A reply to a pretended Christian plea for the anti-Chistian [sic] Church of Rome: published by Mr. Francis Iohnson a⁰. 1617 Wherin the weakness of the sayd plea is manifested, and arguments alleaged for the Church of Rome, and baptisme therein, are refuted; by Henry Ainsworth. Anno 1618.

A REPLY TO A PRETENDED Christian Plea, for the Antichristian Church of Rome.

WEe are taught of God, that * 1.1 they which forsake the Law, praise the wicked; but such as keep the Law will contend with them. Wherfore, though my desire hath been to leave off contention with all men, & to labour to build up Sion in peace: yet being provoked by name, & my writings against the † 1.2 Man of syn, that Son of perdition being pub∣lickly traduced; I held it my dutie to mainteyne the warre which I began to wage against the Beast, whom “ 1.3 The Lord will consume with the spirit of his mouth, and will abolish with the brightnes of his coming.

The state of this controversie is; whether notwithstanding the infinite idolatries and other abominations now of a long time with strong hand practised by the church of Rome; it be to be re∣puted the true church of Christ; and the Sacraments (especially Baptisme) to be esteemed the true signes and seals of the covenant of grace, from God to them, in their present estate. I deny it: mine opposite hath colourably pleaded for it, & inveighed much against me, in his last book called A Christian Plea; a^o. 1617. Wherin, though in many things he deserved sharp blame; yet ha∣ving ended his life with his work, and not being now to answer for himself, or make use of that which is written: I will omitt the just reproofs, which might through Gods mercie have been * 1.4 a benefit unto him: and will address my self, to remove the stum∣bling blocks out of others way, and to cleare the trueth which is darkned with the cloud of error. The Lord which hath taken this counsel against Babylon, that † 1.5 the least of the flock shal draw them out; and that he will surely make their habitation desolate with them: inable me with his grace to ••ight the good fight of ••aith, and to declare in Sion † 1.6 the vengeance of the LORD our God, the vengeance of his Temple.

Of the church of ••ome.

BEcause the true Church is that people to whom perteyneth * 1.7 the adoption of sonns, and the glorie, and the covenants, &

the giving of the Law, and the service (of God,) and the promi∣ses: it is requisite that we first hādle the state of Antichrists church, so shall we the better discerne of the ministerie; seales of the cove∣nant, and other ordinances of God which the man of syn abuseth, whether they be true or false unto them, in that their synfull abuse.

In my former answer, I layd downe these grounds; † 1.8 The An∣tichristian synagogue is by the Holy Ghost called a Beast, Rev. 13. 11. which signifieth a Kingdome, Dan. 7. 23. it is named also a great Citie, Rev. 11. 8. which noteth the largenes of tha tpolitie & king∣dome. It cometh up out of the earth, Rev. 13. 11. as being of this world, (which Christs kingdome that cometh downe from heavē Rev. 21. 2. is not:) and therefore is called a man of syn, 2 Thes. 2. 3. and a great whore, Rev. 17. 1. whose head is Abaddon or Apollyon, Re∣vel 9. 11. the Destroyer of others, and himself the son of perdition, 2 Thes. 2. 3. and they that follow him are the children of damna∣tion, 2 Thes. 2. 12. This wicked generation warreth against the Lamb Christ, and against the Saincts,, Rev. 17. 14. 6. and 13. 7. blas∣phemeth Gods name and Tabernacle, and them that dwel in hea∣ven, Rev. 13. 6. that is the true church, whose conversation is hea∣venly, Phil. 3. 20. Yet doe they all this mischief, under shew of Christian religion: and therefore this Beast, hath hornes like the Lamb Christ, Rev. 13. 11. this whore is arayed with purple & scar∣let, guilded with gold, precious stones and pearles, Rev. 17. 4. as if she were the Queen and spouse of Christ, Psal. 45. 9. 13. Ezek. 16. ••0.—13. Song. 7. 5. she hath Peace-offrings and Vowes, Prov. 7. 14. (as if she were devout in Gods service, Psal. 66. 13.) bread and wa∣ters, Prov. 9. 16. 17. (as ready to refresh the wearie soules.) Her doctrines, sweet and amiable, lyes spoken in hypocrisie, Prov. 5. 3. 1 Tim. 4. 2. but yet confirmed with signes and miracles, as if they came from heaven, 2 Thes. 2. 9. Rev. 13. 13. 14. her power & effi∣cacie great, prevailing over the many and the mightie, the Kings and Princes of the world, deceiving all nations with her inchant∣ments, Prov. 7. 21. 26. Rev. 17. 2 & 18. 23. and if it were possible, Gods very elect, Math. 24. 24. Her continuance and outward prosperitie is long, Rev. 13. 5. & 18. 7. & 20. 2. 4. her end, misera∣ble, Rev. 18. 19. 21. & 19. 20. 21. consumed with the spirit of the Lords mouth, and abolished with the brightnes of his coming, 2 Thes. 2. 8. And for her destruction, the heavens shall rejoyce, and sing praises to God, Rev. 18. 20. & 19. 1. 2.

The accomplishment of these prophesies, I * 1.9 there shewed to be in the Church of Rome at this day; confirmed by her own ca∣nons and doctors, that set forth her profession and practise. These grounds remayne yet unanswered by mine opposite; being such as I assure my self neither could he, neither can any soundly refute. Now let us see how farr he yeildeth, and how he opposeth. First † 1.10 he prayeth all to take knowledge, that his minde and desire in himselfe is to plead against the present estate of that church, and not for it: acknowledging it to be fallen, into most synful and deep defection and apostasie, and so to be a notorious harlot and idolatress: which all the people of God ought to forsake, and to witnes the trueth there against, even vnto death.

How well this his acknowledgement agreeth with his plea in the residue of his book; shall appeare in the discussing of the reasons after folowing. But what sayth he to the description of Anti∣christs church, which I before shewed from the scriptures? He “ 1.11 sayth, I speak of the church and Synagogue of Antichrist, of the Beast, of the great Citie, of the man of Syn, of the great whore, of Abaddon or Apol∣lyon, the son of perdition &c. wheras I should treat of the Temple of God, wherof Paul speaketh. 2 Thes. 2. Hereupon he chargeth me, † 1.12 to keep what I could from the point of the question in hand, and therefore also to con∣found things that differ.

I answer, that the the question was by this mine opposites former “ 1.13 graunt, about the church of Rome, whether it were the church of God or no. Now when at first I shew from the scriptures, what maner of Church that Romane church is, in Gods account: how could he charge me to keep from the point of the question? 2ly. the place of th'Apostle being alleaged * 1.14 by mine opposite for a proof that the church wherein Antichrist sitteth, is the Church of God; I come immediately after † 1.15 to scan that scripture: and yet he challengeth me for keeping from the point; wheras all men of judgement may see it was needful to know what God foretold of that church throughout the scriptures, that so we might under∣stand in what sense Antichrist is sayd to sit in the Temple of God, 2 Thes. 2. For seing the Temple of God, is a figurative phrase, taken from the shadowes of the Law: it is not wisedome in us, to ex∣pound a parabolical speech contrary to the plaine scriptures & grounds of Christian religion; but we must understand it accor∣ding to them. Wherefore, there being no other answer made to the description aforesayd: it standeth in force to prove that the

church of Rome, is not the true Church of Christ.

So for the accomplishment of the prophesies, wheras I † 1.16 shewed from the Papists own writings of their church, how fitly it agreeth with Antichrists synagogue foretold of by God: mine opposite answereth * 1.17 I tell them of a Church, such as Bellarmine and others describe, one part wherof lives on earth, an other under the earth, and a third part in heaven &c. Wheras our question is of the Temple of God, wherof Paul spea∣keth, 2. Thes. 2. 4. and of the court and holy citie wherof Iohn speaketh Rev. 11. 2. Thus neyther the Prophesies of God, nor the complement of them shewed by the men themselves whom the prophesies con∣cerne, may be brought to clear the controversie: but mine oppo∣site will insist upon dark and figurative speeches; that men may be the more easily deluded. For how shall we prove against Papists, that the Pope is Antichrist; if we may not alleage the Popes owne doctrines and practises, which are contrary to Christ? Yea how shall we judge of any church, but by their owne Confessions published, and comparing them with the scripures? Wherefore the profession of Papists concerning their church, is a strong ar∣gument wherby they may be discovered to be none of Christs: & even the Cretian lyars testimonie against themselves, is true, as the Apostle noteth, Tit. 1. 12. 13.

An Answer to the arguments brought for the church of Rome.

MIne opposite pleadeth thus; 1. First, J take an argument from the baptisme had in the churches aforesayd, [the Apostate churches of Christians▪] thus. The Baptisme had in the church of Rome, is the Lords baptisme, the signe and seale of his covenant, the ordinance of God had in that church from the Apostles times (before Antichrist there arose) Rom. 6. 2. 3. and so is true baptisme, which is from heaven and not of men: that one baptis∣me which perteyneth to the bodie of Christ, Eph. 4. 4. 5. which the Lord hath given to his church, and not man &c. Therfore the church of Rome, is the church of God, and under his covenant &c.

Answ. Here, let it first be observed, whether mine opposite plead∣eth against the present estate of that church, as before he pretended. For if they be under Gods covenant, & have it sealed unto them from heaven, by that one true baptisme, then are they in the state of

grace and of salvation: which is the very thing that all Papists at this day doe plead for. Concerning his Argument, I deny, that the baptisme had in all Apostate churches of Christians and particu∣larly in the church of Rome, is the Lords true baptisme, or the signe and seale of his covenant of grace unto them. Here mine opposite referreth me to an other place of his book, for proof of the trueth of their Baptisme: wherto I will make answer anone, in their place. And now that my denyal may not be so bare as is his assertion here: I will insist upon the two scriptures which he citeth▪ and disprove their baptisme.

In Rom. 6. 2. 3. 4. the Apostle sayth; How shall we that are dead to syn, live any longer therin? Know ye not that so many of us as are baptised in∣to Christ Iesus, were baptised into his death? Therfore we are buried with him by baptisme into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead, by the glorie of the Father, even so we also should walk ••n n••wnes of life. Here first the Apostle speaketh of such as are dead to syn; that is mortified Christians, which live not in syn, neyther * 1.18 reigneth it in them, but they are † 1.19 freed (or justified) from syn; and are * 1.20 alive unto God. But Antichristians (such as are the professant members of the church of Rome,) are not dead unto, or freed from syn: for they are the subjects of the † 1.21 Man of syn, the worshipers of the Beast, for whom is prepared the wine of the wrath of God, Revel. 14. 9. 10. They are of that church, which by my opposites confession a lit∣tle before) is fallen into most synfull and deep apostasie, & is a notorious ••arlot and idolatress, which all the people of God ought to forsake: Where∣fore they are rather to be counted dead in synns (as th'Apostle speak∣eth of the Gentiles, Ephes. 2. 1.) and that they are in deed dead, and not partakers of the first resurrection; is evident by Revel. 20. 4. 5. 6. in that they are the worshipers of the Beast, and murder∣ers of the witnesses of Iesus. Wherfore, the doctrine of Baptisme in Rom. 6. is farr from proving the Antichristians or other hereti∣cal and apostate churches, to have the true baptisme of Christ, or seale of his covenant: but his servants they are to whom they o∣bey, even of syn unto death, Rom. 6. 16.

