis usum 
 adepti sunt: sic et Nehem. 8. vers. 2. 3. Ezra dicitur 
 librum legis legisse audientibus et intelligentibus[.] 
 Surdo narrat fabulam, qui infantibus doctrinam ec- 
 clesiae proponit. Sic et caecum consulit de coloribus 
 qui infantes aqua baptismatis abluunt. Cum ergo intel- 
 lectus humanus realiter instituitur per visum, gustum, 
 olf actum, tactum in sacramentis ecclesiae, 1 Job. 1, 1 
 
Against Infant Baptism 711 
 
 quemadmodum verbaliter edocetur ex auditu in verbi 
 ministerio, cumque infantes nihUomagis instruuntur visu, 
 olfactu, gustu, tractu per medium sacramentorum, quam 
 auditu per ministerium verbi: exinde manifestum est, 
 cum utrumque infantibus non competit, ergo neutrum 
 ad eos pertinere. 
 
 2. argumentum. 
 
 Qui non possunt doceri, ij non debent baptisari. 
 
 Infantes non possunt doceri. 
 
 Ergo infantes non debent baptisari. 
 
 Major colligitur ex Mathei cap. 28. vers. 19. fiadrjTeva-aTe 
 /SaTTTt^ovres : ubi Christus praecipit ut prius doceantur, 
 deinde baptisantur: Si prius docendi sunt, quam baptis- 
 andi, tum ij qui non possunt doceri, non debent baptisari : 
 Ideoque praxis Christi Johan. 4. 1. buic praecepto consona 
 erat : dicitur enim discipulos f ecisse et baptisasse : verum 
 adversarij primos infantes baptisant, deinde eos docent; 
 hoc autem est christi praeceptum violare atque irritum 
 facere: Non enim ea solum agenda sunt quae praecipit 
 dominus, sed eundem etiam ordinem observare debemus 
 quam dominus instituit: Exuite veterem hominem 
 (inquit Apostolus) et induite novum : Si quis prius veUet 
 novum hominem induere quam veterem exuisset nonne 
 f rustra operam impenderet ? eadem ratio : ne operam 
 abutuntm- qui infantes aqua baptismatis tingunt, prius 
 quam eos disciplina ecclesiae instituerunt ; eum Christus 
 apertissime praecipit; Docere ut fiant discipuh, et 
 baptisate : 
 
 Minor absque omni controversia est : nam etsi quidam 
 asserunt infantes a spiritu sancto doceri, eque atque 
 spiritu sancto impleri; tamen hoc nihil ad rem, cum 
 christus non loquitur de spiritus interno ministerio et 
 eruditione, sed de externa ecclesiastici ministerij institu- 
 tione et doctrina. Jubet enim dominus apostolos suos, 
 gentes docere et baptisare : hoc ergo duo sunt Apostolorum 
 opera, non spiritus sancti: Deinde impleri spiritu sancto 
 non significat, quenquam a spiritu sancto, in infantia, 
 doctrina resipiscentiae aut fidei imbui, sed potius spiritus 
 ductu et praeventione habUem fieri ad destinatum munus 
 in posterum ducendum, eodem pene modo, quo infans 
 
712 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 rationalis est[:] vide. Judicum. cap. 13. vers 25. et Lucae 
 1. 15. 80. Unde concludere possumus, cum Christus 
 mandavit discipulos baptisare, infantes autem non possunt 
 doceri aut discere ut fiant discipuli, ideo ad eos baptismum 
 non pertinere. 
 
 3. argumentum. 
 
 Qui non agunt poenitentiam non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Infantes non agunt poenitentiam. 
 
 Ergo infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Propositio major confirmatur ex ipsa baptismi institu- 
 tione, nam Joannes baptista dicitur baptismum poeni- 
 tentiae predicasse: Luc. 3. 3. et Petrus ait Act. 2. 38. 
 Resipiscite, et baptizetur unusquisque. Unde liquide 
 constat Resipiscentiam esse baptismi conditionem: sic 
 enim conc[i]l[i]atio inter signum et signatum prae se fert : 
 nam resipiscentia in animo est id ipsum quod Aqua[e] 
 ablutio in corpore: baptismus abluit sordes a corpore, 
 sic et poenitentia vera abluit peccatum : Infantibus 
 autem deest signatum qua est poenitentia, ineptum est 
 igitur signum illis impertire nempe baptismum aquae. 
 
 Minor propositio non eget multa explicatione, cum 
 manifestum sit infantes adhuc usum rationis non esse 
 adeptos. Resipiscentia autem, sive sit /xerai^oia; sive 
 jaera/ieA-eia ; est perfu[n]ctus et absolutus rationis usus: 
 fjieToivoLa enim est actus mentis; propositum scilicet 
 animi de vita corrigenda: ju-era/xeXeta autem est cordis 
 soUicitudo et anxietas de vitae anteactae ratione ; uterque 
 autem hie rationis actus confirmatus deprehenditur in 
 solis actu ratiocinantibus, non impotentia rationalibus, 
 in adultis non in infantibus. Etenim animi propositum 
 a malo in bonum commutare ; conscientiae stimulos per- 
 sentiscere ; dolore et tristitia affer[r]i ob admissa peccata ; 
 vota et promissa de vita emendanda; Assidua diligentia, 
 et impiger conatus in eundem finem ; haec omnia inquam 
 quae vel partes vel adjuncta sunt verae poenitentiae 
 longe absunt ab infantibus, ergo et ipsa poenitentia. 
 nihil autem moror quod quidam affirmant infantes 
 potentia vel inclinatione haec omnia habere quod ipsis 
 sufficeret; nam ea ratione etiam coenam participarent 
 infantes quia potentia possunt seipsos examinare : verum 
 
Against Infant Baptism 713 
 
 ad ecclesiae privilegia participanda non potentia sed 
 actus requiritur, poenitentiae et fidei: ideo Joannes ait 
 poenitentiam agite: /Aeravoeire. Mat. 3. 
 
 4 argumentum. 
 
 Qui non credunt, non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Infantes non credunt: Ergo infantes non sunt 
 baptisandi. 
 
 Major constat ex verbis Philippi ad Eunuchum Act. 8. 
 37. Si credis ex toto corde poteris baptisari. et christi 
 Marc. 16. 16. qui crediderit et baptisatus fuerit, salvabitur. 
 Siquidem sacrae literae duo haec simul conjungunt, 
 fidem et baptismum, baptismus est signum fidei per quam 
 remissionem peccatorum et eorundem purgationem in 
 sanguine Christi adipiscimur : fides est res signata in 
 baptismo quae cor purgat a peccatis ut aqua corporis 
 sordes abluit: Act. 15. 9. Si quis forte obijciat haec 
 scripturae testimonia ad adultos solos pertinere, non 
 autem ad infantes: sed eandem esse infantum rationem 
 sub novo testamento atque sub veteri: cum baptismus 
 circumcisioni successit : respondeo : neque baptismum 
 aquae circumcisionis vires supplere sub novo testamento, 
 sed mortificationem peccati: (nam figura non respondit 
 figurae sed veritati) neque eandem esse infantum rationem 
 sub utroque testamento cum ilUc masculi tantum circum- 
 cidebantur, hie mas et foemina baptisandi sunt : cumque 
 masculus octiduus circumcidebatur non sui ipsius causa 
 quod ipsi opus esset vel externa vel interna circumcisione, 
 sed solum astantium ergo, qui hoc symbolo externo 
 instituebantur ; quod circumcisio ipsis in memoriam 
 reserabat foedus ictum cum ipsis eorumque in foedere 
 ofiicium, cordis scilicet circumcisionem : verum nee foedus 
 nee conditio foederis nempe circumcisio cordis ad infantes 
 pertinebat, qui peccatis vacui in statu innocentiae adhuc 
 constituti, permanserunt. Masculum autem assumpsit 
 dominus non foeminam, ut primogenitum, non reliquos 
 fratres mysterij caussa. Ut christum venturum prefigu- 
 raret, omnesque in Christo regenitos, sive mares sint, sive 
 foeminae. Colos. 1. 15. Gal. 3. 28. 
 
 Minor etiam per se satis manifesta est, atque ex 
 praemissis argumentis confirmari potest, etenim cum 
 
714 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 infantes, nee capaces sunt doctrinae ecclesiae quae ad 
 eos non pertinet, neque uUos rationis actus edunt credere 
 procul dubio nequeunt, cum fides ex auditu verbi divini 
 creatur Rom. 10. 14. futile est illud quod obijciunt 
 adversarij, semen fidei inesse infantibus nam primo 
 semen fidei est verbum dei, quod non est in infantibus: 
 deinde si semen fidei interpretentur inclinationem ad 
 fidem, nego specialem aliquam in infantibus fidelium 
 esse inclinationem ad fidem supra infantes aliorum, 
 omnes enim infantes sub eadem conditione nati sunt 
 creati scilicet ad jmaginem dei, peccato vacui, rationales. 
 Gen. 1. 27. et Gen. 3. 2. et 9. 2. Psalm 8. 4-8. 
 
 5 argumentum. 
 
 Qui peccato vacui in innocentia sua permanent, non 
 sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Infantes peccato vacui in innocentia sua permanent. 
 
 Ergo Infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Ratio majoris propositio[nis] haec est, quod baptismus 
 symbolum est remissionis peccatorum et mortificationis ; 
 nam quemadmodum ablutio aquae sordes corporis 
 expurgat, sic animae peccatum purgatur remissum et 
 mortificatum. Cum igitur infantes non egent aut pecca- 
 torum remissione, aut mortificatione, in innocentiae 
 statu consistentes, baptismus infantibus non competit 
 qui eorundem beneficiorum symbolum est. 
 
 Minor propositio aliquantulum in dubium vocatur, 
 cujus Veritas inde constat, quod omne peccatum volun- 
 tarium est. Jacob. 1. 15. Infantes autem neque mentis 
 neque voluntatis actus uUos persentiunt, neque a peccato 
 tentantur Sathanae motu et instigatione, neque uUos 
 concupiscentiae motus persentiunt, quibus assentiantur : 
 Si quis autem velit bine concludere nos tenere Redemp- 
 tionem christi ad infantes sese non extend[e]re: 
 respondemus minimi gentium : nam Redemptionis christi 
 tria sunt beneficia, unum ut peccata remittantur et 
 mortificiantur : alterum ut peccatis ademptis, pristinus 
 innocentiae status restituatur: tertium ut vera justitia 
 id est nova creatura locum subeat: Christus ergo servat 
 populum suum a peccatis suis dupliciter, primo toUit 
 peccata ubi sunt, secundo impedit peccata ne sint. Sic 
 
Against Infant Baptism 715 
 
 credibile est bonos angelos christi redemptionem 
 participare. Colos. 1. 16-20. et bruta animalia etiam 
 liberationem expetant et participant per christum. 
 Rom. 8. 19-22. Et christus dicitur redemisse eos qui 
 ipsum abnegant. 2 Petrus 2. 1. Si bruta liberantur per 
 Christum, si angeli boni confirmantur per christum, si 
 impij redimuntur per Christum, si Maria virgo (ut affirmant 
 papistae) exultat in Christo servatore suo, quod ipsam 
 conservasset ne peccaret, quidni etiam ut nos affirmemus 
 infantes aliquod beneficium per Christi redemptionem 
 nancisci, etsi non assecuntur remissionem peccatorum 
 quae non habeant, cum sint innoxij. Si ergo quispiam 
 affirmaret posteritatem Adae per peccatum originale 
 commaculatam esse, respondeo fieri non potest ut Christi 
 redemptio angustior esset quam Adae transgressio : 
 Ideoque cum Christus agnus occisus sit ab initio mundi, 
 mors Christi prevenit peccatum originale ne transiret per 
 traducem ad posteros Adae. 
 
 6. argumentum. 
 
 Aut infantes debent coenam dominicam comedere, 
 aut non debent baptisari. 
 
 At infantes non debent coenam domini comedere. 
 
 Ergo infantes non debent baptisari. 
 
 Disjunctio necessaria est, quia qui digne potest unum 
 sacramentum participare, potest et alteram : cum eadem 
 sit utriusque natura et conditio : eadem enim beneficia in 
 utroque sacramento proponuntur: eadem conditio ad 
 utriusque sacramenti communicationem requiritur: 
 Coena domini remissionem peccatorum praefigurat in 
 fractione panis et vini effusione, quae symbola sunt 
 mortis et sacrificij Christi: aquae ablutio in baptismate 
 id ipsum ante oculos ponit, fides et poenitentia requiruntur 
 ad Eucharistiam participandam : Eadem etiam deside- 
 rantur ad baptismum ut prius probavimus: Argumentis 
 3 et 4. vide Act. 2. 38. et Act. 8. 37. ubi Petrus exigit 
 resipiscentia[m] a judeis ante baptismum, et PhUippus 
 fidem ab Eunucho : Deinde si velimus veteris testamenti 
 figuras inspicere, unusquisque circumcisus comedebat 
 pascha et panem [azijmum] dies septem: atque omnis 
 masculus in festo paschatis comparebat coram Domino: 
 
716 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 Deut. 16. 16. Luc. 2. 41. 42. 43. Si ergo ut adversarij 
 volunt infantes baptisandi sunt, quia sub vetere testa- 
 mento ctrcumcidebantur masculi octidui, eadem ratione 
 et coenam domini comedent, quia pascha comedebant 
 infantes: Exod. 12. 47. Luc. 2. 42. Cum ergo eadem 
 gratia proponatur in utroque Sacramento, videlicet 
 remissio et ablutio peccatorum per sacrificium et san- 
 guinem Christi, cumque una eademque conditio requiritur 
 ab ijs qui utrumque sacramentum participant, fides 
 scilicet et poenitentia, necessum est ut infantes aut 
 utrumque sacramentum aut neutrum communicent. 
 Assumptum facile concedunt adversarij : affirmant enim 
 ad coenae participationem ab apostolo desiderari proba- 
 tionem sui ipsius: et recte nam Christus coenam solis 
 apostolis suis distribuebat viris scilicet aetate provectis, 
 et discipuli congregati erant ad frangendum panem. 
 Act. 20. 7. inter discipulos autem sunt foeminae Act. 9. 
 36. Soli ergo discipuH admittendi sunt ad coenam 
 domini, infantes autem non sunt discipuli Christi, quod 
 non possunt doceri ut fiant discipuli: Verum sciendum 
 est hoc argumentum tantas in se vires habere ad veritatem 
 corroborandam ut quidam in dubium vocant an coena 
 domini etiam infantibus praebenda sit cum fateantur 
 utriusque sacramenti eandem esse rationem et coenam 
 respondere Paschati, ut baptismum ctrcumcisioni. 
 
 7 argumentum. 
 
 Quorum corda non aspera sunt a mala conscientia, 
 eorum corpora non sunt abluenda aqua pura baptismatis. 
 
 Corda infantum non sunt aspera a mala conscientia. 
 
 Ergo infantum corpora non sunt abluenda aqua pura 
 baptismatis. 
 
 Majoris consequentia habetur ad Heb. cap. 10 vs. 22. 
 23. ubi turn signum tum signatum ab Apostolo copulantur 
 et sibi invicem adiunguntur[:] signum est ablutio corporis 
 elemento aquae: Signatum est aspersio, id est purgatio 
 cordis a conscientia mala per sanguinem Christi: ubi 
 serio animadvertenda est coUatio ex propositis figurae et 
 veritatis, sive sacramenti et rei sacramenti: nisi adsit 
 malae conscientiae aspersio, non dolet adesse purae 
 aquae ablutio : nam haec se invicem ponunt et auf erunt : 
 
Against Infant Baptism 717 
 
 Quemadmodum enim umbra sequitur corpus, sic ablutio 
 aquae, conscientiae aspersionem. baptismus sine con- 
 scientiae aspersione per sanguinem Christi facta, est 
 quiddam monstris simile, nempe umbra sine corpore: 
 firmissima est ergo majoris consequentia nisi velimus 
 umbram a corpore divellere, eaque seperare quae dominus 
 institutione divina copulavit. 
 
 Assumptionis Veritas pendet partim ex quinti argu- 
 menti ratione quia infantes in innocentiae statu permanent, 
 ideoque nullos conscientiae stimulos habent qui illos 
 pungant aut vigeant, quibus liberentur: partim quia 
 conscientia mala originem suam habet a peccatis 
 actuaHbus contra scientiam et cognitudinem admissi[s] : 
 nam conscientia est contra scientiam, vel cum scientia: 
 sic graece dicitur a-vveiBrjcns : idest scientia cum accusa- 
 tione vel excusatione. nam in conscientia est (TvvTnqprjcn^ 
 sive memoria eorum quae bene vel male fecimus: In 
 infantibus nulla est memoria: nuUa accusatio ob male 
 facta vel ob bene facta excusatio: nuUa scientia, nam 
 nihil est in inteUectu quod non prius f uit in sensu : neque 
 aurem habent ad audiendum neque oculum ad videndum 
 qui proprii sunt sensus disciplinae. Ergo neque bonam 
 neque malam conscientiam habent: nuUam omni[n]o 
 habent conscientiam : quia conscientia oritur ex scientia : 
 sunt rationales creaturae, id est potentiam habent satis 
 amandi, inteUigendi, recordandi, sciendi, verum horum 
 omnium nihil habent actu[:] verum actus, rationes, intel- 
 lectus, memoriae, scientia boni et maU requiruntur ad 
 conscientiam sive bonam sive malam producendam. Et 
 quemadmodum Adam, antequam comederet de arbore 
 scientiae boni et mali erat nudus neque tamen pudore 
 sufEusus: Sic omnes infantes ad ipsius exemplar com- 
 parati sunt, nullos persentiunt conscientiae motus, dum 
 scientiam boni et mali assequuntur. 
 
 8 Argumentum. 
 
 Qui non habent remissionem peccatorum, non sunt 
 baptisandi. 
 
 Infantes non habent remissionem peccatorum. 
 
 Ergo infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Ratio consequentiae majoris propositionis petitur ex 
 
718 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 institutione baptismi nam dicitur baptisma poenitentiae 
 in remissionem peccatorum Luc. 3. 3. nam per baptismum 
 aquae remissio peccatorum ante oculos ponitur: ubi ergo 
 non est signatum, frustra et temere adhibetur signum: 
 neque credibUe est voluisse Dominum Christum, qui in 
 se omnes thesauros scientiae et sapientiae habet, tam 
 jejune et frigide rem tractare scilicet signum divinum 
 abrasae tabulae appendere: haec siquidem differentia 
 est inter christum filium et Mosen servum, quod Lex per 
 Mosen lata umbram futurorum bonorum habuit : ideoque 
 sacramenta veteris testamenti non presentia sed futura 
 bona prefigurarent. Christus autem filius in carne exhibitus 
 ecclesiae sub novo testamento sacramenta reliquit ejus- 
 modi, quae partem saltem futurorum bonorum presup- 
 ponunt, alias nuUum esset discrimen inter sacramenta 
 veteris et novi testamenti: Potuit infans sub vetere 
 testamento tum circumcidi, tum etiam pascha manducare 
 quia haec sacramenta erant futurorum bonorum. Heb. 
 10. 1. Verum sub novo testamento iUicitum est infantibus 
 vel baptisari vel coenam comedere quia sub novo testa- 
 mento bona ipsa adesse debent vel saltem pars aliqua 
 bonorum quae sub veteri prefigurabantur : debet ergo 
 adesse peccatorum remissio, aliter baptismus non potest 
 merito vindicari. Quod infantes non habent remis- 
 sionem peccatorum siquidem constat, tum ex prioribus 
 argumentis, tum ex reipsa, omnes enim uno ore fatentur 
 infantes peccata actualia nulla perpetrasse: baptismus 
 autem non significat alterius peccati imputati remis- 
 sionem, cum non aliorum sordes, sed propriae a corporibus 
 baptisatorum abluuntur, nee infantes uUa peccati labe 
 contaminantur cum Christi gratia universalis peccati 
 traducem et scaturiginem praeoccupavit : cumque re- 
 missio peccatorum fide sola apprehenditur, quae ex 
 audito evangelio suum habet ortum et originem, mediante 
 spiritus sancti operatione in intellectu et corde hominum 
 adultorum, infantes autem neque fidem habent neque 
 aures habent ad audiendam evangelij promulgationem, 
 neque intelligunt ea quae a spiritu sancto suggeruntur, 
 ergo manifestum est infantes remissionem peccatorum non 
 habere, denique si f ateremur infantes peccatum originale 
 habere (quod negamus) ej usque remissionem ad ipsum, non 
 
Against Infant Baptism 719 
 
 ex inde sequitur debere baptisari, quod baptismus est 
 signum remissionis peccatorum non peccati unius ej usque 
 involuntarij . vide Rom. 5. 26. Luc. 3. 3. 
 
