A iustification of separation from the Church of England Against Mr Richard Bernard his invective, intituled; The separatists schisme. By Iohn Robinson.

• 1. Arg. They cannot prove this simply by any playne doctrine of scripture, and that which they would prove is but onely respectively, and so may any thing, and their Church also be condemned.
• 2. Arg. It is against the evidence of the scriptures which maketh the word, externall profession, and sacraments the visible constitution, &c.

That you then affirm in the first place is, that wee cannot prove this simply by any playne doctrine, wherein you do half confesse that wee do it by iust consequence, though not by playne doctrine, & whol∣ly, that respectively, and so & so considered (as you speak) your cō∣stitution is false. And thus (you say) any thing may be condemned.

But first it is not true that any thing may be condemned af∣ter this sort. The constitutiō of the Ch: Apostolike could in no cō∣sideration be condemned, neyther could ours (to our knowledge) being according to that pattern, how weakly soever we walk in it.

Secondly, the constitution even of Rome (as now it stands) is not simply false, but onely in this & that respect. So far as it se∣parates fro heathenish Idolatry, & Idolaters vnto the true God, & reteynes any truthes of God & remaynders of Christs testament, so far it is not false, or feyned, and yet is her present constitution false & she vncapable of the Lords covenant.

To come nearer the matter. The constitution of the Church is the orderly collection and coniunction of the sayncts into & in the covenant of the new Testament: 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the saynts are the matter, the covenant the form, from which two concurring, the Church ariseth, and is by them constituted. Now for the word, it is an outward instrument preparing, and preserving the matter, but no more the constitution of the Church then the ax is the cō∣stitution or frame of the house: and for externall profession it ma∣nifests the fitnes of the matter for the form, and by it the saynts

enter covenant? which covenant also the sacraments confirm as s••ales annexed to that end.

And where Mr B. affirmeth we cannot prove their Church cō∣stition false by any playn doctrine of scripture, we will consider the scriptures he himself alledgeth, and the doctrine of them which as so many touchstones do discover the counterfeyt constitution of the same.

The word (saith he) is the constitution of the Church: His mea∣ning is, or should be at the least, that the word is the ordinary out∣ward meanes for the collecting, and constituting of the Church of God▪ I graunt it. But how considered? Not the word in mens bibles alone▪ for then all the Haeretiques in the world are true Ch: nor yet the word preached simply, for Paul preached the word to the scoffing Athenians, & † to the blasphemous Iewes, yet I think he will not say that eyther the one or the other were Churches tru∣ly constituted. How then? the word published vnderstood, be∣leeved, and obeyed outwardly at the least, as the spirituall sword, or ax, hewing the stones in the rock, and trees in the forrest, and preparing them to be the Lords spirituall house. And thus much the very places produced by Mr B: (like Golyahs sword drawn out to cut off his owne sword) do evidently declare.

Math. 28. 19. (which is the first place), shewes that such as by prea∣ching of the word were made disciples, for so much ‘ the word importeth, were to be gathered into the Church & baptised. Mar. 16. 15. shewes the same, especially if you adde vers. 16. inferring that men by preaching must beleeve, and so beleeve, as they have the promise of salvation, which I note the rather to shew the vani∣ty of that verball profession in a profane conversation, which els where Mr B. makes so much of.

The places 2 Cor. 5. 19. & 11. 2. cited by you do prove that the wor•• of reconciliation and ministery of the gospell beleeved & obeyed to the forgivenes of sinns and to the preparation & sanc∣tification of the Church to Christ is the means of gathering and building vp the same, to which that of Iob. 33. 23. 24. consorteth.

The two places Act. 2. 14. 37. 38. 41. and 16. ••2. 32. 34. are of the same 〈◊〉〈◊〉 with the former and do prov•• that sundry of

the Iewes at Ierusalem by Peters preaching and that the ••aylours houshol•• at Philippi by Pauls preaching were brought to repen∣tance, and faith in Christ, and so added to the Church.

But what wilbe the conclusion of all these premises?

The Proposition is this. The true Apostolick Churches ha∣ving a true constitutiō were gathered & constituted of such men and women as by the preaching of the gospel were made disci∣ples, had faith and repentance wrought in them to the obtey∣ning of the forgivenes of sinns, & promise of life eternall and to sanctification and obedience.

Now though my logick be not much better then yours Mr B. yet since my cause is, I will help you with an assumption or 2. Pro∣position.

But the Church of England was not so gathered after Popery, but on the contrary without preaching of the gospel, & of men & women for the most part ignorant, faythles mispenitent diso∣bediēt, to whō no promise of the forgivenes of sinns, & life eter∣nal appert••ynes: whervpō the cōclusiō necessarily followeth, that the constitution of the Church of England is not true or Aposto∣lick, but false counterfeyt and apostaticall.

Secondly the scriptures (sayth Mr B.) make externall professi∣on the visible constitution of the Church. His meaning must be, that profession of faith is required of such persons of yeres before they be admitted into the visible Church. Which truth the place cited by him Act. 8. 12. 37. 38. doth iustify, to which one place many other may be added to the same purpose, as Act. 10. 46. & & 16. ••4, & 18. 8.