The other scripture is Ephe. 4. 4. 5. There is one body and one spi∣rit, even as ye are called unto one hope of your calling: one Lord, one faith, one baptisme. By which words it appeareth, that such as have the One baptisme, have also one and the same faith, Lord, hope, spirit, and body: which to affirme of the Antichristian church of Rome, and

of all other heretical and Apostate churches that professe Christ, is very impious. And most firme arguments there are from the A∣postles words to the cōtrary of that which this man pleadeth for. As, The Romish and other heretical churches have not the one & same faith with the true Churches of Christ; witness, their blas∣phemous doctrines published by the Council of Trent, and in o∣ther books; and the Apostles prophesie, that they are de∣parted from the faith, 1 Tim. 4. 1. &c. therfore they have not the one Baptisme. They have not one and the same Lord Iesus Christ; but have Antichrist the Man of syn, for their Lord: therefore they have not the one baptisme. They have not that one hope, nor that one Spirit, neyther are they one bodie with the true Christi∣an churches: therfore they have not that one baptisme. These things are partly prooved before in the description which I set downe of Antichrists church: they are also acknowledged of all Christian churches, which disclaim the unitie with the Antichristi∣ans in their faith, spirit, & bodie. And the scriptures most abun∣dantly disclaime this feighned unitie: as 2 Cor. 6. 12. what concord hath Christ with Belial? meaning, none at all. And Belial is there put for Antichrist and his retinue, as in 2 Sam. 23. 6. & 22. 5. The Apostle sheweth, that the Antichristians have from God, strong delusions, to beleeve lyes unto their damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 11. 12. That they are departed from the faith, doe give heed to ••educing spirits, and doctrines of Divils, speaking lyes in hypocrisie, &c. •• Tim. 4. 1. 2. That the false teachers (among Christians) privily bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction, 2 Pet. 2. 1. That the Beast (which is the * 1.22 kingdome of Antichrist,) and the false prophet (his ministers) and all that worship him, or take his mark; shalbe tormented in fyre and brimstone for ever and ever, Rev. 20. 10. &c. & 14. 9. 10. And shall we now say, that these mise∣rable creatures, have one Spirit, hope, Lord, faith and baptisme with the saincts and true Churches of Christ? My soule, come not thou into their secret, that so affirme.

The second argument for such churches, is; † 1.23 If they be not un∣der* 1.24 the covenant of God, but divorced from the Lord &c: then is there no salvation for any in those churches.

Answ. I deny the consequence. For then, after Israel was di∣vorced

from the Lord, (as is testified in in Ier. 3. 8.) there was no salvation for any among them: which I know mine opposite him∣self would not say.

Objection. Why, * 1.25 out of the covenant of God, there is no salvation.

Answ. I grant it. But though the church be not under the covenant of God, but without it, or divorced from him, yet some parlicular persons in that church, may through Gods grace be in his covenant. For as every true church is in the covenant of God, yet some hypocrites and reprobates are in the same, which perish for ever: so every false church is out of the covenant; yet some truly faithful and elect may be therein, which by the co∣venant of grace may be saved. Example in Rahab the Canaanitess, the church whereof shee was, had not the covenant of grace in Christ: yet she having heard of Gods works towards Israel, belee∣ved in God, and was saved; and before she joyned her self to the church of Israel, shee shewed the fruits of true and living faith, wherby shee was justified, & is put in the catalogue of the Saincts, Jos. 2. 1. 9. 10. &c. Heb. 11. 31. 39. Jam. 2. 25. 26. The like is to be thought of the other nations, farr off from God, who by some meanes hearing of his name and trueth, might imbrace the faith unto salvation, though the churches wherof they stood members were false and idolatrous, 1 King. 8. 41. 42. 43. So where mine op∣positē * 1.26 bringeth scriptures to prove, that they which are not in the covenant of God and Christ, cannot be saved: he proveth that which is not denyed: but this he should have proved, if he could; that if a church be false, and not under the covenant; none in that church can by any meanes come unto the faith and cove∣nant of Christ; for this I deny. And his argument if it had been sound, should have been this. If Antichristian churches be not under the covenant of God, but divorced from the Lord; then is there no salvation for any that are under the covenant of that church, and in no other covenant: and so I would have granted his argument; as confirmed by the Holy ghost, that all such are in the state of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Rev. 14. 9. 10.

Here to help the church of Antichrist into the covenant of Christ, he † 1.27 bringeth in the profession of the Iesuites of Rhemes, which (as he sayth) ••old * 1.28 Christ by nature to be truely both God and man, to be the one eternal Priest and Redeemer, which by his sacrifice and death upon the cross, hath reconciled in to God, and payd his blood, as a f••ll

and sufficient ransome for all our synns, &c. againe to be the singular advo∣cate and patron of mankinde, that by himself alone, and by his owne merit•• procureth all grace and mercie to mankinde. &c.

I answer, First for the persons that set downe this profession they are by the testimony of God that false prophet, which with the Beast shalbe tormēted for ever & ever, Rev. 20. 10. or at least, they are those uncleane spirits which come out of the mouth of the Beast & of the False prophet, for they are the spirits of Divils, working miracles, which goe forth unto the Kings of the earth, and of the whole world, to gather them to the battel of that great day of God almighty, Rev. 16. 13. 14. And this is apparant by that corrupt Testament and blasphemous notes and interpretations upon it, which they there set forth to the world, in sted of the true Christian and catholik faith. Moreover they are a part of the popish hierarchie which mine opposite after maketh to be the Man of syn, the son of perdition, and the Beast, which hee will not indure to heare that they should be accounted the church, or maried to Christ: yet here he maketh them the preach∣ers of the doctrine of salvation. Secondly for the Profession which they there make, if it were sound and good, yet denying it againe in their works, it nothing availeth them: for of such it is written, They professe that they know God, but in works they deny him, being abomi∣nable and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate; Tit. 1. 16. But what shal we say, if they deny the trueth of the doctrine of Christ, not in work onely, but even in word and profession? First then, (to omitt their rayling against Calvin about the Godhead of Christ being of himself, in their Annot. on John 1. sect. 3.) con∣cerning Christs manhood, and the trueth of his humane nature, how ever they acknowledge him to have taken flesh of the virgin; yet beleeve they, (and burne to ashes such as wil not beleeve it,) that the bread in the sacrament is transsubstantiated into the very body of Christ; so they have a Christ made of a wafer cake; a Christ whose whole bodie is in an hundred thousand places and moe at once, even in all places of the world, whersoever Masse is sayd by a Preist: so he must have a fanatical bodie, which can neyther be seen, felt, tasted or by any sense of man perceived as an humane bodie: & this breaden Christ they worship in that their idolatrous sacrament, and doe eat him really & properly with their mouthes. And doe these now beleeve Christs humane nature aright; when as

by the plain scripture we are taught, that the heaven must receive him, until the times of restitution of all things, Act. 3. 21.

As for his office of Mediatorship; wheras they profess him to be the singular Advocate and patron of mankinde; by singular they mean not the onely Advocate or mediator, as the scripture teacheth, •• Tim. 2. 5. 1 Joh. 2. 1. but a speciall or chief mediatour: for they have innumerable other advocates and mediators, as the heathēs of old, had one chief God, and many inferiour gods. So the same Rhemists gloss on 1 Tim. 2. telleth us, that though Christ be the onely singular Advocate and patron &c. yet this letteth not but there may be other inferiour mediators, though not in that singu∣lar sense: And how they beleeve in their Queen of heaven, let this one song (amongst many other) to the virgin Marie witness, when they sing O regina poli, mater gratissima prosi: Spernere me noli, me com∣mendo tibi soli. i. O queen of heaven &c. J commend me to thee onely.

As for the redemption, the full and sufficient ransome for all our synns, payed by his blood, which they would seem to hold: it is with fraud and injurie to Christs blood, which by their distinction) satisfied for the syn, but not for the punishment; and therefore they have feighned a purgatorie fyre, wherein mens soules doe beare the punishment of their owne venial synns: Concil. Trid-sess. 6. can. 30. Bellarm. de Parg. c. 1. From which also they can redeem themselves by money, given to Antichrists priests that sacrifice for the synns of the living and the dead. And whereas God teacheth us, that we are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ; Rom. 3. 24. and that we are not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, Gal. 2. 16. the Antichristians teach us a justification by faith and works togither; by Christs merits, Saints and Popes merits, & their owne; and these works by which they beleeve to be saved in part, are very many of them wicked works of their owne devisings, as going on pilgrimage, giving of their goods to mainteyne Antichrists clergie, and idolatrie, and other like works of the Divil. And of their owne idols, as of an Agnus Dei made of waxe, they beleeve and profess, * 1.29 Omne malignum pec∣catum frangit, ut Christi sanguis, et angit. Jt breaketh all wicked syn, as the blood of Christ doeth. Thus blasphemously they tread Christs blood under their feet.

Finally, the faith which they profess to have in Christ, what is it? Any trust or confidence such as the faithful have in Christ to be

their saviour, as the Apostle teacheth, in Rom. 8. 33. ••. 39. & Gal. 2. 20. Hebr. 3 6. Ephe. 3. 12. Nay, this confidence they reject as a pre∣sumption; and their faith, (which is without confidence) being but an assent to the trueth of Gods promises; & not a confidence of their justification in particular: is such a faith as the Divils * 1.30 have, who know and assent to the trueth of Gods promises un∣to mankinde. See Bellarm. de Iustific. l. 1. c. 5. 6. &c. Now if this painted face of the Romish Iezebel, be so fowle and uglie, being compared with the beawtie of Christs true spouse: what may wee think is the faith of that ignorant seduced multitude of Antichri∣stians, who professing Christ in name, looke for salvation by the wicked workes which the Pope hath learned them, and by the works of the Law of God, and beleefe in Christ, and their owne sufferings, confusedly togither; and yet neyther know Christ, nor what true saving faith in him doth meane.

Object. Who dare say but that God by this faith in Christ, saveth some of them, who doe thus beleeve in simplicitie &c.

Answ. And who dare say, but that God, notwithstanding this faith professed by the Iesuites as before, may justly damne them, though they thus beleeve in simplicitie' Seing even in these things which they profess, they corrupt themselves with horrible idola∣tries, having many false Gods, and false Christs in whom they al∣so trust, and dayly pray unto them, as did the heathens. And, seing this their faith, considered in the best, is no true saving faith; but as themselves say, The faith which truely justifieth, is not that wher∣by they beleeve that God is merciful unto them; but that wherby they beleeve with the whole hart without any doubting, that Jesus is the Christ, and the son of God. Bellarm. de Iustific. l. 1. c. 8. Such a faith appeareth to have been in the Divils, as it is written And Divils also came out of many, crying out and saying, Thou art Christ, the son of God, Luke 4. 41. But that God giveth some in that church a sounder faith, and saveth them of the riches of his grace; I never denyed or doubted of.

Object. 2. Of this minde concerning them, J have been a long time; see Answ. to Mr. Jak. p. 13. 47. &c.

Answ. But then and there, this distinction was rightly put, of, some particular men, considered a part from their constitution; that is, from their church estate: now, that church and all other Apostate chur∣ches professing Christs name, are generally pleaded for, to be in the state of grace, having the one true baptisme &c. which is to

justifie the open wicked, and count Christs enemies blessed.

Object. 3. Some of them dye Martyrs in defense of the Christian faith, (acknowledging Iesus to be the Christ the son of God.) against Turks, &c.

Answ. If it be in defense of the Christian faith, it is well: but if acknowledging Iesus to be the Christ, they dye also in defense of the Antichristian faith professed by that church, and for the ido∣latrie of the same, (which is hatefull to the very Turks:) then I say with th'Apostle, they may * 1.31 give their body to be burned, and it profit them nothing. Neyther doubt I, but some of the Iewes, have dyed and will dye in defense of the God of Israel as they now profess him from Moses and the Prophets; rather then yeeld to the heathens. But the extraordinary mercie of God to some in Antichrists church, justifieth no more the estate of that Synagogue of Satan, then his like extraordinary mercie to some of the hea∣thens (of whom we shall speak anone) wil justifie the heathens sy∣nagogues to be Gods true churches. As for Martyrs, our owne English acts and monuments and other, doe shew that many have given their lives for this, that the church of Rome is not the true church of Christ. Now by mine opposites plea they died not here∣in for the trueth but for errour: what Martyrs them were they?

Obj. 4. Many Jndians, Pagans, Jewes are by them converted, and brought to the profession of Christian religion, among whom I doubt not, but the Lord hath and saveth his, even by that knowledge and faith of Christ, which by their preaching among them they are brought unto, &c.