 9. argumentum. 
 
 Qui non possunt viam domini praeparare, non debent 
 baptisari. 
 
 Infantes non possunt viam domini praep[ar]are. 
 
 Ergo infantes non debent baptisari. 
 
 Consequentiae ratio pendet ex prima baptismatis 
 institutione, nam Johannis Baptistae ofificium erat viam 
 domini rectam f acere : quod perf ecit iUe partim doctrina, 
 partim sacramento baptismatis. Mat. 3. 3. Esaiae. 40. 3. 
 Johannis doctrina erat poenitentia ad remissionem pecca- 
 torum: via domini praeparatur implendo vaUes, depri- 
 mendo montes, rectificando curva, aspera complanando: 
 ut ergo Johannis baptisma administrari posset, praedictae 
 conditiones desiderabantur, baptismus enim erat doctrifiae 
 praecedentis sacramentum sive emblema ut mysterium 
 sacrum. Ergo Johannes non baptisabat vel impoeni- 
 tentes ut phariseos et Sadducaeos. Matt. 3. 8. Luc. 7. 30. 
 vel non poenitentes infantes quibus poenitentia non erat 
 opus, neque baptismus poenitentiae : nam qui ab eo 
 baptisaba[n]tur confessi sunt peccata sua quod infantes 
 non potuerunt facere. Mat. 3. 6. et Luc. 3. 10. 12. 14. Sed 
 homines poenitentiam agentes qui viam domini parabant 
 in cordibus suis, per veram contritionem — ^humiUationem, 
 et conversionem. Luc. 1. 17. qui externi signi significa- 
 tionem remque ipsam internam habebunt[:] quod hie 
 obijciunt adversarij nullius ponderis est, nempe non loqui 
 hoc in loco Evangelistam de infantibus sed de adultis, 
 neque opus esse ut baptismatis eorum mentionem faceret, 
 cum notum satis erat judeis baptismum in locum circum- 
 cisionis succedere : nam primo id f alsum est quod affirmant 
 baptismum externum circumcisioni manufactae respon- 
 dere ut supra probatum est. deinde quare in actis aposto- 
 lorum nuUa sit mentio baptismatis infantum inter Ethnicos, 
 quibus circumcisionis lex incognita erat: si respondeant 
 gentes legem illam a Judeis didicisse affirmo ego hoc esse 
 conjecturam non rectissimam veritatem: denique magna 
 est Evangelistarum et Apostolorum incuria, si baptisarint 
 
720 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 infantes turn judeorum turn Ethnicorum, quod hujus 
 facti ne semel meminerint: cum id maxime debuit fieri 
 in tanti sacramenti institutione : non debuit fieri 
 inqui[u]nt adversarij : debuit inquam, nam non successit 
 baptismus circumcisioni ; si enim boc verum esset, quare 
 abstulit dominus circumcisionem praeputij ut induceret 
 baptismum aquae, umbra non respondet umbrae sed 
 corpus: Christus est Pascha: et Cbristus est circumcisio 
 nostra, sic ait Petrus baptisma non externum sed internum 
 est avTiTv-rrov. 1 Pet. 3. 21. id est A. vicem supplet 
 typi. Assumptio patet ex reipsa, nam infantes non 
 agunt poenitentiam, non confitentvir peccata, non implent 
 valles, non deprimunt montes, non rectificant curva, non 
 complanant aspera, non convertunt corda, ergo non 
 parant viam domini neque rectas faciunt semitas ejus: 
 ideoque non perficiunt doctrinam baptismi. 
 
 10. argumentum. 
 
 Si sacramenta novi testamenti multo praestantiora 
 sunt sacramentis veteris testamenti: tum infantes non 
 sunt baptisandi: 
 
 At sacramenta novi testamenti multo praestantiora 
 sunt sacramentis veteris testamenti. 
 
 Ergo infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Ratio consequentiae haec est, quod externum signum 
 nempe baptismus aquae non anteceUit circumcisionem 
 manibus factam, immo baptismus aquae erat sub veteri 
 testamento. Heb. 9. 10. Ideoque exceUentia et dignitas 
 sacramentorum testamenti novi non consistit in externo 
 signo, sed in persona sacramentum participante : Ergo si 
 infantes in novo testamento baptisandi sunt uti in veteri 
 testamento circumcidebantur, nuUa est prestantia sacra- 
 menti, quod ad personam attinet, in novo testamento: 
 et sic sacramenta utriusque testamenti paria et dignitate 
 aequalia futura sunt: quod Cbristi ofiicia non parum 
 derogat, cum Christus novi testamenti Legislator, et ipse 
 filius in domo patris sui sit: Heb. 3. 6. 
 
 Assumptionis Veritas praecipue convertitur, quae 
 tamen facile confirmari possit si rationem habeamus, 
 personae Christi; conditionis ecclesiae; atque plenitu- 
 dinis temporis: Quod ad christi personam attinet jubet 
 
Against Infant Baptism 721 
 
 pater coelitus ipsum audire. Mat. 17. 5. ejusque officium 
 erat neque inferius, nee solum Mosis officio par: sed 
 multo perf ectius et magis veritati congruum : Per Mosen 
 lex data est : Veritas per Christum accidit ; Ergo quicquid 
 instituit Christus multo nobUius et praestantius erat 
 Mosaicis ceremonijs: deinde quod attinet ad ecclesiae 
 statum et conditionem, vetus ecclesia judaica infanti 
 assimilatur, vel in cunis vagienti, vel cum matrice saltem 
 balbutienti Gal. 4. 3. ecclesia autem novi testamenti viro 
 provectae etatis comparatur, qui incunabula dereliquit, 
 quique sapientiam loquitur cum perfectis. 1. Cor. 13. 14. 
 1 Cor. 2. 6. ideoque sacramenta novi testamenti comparata 
 sunt ad statum et conditionem ecclesiae quae consistit 
 ex viris quasi perfectis. Denique si temporis plenitu- 
 dinem respiciamus sacramenta novi testamenti, plenam 
 et completam (ut ita dico) instructionem et doctrinam in 
 se contineant necessum est, quae non competit infantibus, 
 qui nullius doctrinae capaces sunt: Omnia ergo externa 
 ecclesiae externae mysteria, quia sub Christo admini- 
 strantur in carne exhibito, corpus quoddam et substantiam 
 sibi substratum habent, verum fidem, poenitentiam, 
 conversionem, neque sunt nuda signa, umbrae merae, 
 aut figurae superficiariae, quales erant veteris testamenti 
 ceremoniae. 
 
 11 argumentum. 
 
 Si solus Christus, utpote Doctor coelestis audiendus 
 est, in ecclesia novi testamenti tum infantes non sunt 
 baptisandi. 
 
 At solus Christus utpote D. coelestis audiendus est in 
 ecclesia novi testamenti. 
 
 Ergo infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Consequentiam satis probat silentium spiritus sancti 
 in scriptis apostolicis novi testamenti, nulhbi enim 
 monet sp. sanctus baptismum infantum, ne in ipsius 
 prima institutione inter judeos, vel postea inter gentes: 
 neque sufficit quod afferunt adversarij, posse baptismum 
 infantum facile intelligi ex circumcisione marium in 
 veteri testamento : nam tum Christus solus non esset 
 audiendus sed et Moses: Si ergo debemus Christum 
 solum audire, in omnibus novi testamenti negotijs et 
 
 w. II. 26 
 
722 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 institutionibus, turn vel Christus debet nos docere 
 baptismum infantum, vel si non docuit non debent 
 baptizari, nam a Mose non debet infantum baptismus 
 mutatus accipi[.] Verum adversarij nostri graviter hie 
 hallucinantur cum volunt Christum baptismum instituere, 
 Mosen vero personam inf antis non totam illam et integram, 
 sed masculam solam, femellam autem introducunt per 
 quasdam (nescio quas) consequentias a libertate et 
 latitudine evangelij ductas: utcumque se res habet, 
 fateantur necessum est Christum non tam dilucide, non 
 tam perfecte externam novi testamenti ecclesiam suis 
 privilegijs instruxisse, atque Moses veteris ecclesiae 
 ceremonias instituerat : cum opus nobis est Mosis infante 
 masculo, et consequentia (nescio qua) pro femella in 
 baptismatis institutione, alias Christi, doctrina non est 
 absoluta. 
 
 Minor propositi© confirmatur partim elogio patris e 
 caelo facto. Mat. 17. 5. hie est filius meus dilectus ipsum 
 audite, partim Mosis testimonio. Deut. 18. 15. et Act. 3. 
 22. ipsum audietis in omnibus. Si enim Moses audiendus 
 esset in una parte unius ceremoniae, quid ne in reliquis 
 omnibus tum ceremonijs turn ceremoniarum partibus et 
 si Christus solus audiendus sit ; non est conf ugiendum ad 
 Mosen; non possunt Moses et Christus permisceri, quin 
 Christus imperfectus habendus est sine Mose: minime 
 vero inquiunt advergarij, quia plurima petenda sunt ex 
 veteri testamento, quae tamen Christus per Mosen 
 stabihvit : at vero inquam quod attinet ad ceremonias in 
 novi testamenti ecclesiam receptas nihil a Mose petendum 
 est quod Christus ipse non stabilivit: nam Christus per 
 crucem suam Mosaicas omnes ceremonias et figuras 
 abolevit, exceptis ijs quos ipse pro coelesti sua sapientia 
 expressis verbis et praeceptis in ecclesia novi testamenti 
 et praeceptis retinuit : cum ergo inf ans masculus octiduus 
 est, ceremonia non potest retineri in usu baptismi nisi 
 velimus totam legem mosaicam introducere in ecclesiam 
 novi testamenti cum ipse Christus neque praecepto, neque 
 exemplo vspiam nobis mandavit ejusmodi infantem ad 
 baptismum sacrum admittere: quem ipse in veteri 
 testamento vtpote umbram et figiu-am constituerat. 
 Gal. 3. 28. 
 
Against Infant Baptism 723 
 
 12 argumentum. 
 
 Nudae umbrae non debent baptisari. 
 
 Infantes sunt nudae umbrae. 
 
 Ergo infantes non debent baptisari. 
 
 Major propositio pendet ex proportione ecclesiae 
 veteris testamenti ad ecclesiam novi testamenti: tota 
 enim mosaica paedagogia erat umbra et figura futurorum 
 bonorum, sic ait Apostolus, ad Heb. 10. vs. 1. ecclesia 
 ipsa, membra ecclesiae, sacerdotes, Levitae, masculi, 
 foeminae, primogeniti, reliqui fratres, animalia pura et 
 impura, judeus, graecus, templum, terra sancta, ci vitas 
 sancta, cibus et potus, vestes, denique quid non ? totusque 
 populus Israeliticus per has ceremonias instituebatur 
 tam quod per rudimenta, sive elementa mundi a-TOixeM 
 KTicrewi Gal. 4. 3. ad corpus ipsum sive veritatem Christi, 
 hae umbrae nudae et simplices non admittuntur in 
 communionem novi testamenti, ej usque mijsteriorum 
 participationem ; Etendm Joannes baptista ab ipsis 
 judeis, immo a phariseis legis doctoribus poenitentiam 
 exigebat priusquam eos ad baptismum suum admisit: 
 potuissent Pharisei Joanni objecisse hunc in modum. 
 sumus nos filij Abrahae, populus dei cumque deus foedus 
 suum pepigerat, circumcisi octavo die, docti in lege dei, 
 inexpresensibiles et inculpati quod attinet ad legis justitiam, 
 non ergo debes nos abigere a baptismate tuo, unquam 
 baptisma tuum sanctius quiddam est quam omnia veteris 
 testamenti privilegia ? licitum ne nobis est iUa participare, 
 tuque nobis baptisma tuum sub conditione poenitentiae 
 proponis. Respondet Joannes : omnia iUa praedicta 
 privilegia nuUius sunt momenti ad novi testamenti 
 ecclesiam et sacramenta participanda : opus vobis est 
 cordis contritione et conversione, vera poenitentia et fide 
 in presentem Messiam Jesum qui me fortior et robustior 
 est, cujus ego precursor sum ut viam ejus parem. Nox 
 abijt, dies adest, umbrae veteris testamenti evanuerunt, 
 Veritas in earum locum successit, ignorantiam priorem 
 illam connivendo dissimulavit dominus: jam admonet 
 omnes ubique homines ut resipiscant, non solum gentes 
 et Ethnicos verum et vos judeos etiam, nam altius 
 quiddam vobis jam proponit, magis quiddam ergo a 
 
 26—2 
 
724 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 vobis exigit ut in regnum coelorum admittamini : 
 jam adest regnum coelorum, resipiscite itaque et credits 
 evangelio, et baptisabimini. Quod infantes sunt nudae 
 umbrae, apparet ex consideratione maris et foeminae, 
 mas circumcidebatur, foemina non: qua re? quia mas 
 Christum masculum denotabat, Apoc. 12. 5. et in Christo 
 omnes regenitos Apoc. 2. 26. 27. foemina significat 
 contrarium id est non regenitos : quod intelligitur partim 
 per proportionem sexus, partim ex verbis Apostoli. ad 
 Gal. 3. vs. 28 non enim circumcidebantur masculi quod 
 per circumcisionem in foedus admittebantur, sed quod 
 nudae erant umbrae et figiu-ae. Sic primogenitus : etc: 
 
 13 argumentum. 
 
 Aut omnes infantes baptisandi sunt; aut nulli: 
 
 Sed omnes infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Ergo nuUi infantes debent baptisari. 
 
 Disjunctio necessaria est: sunt enim hoc contraria 
 sine medio; omnes enim omnium mortalium infantes 
 eadem sorte et conditione nati sunt, tum quod ad 
 peccatum, peccati poenam et gratiam Christi univer- 
 salem attinet: neque jam ulla est differentia inter 
 judeum et graecum, sed materia jam diruta est per 
 Christi mortem, et uterque populus deo reconciliatus est. 
 Eph. 2. 13-18. Si ergo quispiam somniare veUet foedus 
 particulare, Apostoli verba aperte huic errori refragantur 
 et coelitus demissum linteum quadrupedibus, feris, 
 reptilibus, volatilibus refertum Act. 10. 15. 11. docet 
 gentes jam puros esse et sub foedere atque judeos: 
 ideoque etiam et eorum liberos: neque obj actio iUa 
 trita ullas in se vires habet quae volunt adversarij gentes 
 deficientes vel absistentes ab evangelij gratia, ex foedere 
 exclusos esse; minime quidem; gratia enim foederis 
 divini non irrita est per infidelitatem hominum, Rom. 3. 
 3. 4. et quamvis decem tribus Israelis apostatae erant, 
 et defecerant a gratia dei, tamen foedus cum Abrahamo 
 ictum firmum et inviolatum permansit ex parte dei, et 
 adhuc sub divino foedere continebatur. Rom. 9. 1-15 et 
 11. vers 1. 2. 28. Cum ergo omnes infantes tum gentium 
 tum judeorum sunt sub foedere divino comprehensi una 
 cum parentibus : ergo aut omnes aut nuUi sunt baptisandi 
 
Against Infant Baptism 725 
 
 volunt enim adversarij infantes confoederatos esse bapti- 
 sandos. Verum ipsi adversarij affirmant omnes infantes 
 non debere baptisari quod pro lucro nostro assumimus: 
 concessiones enim adversariorum licet nobis ad lucrum 
 nostrum apponere: verum tamen fundamentum conces- 
 sionis illorum omni[n]o improbamus, fingunt enim semen 
 infidelium poUutum et contaminatum, a domino rejectum 
 ob parentum infidelitatem : quasi vero dominus a gratia 
 sua aliquem excluderet ob alterius peccata? minime 
 gentium: testatur enim dominus apertissime animam 
 quae peccat morituram, non filium moriturum ob peccata 
 parentum. Ezech. 18. accidit aliquando ut poena tem- 
 poraria castigantur infantes una cum parentibus, sic et 
 bruta animalia: sed ut quispiam poenas aeternas lucet 
 ob alterius peccata, contradicit turn divinae justitiae, tum 
 misericordiae dei et Christi qui inimicos suos amore pro- 
 sequitur, multo magis nesontes infantes : immo tanta est 
 divinae misericordiae immensitas ut poenam temporariam 
 differat ob infantum et brutorum caussam, quemadmodum 
 videre est Jonae 4. 11. Etsi ergo concessionem adver- 
 sariorum amplectimur, omnes scilicet infantes non debere 
 baptisari, tamen fundamentum hujus assertionis reijcimus : 
 et dicimus deum neminem, nedum innocentes odio habere. 
 
 14. argumentum. 
 
 Si Johannis baptistae ministerium praestantius est, 
 omnium prophetarum ministerio, tum infantes non debent 
 baptisari. 
 
 At ministerium Joannis praestantius est reliquorum 
 prophetarum ministerio. 
 
 Ergo infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Consequentia ma j oris patet ex coUatione ministerij 
 Mosis et Joannis baptistae : Moses erat maximus propheta 
 sub veteri testamento : Deut. 34. vs. 10. Moses instituit 
 in ecclesia veteris testamenti circumcisionem. Joan. 7. 
 19-23. ut circumcideretur masculus octiduus : Si. Johannes 
 baptista qui primus spiritus ductu baptismum introduxit, 
 infantum baptismum instituit, ejus officium et mini- 
 sterium Mosis ministerio solummodo par, non superius aut 
 praestantius esset: nam Moses etiam instituebat cir- 
 cumcisionem adultorum proselytarum, quemadmodum 
 
726 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 Joannes baptismum adultorum: ergo quod attinet ad 
 personas nullum est discrimen: deinde quod attinet ad 
 signum videtur circumcisionem baptismum longe antecel- 
 lere respectu significationis : in circumcisione enim, sanguis 
 efEundebatur, cum magno dolore infantis circumcisi pars 
 carnis abscissa mortificabatur, impressa erat genitali 
 cicatrix, sive sigiUum; quae omnia profunda pietatis 
 mijsteria exprimunt: viz: suum et sanguinem et vitam 
 peccati debere effundi : cor contritum et dolore secundum 
 deum fractum et humiliatum: carnis mortificationem : 
 spiritus sigUlum sive arrham post carnem mortificatam, 
 quod est nova creatura. Ergo circumcisio plenissime et 
 apertissime explicat totam novi testamenti doctrinam. 
 baptismus autem Joannis haec eadem mysteria non tam 
 dilucide et distincte exprimit, praeterea baptismus erat 
 sub veteri testamento. Dignitas ergo et exceUentia 
 ministerij Joannis non est in signo, nee in personis 
 Sacramento signatis: debet ergo alibi exquiri; nempe in 
 conditione baptismi: Conditio Joannis baptismi erat 
 poenitentia et fides in Messiam presentem : per quern via 
 domini parabatur : vel ergo hae conditionis debent adesse 
 in baptismate aquae, vel ministerium Joannis nihilo 
 dignius est ministerio Mosis. 
 
 Quod ministerium Johannis dignius et praestantius 
 est ministerio reliquorum prophetarum, et Mosis ipsius, 
 apparet ex verbis Christi: Mat. 11. 9-13. quodque 
 Joannes Christum digito ostendebat, non solum digito 
 corporis, sed doctrina quae Christum Christique officium 
 vivis coloribus exprimebat : Siquidem haec sunt dignissima 
 de Christi officio elogia : Ecce agnus dei qui toUit peccata 
 mundi: Hie est sponsus qui habet sponsam, fortior me 
 est et baptisat spiritu sancto et igni. Purgabit aream, 
 coUiget triticum in granarium, paleam comburet igni 
 inextinguibili : talia non docuit Moses. 
 
 15 argumentum. 
 
 Si ministerium Johannis sit principium evangelij 
 Christi, et tamen minus ministerio Christi : tum infantes 
 non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 At ministerium Johannis est principium evangelij 
 Jesu Christi, et tamen minus ministerio Christi. 
 