But what is the Church of Worxsop better for this? what profes∣sion of faith did the particular members make, when at the first of an Antichristian Synagogue (as in Popery it was), it became or was constituted a true Christian Church? was not the house built at the first as it is at this day repayred? Let a man but hire a house within the precincts of your parish, & he is a ioyned member in your Ch: ipso facto, though he cannot manifest the least kernel of faith, or re∣pentance, yea though he professe himself an atheist, horetick, ••orce∣rer, blasphemer (or that which is worse if worse can be). All you do

is to vse the woodden dagger Mr Barrow tells you of, to suspend him from the Lords supper, & it may be to get him excōmunica∣ted by the officiall, (if he have neither freinds nor mony.) And this very excommunication shewes him to have been a member of you, for onely a brother is to be excommunicated, Math. 18. 15. 16. 17 and onely he that was within, may be cast out, 1 Cor. 5. 12. 13.

And here, as before I will help to form your argument.

The members of the Apostolick Church which were truely con∣stituted were admitted by their personall profession of faith, and confession of sin, Math. 3. 6. Act. 8. 37. 38. and 10. 46. & 16. 14. & 1••. ••. & 19. 18.

But the members of the Engl. assemblies neyther were nor are so admitted, but according to the parish perambulation whatsoe∣ver impiety they professe.

Therefore their constitution is proved false by the evidence brought to iustify it.

Lastly for the sacraments, as they are not the constitution of the Church, but do necessarily presuppose a Church constituted vnto which they are committed as † the oracles and ordinances of God vnto Israel, so is not the Church of England the Israel of God, the seed of Abraham, a peculiar people unto the Lord, but a mingled seed, as Ezra, 9. 1. 2. uncapable of the sacraments the seales of the covenant of grace. And the places Mr B. brings forth are so far from iustifying the constitution of the Church of England by the sacraments, as they do most notably evince the prophanation of the sacraments by the Church.

The two places are Mat. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 10. 16. In the former the Lord Iesus sends his Apostles first to teach, or make men disci∣ples, and then to baptise them (including the children in the pa∣rents according to the covenant made with Abraham into which the gentiles were in their time to be gathered. Rom. 11. 17. Ephe. 2. 1, 2. 13. 14. & 3. 6.) But on the contrary the Lord Bishops in Engl. having found a readier way send out their parrish priests to baptise all before them that are borne in their parishes, whether their pa∣rents be taught or vntaught, the disciples of Christ or of antichrist, and the Divil, not passing by the children of recusant Papists & o∣thers refusing all communion with them, whose children they use to baptize by force, & against the will of their Parents, as I could prove (if need were) by sundry instances.

And is not here an orderly constitution, and a Church truely ga∣thered by the sacrament of baptisme?

Now 1 Cor. 10. 16. the Apostle teacheth that the bread and wine in the supper are the communion of the body and blood of Christ, that is effectuall pledges of our conjunction, and incorpo∣ration with Christ, and one with another: and in the 17. vers. that all which eat of one bread, or one loaf, are one mysticall body. This place alone if Mr B. and his fellow ministers would seriously con∣consider and set themselves faithfully to observe they would rather offer their owne bodies to be torn in peices by wilde beasts, then the holy misteries of Christs body to be prophaned, as they are.

And here as formerly I will help the Arguments raysed from the scriptures produced by Mr B. and some other of the same kinde into form thus.

The sacrament of baptisme is to be administred by Christs ap∣pointment, and the Apostles example onely to such as are (viz externally and so far as men can judge) taught and made disci∣ples, Mat. 28. 19. do receive the word gladly, Act. 2. 41. be∣leeve and so professe Ch. 8. 12. 13. 37. have received the holy Ghost Ch. 10. 47. and to their seed. Act. 2. 39. 1 Cor. 7. 14.

But baptisme in Engl. is ministred by a far larger commis∣sion then Christs: though there be in the parents neyther ap∣pearance of faith nor holynes, if in stead of them they can pro∣cure godfathers and godmothers to cary the children to the font (yea will they nil they) the parrish priest hath commission to make them Christian soules every mothers childe of them, borne within his parrish precincts. And therefore the bap∣tism in Engl. is not Christs baptisme in the administration of it.

For the Lords supper the Apostle sayth, 1 Cor. 10. 16. that the bread and wine sanctifyed to that purpose is the communion, that is, an effectuall symbole or pledge of that communion which the receivers have with Christ. Wherevpon I do turne the point of this scripture into the bowels of the Church of Engl. thus.

That which ioynes such men in communion with Christ as by his expresse word he excludes from all communion with him, that is so far from being the true constitutiō of the Church

as it shewes both an vnholy confusion in the Church and a vio∣lent prophanation of the ordinance by it.

But the supper as it is ministred in the Parish-assemblies, (as they were at the first, & still are clapt together) ioynes them with Christ with whom he expresly disclaymes all communion & fellowship as their practise compared with these scriptures doth make manifest to all men. 2 Cor. 6. 14. 15. 1 Ioh. 1. 6. Ergo.

So that baptisme and the Lords supper are amongst you Mr B. and in your hands & handling, but as the holy vessels of the tem∣ple in Babylon & there togeither with the Lords people deteyned by frawd and violence.

Our 2. supposed errour is thus layd downe.

Notes

• Mr B.
• Answer.
• Act: 17. ••2. 23.-32.
• †

  Act. 19. ••. 9.
• "1 Pet. 2. ••
• ‘

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• †

  Act. 7. 38. Rom. 9. 4.
• Mr B.