Answ. That many of all nations are converted or perverted unto Antichristianitie by the Papists, there is no doubt, for expe∣rience sheweth it, and so it is prophesied, that by Babylons sorce∣ries, all nations should be deceived, Reve. 18. 23. So the heathens of Babylon, Cuth, Hamath &c. were converted by a Samaritan Priest, and taught to feare the Lord the God of Israel: that they feared the Lord, and served their own Gods; & also, they feared not the Lord, neyther did they after their statutes or after their ordinances, 2 King. 17. 28. 29. 30. 33. 34. If that misceline rable were Gods true church, so are these popish proselytes: if they were not (as I never heard any affirme they were,) neyther are these. And what have our learned men of England answered to this old popish argument? J deny (sayth D^r. Fulk) that ever the popish church converted any to the true faith. An∣swer to a counterf. Catholik art. 1. Yea what say the Papists themselves, of this point? Hierom Benzo (in Histor. Indiarum) sayth, that all

the religion the Indians have, is to make the signe of the cross, & to heare a Latine mass, and to perform such like ceremonies. Io∣seph a Costa, a Iesuite, in his book De procuranda Judaorum salute, telleth us, † 1.32 that the Spanyards have baptised many against their wills. He sayth, “ 1.33 they are like the Samaritans, that worshiped God and idols both togither: they make (sayth he) a feighned shew of Christianitie, they serve not God in deed, neyther beleeve they unto righteousnes. And are not these converts now, a good∣ly plea for mine opposite to alledge, for proof of a true Christian church? But he procedeth,

* 1.34 Yea and who can say, but that whersoever the name of Christ is preach∣ed and called upon, the Lord saveth some &c. seing that Christ is the way, the trueth, and the life, and whosoever beleeveth in him shall not perish, Ioh. 3. 16. 17. &c.

Answ. Where Christ is truely preached, and beleeved, no Chris∣tian wil say, but the Lord saveth some: but where Christ is falsly preached and beleeved in, after Antichrists idolatrous manner, none can truly say, that they are a true Christian Church. As for Gods saving some by the doctrine there preached; it is a thing not for us to dispute of: we are commanded to leave secret things un∣to God, and to hold us unto things revealed, Deut. 29. 2••. God who brought light out of darknes, can cause the trueth to shine in∣to the harts of his elect, by the corrupt preaching of the Papists▪ and so I doubt not but he doeth. yet is this no justification of the popish church; any more then the true preaching of the gospel, which is unto the reprobates the savour † 1.35 of death unto death, is a condemnation of the Christian Church, and true doctrine of the same.

Object. 5. But, * 1.36 Out of the Church there is no salvation, which J suppose themselves wil not deny. And (that which is more) the Lords con∣stitutions cease not to be his holy ordinances, though the people that injoy them, should have no benefit therof to salvation.

Answ. Here we have suppositions in sted of proof. His asser∣tion I deny, though he supposed the contrary: for out of the true visible Church (wherof we dispute) there may be salvation. Many that are not of any true Church, yea are persecutors of it, and ex∣communicates out of it, may repent and beleeve in Christ, even at their last houre, and at their death; and so be saved; though they neyther have time, place, or means to be joyned to any true visi∣ble

church on earth. If he speak not of a particular visible church, but of the Vniversal church which is invisible, and comprehendeth all Gods elect: he swerveth from the question, and deceiveth by aequivocation; for we treat of the visible church of Rome, whether it be Christs true church or no. As for the Vniversal church, which is all over the earth, and from the beginning of the world to the end therof, and conteyneth Gods elect onely: out of it in deed there is no salvation. But what is this to the purpose? For so a man might reason thus. In the church there are no reprobates, there is no damnation; for Christ giveth all his sheep eternal life, and they shal never perish, Ioh. 10. 28. But the Popish synagogue, is (by mine oposites plea) the church, even the true church of Christ. Therfore in it there are no reprobates, there is no damnation. Here (I doubt not) mine opposite would distinguish between the Catholik or universall church in the first proposition, and the par∣ticular church of Rome, in the second; and so deny the argument: & why would he then himself obtrude upon us, such a deceitfull reason?

The latter part of his speech I grant: but it helpeth him no∣thing. For the synagogue of Antichrist, is none of Gods consti∣tutions, though every true Christian church is: neyther hath he annexed promise of grace, to his ordinances abused by the man of syn, and his subjects, in that malignant church, but hath threat∣ned the destruction of the deceivers and deceived, 2 Thes. 2. 8. 10. 11. 12.

3. The third * 1.37 reason for the church of Rome consisteth of a division of the world into Christians, Iewes, Turks and Pagans; and of a question, if it be asked, which of these is the Church of God at this day? should we not answer, the Christians: and among the Christians, comprise the churches aforesayd, for the reasons before specified?

Answ. The first part of his answer, I yeild unto, that Christi∣ans now are Gods church. The second I deny, namely that Anti∣christians (such as the Papists be,) & other heretical and apostate churches, are to be comprised in the number; save in name onely, for in deed and trueth they are not. His reasons before specified, I have particularly refuted: & so might here end. But further to explaine the trueth, I answer; that after this general division, we must make an other subdivision, or els we may be deceived. The subdivision is of Christians againe, into true and false, or into Christians and

Antichristians which professe Christ in name & deny him in deed. And this I learne of the holy Ghost, who in the Apostles times di∣vided the Iewes into outward, and inward, Rom. 2. 28. 29. and counted these latter onely Iewes: and such as sayd they were Iewes and were not, but did lye, he calleth them the Synagogue of Satan: Revel. 3. 9. Even so, he prophesied of a Beast (or kingdom) which should have two hornes like the Lamb (Christ, and so be called Chris∣tians) but should speak as the Dragon, work wonders, & deceive men that dwell on the earth, &c, Revel. 13. 11. 13. 14. He also foretold of false teachers among Christians, who privily should bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them &c. 2 Pet. 2. 1. If thus we distinguish not between the true Christ and * 1.38 false Christs, be∣tween true prophets and false prophets, and so between true church∣es and false: we may reteyn the name of Christ and Christian churches, and be in deed nothing less. And according to mine opposites manner of plea, an other might reason thus, Of synners in the world, some are † 1.39 Angels, and some are men. If then the question be asked, seing Christ came to save synners, 1 Tim. 1. 15. which of these are redemed and saved by Christ, & are the church of God? should we not answer men; and among men also comprise all peoples upon earth, Iewes, Turks Pagans &c. This is the mould of mine Opposers argument; and as colourably as he pleadeth for Antichrists synagogue to be Christs Church, so others doe plead for universal redemption of all peoples & persons borne into the world; from Ioh. 1. 9. Rom. 5. 18. and other like scriptures.

4 The * 1.40 fourth reason is from baptisme, a visible signe of Gods visible Church among Christians, as circumcision was among the Iewes &c.

I answer, the baptisme among Antichristians is in deed like their church; Christs in name, but not in deed and trueth. As for that which he annexeth, of our defending and reteyning that visi∣ble baptisme received in the church of Rome; it foloweth after to be discussed, when we come to treat of their baptisme. In the mean while, let it be observed, that as Circumcision was a signe of the Church of old; so was sacrificing, both then, and before Cir∣cumcision was instituted: and all nations reteyning sacrifice then, as well as Antichrist reteyneth baptisme & the Lords supper now; it wil also folow by like reason, that all nations were then Gods churches; which argumēt shal be prosecuted hereafter. Againe, as the

foolish woman calleth passengers to her sweet stollen waters, and plea∣sant bread of secresies, Prov. 9. 13. 17. so this foolish * 1.41 woman (the church of Antichrist) by like stales, allureth the simple unto her: which are no sounder proof that she is Christs true spouse, then the true mans purse in the theefs hand, wil prove the theef to be a true and honest man.

5 The 5▪ reason † 1.42 is from the defection of Iudah and Israel, re∣mayning stil Gods people notwithstanding: therfore also the church of Rome, in like manner.

Answ. Of the first part of this reason, touching the state of the Israelites, we are after to speak in particular: but were it gran∣ted, I deny the consequence, it foloweth not, the Antichristian synagogue is so also.

Inst. * 1.43 The consequence (sayth he) is prooved, because these were types of the like state of the Christian churches, recorded for our instruction. 1 Cor. 10. 6.—11. with Rom. 154. & 2 Tim. 3. 16. 17. 2 Pet. 2. 1. Jude v. 5. 11. Rev. 2. 14. 20. & 11. 2. &c.

Answ. I grant that he sayth, for the Christian churches: but for the Antichristian, it is true in part onely. The synns of Iudah and Israel, are found in Rome: so are the synns of Sodome, Aegypt, Babylon, and heathen Rome; which by warrant from God, were types also of this Antichristian Babylon, Rev. 11. 8. and 17. 5. From which I may as truly conclude; Sodome, Aegypt and Baby∣lon of old, were so farr fallen frō God, as they were not his chur∣ches or peoples: and they were types of this church of Antichrist, and the things written of them, are for our instruction, Rom. 15. 4. Iude v. 7. 2. Pet. 2. 5. 6. Therfore this Antichristian synagogue, is not Christs true church.

Further I answer, that the types which were in Israel, prove not that the things typed are in the same degree of good or evil, neyther more nor less; as mine opposite would inferr that Anti∣christians are not now more deep in apostasie then were the Israel∣ites. For types and figures agree in some things, but not in all. Moses, Aaron, David and all other types of Christ were synners: but it were wicked therupon to conclude, that Christ himself was a synner. Moreover Christs Preisthood was figured in Aaron & his sōns: yet did not that Levitical Preisthood fully type out his office, but in part: & a more complete figure of him was in Melchisedek, as th'Apostle sheweth in Heb. 5. and 7. chapters. Accordingly,

it wil follow, that Antichrist is answerable to Israels apostasie in part: and yet a more complete figure of him is to be found in the Gentiles. And as Christ excelleth in holynes all that were types of him: so Antichrist exceedeth in wickednes all the types of him; & therfore hath many sorts of wicked men, to resemble his impietie. Rev. 11. 8. And that his consequence followeth not from the type to the thing typed, that they are both in an equal estate, appeareth further by his own grant (in pag. 126.), where he maketh Antio∣chus and his captaines &c. a type of the Papacie. Now it is confes∣sed of all, that Antiochus and his companie were Pagans in religi∣on: so by the like reason, the Pope with his captaines and sould∣jers, must be Pagans also.

6. The 6 reason † 1.44 alleaged for them is, that it should be syn for Papists and Apostate Christians, to marie with Pagans, to neglect baptisme, not to sanctifie the Lords day; as it was in Iudah and Is∣rael to marie with the heathen, to neglect circumcision, to profane the Lords day &c. Dan. 11. 32. with 1. Maccab. 1. 16. 45. 51. 55. and with Mal. 2. 11. Ezr. 9. 1. 2. & 10. 10. Neh. 13. 3. 23.—27. Hos. 5. 7. & 7. 8. & 8. 12. Amos 8. 5. with 2 Cor. 6: 14. &c. which should not so be, if they were not the church and people of God, under his covenant, and bound to the observation of his ordinan∣ces. For Pagans, and such as perteyn not to the Lords covenant, being not his church and people, are not in their estate bound to these and the like ordinances of the Lord, which he hath given to his church and people. Psal. 147. 19. 20. with Deut. 7. 1.—11.

Answ. This reason is sundry wayes faultie. 1. Of Pagans he sayth, they are not in their estate bound &c: but Papists and apos∣tate Israelites, he would have them bound, yet mentioneth not their estate: wheras if he speak not of them also in their estate, his ar∣gument is false and fraudulent.