Against Infant Baptism 727 
 
 Ergo Infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Connexio propositionis certissimam veritatem in se 
 continet, etsi non cuivis obviam: nam principium 
 Evangelij est a baptismate Johannis: turn enim incipit 
 Christus nuntium illud salutare, et laetitia plenam 
 cordibus poenitentiam et fidelium promulgare et 
 patef acere : inf antibus evangelij principium non revelatur 
 neque ad infantes pertinet, nam illi non opus habent 
 nuntio hoc salutari cum adhuc integri et liberi a peccato 
 in innocentia permanent, soli autem peccatores qui 
 conscientiae stimulis ob peccata admissa urgentur, hac 
 Evangelij consolatione egent; ideoque ministerium 
 Johannis infantes non attingit : deinde cum ministerium 
 Joannis minus sit ministerio Christi; et tamen ad ejus 
 ministerium praeparatio et praevia quasi dispositio per 
 poenitentiam scilicet et fidem opus sit: inde manifesto 
 apparet, quod Johannis baptisma neque infantes attingit, 
 quibus nulla opus est praeparatione, ut ad Christum 
 adducantur cum numquam a Christo recesserint per 
 peccata actualia; neque regenitos, qui Christi baptisma, 
 id est novam creatiu-am, vel spiritus effusionem in corda 
 sua assecuti sunt ; sed quod sit mediae cujusdam naturae, 
 quodque filium prodigum respicit, et ovem errantem ab 
 ovih, nempe homines peccatis actualibus poUutos et 
 contaminatos : ergo Joannes praeparat viam Christo: 
 quod nobis significat viam adhuc non esse praeparatam, 
 sed esse inaequalem et asperam: coUibus et vallibus 
 praesumptionis et desperationis, aliorumque peccatorum, 
 quibus Christi adventus impeditur, refertam. 
 
 Assumptio manifesta est ex duobus scriptiu'ae testi- 
 monijs Marc. 1. 2-3. Et Mat. 3. 11. Marcus ait, 
 Principium Evangelij Christi est a baptismate Joannis : et 
 Matthaeus ait, qm venit post me validior me est; ergo 
 Joannis ministerium est infirmius ministerio Christi, et 
 tamen Evangelium Jesu a ministerio Joannis initium 
 suumhabet; ideoque Apostolus ad Heb. 6. vs. 1. 2. appellat 
 baptismum, poenitentiam et fidem, sermonem principij 
 Christi sive fundament!: Xoyov Trj<; apx"^' rod Xpia-rov, 
 KoX OefieXiov. totum ergo ministerium Joannis tribus 
 hisce circumscribitur, ab Apostolo Paulo Act. 19 vs. 4: 
 verum haec tria minora sunt Christi ministerio, quae pro- 
 prie regeneratio, nova creatura, sive spiritus baptisma est. 
 
728 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 16 argumentum. 
 
 Si Christus servat populum suum a peccatis suis; 
 turn infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 At Christus servat populum suum a peccatis suis. 
 
 Ergo Infantes non sunt baptisandi. 
 
 Ratio consequentiae haec est, quod cum baptismus 
 sit symbolum purgationis peccatorum per sanguinem 
 Christi, baptismus non competit ijs qui peccatorum 
 expurgatione non egent id est infantibus: Infantes non 
 habent peccata quae possunt expurgari, in innocentia 
 sua adhuc permanent, cursus enim atque fluxus peccati 
 originalis intercipitur per Christi mortem, qui agnus 
 occisus est ab initio mundi, adeo vt peccatum non sit ex- 
 traducere: nam mors Christi aeque ampla et efificax est 
 ad peccatum originate intercipiendum atque Adae trans- 
 gressio ad idem introducendum. quid ergo ? Christus non 
 servat infantes a peccatis suis, sed impedit et prohibet 
 ab infantibus peccatum unum alterius: (loquitur per 
 suppositionem) infantes ergo non debe[n]t in corpore suo 
 baptismum aquae suscipere, cum aquae baptismus ijs 
 solis dispensum debet, qui sanguine Christi opus habent 
 ad peccata sua propria abluenda: non enim Christus 
 servat nos a peccatis aliorum, vel a peccato uno solo 
 eoque alterius non nostro, sed liberat nos a peccatis, 
 proprijs, nostris: Sic ait Apostolus: ad Rom. 5. Reatus 
 est ex una offensa ad condemnationem, donum gratuitum 
 est ex multis offensis ad justificationem : ex multis 
 offensis dicit: non ex una offensa. Praeterea Mat. 1. 21. 
 servabit populum suum a peccatis suis, non dicit aliorum, 
 vel alterius nempe Adae: ideoque Apostolus apertissime 
 testatur ad Heb. 2. vs. 15. Libera vit Christus, quotquot 
 metu mortis per omnem vitam obnoxij erant servituti: 
 quod de adultis solis intelligitur. 
 
 Assumptio sunt ipsissima verba Angeli ad Mariam. 
 Mat. 1.21. Nominabitur Jesus, quia servat populum suum 
 a peccatis suis, id est non solum remittit peccata sua per 
 ipsius sanguinem effusum in remissionem peccatorum sed 
 penitus eximit et extrahit peccata ut amplius non sint: 
 sic enim Christus eijcit daemonia, ut praeterea non 
 vexent obsessum: sic penitus toUit lepram ut corpus 
 purum sit, ex omni contagione vacuum, scilicet perfecte 
 
Against Infant Baptism 729 
 
 sanum. Sic enim testatur Evangelista Matheus cap. 8. 
 vs. 17. ipse infirmitates nostras accepit, et morbos 
 porta vit, nam curatio quam perfecit Christus in corporibus 
 aegrorum, figurabat sanationem quam ipse complet in 
 animis peccatorum: Peccata enim animi morbi sunt. 
 
 17. argumentum. 
 
 Cujus nullum extat vel exemplum vel praeceptum, 
 id non debet fieri. 
 
 Baptismatis infantum nullum extat vel exemplum 
 vel praeceptum. 
 
 Ergo iiifantes non debent baptismate donari. 
 
 Propositionis ratio pendet ex verbis Apostoli ad 
 Corinthios cap. 4. primae epistolae, vs. 6. nolite sapere 
 supra quod scriptum est; etsi enim traditiones non 
 scriptas nobis obtendere velint pontificij, inter quas 
 baptisma infantum atque alios quosdam articulos fidei, 
 quos affirmant ad salutem esse necessarios, reputant: 
 tamen eadem severitate a nobis reijciuntur, ficti scripturae 
 sacrae authoritate atque perfectione, qua illas nobis 
 obtendunt importunitate. neque nobis quicquam obest 
 Joannis elogium de rebus gestis Christi non scriptis. Joan. 
 21. 25. ea enim quae scripta sunt possunt virum dei 
 perfectum reddere ad omne opus bonum accurate instruc- 
 tum. 2 Timoth. 3. 16. 17. 
 
 Minor propositio in dubium vocatur: exempla quae 
 proferuntiir solummodo probabUia sunt, ex adversariorum 
 confessione: verum non faciunt fidem probabUia seu vel 
 similia: quod attinet ad praecepta, fatentur etiam 
 adversarij nulla extare praecepta totidem verbis expressa 
 verumtamen ad consequentias nescio quas obscuras et 
 incertas confugiunt: sed nos respondemus debere sacra- 
 menta novi testamenti a Christo qui filius est et fidelis- 
 simus in tota domo dei tam dilucide explicari, quod 
 attinet ad omnes circumstantias, atque a Mose factum 
 est de sacramentis veteris testamenti: neque posse nos 
 confugere ad circumcisionem ut inde lucem afferamus 
 baptismati. quis enim exponeret testamentum novum per 
 vetus? quis scripta apostolica per prophetica explicaret? 
 quis baptismatis rationem per circumcisionis circum- 
 
730 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 stantias describeret ? quis Christum per Mosen inter- 
 pretaretur? Joannes baptista major et dilucidior est 
 omnibus prophetis, minimus in regno coelorum major est 
 Johanne: et tamen adversarij nos remittunt ad circum- 
 cisionem pro legitimo usu baptismatis : hoccine quid aliud 
 est quam taedam soli preferre? Si ipsis concedamus 
 dicentes, esto baptisentur ergo masculi octidui non 
 foeminae: tum iterum recurrunt ad libertatem novi 
 testamenti pro foeminarum baptismate: Sic circulatores 
 hi undique corradunt, quod ipsis visum est proposito suo 
 convenire. Verum sciendum est, cum Christus in novo 
 testamento revelavit nobis occulta mijsteria veteris 
 testamenti, ideo etiam et sacramenta novi testamenti 
 multo plenius et dilucidius exponunt, quam ut vel conse- 
 quentia vel circumcisionis analogia et proportione nobis 
 opus sit ad verum et genuinum usum baptismatis 
 assequendum. hoc enim fidelitati Christi maxime derogaret 
 Mosenque Christo praeferret, qui singulas circumcisionis 
 circumstantias etiam minutissimas enucleate exposuit. 
 De his hactenus[.] 
 
 Tam veteris ecclesiae et Antiquorum patrum 
 Elogia quaedam addamus. 
 Antiqui patres, ut Origines, Ciprianus, et Augustinus, 
 infantum baptismum traditionem ecclesiae nuncupant. 
 
 Augustinus. de Genesi ad literam Lib. 10. cap: 23. 
 Consuetudo tamen matris ecclesiae in baptisandis 
 parvulis nequaquam spernenda est; neque uUo modo 
 superflua deputanda ; nee omnia credenda nisi apostolica 
 esset traditio. 
 
 Idem Aug. Epistola ad Hieronymum. 28^. 
 Nemo sentiat contra fundatissimam ecclesiae morem. 
 loquitur autem Aug. ibi de infantum baptismate[.] 
 
 Idem Aug. de baptismo contra 
 Donatistas lib. 4. cap. 23. 
 Quod traditum tenet universitas ecclesiae cum parvuU 
 infantes baptisantur, qui nondum possunt corde credere 
 et ore conliteri. 
 
 Hinc Romana ecclesia et omnes pontificij uno ore 
 fatentur baptismum infantum esse traditionem Apo- 
 stolicam*non scriptam. 
 
Against Infant Baptism 731 
 
 18 argum*. Inde concludimus hoc modo. 
 
 Traditiones ecclesiae non scriptae reijciendae sunt. 
 1 Cor. 4. 6. 
 
 Baptismus infantum est traditio ecclesiae non scripta. 
 Ergo baptismus infantum reijciendus est. 
 
 Secundo in loco certum est Christianos plurimis in 
 locis liberos suos non baptisasse infantes, sed baptismum 
 Ulorum distulisse usque ad aetatem perfectam: Sic 
 Monica non baptisabat Augustinum: neque Ambrosius 
 et MarceUina baptisabant Ambrosium filium suum sed 
 ipsi postea baptisabantur : Ambrosius Mediolani cum 
 electus est Episcopus: et Augustinus ab Ambrosio in 
 festo Paschatis natus annos triginta: qui quidem mos 
 vulgatus erat in locis quibusdam: uti satis manifestus 
 est ex Historia iUa quam refert Eusebius. Ecclesiast: 
 Historia lib. 10. cap. 15. de Athanasio parvulo, alios 
 parvulos ludicro baptisante, qui quaestiones et respon- 
 siones Catechumenis propositas in baptismo tenebant, 
 quique procul dubio infantes in ecclesia nati erant: 
 
 19. argument. Unde sic coUigo. 
 
 Si plurimi Christiani antiquitus infantes suos non 
 baptisabant; tum infantum baptismus communi con- 
 sensu non receptus erat. 
 
 At Plurimi Christiani infantes suos non baptisabant. 
 
 Ergo infantum baptismus communi consensu non erat 
 receptus. 
 
 Hue pertinet testimonium TertuUiani 
 lib. de baptismo. Cap. 18. 
 Itaque pro cujusque personae conditione ac dispositione 
 etiam aetate cunctatio baptismi utilior est, praecipue 
 tamen circa parvulos : quid enim necesse est, si non tarn 
 necesse, sponsores etiam periculo ingeri. qui et ipsi per 
 mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possunt et 
 proventu malae indolis falli. Ait quidem dominus nolite 
 iUos prohibere ad me venire ; verdant ergo dum adolescunt, 
 veniant dum discunt, dum quo veniant docentur, fiant 
 Christiani cum Christum nosse potuerint. Quid festinat 
 innocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum? Cautius 
 agitur in secularibus, ut cui substantia terrena non 
 
732 Against Infant Baptism 
 
 creditur, divina credatur? norint petere salutem ut 
 petenti dedisse videaris. hoc Tertullianus : ubi plura 
 argumenta adducuntur contra infantum baptismum. 
 
 1. Non sunt adulti, non possunt doceri, non possunt 
 discere, non norunt Christum, ergo ne baptisentur infantes. 
 
 2. Innocens est aetas infantum: ergo non opus est 
 baptismate. quia baptismus est symbolum remissionis 
 peccatorum. 
 
 3. Non credimus infantibus terrena: Ergo non 
 debemus infantibus credere divina, quaKs est baptismus. 
 
 4. Debemus dare petentibus. 
 Infantes non possunt petere baptismum. 
 Ergo non debemus baptismum infantibus dare. 
 
 Post tempora Tertulliani, invalescente errore illo de 
 anima quod scilicet ex traduce sit, ideoque quod peccato 
 originaU contaminata sit; quodque baptismus externus 
 aquae ex opere operato abluit peccatum : undique paulatim 
 admissus est error de infantibus baptisandis. 
 
 Sic inquit Augustinus. de genesi ad hteram. 
 Lib. 10. cap. 23. 
 
 Eorum sententia, qui animas ex parentibus creari 
 putant, de baptismo parvulorum, praeponderat. 
 
 Nam satis constat ex Tertulhano: Hb. de baptismo 
 sub finem, quod mos antiquus erat tempore Paschatis et 
 Pent[e]costis baptisare solum, nisi in casu necessitatis: 
 casus iUe erat periculum mortis, tum autem omni die et 
 hora baptisare licitum erat, quia putabant non posse 
 infantem salvum fieri aut purgari a peccatis alia quam 
 per baptismum. 
 
 Sublatis ergo erroribus hisce: toUitur infantum bap- 
 tismus. Fatentur ergo. Ludovicus Vives: in lib. 1. 
 Augustini de civitate dei. cap. 27. et Erasmus Rotero- 
 damus in cap. 5. Epist. ad Rom. temporibus Apostolorum 
 infantes non fuisse baptisatos. 
 
 Concludimus ergo infantes non debere 
 aqua baptismatis ablui. 
 
Propositions and conclusions, 
 
 concerning true Christian religion, 
 
 conteyning a confesion of faith of certai- 
 
 ne English people, liuinge at 
 
 Amsterdam 
 
 1. '%3^|^j^^Ee beleve that ther is a God. Heb. 11. 6. 
 against all Epicures and Atheists, which 
 either say in ther harts, or vtter with 
 ther mouths that ther is no God. Psal. 
 14. 1: Esay 22. 13. 
 2. That this god is one in number 
 
 1 Cor. 8. 4, 6 against the Pagans or anie other that hold 
 
 a pluralitie of gods. 
 
 3. That god is incomprehensible and inefiable, in 
 regard of his substance or essence: that is, gods essence 
 can neither be comprehended in the minde, nor vttered 
 by the words of men or angells. Exod. 3. 13-15. 33. 
 18-23. 
 
 4. That the creatures and holy scriptinres, do not 
 inted to teach vs what god is in substance or essence, 
 but what he is in effect and property ro. 1. 19-22. 
 Exod. 33. 23. 
 
 5. That these terms, father, sonne, and holy Spirit, 
 do not teach gods substance, but only the hinder parts 
 of god: that which may be known of god. Rom. 2. 
 Exod. 33. 
 
 6. That god may be known by his titles, properties, 
 effects, imprinted and expressed in the creatures, and 
 scriptures. Joh. 17. 3. 
 
 7. That to vnderstand and conceive of god in the 
 minde is not the sauing knowledge of god, but to be 
 like to god in his effects and properties: to be made 
 conformable to his diuine and heauenly attributes. 
 That is the true sauing knowledge of god. 2 Cor. 3. 18. 
 Matt. 5. 48. 2 Peter 1. 4. whervnto we ought to give 
 all diligence. 
 
734 A confession of faith 
 
 8. That this god manifested in father, sonne, and 
 holy ghost: Mat. 3. 16. 17. is most mercifull, most 
 mighty, most holy, most just, most "wise, most true, 
 most glorious, eternal and infinite. Exo. 34. 6. 7: 
 Psal. 90. 2. Psal. 102. 27. 
 
 9. That god before the foundatio of the world did 
 foresee, and determine the issue and event of all his 
 works. Acts 15. 18. and that actually in time he worketh 
 all things by his providece, according to the good pleasure 
 of his will Eph. 1. 11. and therfor we abhorre the 
 opinion of them, that avouch, that all things happen by 
 fortune or chance. Acts 4. 27. 28. Matt. 10. 29. 30. 
 
 10. That god is not the Author or worker of sinne 
 Psal. 5. 4. James 1. 13. but that god only did foresee 
 and determine what euil the free will of men and angels 
 would doe: but he gave no influence, instinct, motion or 
 inchnation to the least sinne. 
 
 11. That god in the begininge created the world 
 viz: the heaves, and the earth and all things that are 
 therin Gen. 1. Acts 17. 24. So that the things that 
 are scene, were not of things which did appeare. Heb. 
 11. 3. 
 
 12. That god created man to blessedness according 
 to his image, in an estate of innocency, free without 
 corruption of sinne Gen. 1. 27: 2. 17. 25: he created 
 them male and female, (to witt) one man and one woman. 
 Gen. 1. 27: He framed man of the dust of the earth, 
 and breathed into him the breath, of lyfe, so the man 
 was a liuinge soule Gen. 2. 7: 1 Cor. 15. 45. But the 
 woman he made of a ribe. Taken out of the syde of the 
 man, Gen. 2. 21. 22. That god blessed them, and 
 commaunded the to increase, and multipUe, and to fill 
 the earth, and to rule over itt and all creatures therin 
 Gen. 1. 28 et 9. 1. 2: Psal. 8. 6. 
 
 13. That therfor marriage is an estate honourable 
 amongst all men, and the bedd vndefiled: viz: betwixt 
 one man and one woman Hebre. 13. 4: 1 Cor. 7. 2. but 
 whoremongers and adulterers God will iudge. 
 
 14. That god created man with freedome of will, so 
 that he had habilitie to chuse the good, and eschew the 
 evil, or to chuse the evil, and refuse the good, and that 
 
A confession of faith 735 
 
 this freedome of will was a naturall faculty, or power, 
 created by god in the soiile of man. Gen. 2, 16. 17 and 
 3. 16. 17. and 27. Ecclesia. 7. 29. 
 
 15. That Adam sinninge was not moued or inclined 
 therto by god, or by anie decree of god : but that he fell 
 from his innocency, and died the death alone, by the 
 temptation of sathan, his freewill assenting thervnto 
 freely. Gen. 3. 6. 
 
 16. That the same day that Adam sinned, he died 
 the death Gen. 2. 17, for the reward of sinne is death. 
 Eom. 6. 23, and this is that which the Apostle saith, 
 dead in trespasses and sinnes Eph. 2. 1, which is losse of 
 innocencie, of the peace of consciece and comfortable 
 presence of God. Gen. 3. 7-11. 
 
 1 7. That Adam being fallen did not loose anie naturall 
 power or facultie which god created in his soul. For the 
 worke of the devill, which is sine, cannot abolish gods 
 works or creatures: and therfor being fallen he still 
 retained freedome of wiU. Gen. 3. 23. 24. 
 
 18. That original sin is an idle terme, and that ther 
 is no such thing as men intend by the word Ezeck. 18. 20, 
 bicause god threatned death onhe to Adam. Gen. 2. 17 
 not to his posterite and bicause god created the soule 
 Heb. 12. 9. 
 
 19. That if original sinne might haue passed from 
 Adam to his posteritie, Christs death, which was effectuall 
 before Caine and Abells birth he being the lambe slaine 
 from the begininge of the world, stopped the issue and 
 passage therof. ApocaUps. 13. 8. 
 
 20. That infants are conceiued and borne in inno- 
 cencie without sinne, and that so dyinge are undoubtedly 
 saued, and that this is to be vnderstoode of all infats 
 vnder heaue Gen. 5. 2. 1. 27 compared with 1 Cor. 15. 
 49, for wher ther is no law ther is no transgressio, sinne 
 is not imputed while ther is no law, Rom. 4. 15. and 5. 13. 
 But the law was not given to infants, but to them that 
 coulde vnderstand. Rom. 5. 13: Matt. 13. 9: NehemiaS. 3. 
 