2. The scriptures alleaged Psal. 147. & Deut. 7. are by him abu∣sed, whiles he restreyneth them to these and the like ordinances, name∣ly, mariage, circumcision, baptisme, and the Sabbath; understan∣ding by the like ordinances, (as I suppose) the Passover and other sacrifices, the Lords supper, &c: whereas the Psalmist speaketh ge∣nerally of Gods Words, Statutes (or Ordinances) and Judgments, Psal. 147. 19. 20. which three, doe comprehend the moral Law, called the * 1.45 Ten Words, the Ordinances of worship and service, and the Iudicials for punishment of malefactors: all these the Prophet sayth,

were shewed unto Jsrael, and God dealt not so with any nation. Now to conclude from these words, therfore the nations were not bound to observe the ordinances, because God had not shewed them unto them, as he had doen unto Israel (namely by his written Law given at Mount Sinai,) hath no more weight then this, Therfore the nations were not bound to the moral Law, or to the Iudicials; and so synned not in committing idolatrie, murder, whordome, or the like. But this is impious to say, and a false conclusion: therfore his conclusion also touching the ordinances is false, and can not rightly be gathered from this text. The evil of it further appeareth in one of his instances, the Sabbath day: which is one of the ten cōmandements, and instituted from the beginning of the world, Gen. 2. If then the nations were free from syn when they kept not the Sabbath, because they had it not written in the book of the Law or Tables of stone as had Israel: were they not also by the same reason free from syn in not keeping the other comman∣ments?

So for the Lords day now, he maketh the church of Christ onely (and so the Papists and other like whom he accounteth true churches) synners if they keep it not: all others he freeth from syn, as not bound to keep it. Wherupon this paradox followeth, that the further men fall away from Christ, the more free they are from syn. For the church of Rome being fallen to Antichrist the Pope, they are synners in his account, if they keep not the Lords day: but the churches of Corinth, Ephesus and other like which are fallen to Mahomet, they are no synners in his account, though they observe not the Lords day: and why? Onely because they are fallen so farr, as they are no church of God, nor in his covenant of grace. Thus, the further from Christ the freer from syn; if this doctrine be true.

But I suppose the contrary to be true: and that all peoples how farr soever fallen from Christ, are now bound to keep the Lords day, and other ordinances of Christ; and it is their great syn that they doe not. For Christ sent his Apostles to teach all nations, & to baptise them, and to teach them to observe all things whatsoe∣ver he commanded his Apostles, even to the worlds end, Mat. 28. 19, 20. And they went into all the world, preaching and admo∣nishing all men every where to repent, and beleeve the Gospel, & to be baptised, and observe all the ordinances of Christ: and all

that obeyed not, or that have since fallen from their obedience, are guiltie before God, and shalbe condemned, because they be∣leeve not in Christ, and keep not his commandements. Mark. 16. 15. 16.

If it be sayd that a Turk or Pagan in that their estate of unbe∣leef may not lawfully be baptised or admitted to the Lords supper, til they repent: this is true; yet can we not therfore say, they are not bound to be baptised, or are free from synin neglecting baptis∣me: for they are bound to all the doctrines and ordinances of the gospel in order, first to repent and beleeve, then to be baptised, then to receive the Lords supper, and so all the rest. If further it be sayd, that the Papists in their estate of misbeleef and idolatrie; may without repentance and without returning to the true faith, be partakers of baptisme and the Lords supper &c: it is denyed. For if the Iewes (which were the true church though corrupted) might not be received to baptisme without repentance, as the scriptures shew, Mat. 3. 6. 7.—10. Luk 7. 29. 30. Act. 2. 38. then the Antichristians, the members of that church which (by Mr. ••ohn∣sons owne acknowledgment * 1.46) is fallen into most synfull and deep de∣fection and apostasie, and is a notorious harlot and idolatresse; may much less be baptised, or admitted to the Lords supper unless they re∣pent. And wheras mine opposite pleadeth for their right in the sacraments & other ordinances which they should syn to neglect: it would be knowen where they are bound to receive them, whe∣ther in their own church, or in some Christian reformed church. If in their owne; then they are bound to heare Mass, and syn if they be not partakers of it; for that is their idolatrous supper: then doe not the Magistrates well to forbidd them their Masses, and other ecclesiastical exercises, which they are bound by God to frequent, and should syn if they used them not. If they have right unto them in other reformed churches: then is there to be a com∣munion between true Christians and those Antichristians, in one body, at one Table: for (as the Apostle sayth) wee being many are one bread, and one bodie: for we are all partakers of that one bread, 1 Cor. 10. 17. But this were to build a new Babylon, and to make a confused mixture of the members of Christ and of Antichrist, contrary to all the scriptures. 2 Cor. 6. 14. 15. 16. 17 Rev. 21. 27.

The other scripture which he citeth, Deut 7. 1 - 11. helpeth him no more then the former: for there in the 11. verse, the Commande∣ments,

Statutes and Judgments (which imply all Moses law) are ex∣pressed: if other nations were freed from all these, then were they freed from all law, and so from all syn; for where there is no Law, there is no transgression, seing Syn is the transgression of the Law: 1. Ioh. 3. 4. And where he instanceth mariage with Pagans, which is there forbidden Deut. 7. 3. and applieth it to Papists now, that they should syn to mary with such, I grant it. But his inference therup∣on, that therfore they are the true church and in the covenant of grace, I deny. For the Iewes at this day, which professe (after their false manner) the God of Israel, and all things written in the Law and Prophets, should syn if now they maried with such, doing contrary to their express Law, Mal. 2. 11, Yet are not the Iewes now in the covenant of grace, or the church of God.

Againe in Deut. 7. 5. there is commandment to destroy images and like monuments of idolatrie: if this was peculiar to Israel, then other nations synned not, in suffering idols among them un∣destroyed: wheras the Apostle plainly sheweth their greivous syn in making and using such idols, Rom. 1. 23. and consequently it must needs also be their syn, that they did not forsake, destroy and abo∣lish them.

If any now aske, whether the other nations were then bound to all the ordinances of Israel? I answer, no: for some things were never before commanded, nor unto other then the church of Isra∣el, as the strangers might eat some meates, which the Israelites might not, Deut. 14. 21. Such things having never been forbidden them of God, they might eat without syn, as we may at this day. But this I say of the nations, that all the Lawes, Statutes and judg∣ments which were once commanded them of God; they were bound for ever to keep, til God againe repealed them. As for ex∣ample all the ten commandements; and such Statutes (or cerimo∣nies) as were taught them of God, as sacrificing, Gen 4. 3. 4. & 8. 20. not to eat flesh with the blood, Gen. 9. 4. and all other the like. And for judgments, to kill murderers, Gen. 9. 6. and so to punish other malefactors. And no Apostasie could ever free them from syn, in neglecting any of Gods lawes once given them. So no Apostasie could free the Israelites from any law of Moses; or the world now, from the Law of Christ. The Iewes that under Antiochus turned, to Paganisme, 1 Maccab. 1. 43. were guiltie they and their seed, for neglecting circumcision, the Passover and all o∣ther

ordinances of Moses; and their apostasie (wherby they went out from the covenant of God and his church,) freed them not from syn at all. So the Christians in like manner that have Apost∣ate to Mahometisme, are nevertheless in their synns for neglect of Christs trueth & ordinances; though they be no Christian church, as all of us graunt.

Onely there is this difference to be put; that such as know the will of God, (as did the Iewes, and many Papists now may, by the scriptures,) and doe it not; shalbe beaten with many stripes; wheras the ignorant peoples, and Popish multitude, shalbe beaten with few, Luke. 12. 47. 48. But to excuse them from syn wholly, is to plead for iniquitie. And for this cause, both David in Ps. 147. and Moses in Deut. 7. urgeth Israel to thankfullnes and obedience above other peoples, in that the Lord had now written his lawes and ordinances unto them, and made them an holy people, when he left other peoples, onely to that doctrine which by word of mouth was delivered them from Noe and his sonns; which if they did forsake (as they had in a great mesure,) they should perish for ever.

7. His seventh & last ” 1.47 reason for the church of Rome is taken from 2. Thes. 2. 3. 4. Where it is prophesied that Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God. This argument he handleth at large. But first let it be observed, how all his reasons, hetherto, are shewed to be insufficient▪ and built upon weak grounds, the first being taken from their baptisme, which is adulterate as the church it self: The second, frō an inconvenience falsly presupposed, that none in that church can else be saved: The third, from a question, whether Christians, Iewes, Turks or Pagans, be the church. The 4. is a∣gaine from their baptisme. The 5. is from the types of Iudah and Israel in apostasie. The 6. is from a supposed freedome that such as are apostate from the covenant of God, should have from syn, if they neglect the ordinances of the gospel. None of these argu∣ments are taken from the essential things wherof the true church consisteth; none from the matter, to prove them saincts; or forme, to prove them united unto Christ and one to an other, according to the order of his testament; none from the faith, to shew it to be true; or from the worship and service of God; or from the ministe∣rie, to manifest eyther of these to be according to Christ. And now, the last of his reasons is from a figurative phrase the Temple

of God, which may be diversly understood and applied, as himself cannot deny. Let the prudent reader judge, whether these his seven arguments be any thing like those seven pillars, which Wisdome hewed out, when she builded her house, Prov. 9. 1.

Now let us weigh, his seventh reason. The Apostle (sayth he) speaking of Antichrist, in 2 Thes 2. 3. 4. describeth him thus; There shall come an Apostasie (defection or falling away) and the man of syn shalbe re∣vealed, the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped: so that he as God, suteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God &c. Here the Apostle describing Antichrist▪ speaketh of the Temple of God, where he suteth &c. Now that by the Temple of God in Jsrael, was figured the church of God among Christians, appeareth by these scriptures, 1 Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2 Cor. 6. 16. Ephe. ••. 21. Rev. 11. 1. 2. 19. & 14. 15. 17. & 15. 5. 6. 8. & 16. 1. 17. compared with Zach. 6. 12. 13▪ and is acknowledged by the best writers of all ages &c. So then from this scripture J reason as followeth.

Jf the Pope of Rome with his hierarchie be the man of syn (here spoken of) and the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped: then is the church of Rome the Temple of God here spoken of; wherein he suteth as God, shewing himselfe that hee is God.

But the Pope of Rome with his hierarchie, is (by * 1.48 their owne grant) the man of syn of whom the Apostle here speaketh &c. Therfore the church of Rome, is the Temple of God also, that here is spoken of.

I answer. This argument I might wholly grant, and not hurt the cause I plead for. For though the church of Rome be the Temple of God, which Paul speaketh of: yet followeth it not, that it is Gods true Temple, or true Church, (which is the point that should be concluded;) seing the scriptures often speak of things as once they were▪ though so they continue not still: as also, they speak of things according to the outward pretense and shew that is made of them; though in deed and trueth they be nothing less. The first is manifest by these and other like instances: Abigail is called the wife of Nabal, 1 Sam. 30. 5. though Nabal was then dead, and his wife maried to David. Simon is still called the Leper, Mat. 26. 6. though he was then clensed of his leprosie. The king of Ty∣rus an heathen man that lived in Ezekiels dayes, is sayd to have been in Eden the garden of God, to have been upon the holy mountaine of God, and to have walked in the middest of the stones of fyre, Ezek. 28. 13. 14.

meaning that he had been in Gods church, on mount Sion, a∣mong the people of God: although not he himself, but Huram his predecessor (many yeres before, in the dayes of David and So∣lomon) was the man that became a proselyte in Israel, and helped to build the Temple; 2 Chron. 2. 3.—16. even as if a man should speak to the Bishop of Rome at this day, and tell him what he was for a Bishop in th'Apostles dayes, and how now he is degenerate and become the man of syn. The mountaines of Horeb and Tabor, where God once gave his Law and Christ was transfigured; are af∣ter still called the mount of God, and the Holy mount, 1 King. 19. ••. 2 Pet. 1. 18. because they had been for the time * 1.49 sanctified by the presence of God. And so the Temple in Ierusalem, after the Iewes had crucified Christ, refused the gospel, & were † 1.50 broken off, because of unbeleef; and the sacrificing and ” 1.51 worshiping in that place was ended; yet is it until the utter ruine of it by the Romans, called the holy place, Mat. 24. 15. Thus also the Citie become an harlot, is called the faithfull Citie▪ Esai. 1. 21. the wicked that hath forsaken his righte∣ousnes is named arighteous man. Ezek. 18. 26. according to their former and not their present estate. And when these titles are gi∣ven them, it is not to justifie them at all, but to aggravate their syn. So for the second, that things are called according to the outward appearance and pretext set upon them, though they be in deed false; is evident by these and the like examples; false Gods, which are but idols, are called gods, usually: so one Prophet calleth those the Philistians gods, 1 Chron. 14. 12. which an other calleth their ima∣ges. 2 Sam. 5. 21. False prophets are called Prophets, 1 King. 22. 6. 22: and Balaam a Soothsayer among the heathens, Jos. 13. 22. is called a Prophet. 2 Pet. 2. 16. The evil spirit whom the witch of End or raised up for Saul, is called in the scripture Samuel, 1 Sam. 28. 11. 12▪ 15. 16. 20. by reason wherof, the Papists * 1.52 contend that it was Samuel in deed, and not the Divil; urging the letter, as mine opposite doth urge against me this phrase of the Temple of God. The idolatrous Temple which Ieroboam made in Israel, in honour of the God which had brought them out of Egypt, is called the house of their God, Am••s 2. 8. yet that it was his true house or temple, I never heard of any that would affirme: though it was the true God whom they worshiped therin; for Baal with his house, was then destroyed out of Israel, 2 King, 1••. 27. 28.

Now mine opposite hath given us a good rule in this his last

book, when answering the Anabaptists he sayth, * 1.53 The word of God is not the bare letter or outward syllables, but the intendement and mea∣ning of the holy Ghost by whom it was given. Which should carefully be ob∣served by the due consideration of the scriptures, with the circumstances ther∣of, and by the conference of other places of scripture, and the proportion of fayth layd togither. Which whiles the Anabaptists neglict, they look on the scrip∣ture partially, and press the letter extreamly, without consideration of the true and right meaning therof. These words of his are true; the more it is to be lamented that he himself would so press the letter against me, and not weigh the meaning of the same, by it self, and other scrip∣tures, and the proportion of fayth layd togither.

In alleaging this text, he layeth downe the words thus, There shal come an apostasie (or falling away): wheras the Apostle sayth, except there come an apostasie (or falling-away) first: which word first, may in∣timate that the church should fall away from the love of the trueth, before the man of syn should be revealed: and this is apparant by the 10. verse, where the people whom Antichrist seduceth, are sayd to be them that perish; because they received not the love of the trueth, that they might be saved. Or, if the word first (which mine opposite lea∣veth out,) be understood before Christs coming, then is it meant of the apostasie (or the falling. away,) so called by an excellencie, as ex∣ceeding all other. And is not to be referred to Antichrist the head onely, but to Antichristians the bodie also; who after other synns, should fall away with Antichrist, and be damned with him; as in the 11. verse it is sayd, God shall send them strong delusion, that they should beleeve a lye; shat they all might be damned who beleeve not the trueth, but had pleasure in unrighteousnes. So that by the whole scope of this scrip∣ture it is evident, the Apostle divideth not the people of the church of Rome, from the Bishop and ministers of the same; as if the peo∣ple should be Gods true Temple, Christs true Church, under his covenant, and so in the state of grace; when the Bishops and mi∣nisters are the Divils Temple, Antichrist, the man of syn, and so in the state of damnation: but maketh both bishops and people, de∣ceivers and deceived, all of them under wrath and condemnation; otherweise then my opposite would perswade. For he pleading thus, The Apostle speaking of Antichrist, describeth him thus. There shal come an apostasie &c: would have men think, that the Bishop and ministers of the church of Rome are the apostasie, and the people not: contrarie to all the scope of this scripture, contrarie also to

Paul, in 1 Tim. 4 1. where he foretelleth of some that should apostate (or depart) from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of Divils; meaning it of the people deceived by false teachers: yea it is contrary also to mine opposites own graunt, who sayd (a litle before) that the church of Rome is fallen into most sinfull and deep de∣fection and apostasie, and so is a notorious harlot and idolatr••ss. Wherefore his distinction here between the apostasie & the church of Rome, making the one Antichrist, the other Gods temple, under his co∣venant of grace: neyther accordeth with the scriptures, nor with his own assertion.

Next this, where he sayth, that by the Temple of God in Israel, was figured the church of God among Christians: it is graunted. But withall, let it be noted, that himself can not deney, * 1.54 but the Temple and ta∣bernacle in Israel, was not the church and congregation of Gods people proper∣ly, but a sacramental signe of Gods dwelling with them; which I before † 1.55 confirmed by these scriptures, Exod: 25. 8. 2. Chron. 6. 2. Ezek. 37. 26. 27. Rev. 21. 3. Secondly, he himself affirmeth, that * 1.56 the temple at Ie∣rusalem, did primarily figure out Christ, and secondarily the church, both the catholik or universal, and particular churches likeweise; & particular Chris∣tians, and (in several respects) both their bodies, and their soules and consci∣ences. Vpon which graunts of his, it foloweth, that there is no ne∣cessarie consequence of this his proposition, Jf the Pope of Rome with his hierarchie be the man of syn spoken of in 2. Thes. 2. then is the church of Rome, the Temple of God there spoken of: for he understanding by the church, the people, (as in 1. Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Eph. 2 21.) and yet granting that the Temple in Israel, was not the people; all may see the weaknes and insufficiencie of this inference, that because the Pope of Rome sitteth as God in the Temple of God; therfore the people of the church of Rome, are that Temple of God there spoken of; & consequently Gods true church. For why now may* 1.57 we not as well (if not much better) say that by the Temple of God, is understood the doctrine and profession of Christ the true Tem∣ple; or as in my former † book I shewed, thus. As the Temple was an outward signe of Gods presence with his people, and of his inward dwelling in their harts * by saith and by his spirit▪ unto their salvation: so Antichrists temple is an outward shew of his presence with that seduced people, in whose harts † he dwelleth by Popish faith, and by his spirit of errour carying them to damnation. But as Antichrist shal not professedly deny the true God or Christ, though in deed he falsly * sheweth himself that he is▪ God: so shal h••

not professedly deny the Temple or church of God, but falsly vaunt his adul∣terous synagogue to be the same. Vnto this exposition, mine opposite hath given no answer: and it being according to the scriptures, & trueth of the thing in controversie; I leave it to the prudent reader, whether the outward shew and profession of Christ and Christian religion, be not the first thing here intended of th'Apostle by the Temple of God. And this is further confirmed by Rev. 11. 1. Where the Temple, Altar, and Worshipers, are three distinct things; and the people are the worshipers there spoken of, & neyther the Temple, nor the Altar; of which place we shal treat anone.

Then wheras he granteth that the Temple in Ierusalem did pri∣marily figure out Christ: how is it, that he wholly neglecteth the pri∣marie thing figured, and insisteth upon the secondary, the church or people of Rome? Seing it is knowen, how the Pope pretendeth him self to be Christs vicar and deputie on earth, and to be the ser∣vant and worshiper of Christ in heaven: and may we think that th'Apostle in warning them of the * 1.58 mysterie of iniquitie, would not imply the chief point of the mysterie, that Antichrist should in pre∣tence sit for Christ and in his sted, as his vicar generall on earth? Thus to sit in the Temple (or for the Temple) of God, may well be un∣derstood, that Antichrist should sit for Christ, a pretended friend, but in deed an adverse foe.

Now for that which the Temple secondarily figured, namely the church catholik, and also particular, and so mens consciences: he wavereth in his application. He sayth † 1.59 this terme [the church of Rome] is taken eyther particularly (which he applieth to the Laterane church in Rome, the Popes parish church:) or more generally, for all other such Christian churches; as are come under the Popes jurisdiction &c. This later I hold to be most proper here: for what needed there such warning to the Thessalonians & other christian churches through the world, if a Bishop of the Lateran parish (a corner in Rome) had exalted himself above God therin onely; and had not usurped also a pretended Christian power over all? And the complement of the prophesie, is an evident exposition of it: for who knoweth not, that the Pope scorneth to be Bishop of the Lateran parish onely▪ it is a jurisdiction over the catholik church throughout the earth, which he chalengeth. And now what proof bringeth mine oppo∣site, that the church of Rome as God constituted it, is taken gene∣rally for other Christian churches under the Popes jurisdiction? None at

all: neyther can he bring any jote of Gods word for the same▪ Againe what proof maketh he, that the catholik Romane church wherin the Pope sitteth, is the true church of God? None but this, * 1.60 J suppose these men themselves being better advised, wil not deny them to be the churches and Temple of God. But he should have shewed (if it had been possible for him) that the Romane church is by divine insti∣tution the catholik or universal church: which because I assure my self it can never be doen, I conclude that this Romane catho∣lik church is a fiction of the Popes braine, and a meere idol like himself: and is no otherweise the Temple of God, then the Pope is Christs universal vicar; namely in lying words and vaine ostenta∣tion. And so the maine ground for the Temple of God wherin Anti∣christ sitteth, to be the true church of Christ, is overthrowne.

As for the Popes Laterane parish, I both deny it to be Christs true church; and that it onely is the Temple of God wherin Anti∣christ should sit. His proof of the former is this. * 1.61 Jf we understand it of a particular church, (as the Apostle wrote his epistle to the church of the Romans) how shall we soundly deny it eyther to be the Temple of God, or Antichrist to be set therin? Thus have we suppositions and questions, in sted of proofes. To his demand I answer: it is the Temple of God in pretence, not in trueth; even as the Pope is a bishop of Christ in pretence, but in deed is Antichrist the man of syn, as mine opposite granteth. The church that was in Rome in Pauls time, wil no more justifie the Popes synagogue there now; then the Chris∣tian ministers which were then in that church, Rom. 12. wil justifie the Antichristian prelates that there reigne at this day. Secondly, the Laterane parish at Rome, is of the Popes faith, religion and worship: there are like priests like people. Now if the Bishop of that parish be Antichrist, the son of perdition, as th'Apostle telleth us, 2 Thes. 2. 3. then his parishoners which have no other faith or religion then he, are also the children of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 12. and so can not be judged to be Christs true church, and in the state of grace▪ sealed of God with his covenant unto salvation. In the Lateran Church of Rome, where Antichrist is parish priest; the people are grosse idolaters, hereticks, worshipers † 1.62 of Divils, and of him that sitteth as God in the Temple of God; ascribing unto him that Holyness, divine power and jurisdiction, which he doeth blas∣phemously challenge; and mine opposite could not shew one man of that parish that differeth at all from the religion of their priest:

how is it then possible that he should be Antichrist, and they true Christians; he under wrath, they under the covenant of grace; he the very Temple of the Divil, and they the true Temple of God? For shal not the same religion and faith which justifieth them, jus∣tifieth him also; when it is found in him as well as in them? Wher∣fore eyther the man of syn himself must be a sainct among those saincts: or they togither with him must be (as the holy Ghost calleth them) an habitation of Divils, Revel. 18. 2. To conclude then, seing there is no true visible church of Gods institution, but a par∣ticular congregation; (any other general or catholik visible church of Rome, being but the Popes own wicked fiction;) and seing An∣tichrists parish church can no more be Christs then Antichrist him∣self: it can not without injury to the Apostle, and to the propor∣tion of faith, and to other scriptures, and to reason it self, be ga∣thered that the church of Rome is at this day Gods true Temple or Christs true Church. Albeit, for that there was once a true Chrrstian church * 1.63 in Rome, and these Antichristians now profess to be the successors of the same, and pretend one faith, religion & worship, and reteine some doctrines and ordinances of Christ still, which they synfully profane: they are therfore sayd to be the Tem∣ple of God; as before I have shewed.

Moreover there can no church be called the true Temple of God, but in respect of Christ the chief corner stone and foundation of the building: for he is called the living Stone, and his people are living stones, built up a spiritual house in him, and so grow up to an holy Tem∣ple in the Lord, 1 Pet. 2. 4. 5 Eph. 2. 20. 21. If therfore Antichrist sitteth in the true Temple of God, he sitteth first in Christ the head, and secondarily in his body and people: but Antichrist is no other∣weise in Christ then in a feighned profession of him, whom in deed he denyeth, 1 Joh. 2. 22. therfore he is not in the Temple of God, but in respect of his profession of Christianitie and of the Christi∣an societie in his people, both which are false and deceitfull, after the working of Satan, & in all deceivablenes of unrighteousnes, 2 Thes. 2. 9. 10. Now it followeth, that I defend my former writings against which he excepteth; as for the reproches which he layeth upon my self, and his trifling exceptions against words and phrases, I will o∣mitt as fruitless.