 21. That all actuall sinners beare the image of the 
 first Adam, in his innocencie, fall: and restitution, in 
 the offer of grace. 1 Cor. 15. 49 and so passe under 
 these three conditions, or threefold estate. 
 
736 A confession of faith 
 
 22. That Adam being fallen god did not hate him, 
 but loved him still, and sought his good Gen 3. 8 to 15, 
 neither doth he hate anie man that falleth with Adam: 
 but that he loueth mankinde, and from his loue sent his 
 onely begotten sonne into the world, to save that which 
 was lost, and to seeke the sheepe that went astraye. 
 John 3. 16. 
 
 23. That god never forsaketh the creatuere till ther 
 be no remedie, neither doth he cast away his innocent 
 creature from all eternity: but casteth away men 
 irrecouerable in sinne Esa. 5. 4: Ezek. 18. 23. 32 [and] 
 33. 11: Luke 13. 6. 9. 
 
 24. That as ther is in all the creatures a naturall 
 inclination to ther yonge ones, to doe them good, so ther 
 is in the lord toward ma: for everie sparke of goodnes 
 in the creature is infinitely good in god. Rom. 1. 20: 
 Psal. 19. 4: Eom. 10. 18. 
 
 25. That as no man begetteth his childe to the 
 gaUowes, nor no potter maketh a pott to breake it: so 
 god doth not create or predestinate anie man to destruc- 
 tion Ezeck. 33. 11: Gen. 1. 27: 1 Cor. 15. 49: Gen. 5. 3. 
 
 26. That god before the foundatio of the world, 
 hath determined the way of life and saluation to consist 
 in Christ, and that he hath foreseen who would follow it 
 Ephe. 1. 5: 2 Timoth. 1. 9, and on the contrary hath 
 determined the way of perdition to consist in infidelitie, 
 and in impenitecie, and that he hath forseen who would 
 follow after it Jude 4 verse. 
 
 27. That as god created all men according to his 
 image, so hath he redeemed all that fall by actuall sinne, 
 to the same end: and that God in his redeption hath 
 not swerved from his mercie, which he manifested in his 
 creation John 1. 3-16: 2 Cor. 5. 19: 1 Timoth 2. 5. 6: 
 Ezeck. 33. 11. 
 
 28. That Jesus Christ came into the world to saue 
 sinners, and that god in his loue to his enemies did send 
 him John 3. 16: that Christ died for his enemies Rom. 
 5. 10: that he bought them that denie him 2 Peter 2. 1, 
 therby teaching vs to loue our enemies Matt. 5. 44. 45. 
 
 29. That Christ Jesus after his baptism by a voyce 
 out of heauen from the father, and by the anoyntinge of 
 
A confession of faith 737 
 
 the holy ghost, which appeared vppon his head in the 
 forme of a done, is appointed the prophet of the church, 
 whom all men must heare Matt. 3: Heb. 3. 1. 2: and 
 that both by his doctrine and life, which he ledd heere 
 in the earth, by all his doings and sufferings, he hath 
 declared and pubhshed, as the only prophet and lawgiuer 
 of his church, the way of peace and life, the glad tidings 
 of the gospell. Acts 3. 23. 24. 
 
 30. That Christ Jesus is the brightnes of the glorie 
 and the engrauen forme of the fathers substance, sup- 
 porting all things by his mighty power [Heb.] 1. 3: and 
 that he is become the mediatour of the new Testament 
 (to wit) the kinge. Priest, and Prophet of the Church, 
 and that the f aithfull through him, are thus made spiritual 
 kings. Priests, and Prophets Apoc. 1. 6: 1 John 2. 20: 
 Apoc. 19. 10. 
 
 31. That Jesus Christ is he which in the beginning 
 did lay the foundation of the heauens and earth which 
 shall perish Hebr. 1. 10: Psalm 102. 26: that he is 
 alpha and omega, the begininge and the end, the first 
 and the last. He is the wisdom of god, which was 
 begotten from everlasting before aU creatures Michai 
 5. 2: Prov. 8. 24: Luck 11. 49: he was in the form of 
 god, and thought it no robberie to be equaU with god: 
 yet he took to him the shape of a seruant, the word became 
 flesh John 1. 14, wonderfully by the power of god in 
 the wombe of the virgin Marie: he was of the seed of 
 David according to the flesh Phil. 2. 7: Hebre 10: 
 Rom. 1. 3: and that he made himself e of no reputation, 
 humbled himself, and became obedient vnto the death of 
 the crosse, redeeming vs from our vaine conversation, not 
 with siluer or golde, but with the pretious blood of himself, 
 as of a lambe without spot and vndefiled 1 Pet. 1. 18. 19. 
 
 32. That although the sacrifice of Christ[s] body and 
 blood offered vp vnto god his father vppon the crosse, be 
 a sacrifice of a sweet smeUing sauor, and that god in him 
 is well pleased, yet it doth not reconcile god vnto vs, 
 which did neuer hate us, nor was our enemie, but recon- 
 cileth vs vnto god 2 Cor. 5. 19, and slayeth the enmitie 
 and hatred, which is in us against god Ephes. 1. 14. 17: 
 Rom. 1. 30. 
 
 w. n. 27 
 
738 A confession of faith 
 
 33. That Christ was dehuered to death for our 
 sinnes Rom. 4. 25, and that by his death we have the 
 remission of oiir sinnes Eph. 2. 7, for he cancelled the 
 handwriting of ordinances, the hatred, the law of com- 
 maundements in ordinances Eph. 2. 15: Colos. 2. 14 
 which was against vs Deut. 31. 26: he spoyled princi- 
 palities and powers, made a shew of them openly, and 
 triumphed over them on the crosse CoUoss. 2. 15: by 
 death he destroyed him that had the power of death, 
 that is the deuill Heb. 2. 14. 
 
 34. That the enemies of our saluation, which Christ 
 vanquished on his crosse, are the gates of hell, the power 
 of darknes, sathan : sinne : death : the greaue, the curse 
 or condemnation: wicked men, and persecutors Eph. 
 6. 12: 1 Cor. 15. 26. 54. 57: Matt. 16. 18: Apoca. 20. 10. 
 14. 15, which enemies we must overcome no otherwise 
 then Christ hath done John 21. 22: 1 Pet. 2. 21: Reue. 
 14. 4. 
 
 35. That the efHcacie of Christ[s] death is only 
 deriued to them, which do mortifie ther sinnes, which 
 are grafted with him to the similitude of his death Rom. 
 6. 3-6, which are circumcised with circumcision made 
 without hands, by putting off the sinfuU body of the 
 flesh, through the circumcision which Christ worketh 
 Coloss. 2. 11. who is the minister of the circumcition for 
 the truth of god, to cofirme the promises made to the 
 fathers. Rom. 15. 8 compared with Deut. 30. 6. 
 
 36. That ther are three which bear witness in the 
 earth, the spirit, water and blood, and these three are 
 one in testimony, witnessing that Christ truely died 
 1 John 5. 8 for he gaue up the ghost, John 19. 30: and 
 out of his side pearced with a speare came water and 
 blood verse 34, 35, the couer of the hart being pearced, 
 where ther is water conteined. 
 
 37. That euerie mortified person hath this witness 
 in himself 1 Joh. 5. 10, for the spirit blood and water 
 of sinne is gone, that is the life of sinne with the nourish- 
 ment and cherishment therof 1 Pet. 4. 1: Rom. 6. 7: 
 1 John 3. 6. 
 
 38. That Christ Jesus being truely dead was also 
 bm?ied John 19. 39. 42, and that he lay in the graue the 
 
A confession of faith 739 
 
 whole saboth of the Jewes: but in the graue he saw no 
 corruption Psa. 16. 10: Act 2. 31. 
 
 39. That all mortified persons are also bviried with 
 Christ, by the baptisme, which is in to his death Rom. 
 6. 4: Colloss. 2. 12: keeping ther saboth with Christ in 
 the graue (that is) resting from ther own workes as god 
 did from his Heb. 4. 10, waiting ther in hope for a 
 resurrection Psal. 16. 9. 
 
 40. That Christ Jesus early in the morning, the 
 first day of the weeke, rose again after his death and burial 
 Mat. 28. 6 for our Justification Rom 4. 25, being 
 mightilye declared to be the sonne of god, by the spirit 
 of sanctification, in the resm-rection from the dead Rom. 
 1. 4. 
 
 41. That these that are grafted with Christ to the simi- 
 litude of his death and buriall shall also be to the similitude 
 of his resm-rection Rom. 6. 4. 5: for he doth quicken or 
 give fife vnto them, together with himself Colloss. 2. 13: 
 Eph. 2. 5. 6: for that is their salvation, and it is by grace 
 Eph. 2. 5: 1 John 5. 11. 12. 13: Titus 3. 5. 6. 7. 
 
 42. That this quickening or reuiueing of Christ, this 
 lauor of regeneration, this reneweing of the holy ghost, 
 is our iustification and salvation Titus 3. 6. 7. This is 
 that pure riuer of water of life cleare as crystal, which 
 proceedeth out of the throne of god, and of the lambe. 
 reuel. 22. 1: which also floweth out of the belly of him 
 that beleeueth in Christ John 7. 38: this is those pre- 
 tious promises wherby we are made partakers of the diuine 
 natiu-e, by fiying the corruptions that are in the world 
 through lust 2 Pet. 1. 4: this is the fruite of the tree of 
 life which is in the midst of the paradise of god: this is 
 the white stone wherin there is a name written, which 
 no man knoweth, saue he that receiueth yt. This is the 
 morning starre, this is the new name, the name of god, 
 the name of the citie of god: the new Jerusalem which 
 descedeth from god out of heauen: this is the hidden 
 Manna, that white clothinge, eye salue, and gold: and 
 that heauenly supper which Christ promiseth to them 
 that overcome reuel 2. 7. 17. 18. et 3. 5. 12. 18. 20. 
 
 43. That ther are three which beare recorde in 
 heauen, the father, the word, and the holy spirit: and 
 
 27—2 
 
740 A confession of faith 
 
 that these three are one in testimonie, witnessing the 
 resurrection of Christ. The father saith Thou art my 
 Sonne this day haue I begotten the Acts 13. 33-35. 
 The Sonne testifieth of his owne resurrection, being 
 fourtie daies, with his disciples Acts 1. 3. The holy 
 ghost testifieth the same, whom Christ sent to his disciples 
 vppon the day of pentecost Acts 2. 
 
 44. That euerie person that is regenerate and risen 
 again with Christ hath these three aforesaide witnesses 
 in himself 1 John 5. 10: for Christ doth dwell in his hart 
 by faith Ej)h. 3. 17: and the father dwelleth with the 
 Sonne Joh 14. 23: and the holy ghost likewise 1 Cor 
 3. 16: and that the grace of our lord Jesus Christ, and 
 the love of God, and the feUowshippe of the holy ghost is 
 with them 2 Cor 13. 13. 
 
 45. That Christ haueinge fourty dayes after his 
 resurrection conuersed with his disciples Acts 1. 3, 
 ascended locally into the heauens [Acts] 1. 9, which must 
 conteyne him unto the time that aU things be restored 
 Acts 3. 21. 
 
 That they which are risen with Christ, ascend vp 
 spiritually with Him, seeking those things which are 
 aboue, wher Christ sitteth at the right hande of God, and 
 that they sett their affections on heauenly things, and 
 not on earthly things Col 3. 1-5. 
 
 46. That Christ now being receiued into heauen, 
 sitteth at the right had of God Mar. 16. 9, hauing ledd 
 captiuitie captiue, and giuen gifts unto men Eph. 4. 8: that 
 god hath now highly exalted him, and giuen him a name 
 aboue euerie name that at the name of Jesus euery knee 
 should bow, of things in heaven in earth and vnder the 
 earth Phil. 2. 9. 10, that he hath obtained aU power 
 both in heaven and in earth Matt. 28. 18, and hath 
 made all things subiect under his feet and hath appointed 
 him ouer aU things to be the head to the church, that is 
 his body, the fulnes of him that filleth all in all things 
 Eph. 1." 12-23. 
 
 47. That the regenerate do sitt together with Christ 
 Jesus in heauenly places Eph. 2. 6, that they sitt with 
 him in his throne as he sitteth with the father in his 
 throne Reu. 3. 21, that they haue power, ouer nations, 
 
A confession of faith 741 
 
 and rale them with a rodd of Iron, and as a potters 
 vessell they are broaken in pieces Reu. 2. 26. 27: and 
 that sitting on twelue thrones, they do iudge the twelve 
 tribes of Israel Matt. 19. 28, which spiritually is to put 
 aU ther enemies in subiection vnder ther feet: so that 
 the euil one doth not touch them 1 Johan 5. 18, nor the 
 gates of hell preuaile against them Math. 16. 28, and 
 that they are become pillars in the house of god, and go 
 no more out Reuel. 3. 12. 
 
 48. That Christ Jesus being exalted at the right 
 hand of god the father, farre aboue all principalities and 
 powers, might, and domination, and euerie name that is 
 named, not only in this world, but in the world to come 
 Eph. 1. 21, hath receiued of his father the promise of 
 the holy ghost, which he also shed fourth upon his disciples, 
 on the day of pentecost Acts 2. 33. 
 
 49. That Christ Jesus, in his resurrection, ascetion 
 and exaltation, is more and rather lord and Christ, 
 sauiour, anoynted, and kinge then in his humiliation 
 sufferings and death Act 2. 36: Phil 2. 7. 11, for the 
 end is more excellent than the meanes, and his sufferings 
 were the way by the which he entered into his glorie 
 Luc. 24. 16, and so by consequent the efificacie of his 
 resurrection in the new creature, is more noble and 
 excellent, then the efficacie of his death in the mortification 
 and remission of sinnes. 
 
 50. That the knowledge of Christ according to the 
 flesh is of small profit 2 Cor. 15. 16. 17, and the knowledge 
 of Christs genealogie, and Historic, is no other but that 
 which the DeviU hath as well if not better than anie 
 man huinge: but the knowledge of Christ according to 
 the spirit is effectual to saluation which is spiritually to 
 be grafted to the simihtude of Christs birth, life, miracles, 
 doings, sufferings, death burial, resurrection ascesion, 
 and exaltation Rom. 6. 3. 6. 
 
 51. That Christ Jesus according to the flesh and 
 history in his doings and suffering, is a great misterie, 
 and diuine sacrament of himself, and of his ministerie, in 
 the spirit, and of those spirituall things, which he worketh 
 in those which are to be heires of saluation Rom. 6. 
 3. 6: Eph. 2. 5. 6. and that spiritually he performeth all 
 
742 A confession of faith 
 
 those miracles in the regenerate, which he wrought in 
 his flesh : he healeth ther leprosy, bloody issue, blindnes, 
 dumbnes, deafnes, lamenes, palsie fever, he casteth out 
 the devils, and vnclean spirits, he raiseth the dead, 
 rebxiketh the windes, and the sea: and it is calm; he 
 feedeth thousands with the barley loaues and fishes 
 Math. 8. 16. 17. compared with Esay. 53. 4. John 6. 
 26. 27. 
 
 52. That the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the father 
 and the sonne John 14. 26. and 16. 7: that he is the 
 eternal spirit wherby Christ offered himself without spot 
 to God Hebr. 9. 14: that he is that other comforter, 
 which Christ asketh, obtaineth, and sendeth from the 
 father. Johan 14. 16 which dwelleth in the regenerate 
 1 Cor. 3. 16. which leadeth them into all truth John 16. 
 13. he is that anointing which teacheth them all things, 
 and that they haue no need that anie man teach them, 
 but as the same anointing teacheth 1 Jo. 2. 20, 27. 
 
 53. That although ther be diuerse gifts of the spirit 
 yet ther is but one spirit, which distributeth to euery one 
 as he will 2 Cor. 12. 4. 11: Eph. 4. 4 that the outward 
 giftes of the spirit which the holy ghost powreth forth 
 upon the day of pentecost upon the disciples, in tongues 
 and prophecy, and giftes, and healing, and miracles, 
 which is caUed the baptism of the holy ghost and fire 
 Acts 1. 5. were onlie a figure of and an hand leading to 
 better things, even the most proper gifts of the spirit of 
 sanctification, which is the new creature: which is the 
 one baptism Eph. 4. 4. compared with Acts 2. 33. 38 
 and with Lucke 10. 17, 20. 
 
 54. That John Baptist and Christ are two persons, 
 their ministeries are two ministeries seueraU, and ther 
 Baptismes are two baptismes, distinct the one from the 
 other. John 1.20: Actor 13. 25: Actor 1. 4, 5: Matt. 3. 11 
 
 55. That John taught the baptism of repentance for 
 the remission of sinnes, baptizing with water to amend- 
 ment of life Math. 3. 11 thus preparing a way for Christ, 
 and his baptism Luck 3. 3, 6 by bringing men to repent- 
 ance and faith in the Messias whom he pointed out with 
 the finger, (saying) behold the Lambe of God that taketh 
 away the sinnes of the world Jo. 1. 31, 29: Act. 19. 4. 
 
A confession of faith 743 
 
 56. That Christ is stronger and hath a more excellent 
 office, and ministerie than John Matt. 3. 11: that he 
 baptizeth with the holy ghost and fire: that he cometh 
 ad walketh in the way which John hath prepared: and 
 that the new creature followeth repentance Lucke 3. 6. 
 
 57. That repentance and faith in the Messias, are 
 the conditions to be performed on our behaHe, for the 
 obtaining of the promises Acts 2. 38: John 1. 12: that 
 the circumcision of the hart mortification and the promise 
 of the spirit, that is, the new creature, are the promises 
 which are made to the aforesaid conditions Deut. 30. 6: 
 A.ctor 2. 38: Gal. 3. 14: 2 Pet. 1. 4, 5 which promises 
 are all yea and Ame in Christ Jesus 2 Cor. 1. 20 and that 
 11 the regenerate Galat. 3. 16. 
 
 58. That repentance and faith, are wrought in the 
 harts of men, by the preaching of the word, outwardlie 
 in "he scriptures, and creatures, the grace of God pre- 
 venting vs by the motions and instinct of the spirit, 
 which a man hath power to receive or reiect Matt. 
 23. 37: Acts 7. 51: Acts 6. 10: Rom. 10. 14, 18: that 
 our irstification before God consisteth not in the perform- 
 ance of the conditions which God requireth of vs, but in 
 the pertaking of the promises, the possessing of Christ, 
 Remission of sinnes, and the new creature. 
 
 59. That god the father, of his owne Good wiU doth 
 begett vs, by the word of truth Jame 1. 18 which is 
 an imuiortall seed 1 Pet. 1. 23. not the doctrine of 
 repentance and faith which may be lost Luke 8. 13: 
 and that god the father, in our regeneration, neither 
 needeth nor vseth the helpe of any creature, but that 
 the father, the word and the holy ghost, immediately 
 worketh bhat worke in the soule, wher the free will of 
 men canr doe nothing Johan 1. 13. 
 
 60. That such as haue not attained the new creature, 
 have need of the scriptures, creatures and ordinances of 
 the churct, to instruct them, to comfort them, to stir 
 them vpp the better to performe the condicion of repent- 
 ance to the remission of sinnes. 2 Pet. 1. 19: 1 Cor. 11. 
 26: Eph. 4. 12-23. 
 
 61. That the new creature which is begotten of 
 God, needeth not the outwoard scriptures creatures or 
 
744 A confession of faith 
 
 ordinances of the church, to support or help them 2 Cor. 
 13. 10, 12: 1 Joh. 2. 27: 1 Cor. 1. 15, 16: Apoklips 21. 
 23 seeing that he hath three witnesses in himselfe, the 
 father, the word, and the hoHe ghost: which are better 
 then all scriptures, or creatures whatsoever. 
 
 62. That as Christ who was aboue the law not- 
 withstading was made vnder the law, for our cause: so 
 the regenerate in love to others ca ad wiU doe no other, 
 the vse the outward things of the church : for the gaininge 
 and supporting of others[:] and so the outward church 
 and ordinances, are always necessary for all sorts of 
 persons whatsoever Matt. 3. 15: 28. 19, 20: 1 Cor. 8. 9. 
 
 63. That the new creature although he be aboue the 
 law and scriptures, yet he can doe nothing against tie 
 law or scriptures, but rather aU his doings shall serue to 
 the confirminge and establishing of the law. Rom. 3. 31. 
 Therfor he can neither lye, nor steale, nor comiAitt 
 adulterie, nor kill, nor hate anie man, or do anie qcher 
 fleshly action, and therfor aU fleshly Hbertinismd, is 
 contrarie to regeneration, detestable, and dami/able. 
 Rom. 6. 15. 16. 18. 2 Pet. 2. 18. 19. 1 John 5. 18. /John 
 8. 34. 
 