Wheras in scanning the Apostles words, I noted mine oppo∣sites omission of Antichrists sitting as God in the Temple of God;

which words as God, doe give light to the true meaning: he excep∣teth * 1.64 how he could alleage that one Greek copie wanteth those words▪ so doth the Syriakas Mr. Beza observeth, also the Latine. I answer, if one copie want them, and many, or all other have them; it is no wisdom to leave the many & follow one without apparant reason. For the Syriak he was deceived, for it hath those words plainly, though the copie which Tremellius used wanted them, through the copiers default, as Mr. Iunius sheweth in his notes upon the Syriak version on 2. Thes. 2. 4. As for the Latine, it omit∣teth sundry other good things in other places, and is no warrant for us to follow.

Obj. The question was not about the manner of Antichrists sitting in the Temple of God, whether he should sit as God therin or no. Therfore I nee∣ded not alleadge these words.

Answ. But the question was about th'Apostles meaning in that place; and therfore his words which help to manifest his mea∣ning, should have been alleaged.

Obj. Jt is knowen to be usual in all writers sometimes not to mention, somtimes not to insist at▪ all upon such words as perte••ne not to the matter in hand &c.

Answ. Yet I, though I first used the whole phrase of the Temple of God, am † 1.65 taxed for that I doe not after alwayes repeat all the words: But to let pass such things, this speech sitteth as God, per∣teyneth much to the matter in hand: for if the people (which he wil have to be the Temple of God,) doe so acknowledge and honour the Man of syn for God, as he there sitteth shewing himself that he is God: then may we as well doubt whether they be the people of the true God, as whether the man of syn be the true God. But whatsoever honour & divine power the man of syn challengeth to himself, the ••ame doe the people of Rome (the Temple of God) give unto him, in word and deed. So the words are needfull, and perteine to the matter in hand. For by the worshiping of that Beast, the false church is distinguished from the true church, which refuseth to worship him, Rev. 13. 8. 16. 17. & 14. 1. 4. 9. 10. 11. 12. & 20. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12.

Obj. * 1.66 Of Antichrists sitting, th' Apostle saith, that he sitteth as God: but of the seat where he sitteth, he sayth expresly, in the Temple of God; and sayth not as in the Temple of God, as the answer here would im∣port; which therfore is merely shifting, and full of deceyt.

Answ. So the Prophet sayth expresly, in the house of their God, Amos. 2. 8. and sayth not as in the house of their God; though he speak∣eth of an idolatrous temple, which Ieroboam pretended to be Gods: and the Apostle sayth expressly, there be gods many and lords many, 1. Cor. 8. 5. and sayth not as gods, or as lords, when yet he mea∣neth the false gods and idols of the heathen. And the scripture expressly sayth, the woman saw Samuel; and Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and, then sayd Samuel, &, because of the words of Samuel; 1. Sam. 28. 12. 14. 16. 20. and sayth not, one as or like to Samuel, though it was but the divil in the likenes of Samuel. Paul sayth expressly that Satan is transfigured into an Angel of light 2. Cor. 11. 14. and sayth not a•• into an Angel; though in the very next words he sayth, that his ministers are transfigured as the ministers of righteousnes, v. 15. Which terme of transfiguring, is sometime used for a true change, as in Phil. 3. 21. he sayth Christ shal transfigure our vile body, that it may be conformed to his glorious body: yet in the former place he useth the word but for a counterfeyt change. And that the people which worship Antichrist as God, are called the Temple of God, for name, shew and pretence; I have before manifested.

Obj. He doth abuse the scripture &c. as if Pauls words were not plaine to such as will understand, that Antichrist exalteth himself above all that is called god, so that he as God sitteth in the Temple of God; and therfore is not the true God, but the man of syn &c.

Answ. Some may think, by Pauls words, that Antichrist should openly profess himself to be God, and above all Gods: yet the Pope (who is the head of Antichrist) professeth himself to be the servant of the servants of God, & to be but the minister of Christ▪ and Paul teacheth the same, when he calleth his working the mystery (or hidden▪secret) of iniquity; 2 Thes. 2. 7. Even so some may think, by the Temple of God, is meant the true church of God, the people that in Christ are builded-togither for an habitation of God through the Spirit, and that Christ dwelleth in their harts by ••aith, Eph. 2. 21. 22. & 3. 17▪ yet the Papists (who are Antichristians) doe beleeve that man of syn, that exalteth himself above all that is called God, to be a most holy man, and Christian bishop, they are of his saith, worship and reli∣gion, trusting in his pardons for remission of their synns &c: and therfore are no better Christians then he, but children of perdition with him, and are by Paul in the very same place counted among them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth that they

might be saved, therfore God hath sent them strong delusion, that they should beleeve a lye; that they all might be damned who beleeve not the trueth, but have pleasure in unrighteousnes, 2 Thes 2. 10. 11. 12. Who now, (ex∣cept they be blinded with affection) can think that Paul calleth such people the Temple of God otherweise then in respect of their profession of Christianitie, and boasting, that they are the onely good Christians, when they are in deed the sworne servants of An∣tichrist, and synagogue of Satan, as Rev. 3. 9.

Object. Difference is to be put, between the man of syn that sitteth, & between the temple wherin he sitteth: he sitteth as God, yet the temple wherin he sitteth, is the Temple of God.

Answ. There is in deed such a difference as is between the pas∣tor and the flock; (understanding by the Temple of God, the church of Rome at this day:) such a difference as is between the seducer and the seduced, both adjudged to destruction, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Rev. 14. 9. 10. 11. Other differences if men feigne, that the pastors (or hierarchie) are the man of syn, sonns of perdition; and the ido∣latrous people which be of one faith and religion with them, are men of God, and in his covenant of grace; it is farr from the trueth.

Object. See the like in the cases that fell out at Jerusalem and the Tem∣ple there: when Baals idol of indignation was set at the entrie of the house of God, Ezek. 8. 3. 5. and when Antiochus Epiphanes and his officers profaned the sanctuarie and citie of Jerusalem, and set the image of Iupiter Olympius, in the Temple and seat of God, Dan. 11. 31. 36. who would not now put dif∣ference between the idols and persons aforesayd on the one hand, and between the Temple and citie of God wherin they were set, and which they polluted, on the other.

Answ. The examples are farr unlike: first Rome, is not Ieru∣salem but Babylon, Rev. 17. Secondly, the Temple and holy things in Ierusalem being made of senseless stones and matter, they could not be polluted with syn in themselves as the * 1.67 living stones of Christs house the people now may soon be, and turned into a sy∣nagogue of Satan; as the christian churches in the Apostles dayes, are now long since turned to be Turks and Papists. Doth not the Law plainly teach us this; for in the yerely cleansing of the Sanctu∣arie, it was because of the uncleannesses of the sonns of Jsrael, and because of their trespasses, in all their synns, Levit. 16. 16. and for no uncleannes or syn in it self. Thirdly, the example of Antiochus is fit, but wrong

applied: for he speaketh onely of Antiochus and his officers; wheras both he, his officers and his people (the common souldjers) were they that defiled the sanctuarie of God; as it is sayd in the storie, Antiochus went up against Jsrael & Jerusalem with a great multitude, and entred proudly into the Sanctuary &c. 1 Maccab. 1. 20. 21. So in applying this, he would have the Pope and his officers (the hierarchie) to be the man of syn, as Antiochus and his officers: & the multitude of papists at Rome, he wil not have to be (as in deed they should be counted) answerable to Antiochus soldjers; but they must be the Temple of God, answerable to the Temple of Ierusalem, a most unjust resemblance. For the Temple then was a mere patient, and suffred that abuse at Antiochus hands: so the thing answerable hereto, should be (if he would have made a fit comparison,) the Christians (Gods true Temple,) which suffer for the truthes sake at the Antichristians hands; such as are opposed to the worshipers of the beast, and those that receive his mark, of whom it is written, Here is the patience of the saincts; here are they that keep the cōmandements of God, and the faith of Jesus, Revel. 14. 9.—12. and againe, I saw the soules of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast nor his image &c, Rev. 20. 4. And such I never doubted but they were the true Temple of God: but I deny that the church of Rome at this day is such a people or such a Temple: they are the marked soldjers of Antiochus the Pope, and honour him as God in the temple of God (their pretended christian church) with high impietie. Or at least, they are like the Apostate Iewes, which turned to Antiochus religion and became heathens, with worse impietie; 1 Maccab. 1. 13. 14. 15. 43. 52.

Of this sort is his next allegation, † 1.68 where to make his reader merry, he likeneth me to the old man of Athens, which would com∣pell the Iewes to call their Temple by the name of Iupiter Olympius, because Iupiters image was set up in it; 2 Mac. 6. 1. 2, so I would have the church of Rome called Antichrists church &c. I answer: if the church, the people of Rome were now mere patients, a∣mongst whom Antichrist cometh in by violence, they not consen∣ting unto him any more then Gods temple did to Iupiters image; it should be foolishnes in me to call it Antichrists church. Or, to put the example more fitly; if a Iew had been forced by Antiochus violently to kyss or bow the knee to Iupiters image, when he resis∣ted and testified against it: none could justly call him an idolater,

or one of Iupiters people. But if an other Iew had revolted to An∣tiochus religion, and beleeved in his Iupiter and honoured him with hart, profession and action; he now might justly be called the servant of Iupiter, or one of his people, (as the Moabites are cal∣led the people of Chemosh, Numb. 21. 29.) So the church of Rome now fallen from true Christianity, and beleeving, worshiping, obeying Antichrist, the Popes holynes, are and may justly be called his church: or else Antichrist hath no temple, church or people in the world.

Object. Observe here and throughout his treatise, how still he calleth that the Temple, church and bodie of Antichrist, which Paul expressly and purposely calleth the Temple of God. And so therin note stil his sh••f••s and his errours &c.

Answ. Loe still an urging of the bare letter, as doe the Papists This is my body, to prove their transubstantiation, that there is no bread left but Christs very body, really and properly. I have (I trust) without shifting or errour proved the present church of Rome to be Antichrists temple church and bodie, if the Pope be Antichrist. And seing his * 1.69 mysterie of iniquitie, is contrary to Christs † 1.70 mysterie of godlynes; and Christ hath a mystical temple which is his church and bodie, Eph. 2. 21. & 5. 23. I would gladly know what temple church and body Antichrist hath, if the church of Rome be not the same. Againe, he speaketh too largely, that J stil so call it throughout my treatise; for I have other weise written, though it liked him not, thus. * 1.71 Gods true temple and tabernacle is in mount Sion▪ in heaven▪ (Rev. 14. 1. 17.) where God sitteth on a throne, (Rev. 16. 17. & 7. 15.) and dwelleth among his people; where is the Ark of his covenant (Rev. 11. 19.) and from thence, lightnings, voices, thondrings, earthquake and h••yle come forth against th•• Antichristians his enemies; and vials of his wrath pow∣red out upon the throne of the beast, (Rev. 16. 1. 2. 10.) and on men that have his mark. On the contrary, the Beast, which is the kingdome of Antichrist, ascendeth from beneath, out of the bottomless pit, (Rev. 17. 8.) and blasphe∣meth this heavenly tabernacle (Rev. 13. 6.) and sitteth in Babylon (Rev. 16. 19.) upon the Dragons throne (Rev. 13. 2.) and fighteth against the Lamb, and against the saincts, (Rev. 19. 19.) treading under foot the holy citie (Rev. 11. 2.) and casting downe the place of Christs sanctuarie, (Dan. 8. 11.) When th' Apostle therfore telleth us, that Antichrist sitteth as God in the Temple of God, it is to be understood of their invading and destroying of Gods church, and people, as the heathens of old deal•• with Jerusalem and dwellers therin,

(Psal. 79. Dan. 8, 11. 13. & 11. 36. Ier. 22. 12. 13. Law. 2. 7. 9.) Secondly of their own vaine ostentation, whiles they wil have it called the Christian catholik church, and the Pope the head of the same. Ezek. 28. 2. 6. Esa. 14. 13. 14. 2 Thes. 2. 9▪ 10▪ Rev. 13. 11. 14. & 17. 4. 2 Cor. 11. 13. 14. 15. Thus I grant, that the Temple which Antichrist invadeth & destroy∣eth, is Gods true Temple: but that wherin the Beast sitteth as God, which he trimmeth, upholdeth and boasteth of; (as he doeth the church of Rome at this day) is the synagogue of Satan. But he procedeth.

Object. As for the ancient Doctor whom here he citeth, let us hear* 1.72 himself speak. His words are these. That which is the Temple of any idolor Divil, the Apostle would not call the Temple of God. Wherupon some will have in this place, not the Prince himself, but after a manner his whole bodie, th•••• is the multitude of men perteyning unto him, togither with himself under the Prince, understood to be Antichrist. And more rightly also they think it to be sayd in Latine 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the Greek; that he sitteth not in the Temple of God, but for the Temple of God which is the church. As we say he sitteth for a friend, that is as a friend. Augustine de Civic. D••••, l. 20. c. 19. Where note how farr differing Augustine is from this man that citeth him, &c.

Answ. There is not so great difference as mine opposite would pretend. First I cited not Augustine for his own judgment, but for others whom he speaketh of, touching the translation of the Text, in the Temple of God, or, for the Temple. Secondly, he setteth down Augustines words maymed both at head and foot. For Augustine beginneth thus: But in what temple of God he shal sit as God, is uncertaine: whether in that ruine of the Temple which was built by King Solomon; or in the church. For that which is the temple of any idol or divil, the Apostle would not call the temple of God: &c. Now the ruine of Solomons temple, cannot at this day be called Gods temple, other∣weise then because it was the Temple of God of old; & hath now no more holynes in deed & trueth, thē any other place in the world. And thus I have granted that the church of Rome may be called the church of God, in respect that there was a church there in Pauls time, wheras now it hath no more true holynes, then the synagogue of Satan. So we see how for advantage mine opposite baulked Augustines first words. In the end, he breaketh off in the midst of a period: for Augustine sayth, sitteth for a friend, that is as a friend: or if any other thing is wont to be understood by this kind of speech,

So he defineth not certainly of this place, but leaves it doubtfull: and presently after confesseth his ignorance; For what is this (sayth Augustine) For the mysterie of iniquitie doth already work, onely he who now holdeth let him hold, till he be taken out of the way. J confess my self to be utterly ignorant what he meaneth. Thus we need not strive about Augustines words here: and I grant, that the Apostle would not have called it the Temple of God, unless eyther it were so in deed and trueth, or had been so in times past, or did pretend to be so still. And I think all wil likewise grant, that the holy Ghost would not have called the witches spirit at endor * 1.73 Samuel, unless eyther it had been Samuel in deed (as the Papists doe contend;) or some thing in pretence and shew like Samuel. Neyther would the pro∣phet have sayd to the King of Tyrus, † 1.74 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God, (a proselyte in the church of Israel;) unless eyther himself or some of his predecessors had been there in times past. Neyther would Amos have called the Israelites idol temple “ 1.75 the house of their God, unless eyther it were so in deed, or in pretense: which phrase when the Greek translateth according to the letter, the house of their God, and the Chaldee paraphrast (as ancient as the Apostles age) expoundeth the house of their idols, they contradict not one another: seing the same thing may be Gods in shew, and the divils in deed and trueth: for even Satan himself is transformed into an Angel of light; 2 Cor. 11. 14.

Obj. When the Apostle describeth the mysterie of Antichrists iniquitie, would he teach the church that the place of his sitting is the Temple of God, if he meant that it were in deed the synagogue of Satan and the temple of An∣tichrist? For that Antichrist should sit in the temple of Antichrist and sy∣nagogue of Satan, what mysterie is there in it? All the world would easily per∣ceive, that these agreed very well and most fitly togither. But for Antichrist to sit in Gods temple and Christs church, this is in deed a mysterie.

Answ. The mysterie of iniquitie began in the true church, but continued not therein alwayes: for when it was discerned, the church eyther cast it out, or soon degenerated into a synagogue of Satan, if it accepted Antichrist for God, as the Church of Rome doth at this day. Which I further manifest thus, 1. The Apostle sayth, As ye have heard that Antichrist shal come, even now are there ma∣ny Antichrists, &c. They went out from us, but they were not of us: for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us, but (they went out) that they might be made manifest, that they were not all of us.

Who is a lyer, but he that denyeth that Jesus is the Christ? he is Antichrist, that denyeth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denyeth the Son, the same hath not the Father: 1. Joh. 2. 18. 19. 22. 23. This scripture teacheth us first that all hereticks departing from the faith of Christ, are gene∣rally Antichrists, though they reteyn the name of Christians still, as did the hereticks in th'Apostles time. 2. That such are gone out from the church, and are in deed none of it, though they pretend to be the true church, as all hereticks have doen. 3. That both teachers and people departed from the faith and church of Christ, are comprehended under the name of Antichrists, and not the Bishops onely. 4. That whosoever is Antichrist (especially the great Antichrist) he denyeth the Son (Christ) and consequently God the Father. Now let us apply these things to the Bishop and hie∣rarchie of Rome, whome mine opposite granteth to be the great Antichrist. If the Pope and his hierarchie be Antichrist, then are they none of the Apostolik church, but gone out of the same: but they are Antichrist (by my opposites owne confession:) Therfore they are none of th'Apostolik church.

The Pope and his hierarchie are both in and of the church of Rome, the heads, teachers and principall members of it, of the same faith, religion and worship: but they are not in or of the A∣postolik christian church, as before is proved: therfore the church of Rome is not an apostolik Christian church.

If the church of Rome denyeth both the Father and the Son: then is it Antichrist (as the Apostle sayth) and so no true Christian church. But the church of Rome denyeth both the Father and the Son: therfore it is no true Christian church.

If the Pope & his hierarchie deny both the Father and the Son, then the church of Rome also denyeth them; for they beleeve as the Pope and hierarchie beleeveth, have one and the same religion with their preists. But the Pope and his hierarchie deny both the Father and the Son, otherweise they are not the Antichrist, (as mine opposite sayth they are:) therefore the Church of Rome al∣so denyeth both the Father and the Son. Now seing it is thus, how is it possible that it should cōtinue the true Church of Christ, otherweise then by lying pretext and ostentation? And this is the mysterie of inquitie, if men could comprehend it that the Bishops and people of Rome, being at first Christs true church, departed by degrees from the faith & worship of God; til they came joyntly

to beleeve lyes, and to worship creatures, idols and divils (Rev. ••. 30.) and became a Beast (or Antichristian kingdome) yet with two hornes like the Lamb Christ (Rev. 13.) & * 1.76 blaspheming Gods Tabernacle & them that dwel in heaven, (that is the true church,) they pretend themselves to be the onely true church of Christ, and that all other are hereticks; they pretend succession even from th Apostles dayes, without change of religion, and so they sit in the temple of God, or for the Temple, as if they & none but they were the Temple and church of God; the Pope being the head of this sinfull corporation, of this Beast or kingdome; and exalting himself above God & Christ, whiles yet he calleth himself Christs vicar, and the Servant of the servants of God; and by strong delu∣sion keepeth his people in beleef of lyes, that togither with him they all might be damned, who beleeve not the trueth but have pleasure in un∣righteousnes; as the Apostle sayth, 2. Thes. 2. 12.

Now where he objecteth, what mysterie is there in it, that Anti∣christ should sit in the temple of Antichrist? I answer, it is a great myste∣rie, in that it is doen by him and his, under the name and shew of Christianitie; and as the Apostle sayth, after the working of Satan, with all power and signes and lying wonders, and with all deceivablenes of unrigh∣teousnes, 2. Thes. 9. 10. And where he further sayth, but for Antichrist to sit in Christs church, this is in deed a mysterie; I answer, it is in deed a contrarietie and impossibilitie (not a mysterie:) for no man can serve two masters, Mat. 6. 24. of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage, 2. Pet. 2. 19. to whom men yeild themselves ser∣vants to obey, his servants they are to whom they obey, Rom. 6. 16. Now the church of Rome, yeilding unto and obeying Antichrist, cannot be the servants of Christ, if th' Apostles doctrine be true. And after mine opposites manner of reasoning, an other▪ man might say, seing Christianitie is the mystirie of godlines, 1. Tim. 3. 16. as Antichristianitie is the mysterie of iniquitie, 2. Thes. 2. 7. Christ must sit in the Temple of Satan, as Antichrist sitteth in the temple of God: for for Christ to sit in the Temple & church of Christ, what mysterie is there in it? but for Christ to sit in Satans temple, and Antichrists church, this is in deed a mysterie. Were not this (think we) good reasoning, to put darknes for light, and light for darknes; Christ into Antichrists place, and Antichrist into Christs; for to finde out a mysterie? But they that have their eyes opened to read the mysterie that is not onely in the Pope, but on

† 1.77 the forehead of the whore of Babylon his church, will soon espie this fraud: though others are bewitched with her painted face. For as Satan can transforme himself into an Angel of light, and his ministers can be transformed as the ministers of righteousnes 2 Cor. 11. 14. 15. is it such a marvel, that he should transforme his temple and church, into the Temple of God, and church of Christ: and yet as he is a Divil stil, notwithstanding his transformation; so his Temple cō∣tinueth stil the Temple of the Divil, and church of Antichrist, how ever they are disguised with other names and habits. And to help a litle to the discerning of both these opposite mysteries of pietie and impietie: wee are to know, that Christs Kingdome beginneth in the kingdome of Satan, and is perfected in the Kingdome of God; and Antichrists kingdome beginneth in the kingdome of God, and is perfected in the kingdome of Satan. For, the god of this world having blinded the eyes of infidels, who are dead in synns, and walk * 1.78 according to the prince of the power of the aier: Christ by his Ministers sent into the world, and by his word of trueth, the gospel, causeth light to arise unto them, openeth their eyes, and turneth them † 1.79 from darknes to light, and from the power of Satan vnto God, that they may receive forgivenes of synns, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in him: and thus God delivereth them from the power of darknes, and translateth them * 1.80 into the kingdome of his beloved son. Then cometh Satan by Antichrists, which are his ministers, † 1.81 privily crept into the church, and by the word of “ 1.82 lying, (which is Antichrists gospel) he darkneth the mindes of them that have not received ‘* 1.83 the love of the trueth, and turneth them back againe from God, and by *‘ 1.84 damnable heresies privily brought in draweth them even to deny the Lord that bought them, and so bring upon themselves swift destruction. Then doe “ 1.85 they goe out from the church, & blaspheme † 1.86 the way of trueth, and togither with the Beast, doe ‘† 1.87 warr against Christ: whom yet in name and pretense they would seem to honour and serve, so ac∣complishing the mysterie of their iniquitie, unto assured damnati∣on, if they turne not againe unto God.

This thing not being observed, how Christ beginneth in the world, and draweth men out of it into his church; and Antichrist beginneth in the church, & draweth men out of it into the world againe, (as the Dragons taile, draweth the starrs of heaven, & ••••fteth them to the earth, Rev. 12. 4.) mine opposite thought it ab∣surditie

and contradiction in me, for writing thus; * 1.88 When th Apo∣stle therfore telleth us, that Antichrist sitteth as God in the Temple of God, it is to be vnderstood first of their invading and destroying of Gods church and people, as the heathens of old † 1.89 dealt with Jerusalem and dwellers therin: secondly of their owne vayne ostentation, whiles they will have it cal∣led the Christian catholik church, and th: Pope the head of the same. Vp∣on this, he thus inveigheth:

“ 1.90 What have we here? Doth himself now by the Temple of God vnderstand Gods church and people: yea such as was answerable to Ierusalem, and the dwellers therin of old? why then hath he so eagerly oppugned us hereabout? &c.