 64. That the outward church visible, consistes of 
 penitent persons onely, and of such as beleeuing in Christ, 
 bring forth fruites worthie amendment of lyfe. 1 Tim. 
 6. 3. 5. 2 Tim. 3. 1. 5. Act. 19. 4. 
 
 65. That the visible church is a mistycali figure 
 outwardlie, of the true, spirituall invisible churcli : which 
 consisteth of the spirits of iust and perfect mto onlie, 
 that is of the regenerate. Reu. 1. 20. compared with 
 2 P. 2. 23. 27. [sic] 
 
 66. That repentance is the change of the minde from 
 evill, to that which is Good Matt. 3. 2. a sorrow for 
 sinne committed, with a humble hart for the same: 
 and a resolution to amend, for the time to come: with 
 an vnfained indevour therin 2 Cor. 7. 8. 11: Esay 1. 16. 
 17: Jer. 31. 18. 19. 
 
 67. That when we haue done all that we can we are 
 vnprofitable seruants, and all our righteousnes is as a 
 stayned clothe Luce 17. 20. and that we can onely 
 suppresse and loppe of the braches of sinnes, but the 
 
A confession of faith 745 
 
 root of sinne we cannot pluck vp out of our hartes. 
 Jer. 4. 4. compared with Deut. 30. 6. 8. 
 
 68. That faith is a knowledge in the mind of the 
 doctrine of the law, and gospell, conteyned in the 
 prophetical, and apostolical scriptures of the old and new 
 testament: accompanyeing repetance with an assurance 
 that god through Christ, will performe vnto vs his 
 promises of remission of sinnes, and mortification, vppon 
 the condition of om- vnf ained repentance, and amendment 
 of hfe. Rom. 10. 13. 14. 15: Act 30. 33 [sic] and Act 
 2. 38. 39: Heb. 11. 1: Mark 1. 15. 
 
 69. That all penitent and faithfull Christians are 
 brethre in the communion of the outward church, wherso 
 euer they liue, by what name soeuer they are knowen, 
 which in truth and zeale, foUow repentance and faith, 
 though compassed with neuer so manie ignorances and 
 infirmities: and we salute them aU with a holie kisse, 
 being hartUie grieved that wee which follow after one 
 faith, and one spirit, one lord, and one God, one bodie, 
 and one baptisme, should be rent into so manie sects, 
 and schismes : and that only for matters of lesse moment. 
 
 70. That the outward baptisme of water, is to be 
 administred onely vppon such penitent and faithfull 
 persons as are (aforesaid) and not vppon innocent Infants, 
 or wicked persons. Matt. 3. 2. 3 compared with Matt. 
 28. 19. 20 and Joh. 4. 1. 
 
 71. That in Baptisme to the penitent person, and 
 beleeuer, ther is presented, and figured, the spirituall 
 baptisme of Christ, (that is) the baptisme of the holy 
 ghost, and fire: the baptisme into the death and resur- 
 rection of Christ: euen the promise of the spirit, which 
 he shall assuredly be made partaker of, if he continue to 
 the end. Gal. 3. 14. Mat. 3. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 13. Rom. 6. 
 3-6. Coloss. 2. 10. 
 
 72. That in the outward supper which onely baptised 
 persons must pertake, ther is presented and figured 
 before the eyes, of the penitent ad faithfull, that spirituall 
 supper, which Christ maketh of his flesh and blood: 
 which is crucified and shed for the remission of sinnes 
 (as the bread is broken and the wine po\^Ted forth) and 
 which is eaten and drunken (as is the bread and wine 
 
746 A confession of faith 
 
 bodily) onely by those which are flesh, of his flesh, and 
 bone of his bone: in the communion of the same spirit. 
 1 Cor. 12. 13. Reu. 3. 20. compared with 1 Cor. 11. 23. 
 26. Joh. 6. 53. 58. 
 
 73. That the outward baptisme, and supper doe 
 not confer, and convey grace and regeneration to the 
 participants, or communicants : but as the word preached 
 they serue only to support and stirr vp the repentance, 
 and faith of the communicants till Christ come, till the 
 day dawne, and the day-stare arise in ther harts. 1 Cor. 
 11. 26. 2 Pet. 1. 19. 1 Cor. 1. 5-8. 
 
 74. That the sacraments haue the same vse that the 
 word hath: that they are a visible word, and that they 
 teach to the eye of them that vnderstand as the word 
 teacheth the eares of them that have eares to heare. 
 Pro. 20. 12 and therfore as the word appertaineth not to 
 Infants, no more do the sacraments. 
 
 75. That the preaching of the word, and ministerie 
 of the sacraments, representeth the ministery of Christ 
 in the spirit: who teacheth baptiseth, and feedeth the 
 regenerate, by the holie spirit inwardlie and invisiblie. 
 
 76. That Christ hath sett in his outward church 
 two sorts of ministers: viz. some who are called pastors, 
 teachers or elders, who administer in the word and 
 sacraments: and others who are called Deacons, men 
 and women: whose ministerie is, to serue tables and 
 wash the saints feet. Actor 6. 2-4. Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 
 3. 2. 3. 8. 11. and Chap. 5. 
 
 77. That the seperating of the impenitent, from the 
 outward comunion of the church, is a figure of the eternal 
 reiection, and reprobation of them that persist impenitent 
 in sinne. Reue. 21. 27. and 22. 14. 15. Math. 16. 18 and 
 18. 18: John 20. 23 compared with Reu. 3. 12. 
 
 78. That none are to be seperated from the outward 
 communion of the Church but such as forsake repentance, 
 which deny the power of Godlines 2 Tim. 3. 5 and namely 
 that sufficient admonition goe before, according to the 
 rule Math. 18. 15. 18. and that none are to be reiected 
 for ignorance or errors, or infirmities: so long as they 
 retayne repentance and faith in Christ. Rom. 14. and 
 1 Thessa. 5. 14. Rom, 16. 17. 18. but they are to be 
 
A confession of faith 747 
 
 instructed with meeknes : and the strong are to beare the 
 infirmities of the weake : and That we are to support one 
 another through loue. 
 
 79. That a man may speak a word against the 
 Sonne, and be pardoned, (that is) a man may err in the 
 knowledge of Christs Historic: and in matters of the 
 outward church, and be f orgiuen : doing it in an ignorant 
 Zeale: but he that speaketh a word against the holie 
 gost (that is) that after illumination forsaketh repentance 
 and faith in Christ, persecuting them, trampling vnder 
 foot the blood of the couenant: returning with the dogg 
 to the vomitt : that such shall neuer be pardoned, neither 
 in this world, nor in the world to come. Math. 12. 31. 32. 
 compared with Hebre 6. 4. and Chap. 10. 26. 29. 2 Pet. 
 2. 20. 22. 
 
 80. That persons seperated from the comunion of 
 the church, are to be accounted as heathens and publicans 
 Math. 18. and that they are so far to be shunned, as they 
 may poUute: notwithstanding being readie to instruct 
 them, and to relieue them in ther wants: seeking by 
 aU lawfull meanes to winne them : considering that 
 excomunication is onely for the destruction of the flesh, 
 that the sj)irit may be saued in the day of the lord. 
 1 Cor. 5. 5. 11. Math. 11. 19. Lucke 15. 1. 2. 
 
 81. That ther is no succession in the outward church, 
 but that all the succession is from heauen, and that the 
 new creature onely, hath the thing signified, ad sub- 
 stance: wherof the outward church and ordinances, are 
 shadowes. Colo. 2. 16. 17. and therfor he alone hath 
 power, and knoweth aright, how to administer in the 
 outward church, for the benefitt of others John 6. 45. 
 yet God is not the God of confusion, but of order: and 
 therfore we are in the outward church, to draw as neare 
 the first institution as may be, in all things 1 Cor. 14. 33. 
 therefore it is not lawfull for euery brother to administer 
 the word and sacraments Ephes. 4. 11. 12. compared 
 with 1 Cor. 12. 4. 5. 6. 28. 29. 
 
 82. That Christ hath sett in his outward church 
 the vocation of maister and seruant, parents and children, 
 husband and wyfe. Eph. 6. 22. 25. Chap. 6. 1. 4. 5. 9. 
 and hath commaunded euerie soule to be subject to the 
 
748 A confession of faith 
 
 higher powers. Rom. 13. 1. not bicause of wrath onlie 
 but for conscience sake, verse 5. that we are to give 
 them ther dutie: as tribute, and custome, honour, and 
 feare, not speaking euil of them that are in authoritie 
 Jude verse 8 but praying and giuing thankes for them, 
 1 Tim. 2. 1. 2. for that is acceptable in the sight of God 
 euen our sauioiu". 
 
 83. That the office of the magistrate, is a disposition 
 or permissiue ordinace of God, for the Good of mankinde : 
 that one man hke the bruite beasts devoure not another 
 Rom. 13. and that iustice and ciuihtie may be preserued 
 amonge men: and that a magistrate may so please God 
 in his calling, in doing that which is righteous and just, 
 in the eyes of the lord, that he may bring an outward 
 blessing, vppon himselfe his posteritie and subiects. 
 2. kin. Chapter. 10. vers. 30. 31. 
 
 84. That the magistrate is not by vertue of his 
 office to meddle with religion, or matters of conscience, 
 to force and compell men to this or that form of rehgion, 
 or doctrine : but to leaue Christian religion free, to euery 
 mans conscience, and to handle onely ciuil transgressions 
 Rom. 13. iniuries and wronges of men against man, in 
 murther, Adulterie, theft etc. for Christ onelie is the 
 king, and lawgiuer of the church and conscience Jas 
 4. 12. 
 
 85. That if the magistrate will follow Christ, and 
 be His disciple, he must deny himself, take vp his crosse, 
 and follow Christ: he must loue his enemies and not 
 kill them, he must pray for them, and not punishe them, 
 he must feed them and giue the drinke, not imprison 
 them : banish them : dismember them : and spoyle 
 their Goods: he must suffer persecution and affliction 
 with Christ, and be slaundered, reviled, blasphemed, 
 scourged, buffeted, spit vpon, imprisoned and killed 
 with Christ: and that by the authoritie of magistrates, 
 which things he cannot possiblie doe, and reteyne the 
 reuendge of the sword. 
 
 86. That the Disciples of Christ the members of the 
 outward church, are to Judge all ther causes of difference, 
 among themselves: and they are not to goe to law, 
 before the magistrates 1 Cor. 6. 1. 7. and that aU ther 
 
A confession of faith 749 
 
 differences must be ended by (yea) and (nay) without an 
 oath. Math. 5. 33-37. Jam. 5. 12. 
 
 87. That the Disciples of Christ, the members of 
 the outward church, may not marrye, anie of the prophane, 
 or wicked, Godles people of the world, but that euerie 
 one is to marry in the lord. 1 Cor. 7. 39 euerie man one 
 onely wyfe, and euerie woman one onely husband 1 Cor. 
 7. 2. 
 
 88. That parents are bound, to bring vp ther children 
 in instruction, and information of the lord Eph. 6. 4. 
 ad that they are to prouide for their familie: otherwise 
 they denie the faith, and are worse then Infidels 1 Tim. 
 5. 8. 
 
 89. That notwithstanding if the lord shall giue a 
 man anie speciaU caUinge, as Simon, and Andrew: 
 James, and John: then they must leaue all, father 
 shipp, netts wyfe, children, yea, and life also to foUow 
 Christ. Luke 14. 26. Math Chap. 4. 18-20. 
 
 90. That in the necessities of the chvirch, and poore 
 brethren, all things are to be common Acto 4. 32 yea 
 and that one church is to administer to another in time 
 of need. Galat. 2. 10. Actor 11. 30. 2 Cor. 8 and .9. 
 Chap. 
 
 91. That aU the bodies of all men that are dead, 
 shall by the power of Christ be raised vp, out of his owne 
 proper seed, as corne out of the seed rotting in the earth. 
 1 Cor. 15. 
 
 92. That these which liue in the last day shall not 
 die, but shall be changed in a moment : in the twinckUng 
 of an eye, at the last trumpett 1 Cor. 15. 52 for the 
 trumpe shall blow, ad the dead shall be raised vp incor- 
 ruptible, and we shall be changed, not in substance but 
 in quahties : for the bodies shaU rise in honour, in power, 
 in incorruption, and spirituall : being sowen in dishonour, 
 in weaknes, in corruption, and naturall. 1 Corinth. 15. 
 42. 44. 
 
 93. That the bodies being raised vp, shall be ioined 
 to the soules, wherto formerlie they were vnited: which 
 till that time were preserued in the handes of the lord 
 Reue. 6. 9. Job. 19. 25. 27. 
 
 94. That it is appointed to all men that they shall 
 
750 A confession of faith 
 
 once dye, and then cometh the iudgmentt Heb. 9. 27 
 and that the change of them that line on the earth at the 
 last day, shall be as it were a death vnto them 1 Cor. 
 15. 52. 1 Thessa. 4. 15-17. 
 
 95. That there shall be a general! and vniuersaU day 
 of Judgment, when euerie one shall receiue according to 
 the things that are done in the flesh, whether they be 
 Good or evill. 2 Cor. 5. 10. Act. 17. 31. 
 
 96. That of that day, and hower knoweth no man: 
 no not the Angells in heauen, neither the sonne himself, 
 but the father onely Mar. 13. 32. 
 
 97. That Christ Jesus that man, shall be iudge in 
 that day Actor 17. 31 that he shall come in the cloudes 
 with glorie: and all his holie angels with him Matt. 25. 
 with a showte and with the voyce of the Archangell, 
 and with the trompe of God. 1 Thessa. 4. 16 ad He shall 
 sit vppon the throne of his glorie: and all nations shall 
 be gathered before Him : and he shall seperate them one 
 from another, as a sheephard seperateth the sheep from 
 the goates, setting the sheep on his right hand and the 
 goates on the left. Mat. 25. 
 
 98. That the king shall say to the sheep the 
 regenerate, which are on His right hand: come yee 
 blessed of my father, inherit the kingdome prepared for 
 you before the foundation of the world: and it shaU be 
 performed accordinglie Math. 25. 
 
 99. That the king shall say to them on his left hand, 
 the goates, the wicked ones, depart from me, yee cursed 
 into euerlasting fire, prepared for the DeviU and his 
 angells. and it shall be accomplished accordinghe Mat. 25. 
 
 100. That after the Judgement ended and accom- 
 phshed, and the last enemie that is death being put under 
 the feet of Christ, then the sonne Himself shall dehuer 
 vp the kingdome into the handes of the father, 
 
 and shall be subiect vnto him, 
 that subdued all things unto him, 
 that God may be all in aU. 1 Cor. 15. 24-28. 
 
 FINIS 
 
 [ornament] 
 
The Last Booke of lohn Smith 
 
 Called the Retra(9:ation of His Errours, 
 and the Confirmation of the Truth 
 
 If any man he in Christ, let him he a new creature 2 Cor. 5- I7- 
 
 For they that are Christes, haue crucified the flesh with the affections, 
 and, the lustes. Gal. 5. 24 
 
Am not of the number of those men, which 
 assume unto them selues such plenarie 
 knowledge and assiirance of ther wayes, 
 and of the perfection and sufficiencie therof, 
 as that they peremptorily censure all men 
 except those of their owne vnderstanding, 
 and require that aU men vppon pain of damnation, 
 become subiect, and captiuate, in their Judgement and 
 walkinge to ther hne and levell : of which sort are those 
 of our English nation, who publish in print ther proclama- 
 tion against all churches, except those of their owne 
 societie and feUowshipp: I mean the double seperation 
 maister Hainsworth, and maister Helwys. although the 
 one more neare the truth, then the other: neither is my 
 piirpose in this my writinge, to accuse and condemne, 
 other men, but to cesure and ref orme my self e : If I should 
 walke with either of the double seperation, I must from 
 the persuasion of mine owne alone, perfect reformation 
 reproue all other, and reiect them as short of that marke 
 wherto I were come: and I must shutt my eares from 
 hearinge anie instruction which others may affoord mee : 
 for this is the Quintessence of the seperation, to assume 
 vnto themselues a prerogatiue to teach aU men, and to 
 be taught of no man. now I haue in all my writings 
 hithertoe, received instruction of others, and professed 
 my readines to be taught by others, and therfor haue I so 
 oftenn tymes beene accused of inconstancie : well, let 
 them thinke of mee as they please, I professe I haue 
 changed, and shall be readie still to change, for the better : 
 and if it be ther glorie to be peremptorie and immutable, 
 in their articles of Religion, they may enioye that glorie 
 without my envie, though not without the grief of my 
 hart for them: 
 
 The Articles of Relligion which are the ground of my 
 salvation, are these, wherin I differ f r5 no Good Christian : 
 That Jesus Christ the sonne of God, and the sonne of 
 Marie, is the Anointed king, Priest, and Prophett of the 
 church, the onlie mediator of the new Testament, and 
 
Confirmations 753 
 
 that through true repentance and faith in him who alone 
 is our saviour, wee receiue remission of sinnes, and the 
 hohe ghost in this lyfe, ad there-with all the redemption 
 of our bodies, and everlastinge life in the resurrection of 
 the bodie: and whosoeuer walketh accordinge to this 
 rule, I must needs acknowledge him my brother: yea, 
 although he differ from me in diuers other particulars: 
 
 And howsoever in the dales of my blinde Zeale, and 
 preposterous Imitation of Christ, I was somewhat lavish 
 in censuring and Judgeing others: ad namely, in the 
 waie of seperation called Brownisme, yet since haueing 
 been instructed in the way of the lord more perfectly, 
 and finding my errour therin, I protest against that my 
 former course of censuringe other persons, and especially 
 for all those hard phrases, wherwith I have in any of my 
 writings, inveighed against either England or the sepera- 
 tion. for England although I cannot with anie Good 
 conscience, acknowledge the wicked ones mingled with 
 the Zealous profescors in one congregation, to be the 
 true outward, visible church which Christ and his 
 Apostles, at the first instituted : which consisted onely of 
 penitent persons and beleeuers: yet therfore to say that 
 the Zealoiis professors them selues are Antichristians, is 
 a Censure such as I cannot iustifie before the lord who 
 is my Judge in my conscience. And therfore I vtterly 
 revoke and renounce it. 
 
 Againe howsoever I doubt not but itt is an erromr 
 of the forward professors of the English, churches, to be 
 mingled with the open wicked, in the supper of the lord, 
 as they daylie are, seeing therin they doe transgresse the 
 first institution, of Christ, who ate his supper onely with 
 the eleuen, (for Judas departed so soone as he had receaved 
 Jihe soppe of the Passe over:) yet I Cannot therfor con- 
 clude the saide forward professors, vnder the same 
 Judgement, or fellowshipp of synne, with the wicked ones 
 with whome they pertake the supper : Yea rather. I do 
 also renounce that evil and perverse Judgement wliich 
 I have pronounced in my writings, in this particular 
 acknouwledgeing my error therin: 
 
 further I must needs avouch that the Bishoppes of 
 the land, greevously synne against God : and the forward 
 
 w. II. 28 
 
754 Iletra6lations 
 
 Professors in rulinge them so rigorously, urgeing ther 
 subscription Canons, and Ceremonies vppon mens con- 
 sciences, vppon payne of excomunication deposition, 
 silence, imprisonmet, banishment, and the like penalties : 
 and that therin they sitte as Antichrist, in the temple 
 of God, which is the conscience. Yet therfor to say 
 that aU the professors of the lade, whether preachers or 
 others that remaine vnder their Jurisdiction, do submitt 
 vnto the beast and receiue his marke, that I dare not 
 avouch and Justifie as I haue done, for I doubt not but 
 manie touch none of their vncleane things: but onely 
 submitt to Christ so farr as they are inlightened: and if 
 a synne of ignorance make a man an Anti-christian, then 
 I demaunde wher shall wee finde a Christian: In these 
 three perticulars especially haue I transgressed against 
 the professors of the English nation: 
 
 Generally all those bitinge and bitter words, phrases, 
 and speeches, vsed against the professors of the land, I 
 vtterly retract and revoke, as not being of the spirit of 
 Christ but of the Disciples, who would have called for 
 fire and brimstone from heaven, which Christ rebuketh. 
 Particularly that booke against maister Bernard, wherin 
 Maister Marbury, Maister White, and others are men- 
 tioned, and cruelly taxed [Paralleles, 335, 545] : I retract 
 not for that it is wholly false, but for that it is wholly 
 censorious and criticall : and for that therin the contention 
 for outward matters, which are of inferiour note, hath 
 broken the rules of loue and charitie, which is the superiour 
 law: 
 
 now for the Separation I cannot, nor dare not in my 
 conscience before the Judge of the whole world: Justifie 
 my writings and dealings against them : for the truthe of 
 the matter I doubt not, but it is on my side: but the 
 manner of writing is that alone wherin I haue failed: 
 for I should haue with the spirit of meeknes instructed 
 them, that are contrarie minded, but my wordes haue 
 bene stout, and mingled with gall : and therfor hath the 
 lord repayed me home fuU measure into my bosome for 
 according to that rneasure wherwith I measured, hath jrfc 
 bene measured againe vnto mee: by maister Clifton, 
 especially by maister Hainsworth and maister Bernard[.] 
 
Confirmations 755 
 
 The lord lay none of our synnes, to the chardge of anie 
 of vs all, but he of His mercy passe by the : for my part 
 the lord hath taught me therby, for hearafter shall I sett 
 a watch before my mouth, that I synne not againe in 
 that kinde and degree. 
 
 for maister Hainsworth book I acknowledge that I 
 erred in the place of the candelsticke and Altar: but 
 that of the Altar, is not maister fenners error with me 
 but mine rather with him. for other things namely the 
 chief e matter in controuersy I hold as I did: yea which 
 is more I say that although it be lawfuU to pray preach, 
 and sing out of a booke, for all penitent persons, yet a 
 man regenerate is aboue all bookes and scriptures what 
 soever, seing he hath the spirit of God within him, which 
 teacheth him the true meaninge of the scriptures, without 
 the which spirit the scriptures are but a dead letter, 
 which is perverted and misconstrued, as we see at this 
 day, to contrary ends and sences: and that to bind a 
 regenerate man to a booke in prayinge, preachinge or 
 singeinge, is to sett the holy ghost to schoole, in the one 
 aswell as in the other, for the other question of elders 
 with maister Hainsworth, and of Baptisme with maister 
 Chfton, and the two testaments, I hold as I did, and therin 
 I am persuaded I haue the truthe: 
 
 If anie man say why then do you not answere the 
 bookes written in opposition, my Answere is, my desire 
 is to end controversies among Christians rather then to 
 make and mainteyne them, especially in matters of the 
 outward Church ad Ceremonies : and it is the grief of my 
 hart that I haue so long cumbred my self, and spent my 
 time therin : and I prof esse That difference in Judgement 
 for matter of circumstance, as are all things of the out- 
 ward church, shall not cause me to refuse the brotherhood 
 of anie penitent and faithfuU Christian whatsoever. 
 And now from this day forward do I putt an end to all 
 controversies and questions, about the outward church 
 and ceremonies with all men: and resolue to sped my 
 time, in the mayne matters wherin consisteth salvation, 
 without repentance, faith. Remission of synne, and the 
 new creature ther is no salvation, but ther is saluation 
 without the truthe of all the outward Ceremonies of the 
 
 28—2 
 
756 Retra6lations 
 
 outward chiirch. if anie man say[:] you answer not, 
 because you cannot, I say to him[ :] that I am accounted 
 one that cannot answere, is not my fame, but to spend 
 my time in a full Answere of those things of the outward 
 Church which I am bound to imploy better, (necessity 
 calling vppon me) would be my synne: and so I had 
 rather be accounted vnable to Answere then to be found 
 in synne against my conscience. Againe if I should 
 answere, it would breed further strife among Christians, 
 further we haue no meanes to publish our writings, but 
 my first aswere satisfieth my conscience, and so I rest 
 haueing peace at home in this point. 
 
 but now to come to maister Helwys his seperation, 
 against which I haue done nothing in writing hitherto, 
 notwithstanding I am now bound in conscience to publish 
 an Apologie of certaine imputations cast vppon me by 
 him in his writings[.] as first the synne against the holy 
 ghost, bicause I haue denied some truth which once I 
 acknowledged, and wher with I was inlightened. then 
 this can there be no more grievous imputation cast vppon 
 anie man, then this can there be no higher degree of 
 censuringe: what shall I say here for my Apologie, shall 
 I say that my hart yet apperteyneth to the lord, that I 
 daylie seeke mercie and aske forgiuenes, that I labour to 
 reforme my self wherin I see my errour, that I con- 
 tinuallie search after the truth ad indevour my self to 
 keep a Good conscience in all things, but this, happily, 
 will not satisfy maister Helwis, well, let vs examine the 
 poynts wherin I Haue forsaken the truth: 
 
 Succession is the matter wherin I hold as I haue 
 written to maister Bernard, that succession is abolished 
 by the Church of Rome, and that ther is no true ministery 
 deriued from the Apostels throiTgh the Church of Rome 
 to England, but that the succession is interrupted and 
 broken of : Secondly I hold as I did hould then, succession 
 being broken of and interrupted, it may by two or three 
 gathered together in the name of Christ, be renewed and 
 assumed againe: and hearin ther is no differece betwixt 
 maister Helwis and me. Thirdly maister Hel. saith that 
 although ther be churches alreadie established, ministers 
 ordained, and sacraments administred orderly, yet men 
 
Confirmations 757 
 
 are not bound to Joyne to those former churches estab- 
 lished, but may being as yet vnbaptized baptize 
 themselues (as we did) and proceed to build churches of 
 themselues, disorderly (as I take it)[.] Herin I differ 
 from maister Helwis, and therfor he saith I Haue sinned 
 against the holy ghost bicause I once acknowledged the 
 truth (as Mr Helwis calleth yt:) 
 
 here I answer .3. things 1. I did never acknowledge 
 it. 2. It is not the truth. 3. though I had acknowledged 
 it, and it were a truth, yet in denying it I have not synned 
 against the hohe ghost. 
 
 first I did never acknowledge yt, that it was lawfuU 
 for priuate persons to baptize, when there were true 
 churches and ministers, from whece wee might haue our 
 baptisme without synne, as ther are 40. witnesses that 
 can testifier onlie this is It which I held, that seeing 
 ther was no church to whome wee could Joyne with a 
 Good conscience to haue baptisme from them, therfor 
 wee might baptize our selues : that this is so the lord 
 knoweth, my conscience witnesseth, and maister Helwis 
 himself will not deny it. 
 
 secondly it is not the truth that two or three priuate 
 persons may baptize, whe ther is a true church and 
 ministers established whence baptisme may orderlie be 
 had: for if Christ himself did fetch his baptisme from 
 John, and the gentills from the Jewes baptised, and if 
 God be the God of order and not of confusion, then 
 surely wee must obserue this order now, or els disorder 
 is order, and God alloweth disorder: for if M^- Helwis 
 positio be true, that everie two or three, that see the 
 truth of baptism may begin to baptise, ad need not 
 Joyne to former true churches, wher they may haue ther 
 baptism orderly from ordained ministers: the the order 
 of the primitiue chm-ch, was order for them and those 
 times onely, and this disorder will establish baptism of 
 priuate persons, Yea of women from henceforth to the 
 worldes end, as M'- Helwis his ground doth evidently 
 affoord to him that will scane it. 
 
 Thirdly though I had acknowledged that assertion 
 of M"^. Hel. and it were the truth, and I now forsake it, 
 it doth not ther vpon foUow, that a man sinneth against 
 
758 Retra6lations 
 
 the holie ghost: for I demaund may not a man forsake 
 a truth vppon a teptation, and obteyne remission vppon 
 repentance, did not Peter so in denying Christ, did not 
 David so ad continued impenitet, till the chUde was 
 borne after adulterie, with Bethshabe. A man therfore 
 that vppon a temptatio forsaketh a knouwen truth, may 
 repent and receiue mercys, further may not a ma (as he 
 supposeth) vppon force of argument, yeeld from the 
 knowne truth to error for consciece sake, haue all those 
 sinned against the holy ghost that haue seperated from 
 England, and are returned againes. Certainly M^. Hel: 
 herin erreth not a Htle, and breaketh the bonde of 
 charitie aboue aU me that I ever read or heard in vttering 
 so sharp a Censure vppon so weake a ground: Besides 
 the synne against the holy ghost is not in outward 
 Ceremonies, but in matter of substance, which is the 
 knowledge of the truth. Heb. 6. 10. namely a forsaking 
 of repentance and faith in Christ, and falling to pro- 
 phanenes and Paganisme: for I hold no part of savinge 
 righteousnes to consist in outward ceremonies: for they 
 are onely as a Crutch for the lame, and weak to walke 
 withall till they be cured. 
 
 concerning succession briefly thus much : I deny aU 
 successio except in the truth : and I hold wee are not to 
 violate the order of the primitiue church, except Necessitie 
 vrge a dispensation: and therfore it is not lawfuU for 
 euery one that seeth the truth to baptise, for then ther 
 might be as manie churches as couples in the world and 
 none haue anie thinge to doe with other : which breaketh 
 the bonde of loue and Brotherhood in churches, but in 
 these outward matters I dare not anie more contend with 
 anie man but desire that we may foUow the truth of 
 Repentance, faith and regeneration, ad lay aside dis- 
 sention, for mint comine and annis seed. 
 
 Another imputation of Mr. Hel. is concerninge the 
 flesh of Christ : wherto I say: that he that knoweth not, 
 that the first and second flesh of an Infant in the mothers 
 wombe are to be distinguished, knoweth not yet the 
 groundes of Nature and natural! resaon. I affirmed 
 concerning Christ that his second flesh, that is his nourish- 
 ment he had from his mother, and that the scriptures 
 
Confirmations 759 
 
 are plain for yt: but concerninge the first matter of 
 Clirist[s] flesh whence it was I said thus much: That 
 although I yeeld it to be a truth in nature that he had 
 it of his mother Mary, yet I dare not make itt such an 
 Article of faith as that if anie man wiU not consent vnto 
 it I should therfore refuse brotherhood with him, ad that 
 the Scriptures do not lead vs (as farr as I conceiue) to 
 the searchinge of that point, whereof Christ[s] naturell 
 flesh was made : but that we should searche into Christs 
 spirituall flesh, to be made flesh of that his flesh and 
 bone of his bone in the comunion and fellowshipp of the 
 same spirit. That this was my speech ad the somme of 
 my assertion concerning this point I call the lord ad aU 
 that hard, as witnesses: wherby appeareth Mr. Helwis 
 his partiality in reporting this particular. 
 
 Concerning a secret imputation, which Mr. Helwis 
 by way of intimation suggesteth as though I had receiued 
 much helpe of maintenace from his company or from that 
 company of enghsh people that came over together out 
 of the north parts with me, I afiirme thus much : that I 
 never received of them aU put together the value of 
 fortie shillings to my knowledge since I came out of 
 England: and of Mr. Helwis not the value of a penny: 
 but it is weU knowne to Mr Helwis, and to all the com- 
 panie, that I haue spent as much in helping the poore 
 as Mr Hel. hath done, and it is not knowne that Mr Hel. 
 hath spent one penny but I haue spent another in anie 
 common burthen for the relieving of the poor. AU. that 
 euer Mr. Hel. can say, is that when I was sick in England 
 at Bashforth I was troublesome and chargeable to him: 
 wherein I confesse his kindnes, but I would haue given 
 him satisfaction, and he refused it, and in my sicknes 
 ther was as much brought in as I spent. 
 
 Another imputation is of some moment, that I should 
 affirme Christ in the flesh to be a figure of himself in the 
 spirit : and that men are not to striue about the naturall 
 flesh of Christ, as about his spiritual flesh: and that the 
 contention concerning the naturall flesh of Christ, is like 
 the contention of the soldier for Christs Coate. True, 
 this I did affirm, and this I defend as the most excellet 
 .and comfortable truth in the scriptures : for who knoweth 
 
760 Retra(5lations 
 
 not that to knowe and be made conformable to tbe 
 similitude of Christs death, buriall and resmrection in 
 the mortification of synne and the new creature, to be 
 made flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone, spiritually 
 in the fellowship of one holy aoynting, which is Christs 
 spiritual flesh, who knoweth not I say that this, is better 
 then the knowledge of Christs naturall flesh. That 
 Christs naturaU flesh is a figure of Christs spirituall flesh 
 is playne by Ro. 6 where the Apostle saith that we must 
 be grafted to the similitude of his death buriall ad 
 resurrection, if his death, bmriall, ad resurrection, be a 
 simiKtude or figure so is his body, that died was buried 
 and rose againe, the like saith the Apostle. Hebre. 4. 15. 
 that Christ was tepted in all things in a figure or simiHtude : 
 but this point is also playne enough, that all Christ[s] 
 miracles and doings in the flesh, with his sufferings, are 
 figures of those heavenly things, which he in the spirit 
 worketh in the regenerate, he cleanseth ther leprosie, 
 casteth out the Deuill, dryeth upp the bloodie issue, 
 rideth to Jerusalem on an Asse, stilleth the windes and 
 sea : feedeth the multitude : for Jesus Christ is yesterday 
 and to-day, and the same also for ever, if this be a 
 truth, then the contention about Christ[s] natmrall fiesh, 
 is in comparison like to the souldiers contention for his 
 coate. It is the spirit that quickeneth the fiesh profiteth 
 nothing saith Christ: and so I rest satisfied in this 
 particular. 
 
 concerning the. 
 
 [ornament] 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 Extracts from the Marriage Registers of Amsterdam, 
 1698-1617, made by Prof. J. G. de Hoop Scheffer and 
 published 1881. 
 
 Translation of such as relate to the Gainsborough 
 district, including two prior to the great emigration. 
 Marks by illiterate people reproduced *. A few notes are 
 added, drawn partly from A Memoriaal voor Reijnier 
 Wij brands, in the Mennonite Library. 
 
 1601. April 28. Jelvis Zetwell* of NottingliamsMre, trunk maker, 
 
 28 years, and Lijsbet Williams* of Essex. 
 1603. November 15. Thomas WUlasone of Beverkorts [West Markham], 
 
 bombazine worker, 32 years, and Jenneke Cras* of Essex, 
 
 widow of Joris Marissen. 
 
 1608. July 5. Henry CuUandt of Nottinghamshire, bombazine worker, 
 
 20 years, — producing certificate by Richard Clyfton, preacher at 
 Sutton [cum Lound], that his banns had been published there 
 — and Margarete Grymsdiche* of Sutton, 30 years. [In 
 November 1613 he married at Leijden Dorothy Pettinger 
 from Moortel, perhaps Morton near Gainsborough.] 
 
 August 23. John Murton of Queynsborch, furrier, 25 years, and 
 Jane Hodgkin of Worchep, 23 years. 
 
 August 30. Francis Pigott* of Axen [Axholme], bricklayer's 
 labourer, 32 years, and Margriet Struts* of Basford, 30 years. 
 
 October 4. Jacobus Hurste of Rekfort, bombazine worker, 26 
 years, and Geertrud Bennister* of Rekford, 23 years. 
 
 December 6. Cuthbert Hutton of Daelton, tinsmith, 27 years, 
 and Prudence Blass of Berford, 21 years. 
 
 December 10. Jan Willems* of Redtford, bombazine worker, 
 24 years, and Marserye Dall* of [Sutton cum] Laundt, 32 years. 
 
 1609. April 11. William Jepson* of Worship in Nottinghamshire, house 
 
 carpenter, 26 years, and Rosemund Horsfeld*, also of Worship, 
 23 years. [He lived in Leijden 1611-1635.] 
 
 1610. October 23. Matthew Auckland of Brechtwyl, glover, 24 years, 
 
 and Elisabet Pygadt* of Axen, 19 years. [He married again 
 August 1, 1615.] 
 
 1611. February 12. Edward Armfield of Eppestown [Epworth or 
 
 Edwinstowe?], damask worker, 26 years, and Margery Orghan* 
 of Kasselwey [Kersall?], 33 years. 
 
762 Appendix 
 
 1612. April 4. Eduard Amlin of Saltsbury, bombazine worker, 25 years, 
 and Lijsbeth Smyth* of Cambridge, 21 years. [Jotn Smyth 
 apparently married near Cambridge in 1598.] 
 
 July 14. Salomon Thomson of Lauwe, bombazine worker, 21 years, 
 and Dorothea Struth* of Axem, 34 years. Witness his father 
 Antoni Thoms and her nephew Francis Pygott. [Their daughter 
 married in 1636. Anthoni Thomasson an old man and Lijsbet 
 his wife joined the church 21 December 1614. 
 
 September 22. Thomas Salzbery* of London, trunk maker, 
 widower of Aelken Andries, and Elisabet Scharp of Nottingham- 
 shire, 25 years. Their witnesses are Francis, Joseph and Richard 
 Bennett. 
 
 1612. November 10. Barthey SUman* of Alewick, Northumber, bom- 
 
 bazine worker, 26 years, and Elsebet Ghnd* of Gilbe in Leicester- 
 shire, 26 years. [G-ilby is close to Gainsborough, in Lincolnshire.] 
 
 1613. June 29. William Masit of Passit, bombazine worker, widower of 
 
 Lijsbet Willens, and Dorothea Thomas* of Thorbuig [Thoresby], 
 19 years. Her witness is her father Thomas Perkins. 
 July 6. Timothy Moyse of Penchaster [Penshurst?] in Kentshire, 
 26 years, and Lijsbet Meryweder of Ingelby in Lincolnshire, 
 
 23 years. 
 
 July 13. Eduard Philip* of Bedfordshire, bombazine worker, 
 35 years, and Anna Hutton* of Boolem [BoUom close to Retford], 
 
 24 years. 
 
 September 7. Richard Plater of Bockingham, compositor, 24 years, 
 and Janneke Hodry* of Nottinghamshire, 28 years. 
 
 November 9. William Bradford of Ostervelde [ Austerfield] , 
 fustian worker, 23 years, dwelling at Leijden; when asked about 
 the banns he said he was an orphan ; and Dorothea May, 16 years, 
 of Witsbuts. Her witness is Henry Mayr. 
 
 1615. May 2. Swithunus Grindall of Tunstal in Yorkshire, fustian 
 
 worker, 22 years, and Margriete Moritz* of Scheckbye [Sorooby?] 
 in Nottinghamshire, 24 years. [Next day, both were received 
 into membership at the Bakehouse. Hamary their daughter on 
 21 Dec. 1636. Johannes was deacon 1661-1666.] 
 
 August 29. William Waldern* of Klokfort and Ruth Walker* of 
 Marquet Overton in Rottland, 20 years. Witness her father 
 Eduard Walker. [Married again at Leijden 1634.] 
 
 November 9. Alexander Hodgkin* of Warssop, damask worker, 
 
 25 years, and Ursele HarstafE* of Gende [Gedney?], widow of 
 Thomas Bywater. [Both received into membership at the 
 Bakehouse on 8 November 1625.] 
 
 1616. July 23. Pieter Alkin of Meltenmook, sword cutler, 24 years, and 
 
 Marijtje Alberts, 28 years. 
 October 13. Jan Robberts* of Nottinghamshire, painter, 25 years, 
 
 and Maritje Thomas of London, 17 years. Witness her mother, 
 
 Maritje Jans. 
 October 27. William Davids of Derbyshire, embroiderer, 29 years, 
 
 and Beliken Harmans of Hillegeloo, 24 years. 
 [1635. Dec. 16. Samuel Pigot the son of Thomas Pigot j oined the church. 
 
 Thomas succeeded Smyth as pastor in 1612 and died 1639.] 
 
NOTES 
 
 THE BRIGHT MORNING STARRE 
 
 This has been reprinted from a transcript, and collated by the editor 
 with the only known copy of the original, in Emmanuel College, Cambridge. 
 The donor was archbishop William Bancroft, alumnus of the college. The 
 volume is a duodecimo, containing six pages unnumbered, 1-195, and 
 a page of errata ; the latter have been incorporated in the reprint. The 
 size is 117 mm. x 65 mm., and a full page contains 24 lines. The side- 
 notes are in the margin. Forty-one other misprints are corrected here ; 
 chiefly dropping a letter or a point, or interchange of u and n. 
 
 P. 2, 1. 6. Priuiledge of the Presse. The publication of opinions had 
 long been controlled by both Church and State. Henry VIII as Head of 
 the Church assumed the authority over printing asserted by the Pope in 
 1501. Mary chartered the Stationers' Company and gave it a monopoly 
 of the press ; its registers contain a record of all books licensed in London, 
 and these entries have been extracted and published by Professor Arber; 
 they hardly bear out Smyth's charges of a general low tone. Under 
 Elizabeth the Star Chamber recognized the rights of the universities. 
 
 P. 2, 1. 32. My style. The book fails to keep the promises here made. 
 Technical terms of grammar, logic, rhetoric abound, with occasional words 
 of Hebrew, Greek and Latin, and rare allusions to commentators. Uni- 
 versity men were perhaps hardly conscious how remote they were from 
 that plainness of words and sentences which Smyth aimed at. Not till 
 he had read the 1610 book of I.H. did he escape the habits of analyzing 
 and syllogizing, to write straightforwardly in his Last Book. 
 
 P. 3. English version. The Great Bible, edited by Coverdale in 1539, 
 was still the version authorized by the State, and the extracts in the Book 
 of Common Prayer were from it. The Bishops' Bible of 1568 had been 
 adopted by the Southern Convocation, with orders that a copy be placed 
 in every cathedral and be bought by every church dignitary. But outside 
 church walls these were little used, even by such ecclesiastics as Bishop 
 Andrewes. For example, the University of Cambridge, when it began 
 printing Bibles in 1591, chose the popular Genevan version. A new edition 
 appeared in 1599, containing the O.T. of 1560, the N.T. Englished by 
 Tomson in 1576 from Beza's Latin version of 1565, the Apocalypse being 
 a version of 1592 from the recent Latin of Junius. This is what Smyth 
 used, and some of his notes refer to the notes of the English editors, which 
 in the N.T. were abbreviated from Beza and Camerarius. 
 
 P. 3, 1. 16. Bright Morning Starre. This title was based upon a sugges- 
 tion by Junius and TremeUius, 1575-1590, in their Latin version, as a 
 
764 NOTES 
 
 rendering of tte Hebrew Aijeleth hasshachar, the exact wording being 
 borrowed from Apoc. xxii. 16. See page 16. But if tbis Hebrew phrase be a 
 subscription to PsaJm xxi., not a superscription to Psalm xxii., as Dr TMrtle 
 contends on the analogy of Habakkuk iii., the title is badly chosen. 
 
 P. 10, 1. 9. The old translatour. Not Coverdale or Wiclif, but the 
 Aramaic Targumist of the eleventh century. 
 
 P. 10, 1. 13. Racking was customable in the Tower at this time. 
 
 P. 15, 11. 7-11. The development of Smyth's views on congregational 
 singing is worth studying. The reformation in Germany led to the con- 
 gregational use of vernacular hymns, and hymns in English were published 
 under Henry VIII, his primer of 1545 containing eight versions from the 
 Latin, enjoined for public use. Elizabeth permitted the Venite to be 
 sung, and also that "in such places where they doe sing, there shall the 
 Lesson bee sung in a plain tune." But the people desired more, and in 
 1562 there was published "The whole booke of psalmes. Collected into 
 English meetre, by Thomas Sternhold, John Hopkins, and others, conferred 
 with the Hebrue, with apt notes to sing them withall. Set forth and 
 allowed to be sung in all churches, of all the people together before and 
 after Morning and Evening praier, &c." In the edition of 1601, metrical 
 versions of the ancient canticles and the commandments are prefixed to 
 the psalms, intermixed with others of the Veni Creator, the Quicunque 
 Vult, the Lord's Prayer, and five modern hymns. But the influence of 
 Calvin was against non-scriptural hymns, and Smyth adopted his view 
 here. As to instrumental music, he fell in with the use of organs, long 
 established in England. The set at Belton was sold about this time by 
 a church-warden to a Councillor at York. 
 
 P. 16, 1. 37. The Genevan note says bluntly that "this was the name 
 of some common song." 
 
 P. 17, 1. 20. Text, an high ; the alteration was made before the editor 
 saw that this agreed with the Genevan text. 
 
 P. 18. Smyth had not yet studied Hofmann's doctrine of the person 
 of Christ. 
 
 P. 35, 1. 10. This identification of the young man mentioned by John 
 Mark, with the John whom Jesus loved, is not due to Beza's notes ; these 
 do identify Peter just above. 
 
 P. 48, 1. 18. There was a healthy reaction at Christ's College against 
 allegorical abuse, led by Chaderton and Perkins. 
 
 P. 56, 1. 5. The mortality of the soul came to be asserted by Richard 
 Overton, associated in 1615 with Smyth's followers. 
 
 P. 64, 1. 37. The problem of the salvation of infants was already easy 
 for Smyth ; he had not yet considered the question of their baptism. 
 
A Paterne of Trve Prayer 765 
 
 A PATERNE OF TRVE PRAYER 
 
 This has been reprinted from tte copy acquired through the editor for 
 the Baptist College at Regent's Park, lent by the kindness of the Rev. 
 Principal Gould, M.A., D.D. A copy has long been at York Minster, 
 where however the catalogue attributes it to another man. A third 
 specimen has been put together from imperfect copies by the Rev. T. G. 
 Crippen, B.A., and is in the Congregational Library at the Memorial Hall. 
 A fourth is owned by Mr Champlin Burrage, and a fifth was in 1905 acquired 
 by the British Museum. 
 
 The book would cost to-day about three guineas. It was sold for 
 sixpence by Master Man, senior, and Thomas Man, junior, who entered it 
 at Stationers' Hall on 22 March, 1604-5. It contains viii and 182 pages. 
 Thomas Man, junior, had it reprinted in 1624 by J.D., a testimony to the 
 devotional character of the book, and its comparative freedom from con- 
 troversy. The reprint has been mistakenly credited in some catalogues 
 to John Smith of St John's College, Oxford, vicar of Clavering, 1592-1616, 
 who did preach on The Substance and Pith of Prayer, printed in The Essex 
 Dove, 1629. Copies of this second edition have long been at the British 
 Museum, Sion College, and Trinity College, Dublin; the editor secured 
 another copy for the Baptist Church House. 
 
 The typography is good, but the editor has replaced nine letters or 
 points which had dropped, put right eleven more, and corrected the order 
 of two changes. 
 
 P. 82, 1. 7. Farel had quite disused liturgies, but Calvin compiled one 
 for use at Geneva on Sundays, and his example was widely followed, as 
 by Knox with the Booh of Common Order. 
 
 P. 88, 1. 13. Libbe. The word meant to maim, especially to geld; 
 compare Lop. 
 
 P. 112, 1. 31. Pray for the dead. Lancelot Andrewes, of Pembroke, did 
 adopt the common ancient petition; Dona eis requiem aeternam, et lux 
 perpetua luceat eis. Oxford edition of 1675, page 326. 
 
 P. 116, 1. 25. Text, seated. But compare John vi. 27 ; "for him hath 
 God the father sealed." 
 
 P. 119, 1. 28. Mouths. Probably a slip for months; compare 167. 
 
 P. 124, 1. 32. Compare Jer. viii. 6; "as the horse rusheth into the 
 battell." Bard, armoured, was obsolescent, like the custom. 
 
 P. 124, 1. 38. Prease, press. 
 
 P. 125, 1. 25. Smyth changed his views on 1 Cor. vii. 14. 
 
 P. 147, 1. 2. This is over-stated ; only one verb is apparently in the 
 past, and that is only if one particular punctuation is adopted; aU the 
 versions take it as a future. 
 
 P. 147, 1. 7. Within a few years, Smyth had a new interpretation of 
 the Mark of the beast on the forehead. 
 
 P. 151, 1. 14. Simonie. Smyth would seem to disapprove even the 
 Puritan systems of lecture-ships and of buying up benefices; as also the 
 transaction whereby Bisse of Batcombe bought in 1613 the next presenta- 
 tion to that living, and presented Bernard of Worksop. 
 
 P. 154, 1.11. Text, .4. Comparison with page 137 shows a combination 
 here of 3, 4 and 5 there. 
 
766 Notes 
 
 P. 155, 1. 29. Apparent meaning, good in its own nature. 
 
 P. 156, 1. 4. Text,/ai«A; but query, /ort^. 
 
 P. 158, 1. 40. Text, substitute ; but query, institute. 
 
 P. 161, 1. 11. The exigencies of controversy compelled this defiance of 
 history. 
 
 P. 225, 1. 34. Callion. Not registered in the Oxford Dictionary. 
 
 P. 227, 1. 20. The diuell. Smyth had not thought of Chrysostom's 
 interpretation. Deliver us from the evil one. 
 
 P. 233, 1. 23. Text, Alezander. The form Apostata here and in hne 33 
 is Low Latin. 
 
 P. 237, 1. 8. Textual criticism was not yet developed, though the 
 Eheims version and Fulke's edition of it parallel with the Bishops' version 
 had raised this and other problems. This particular point had been 
 discussed by Joannes Maldonatus in his Commentarii in quatuor evangelia, 
 1596, and page 347 suggests that this author was known to him. 
 
 PRINCIPLES AND INFERENCES 
 
 This has been reprinted from a transcript by the editor of the only 
 copy known in England, at York Minster Library, and has been read with 
 that original. A second copy once in that library was acquired by Dr 
 Dexter "by the courtesy of its authorities," and is probably now at Yale 
 with the rest of his collection. The copy which he left, once contained two 
 sheets, 32 pages, but the first leaf is now missing. It has been bound with 
 much blank paper into a small volume numbered xx. G. 25, but also 
 numbered xvi. The printing is poor, and suggests Amsterdam as the 
 place. Italic and roman are intermixed on no intelUgible principle, even 
 in the same word, and therefore no attempt has been made to reproduce 
 the variety. The spelling however, and the punctuation, however extra- 
 ordinary, are respected, though nineteen obvious misprints have been 
 corrected in the text. Page 1 may have shown the place and name of 
 author ; in any case the Salutation on pages 270-272 of this edition shows 
 that Smyth speedily avowed the work. 
 
 THE DIFFERENCES OF THE CHURCHES 
 
 This has been reprinted from a transcript by the editor of the copy at 
 the Bodleian, and has been read with the copy at the British Museum, 
 acquired in October 1898. A third copy is at Sion College, a fourth at 
 Harvard. 
 
 Dr Dexter's transcript of the title in his Congregationalism, Appendix, 
 page 23, is not accurate in details, as may be seen by comparison. More- 
 over, the date is clearly given, and the pagination, certainly unusual, is : 
 Title, blank, three unnumbered, 32, three unnumbered. This suggests 
 that the Certayne demaundes after the first finis were an after-thought to 
 fill up the fifth sheet. Even so, there was room for a recapitulation of the 
 chapter-headings, here omitted. 
 
The Differences of the Churches 767 
 
 The size of the quarto page is 177 mm. x 132 mm., and this is the size 
 of the next two books. Apparently Smyth found a printer who suited 
 him, and gave him the rest of his work. Richard Plater of Buckingham, 
 a compositor, was in Amsterdam by 1613, when he married Janneke 
 Hodry of Nottinghamshire. Helwys however after the rupture adopted 
 a different format, perhaps with another press. 
 
 The typography is much better than that of the preceding work, founts 
 are rarely mixed, except for a capital K for a k, and an italic q, corrected 
 here without notice. Perhaps that work was sent in advance and printed 
 without Smyth reading, this was read on the spot. There are many signs 
 that w was insisted upon after w had been set up, and that it had to be 
 borrowed from a larger fount. The long f is often used after the s instead 
 of before, in continental fashion. There are three other cases of wrong 
 fount, twenty-one of u and n interchanged, with nineteen other substitutions, 
 nine errors of points and three of figures; all corrected here. The pages 
 are curiously numbered, with all even numbers on the recto. 
 
 P. 276, 11. 32-3. Probably confortable is meant, the word confort being 
 often used. 
 
 P. 290. It is a singular light on the state of antiquarian learning at 
 Cambridge, that the early church of Rome was supposed to have been 
 Latin, incapable of using the Septuagint. Even a tiro might have remem- 
 bered that Paul wrote to it in Greek. All this chapter assumes that the 
 Septuagint was made for the Gentiles, not noticing that the Jews of the 
 Western Dispersion used Greek. 
 
 P. 294. The second objection. Neither Smyth nor Ainsworth had 
 noticed two facts. At Acts xi. 20 the true reading is still disputed, the 
 Bezan manuscript giving Hellenas, corrected into Hellenistas. Setting that 
 aside, the term Hellenistai is used only twice, of the Grecian Jews in 
 Jerusalem, and not of Grecian Jews generally. The objection therefore 
 is badly stated, and the first reply is acute. But the second is very special 
 pleading, and probably most will feel that Ainsworth had the better of 
 the argument. 
 
 PARALLELES, CENSURES, OBSERVATIONS 
 
 This is a book of 1609, written as a commentary on a letter of 1607 
 and some intervening books. It is Smyth's last word in a controversy 
 which was to engage other disputants for a year longer. 
 
 It arose by Bernard of Worksop formulating some doubts and objections, 
 to which Smyth made answer on the same sheet, one by one, requesting 
 a continuance of the discussion; see page 332, foot. Bernard however 
 ignored the request, and preferred to send a letter to Helwys, printed here 
 on pages 337-8, attacking the Separation and naming Smyth. He replied 
 after three days in a letter which Bernard criticised in a pubUcation now 
 usually referred to as Christian Advertisements, but which is here cited by 
 a later phrase in the title as The Seperatists ScMsme. This was issued on 
 18 June 1608, six or seven months after the letter. Hence the letter can 
 be dated about November 1607, and was written before Smyth published 
 Principles and Inferences. The letter is here divided into nineteen sections, 
 but otherwise is as sent originally ; page 328, foot. 
 
768 Notes 
 
 Bernard was replied to by Ainswortli, another Cambridge Separatist 
 at Amsterdam, in Counierpoyson. Smyth here takes into account (1) his 
 original letter, to which he adds parallels, (2) Bernard's reply, which he 
 censures, (3) Ainsworth's answer to that, on which he ofiers observations. 
 And therefore we have the letter of 1607 and the last word of 1609 on 
 the same pages. They afford the means of tracing how far Smyth varied 
 in these respects during the interval. 
 
 In other respects he had gone further ; for within a few days he put out 
 his first Baptist book. Bernard found it convenient to ignore this set of 
 Censures on his first book, and to reply to Counierpoyson and to the 
 Character in his Plaine Euidences. Smyth deliberately dropped all con- 
 troversy and apologized for having spent so much time on it. 
 
 The present reprint is from the copy at the Bodleian, roto- 
 graphed for the purpose, page by page. For the book is rare, and 
 the only other copy Dexter mentioned seems to be a different book, 
 by John Smith, Fellow of Queens'. A second copy is catalogued at 
 Trinity College, Dublin ; and an imperfect third at the Memorial Hall, 
 Farringdon St. The editor found a fourth copy in the University 
 Library, Cambridge, where the catalogue entry is out of place, and 
 does not identify the author, while the shelf-mark has been super- 
 seded ; it can be seen by applying with perseverance for Old Bb. 11. 1*. 
 
 The typography shows a tendency to space the comma and other stops 
 away from the words, and some intermixture of italic colons, here replaced 
 by roman without notice. 
 
 There are 280 misprints corrected, of which 84 are interchanges of u and 
 n, 21 interchanges of r and t, with a few interchanges of c and e, v and y. 
 Anything at all questionable or exceptional is noted separately. The 
 spelling " distinguish " is almost regular with this compositor. 
 
 P. 335, 1. 40. Thomas White was a minister who, in 1603, had joined 
 the Ancient Church in Amsterdam, left it soon and in 1605 published 
 a book in England against it, was arrested for slander therein, and acquitted. 
 Henoch Clapham in 1598 dedicated a book to " a poor remnant of the ever 
 visible Catholic and Apostolic Church" in Amsterdam, 1598; in 1607 he 
 accepted the vicarage of Northbourne. See Arber, Story of the Pilgrim 
 Fathers, pp. 99, 118. 
 
 P. 341, 1. 3. Robert Browne was now Rector of Achuroh, and was 
 appearing at the archdeacon's visitations in Oundle from 1608 to 1611 
 without any complaint as to his behaviour; Congregational Historical 
 Society, Transactions, iii. 307. Bernard's own conduct was very parallel 
 to Browne's. 
 
 P. 342, 11. 2, 3. The third answer was published by Robinson in 1610, 
 A Ivstification of Separation. It was his maiden work, written at the age 
 of 34. Almost at the same time, in an Answer to a Censorious Epistle, he 
 lifted the gauntlet thrown down by Joseph Hall to Smyth and himself, 
 which Smyth declined to notice. 
 
 P. 345, 11. 6, 8. Text, go. This is evidently a contraction for ergo, 
 for it appears often ; it is however not registered in the dictionaries. 
 
 P. 345, 1. 23. In this edition, page 253. 
 
 P. 349, 1. 31. Anabaptists in Smyth's opinion held false views as to 
 the person and offices of Christ. He had not yet had occasion to examine 
 closely the doctrine of that section which worshipped half a mile from him. 
 
Paralleles, Censures, Observations 769 
 
 When lie did, a year later, lie gave a general approval, but did put certain 
 queries to them : see pages 681-684. 
 
 P. 454, 1. 27. Text, Paguin. Pagninus tie Dominican made the first 
 modern Latin version from the Hebrew, under the auspices of three Popes, 
 and printed at Lyons 1528. The famous decree of Trent commending 
 the Vulgate, was aimed largely against the general use of such new versions 
 as by him and Erasmus. In 1557 Stephanus reprinted it ; it was revised 
 by Arias Montanus and in 1569 was incorporated in the Antwerp polyglot, 
 being published separately, 1584. This passage implies that Smyth and 
 Bernard had heard lectures at Cambridge which took account of the new 
 CathoHc version ; possibly by Baro. 
 
 P. 458, 1. 17. Text, 4- But comparison with Bernard's original, made 
 by the Rev. T. G. Crippen, B.A., at the request of the editor, shows that 
 he gives only these three points, numbered properly. 
 
 P. 504, 1. 39. Text, Revellat. This passage was already being studied 
 in a new connection, and was to prove the key to the problem of a true 
 church, so that it furnished a title to the next book. 
 
 Pp. 516-518. The restraint here is wonderful, when Ainsworth tells us 
 that only a few days after this book appeared, his next came out, dealing 
 with baptism from quite other standpoints. It is a good testimony to 
 the value of the logical training, that he kept so strictly to the matter in 
 hand. 
 
 THE CHARACTER OP THE BEAST 
 
 This is another composite book, showing three stages in a debate. 
 Written discussion began by Smyth sending Clifton two propositions, each 
 supported by three reasons; the paper is printed on page 574. Clifton 
 answered point by point in writing, dating it March 14, 1608, which we 
 should call 24 March, 1609. Smyth replied equally carefully in writing 
 ten days later, and sent the reply direct. He then set to work to prepare 
 for the press, putting first the Propositions, then Clifton's answer dissected, 
 each section followed at once by the section replying to it ; and he prefixed 
 to the whole an Epistle to the Reader. The book came out still during 
 1609, and so far before the close of the year in March, 1610, that Ainsworth's 
 Defence of the Holy Scriptures in the same year refers to it as lately 
 pubhshed; page [iii]; and even as only "a few dayes after" the Paralleles 
 appeared; page 118. Meanwhile Clifton had almost finished his second 
 answer, and was rather surprised to find the "former private passages" 
 thus made public, though he might by this time have known Smyth's 
 methods. Chfton therefore coated the snowball afresh, and using various 
 types to distinguish the layers, published the four rounds of debate in 
 1610 with the title A Plea for Infants. 
 
 All these dates are consistent, but there is one irreconcilable statement 
 hidden in the catalogue of the documents at the Mennonite archives in 
 Amsterdam. Some one translated the preface, making six folio pages 
 in Dutch; catalogued as MS. 1346, where it is dated November 1608. 
 This appears impossible, for the preface was surely written last, and the 
 
 W. II. 29 
 
770 Notes 
 
 discussion did not begin till four montts later. It is possible tiat the 
 translation was executed November 1609, and tbe serial number in the 
 catalogue suggests as much. 
 
 Clifton says that the book was circulaited in England, and this is borne 
 out by the speedy appearance of churches on Smyth's lines. But the book 
 is excessively rare, even the British Museum having acquired a copy only 
 this century. The present reprint is from the only copy previously known, 
 at the Bodleian; the authorities there permitted it to be rotographed 
 page by page for the purpose. A page measures 185 mm. x 135 mm., and 
 contains 44 lines. 
 
 The editor has corrected 73 changed letters, 36 points, 8 redundant 
 letters, 7 spacings, 5 figures, 4 transpositions, 2 turnings; no letters were 
 dropped. 
 
 P. 569, 1. 19. This is in the continuation of Eusebius. 
 
 P. 570, 1. 11. This treatise as to the Covenants was never published, 
 and the manuscript is unknown. Had there been a clear discussion of the 
 historic Covenants in scripture, specially the Old Covenant and the New, 
 connected with Sinai and Calvary, Cocceius might not have led theologians 
 to consider his so-called covenants of works and of grace. Smyth con- 
 tributed so much to clear thinking on all other questions relating to the 
 church and baptism, that it is very unfortunate we do not possess his 
 thoughts on the Abrahamic covenant, or circumcision, on seals; as to 
 which no clear exposition is current even yet. 
 
 P. 617, 11. 32-37. Heimich Pantaleo published his Chronographia 
 Christianae Eoclesiae in 1561. He seems to have missed the point, for 
 according to the 1624 edition at Lyons of the Canon Law, Paschae "tempore 
 celebrandum est catholicum. Sed tamen, si necesse fuerit,...quocunque 
 loco vel momentc.baptizentur." On the statement of Pantaleo, Smyth 
 argued well; he might have found in Gratian other authorities, Socrates 
 regretting that as late as a.d. 440 the Thessalians still baptized only at 
 Easter, so that but for a few, the rest died unbaptized; v. 22: Siricius 
 writing to Himerius of Tarragona about a.d. 300, that at Rome and else- 
 where, Easter and Pentecost were the proper days even for infants, except 
 in cases of necessity. 
 
 P. 618, 1. 5. Again this is not the same Eusebius, but Socrates his 
 continuator. 
 
 P. 618, 1. 13. The confession adopted at Petrikau in 1557 was drafted 
 by Stanislaus Hosius, then bishop of Ermland, who signalized himself by 
 deliberate depreciation of the scriptures, and exaltation of Church authority. 
 
 P. 631, 1. 11. This is an ingenious translation which does not seem to 
 have commended itself lately. It could be defended by pointing to Rom. ii. 
 26-27, iii. 30, iv. 9, and claiming that the article defines the people un- 
 circumcised, the anarthrous noun signifies their state. But a reference to 
 Genesis xvii. 11 will leave the matter open. 
 
 P. 638, 1. 25. Within three years, Smyth explicitly denied that infants 
 were born in sin. 
 
 P. 674, 1. 24. March 14, 1608. This seems to be expressed according 
 to Old Style, which was still legal in England, and was still usual in con- 
 servative circles in Holland; the Amsterdam Waterlanders appointed a 
 meeting for May 23, stilo novo, which the Leeuwarden church declined to 
 attend, in a letter dated May 5 old style, 1610. When therefore Clifton 
 
The Character of the Beast 771 
 
 and Smytli were corresponding, it seems that they retained the method 
 they were familiar with. Their letters are dated March 14 and 24, 1608, 
 but in Dutch legal style they would be March 24 and April 3, 1609. This 
 is confirmed by the printer's date of 1609 on the title-page, page 563 in 
 this edition. 
 
 APPLICATION FOR UNION 
 
 This has been printed from a transcript of the original, a page of 
 foolscap written by Smyth, presented to the Waterlander Mermonite 
 church in Amsterdam, and preserved in the archives of the united 
 Doopsgezinde Gemeente on the Singel in that city, where it is numbered 
 B 1347. A copy by Prof. Miiller was printed by Evans in 1862, since when 
 transcripts have been made by Dexter, Whitsitt, Burrage, and the present 
 editor. Since the contractions and the handwriting have combined with 
 the fallibility of transcribers to produce printed variants, the original has 
 been photographed and is published herewith. In this and the documents 
 following, the contractions have been extended in type. 
 
 The order of the names testifies to Smyth's modesty. The list is 
 headed by the Bromheads, who were well-connected ; that Hugh had been 
 a clergyman was irrelevant in Smyth's present state of mind. Nevill and 
 Jane Southworth were also of the gentry, their families being important 
 enough to attract the attention of the ecclesiastical courts. 
 
 THE FIRST BAPTIST CONFESSION 
 
 This is printed from a transcript of manuscript B 1348 in the Singel 
 library, made for this work. It has not been possible to correct proofs 
 with this autograph of Smyth, but there are only two readings at all 
 doubtful. In article 7 the stroke after postea may be read as a hyphen; 
 the controversy as to the post-nati was stiU in men's minds and may have 
 momentarily confused Smyth. In article 13 the contraction is so abbre- 
 viated that apart from context the word appears to be verbi. A version 
 by Miiller was printed by Evans in 1862, the original by Sohefier 1881 and 
 Burrage 1912. 
 
 The document was almost certainly drafted by Smyth, whose signature 
 indeed is appended ; Bromhead was perhaps capable of doing it, but there 
 is nothing to connect him specially with it. It is worth close study, as 
 a complete exposition of faith, no undue emphasis being placed on any 
 topic. Two points would certainly attract attention in English circles; 
 the emphatic assertion of free will with the accompanying denial of original 
 sin ; the emphasis laid on the human life of Jesus Christ. The sacraments 
 are defined only as symbols, and no hint is given of any efiicacy whatever. 
 
 While form and matter are due to Smyth, so that the document deserves 
 its place in his works, yet the whole church adopted it ; Corde credimus et 
 ore confitemur. From this standpoint it deserves a place which has been 
 occupied by a later confession, altered from Smyth by Helwys. This was 
 
772 Notes 
 
 known to Crosby and reprinted badly; Underbill reprinted from Crosby 
 with further distortion and .with most erroneous notes ; hence arose the 
 idea of its being the first confession. A reprint of Helwys, from a transcript 
 by the present editor of the original pamphlet at York, was printed by 
 McGlothlin in 1911. That edition pointed out tha-t between the 27 Enghsh 
 articles of Helwys, and the present 20 Latin articles of Smyth, intervened 
 19 Latin articles of Helwys; these had been transcribed by the present 
 editor, and have since been published independently by Burrage, ii. 182. 
 Comparison will show that Helwys depended on Smyth, though he difiered. 
 Hence this document is here entitled, The First Baptist Confession. 
 
 It may be added, that Baptists have scarcely ever regarded the Con- 
 fessions of one era as touchstones to test the orthodoxy of later generations ; 
 rather they are like the photographs by which we may trace the growth 
 of a community in wisdom as well as in stature. Later General Baptist 
 confessions are those of 1651, 1660, 1678, 1691, 1696, 1704. From 1731 
 to 1734 there was an agitation as to signing articles, issuing in an emphatic 
 repudiation of the idea. Of the churches surviving to-day, more than 
 two-thirds are now allied with the Baptist Union, the remainder form the 
 General Baptist Assembly. Both bodies, however unequal in other respects, 
 decline to impose any antique test of membership, but declare from time 
 to time what are the chief points which they believe with the heart and 
 confess with the mouth. 
 
 DEFENCE OF RIES' CONFESSION 
 
 This is published for the first time, from a transcript of Smyth's auto- 
 graph, B 1364 in the Singel library, made for this work ; it has not been 
 collated with the original, and a few conjectural emendations are noted, 
 obvious slips being corrected silently. 
 
 The catalogue of the library implies by its numeration that this docu- 
 ment was written after July 1610, and before 1612. The entry sums it 
 up as : Notes to some articles of the confession of faith of Hans de Ries 
 against the opinions therein advanced : Latin, autograph of John Smyth, 
 12 pages folio; with Dutch translation by Reijnier Wijbrands. 
 
 But this description, which probably is quite modern, as has been 
 noted in a previous case, by no means fits the facts. The confession had 
 been censured in many respects, by some members of the Reformed Party, 
 as is stated in the comments on articles 23 and 29 amongst other places, 
 Vos Reformati. This document repels the censures and vindicates the 
 confession. 
 
 The previous document, and the following one, are signed by John 
 Smyth; this is not. Admitting for the sake of argument that this is in 
 his writing, it is quite possible that the Dutch document by Wijbrands is 
 the original, and that this is a version made by Smyth so that he and 
 his friends might consider it. They had asked for further elucidation, 
 perhaps this was given them in response. Whether Smyth was the author 
 of this defence, or only studied it, he undoubtedly came to agree with it 
 in most respects, as can be verified by the full exposition of his own 
 
Defence of Ries' Confession 773 
 
 views in tHe 100 articles. And in the absence of decisive evidence against 
 his anthorsHp, it is printed among his works. 
 
 There are six letters of April-July 1610 between the Amsterdam church 
 and sister churches at Leeuwarden, Harlingen, Rijnsburg and Hoorn, 
 relative to the proposal from Smyth and his friends to unite. Versions 
 by MiiUer were printed by Evans, the originals by Burrage, and Burgess 
 has summarised the correspondence. One point in it claims attention here, 
 the position of this confession by Ries. 
 
 It seems generally agreed that this had been written by him in or 
 about 1580; according to himself as pubhshed in 1744, "This short con- 
 fession I first wrote on entreaty, and on behalf of several Englishmen 
 fled from England for conscience sake." A friend amplified this in 1676, 
 saying that it was in order that 60 or 70 English people might know 
 what he believed; (Barclay, Inner Life, 72, 83). We should suspect con- 
 fusion of date, and that it was written in 1610 for Smyth's friends, only 
 that these sis letters refer to it. In May five other ministers asked for 
 the "short account of the chief articles of your doctrine and the customs 
 of the congregations, which you have pointed out for them, in writing." 
 On 16 July "the confession... according to your desire, is sent to you," 
 and on the 18th it was acknowledged as "the thirty eight articles of 
 creed," clearly identifying it with the 38 articles given to Smyth's friends. 
 But the ministers at Leeuwarden wrote thus: "As regards the request 
 for our advice and approval which you desire about the 38 articles of 
 creed presented to us, this is all -in vain. As aU men can see them in 
 printed books, we may now expect with you a general opinion of them 
 by aU men. Therefore we think it rather impertinent to ask this from 
 us in particular. Time will show ; many have had no other opportunity 
 but to see it once and read it once. Moreover, we have something else 
 to do." 
 
 That is to say, when the 38 articles came, they were recognized as 
 substantially the 40 articles already in print, which had been available 
 for aU men to attend to, and which the Leeuwarden ministers declined to 
 attend to. They declined to regard the views of Ries as deserving any 
 special attention, and decidedly resented being invited to express any 
 opinion in a hurry. 
 
 Their decision was proved wise by two distinct episodes. His views 
 had been challenged by some members of the Reformed — whether Dutch 
 or English does not appear — and especially in that they reproduced much 
 from Kaspar Schwenkfelt the Silesian mystic; this document deals with 
 those challenges. They were repeated from within the Waterlanders by 
 Nittert Obbes, who published an attack in 1624, inaugurating a pamphlet 
 war that subsided only with his death in 1630. Barclay sketches this in 
 his tenth chapter, and claims that through Ries the views of Schwenkfelt 
 were passed to Fox and became standard among the Friends; Barclay 
 did not know this document, which would have thrown further light bn 
 the sequence. 
 
 Then the States of Holland obliged the Mennonites to publish their 
 views, that it might be seen whether they were tolerable. This state 
 demand broke down their reluctance to have any united Confession, and 
 in 1632 one was drawn up in 18 articles, which commanded the assent 
 of several of the groups hitherto divided, then was approved outside the 
 
774 Notes 
 
 Netherlands, and is still standard in America. But tliis is not tlie confession 
 of Ries, whicli thenceforward received little further attention. 
 
 Tlie articles of Ries were printed in Latin, and may be seen in ScMjn, 
 Historia dhc, i. 172. An Englisli version is in McGlotMin, Baptist Con- 
 fessions, 26. They are not quoted here, for the arguments are intelUgible 
 as they stand. 
 
 The Biblical quotations are scarcely ever from the Vulgate, nor from 
 any standard version; they may possibly be indebted to Tremellius and 
 Junius, but are apparently original renderings; in discussing Genesis iv. 
 6, 7, at page 689, minute textual readings are dealt with. Though 13 
 years had elapsed since Smyth went down from Cambridge, he shows good 
 evidence of the thoroughness of his linguistic and theological training 
 there. 
 
 P. 686, 11. 1 and 2. Transcript, degenetur. 
 
 P. 691, 1. 38. Transcript, palumbae, a portmanteau word from palumbi 
 and columbae. 
 
 P. 696, 1. 26. Transcript, versus. 
 
 P. 698, last word. Transcript, externa. 
 
 P. 702, 1. 25. Transcript, quae. 
 
 ARGUMENTA CONTRA BAPTISMUM INFANTUM 
 
 This is published for the first time, from a transcript made for this 
 work of Smyth's autograph, B 1354 in the Singel library, a quarto of 
 twenty pages; a Dutch version by Wij brands is there preserved with it. 
 There is no memorandum as to the circumstances which called it forth. 
 
 This reproduction has not been collated with the original; 57 con- 
 jectural emendations have been made in spelling, thanks largely to the 
 proof-readers. The principal variations from the transcript are as follows : 
 
 P. 711, 1. 31 and often. Transcript, imjpteri. 
 
 P. 712, 1. 13. Transcript, siquido. 
 
 P. 715, 1. 3. Transcript, exportant. 
 
 P. 717, 1. 26. Transcript, einandi. 
 
 P. 722, 1. 4. Transcript, mutae accipe verum. 
 
 11. 26, 29. Transcript, potenda, potendum. 
 
 P. 723, 1. 25. Transcript, suo. 
 
 1. 37. Transcript, coniurendo. 
 
 P. 728, U. 15, 16. The full stop follows atque. 
 
 P. 729, 1. 3. Transcript, occepit. 
 
 PROPOSITIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 
 
 Only a single copy of this work is known, in the Minster library at 
 York. This reprint is from a transcript by the editor, collated with the 
 original; it incorporates the errata tabulated in the original, and obeys 
 the printer's note "Help thyself by the sense as to the faults in words, 
 letters, points," so far as to correct obvious slips in punctuation and 
 
Propositions and Conclusions 775 
 
 misprints. Several of tlie references appear somewhat dubious, and 
 recourse has been made to the manuscript Dutch version at Amsterdam 
 for occasional suggestions. 
 
 The work is a blackletter octavo, 143 mm. x 90 mm., 34 lines to the 
 page ; and is very composite. First is a half sheet of which only leaves ij 
 and iij survive, containing the Epistle to the reader signed T. P. ; the 
 title-page is therefore missing. The Propositions and Conclusions follow, 
 occupying sheets A and half B. Then comes the last book of John Smyth, 
 Retractations and Confirmations, occupying the second half B and a quarter 
 of C. Next, the Life and Death, occupying C 3-7 recto ; two pages blank, 
 with some errata to the Propositions on C 8 verso. The editor of the whole 
 was evidently Thomas Pigott, recognized leader of the church, soon to 
 be ordained as minister. His account of Smyth's deathbed is not reprinted, 
 but one or two touches have been noted in the introduction. 
 
 A Dutch version of the Propositions and Conclusions exists in the 
 Mennonite library, in manuscript, occupying 16 folios; a dupHcate ac- 
 companies in 40 pages quarto ; the one contains 102 articles, the other 
 101. The inter-relation of these two versions with the English here 
 reprinted, would be a valuable exercise in textual criticism. It is reasonable 
 to assume that the English was the work of Smyth, but it is not certain 
 whether the Dutch versions were made from an earlier draft or from the 
 printed edition; nor is it certain whether the variations met with his 
 approval, or whether they were made by Pigott and others when presenting 
 their corporate creed at a later period when again negotiating for union. 
 The catalogue at Amsterdam certainly dates them 1612, but this is not 
 a contemporary note, and apparently dates from after 1862. In that year 
 Dr Evans, of Scarborough, printed a re-translation of the Dutch made by 
 Prof. Miiller of the library, no one then seeming to know of the York 
 copy ; as the present catalogue at Amsterdam refers to this, the reference 
 must be later than 1862. 
 
 The York copy was seen and copied in 1871 by Dexter, who kept his 
 discovery to himself. In 1874 Waddington published long extracts, 
 again without saying whence he obtained them. It was Barclay who ia 
 1876 made its existence generally known, and he also incorporated it 
 after chapter vi in his Inner Life of the Religious Societies of the Common- 
 wealth, whence the Propositions were reprinted in 1911 by Prof. MoGlothlin 
 in his Baptist Confessions of Faith. But though Barclay eulogised his 
 collator as careful, yet the spelling was modernized and the parts were 
 transposed, without notice. A more careful reprint from the original was 
 embodied in 1911 by Mr Walter H. Burgess in his Smith the Se-Baptist, 
 again with modernized spelling, punctuation, and references. He added 
 also seven notes as to the Propositions, assuming, as Prof. McGlothlin was 
 doing independently, that the Dutch version represented an earlier draft. 
 A study of these variations will rather suggest that they were a later 
 modification, after Smyth's death, to adjust the propositions to a Mennonite 
 horizon. 
 
 A note on the first proposition wiU indicate some of the perplexities 
 that await a close student. The first reference was given by Prof. Miiller 
 as Job xi. 6 ; but the English is Heb. xi. 6, which is certainly right. The 
 last reference is given by Prof. Miiller as Job xxii. 13 which is quite pertinent. 
 The English text is Esay xxii. 73, which does not exist; if a conjectural 
 
776 Notes 
 
 emendation be made to Esay xxii. 13, we get, Let us eat and drink, for 
 to-morrow we die ; which, is quite pertinent to the Epicure. So again to 
 the sixth proposition, the English reference is Joh. Ixxvli. 3, apparently a 
 misprint for xvii. 3 which is given in the Dutch version ; but this, though 
 grazing the question, does not prove the proposition. To the fourteenth 
 proposition the references are Gen. ii. 16, 17 and iii. 16, 17 and 27 ; 
 Ecclesiastes vii. 31. These are incomprehensible, and the Dutch version 
 ofiers another unintelligible set. Barclay's edition, followed by Burgess, 
 gives without any notice of change. Gen. ii. 16, 17 ; iii. 6, 7 ; Eocles. vii. 29 : 
 the emendation is happy. The present edition professes to reproduce the 
 references as printed in text or errata, except in the following cases: 
 Proposition 28: text 2 Peter 2. 2, corrected by the Dutch version to 
 2 Peter 2. 1. Proposition 59 : text Johan. 2. 13, corrected by the Dutch 
 version to Johan. 1. 13. Proposition 65 : text 2 P. 2. 23, 27, printed here; 
 Dutch gives Rev. xxi. 2, adopted by Barclay with the conflation of 23. 27 ; 
 followed by Burgess. Proposition 74: text Pro. 2. 12; errata 10. 12; 
 Dutch version 20. 11 ; Burgess amends to 20. 12, adopted here. Pro- 
 position 90 : text 1 Cor. 4. 8 and 9 chap. ; Dutch version 2 Cor. viii. 29 ; 
 Burgess amends to 2 Cor. viii. and chap. ix. which seems substantially right. 
 Proposition 92 : the reference is printed 2 Cor. 15. 52, evidently a misprint 
 for 1 Cor. Proposition 95 : the reference is printed 1 Cor. 5. 10, but the 
 Dutch version guides to 2 Cor. 
 
 RETRACTATIONS AND CONFIRMATIONS 
 
 This is printed by Pigott as one unbroken block. The present editor 
 long ago broke it into paragraphs, and is gratified to see that Burgess 
 independently has made many of the same divisions. The end is curious : 
 after the close of the sentence, the words "concerning the" are centred 
 in the page, then an ornament closes ; but a catchword at the foot, "The," 
 leads on naturally to the title on the next page of The Life and Death 
 of John Smith published by the brethren. Perhaps Smyth never com- 
 pleted his Retractations, and really broke ofi with an unfinished sentence, 
 which Pigott faithfully reproduced. This book and the Propositions are 
 strikingly unlike in form, but the same language is used in both. 
 
 CAM BRIDGE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
.11 
 
 , i Til 
 
 h j|iii{i 
 
 !l!|l' 
 
 ! Ii 
 
 I'ililik.n.M 
 
 i:l!'l!Tilil 1 
 
 iiniiiiiiiniiii 
 
 mwm 
 
 illiiiiiiiiiiiiilniiii 
 
 
 IK iilllliiilinl 
 
 AH! 
 
 I! 
 
 I llllllli 
 
 iiiiiiiiii 
 
 iiliiiuiiUi ii iiJBi