Answ. I oppugne the present church of Rome, which Anti∣christ destroyeth not, but buildeth and adorneth as an alluring harlot: the Christian church which was in Rome of old, that hath he invaded and destroyed long since; for they then were * 1.91 Saints, such as he hateth: these now are worshipers of him and of idols & † 1.92 Divils; and are an habitation of Divils. So there is as much diffe∣rence between the church of Rome now, and the church then: as between the Bishop of Rome now, & the Bishops then: they were Christs ministers, this now is Antichrist, as mine opposite himself confesseth. And what cause hath he to insult, as if he had got the victorie? Let wise men judge. But he proceedeth.

Obj. Where can he shew in the scriptures, that sitting is put for inva∣ding or destroying &c. Otherwhere stil he teatheth that by sitting is meant abiding, continuing, dwelling, &c.

What if I cannot prove that sitting is put for invading or destroying:* 1.93 if I prove my assertion by other words of the text, shall it not suf∣fice? The words Eiston Naon, into the Temple, may imply by a * 1.94 fi∣gure, his invading: and the person that invadeth being an enemy, a theef, a wolf, implyeth his destroying; for our Saviour sayth, The theef cometh not but for to steale, and to kill, and to destroy. 1 Joh. 10. 10. The scripture often wanteth words, easy to be understood: so here Paul sayth of Antichrist, that he (having entred) into the Temple of God, sitteth as God. And if they regard not my exposition, they shall have his on whom they so much rely, Mr. Iunius I mean, who so explaineth it, saying, The testimonie of signe is this, that Invading the temple of God, he shal sit as God. Jun. Animad vers. in Bellarm. Controv. 3. l. 3. c. 14. not. 18. But what if I confirme it by the word sitting, which he thought so unlikely? In Esai. 14. 13. the Prophet upbraideth the

king of Babylon thus, Thou hast sayd in thine hart, J wil ascend into heaven &c. J wil sit also in the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the North; meaning, mount Sion where Gods temple was. But this is meant of Nebuchadnezars invading of Ierusalem to spoile the same, as the historie sheweth, 2 King. 25. and in him, Antichrists tyrannie against the church was lively figured. As for sitting to mean continuing, though it doth so often times, yet not alwayes; Christ sate upon the mount of Olives, Mat. 24. 3. the disciples sate in the house, Act. 2. 2. yet dwelt they not, or continued long there. And when the Babylonian invaded mount Sion to sit there, he con∣tinued not there, but having spoiled the citie, burned the Temple, and captived the people, he returned into Babylon, 2 King. 25. so Antichrist spoiling Christian churches returneth to his * 1.95 whore of Babylon, his proper habitation, which he wickedly boasteth to be the Sion, Temple and church of God.

Wheras mine opposite expounded the Temple of God to be the church, and shewed not whether he meant a church particular, or general and catholik; I sayd for a particular church, it wil not agree with the prophesies of Antichrist, whose citie or church is so great, as peoples, kinreds, tongues & nations, doe dwell in the streets therof, Rev. 11. 8. 9. He gainsayeth me thus:

† 1.96 First, Still he calls that Antichrists church, which th' Apostle calleth the Temple of God.

Answ. It is his own interpretation, that the Temple meaneth the church; and that he that sitteth in it is Antichrist; and sitting he wil have to be continuing: and why may not I call that church wher∣in Antichrist sitteth continually as God, Antichrists church; yea though it were indeed Gods church as he supposeth. Seing the citie wherin Christ did but dwell, was called his owne citie, Mat. 9. 1. And that which God sayth, in my house, and in my kingdom, 1 Chron. 17. 14. an other Prophet relateth it, thine house and thy kingdome, spea∣king to David the governour, 2 Sam. 7. 16. Or to shew a fitter simi∣litude, as the holy Ghost calleth the Moabites the people of Chemosh, Numb. ••1. 29. because they worshiped Chemosh for their God; so the church of Rome which worshipeth Antichrist, is fitly called Antichrists church.

Object. How will he prove that the Beasts citie Rev 11. 8. is the tem∣ple of God, 2 Thes. 24.

Ans. It is himself that expoundeth the Templ▪ to be the church▪

and in special the Lateran church in Rome, where the Pope is pa∣rish priest. I shew by Rev. 11. 8. that the Popes parish is a larger citie or church then eyther that Lateran parish or Rome it self, even o∣ver many nations; and so can not be a particular church such as Christ instituted; but a new catholik church which the Pope hath devised, and would have it accounted the Temple and church of God. Here mine opposite, laboureth to finde a difference be∣tween the Beasts citie and his church: but all in vaine. For thus he reasoneth.

1. † 1.97 This citie in Rev. 11. 8. is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. But the church is here called the Temple of God, or the Court without the Temple, or the holy Citie.

Answ. First then he granteth that the same church may be called both a temple & a citie: so the diverse name helpeth him no∣thing. Secondly, it is true that Antichrists church is called So∣dom and Egypt which was an whole countrie: let men now judge how fitly mine opposite hath confined Antichrists church within the Laterane parish, a corner in Rome. Shall we rather beleeve him, or the Holy Ghost? Thirdly that is called the Holy citie, Rev. 11. 2. which the Gentiles (the church of Antichrist) tread under foot, as destroyed and wast: wheras the church of Anti∣christ is a great citie called Babylon, sumptuously builded, garnish∣ed, and by him mainteyned, Rev. 17. and that is the church of Rome at this day, as all know: and of the present church of Rome is now our controversie.

Obj. 2. This great citie is that where our Lord was crucified, Rev. 11. 8. Now all know that he was crucified in and vnder the jurisdiction of the citie, not of the church of Rome. For he was condemned by Pontius Pi∣late &c.

Answ. The thing he aimeth at, is that the citie mentioned in Rev, 11. 8. is a civil politie, as when Rome killed Christ; and not an ecclesiastical politie or church. But he laboureth in the winde: for the citie is such as is the Beast or kingdome: the Beast is a spiritu∣al politie most synful, for it commeth out of the bottomles pit, Rev. 11. 7. that is from the Divil; wheras all Civil polities are from God, though they be heathens, Rom. 13. 1. 2. Secondly he should have knowen, that the same Citie which was a civil politie in Christs time, & killed him: is now subordinate to an ecclesiastical politie, church, or Papacie; and stil crucifieth Christ in his members.

Obj. 3. This citie is that which was the Dragons throne, and by him given to the Beast, Revel. 13. 2. But this was the citie, not the church of Rome. Neyther J think wil these men themselves say, that the church was the Dragons throne, or was by the Dragon given to the beast.

Answ. The citie or politie which the Dragon gave to the Beast, was civil, but is now subjected to, or become ecclesiastical: for the citie of Rome is now by profession Christen, which of old was hea∣then: and by professed Christians (namely the Pope & his church) are those witnesses of God killed, Rev. 11. 7. 8. so their corpses lye unburied in the streets of the beasts citie, that is of Antichrists church or politie, which reacheth over many nations.

Obj. 4. This citie also is the throne of the Beast, and Babylon the great citie spoken of Rev. 16. 10. 19. & 17. & 18. chapt. which is to be understood of the citie of Rome and dominion therof.

Answ. It is granted that this citie is Babylon, and Rome, and the dominion therof: but it is a spiritual politie or church: for who hath dominion now of Rome, but the Pope or Bishop there, the pretended vicar of Christ; and who but he hath killed those Martyrs, within his Diocese or Bishoprick, which reacheth over many kingdoms?

Obj. 5. This citie is the woman that sitteth on seven-mountains, Reve. 17. 9. 18. And the citie, not the church of Rome, is built on 7. mountaines.

Answ. Yes, the same heathen citie which was first set on seven hills; is now a pretended Christian citie, sitting still on her 7 hills: and being a Christian in name, hath killed Christ in his members, by her Popes power ecclesiastical, who hath his seat in her, but his Dragons pawes reach into farr countries. This citie, the woman on 7. hills, is shee that hath made the inhabiters of the earth drunk with the wine of her ••ornication, Rev. 17. 1. 2. &c. and who but the church of Rome hath doen this?

Obj. 6. This citie hath 7. kings or kindes of government &c. by Kings, Consuls, Dictators, Decemvirs & Tribunes (ceased before Johns time) Em∣perours▪ (when Iohn lived) and Popes (not then come:) But how should this be found in the church of Rome, which was not before Johns tyme; and therfore could not have 5. Kings or kindes of government then fallen.

Answ. Ill doe they thrive, that kick against the pricks. Here himself confesseth the Popes goverment to be one of the seven: now the Popes goverment or papacie, is an ecclesiastical monar∣chie; by it were the witnesses of Christ slayn, as before I shewed.

As for seven goverments to be found in the church of Rome, that is in the papacie, is absurd; for it is to seek 7. kindes of goverment in one. But six are gone and the seventh remayneth by the Pope. That citie or politie which once was heathen, now Christian in name (Antichristian in deed;) which the Pope menageth: is the malignant church that killeth Gods witnesses, amongst peoples, kin∣reds, tongues and nations, Rev. 11. 8. 9. Therfore it can not be restrey∣ned to one particular congregation.

Obj. 7. This citie is that which reigned over the kings of the earth in Johns time, Rev. 17. 8. And that not the church but the citie of Rome so reigned when John wrote, all doe acknowledge.

Answ. But, that the citie the church of Rome now reigneth by the Pope the head of that church, all doe acknowledge. And the killing of those witnesses Rev. 11. was not in Iohns time, but after, when the citie or politie of Rome was become Christian in name and title. To say, it was not so in Iohns time, therfore it is not so now; is dallying, rather then sound reasoning.

Obj. 8. Finally, the Lord himself putteth difference between this citie Babylon, and his people therin, Rev. 18. 4. as of old, in Babylon of Chalde••. Ier. 50. &c.

Answ. This is true; but what can he inferr thereupon? It was not Gods people in Babylon, that killed those witnesses, Rev. 11. but it was Babylon that killed those witnesses, Gods people ther∣in. Because Gods people killed not those witnesses, but the Beast in his catholik citie or church: therfore (thinks he) that citie of the beast, is not his church; a fayre conclusion.

Obj. † 1.98 Note here, that by the great citie, is meant not onely the citie it self, but the whole jurisdiction, authority and dominion therof, how farr soever extended.

Answ. It is a good note, and worth the marking: for the great citie being the church of Rome, as before is proved; it fol∣loweth, that the extents of that church, reach further then the materiall walls of Rome, even to all nations that are of the Popes religion: and therfore to bound it within the Lateran parish of Rome, is to restreyn that which God sheweth to be more large. It were a happy day, if the Popes unruly power, were limited with∣in the Lateran parish, and his jurisdiction reached no further. But he must have a larger scope to range in yet a while: and weak war∣riers are they against him, that plead for his whorish church of

Rome, that it is the true church of Christ, and under his covenant of grace. It is the thing that the Pope would most gladly have proved: and I am well assured, Babylon wil not fall, til it be other∣weise battered.

Obj. † 1.99 Where yet observe further, that the church of Rome, being fallen in∣to deep apostasie, and having the man of syn sitting ther in as God, who hath that citie for his throne: the things that are spoken of this citie, are also applied to the apostate estate of that church of Rome, and the other churches that are under the jurisdiction of the prelacie of that Sea, whersoever, and of whatsoe∣ver people, kinred, tongue or nation they be: &c. But shall wee therfore con∣clude, that by the Temple of God, 2 Thes. 2. 4. may not be understood the church of God?

Answ. How glorious is the trueth, that forceth those to yeild, that fight against it. His former reasons (that by the Citie in Rev. ••1. 8. the church was not meant,) he now frustrateth himself. But still he cleaveth to his first plea, The temple of God 1 Thes. 2. is the church of God. I may answer hereto, as God by Ieremy did to the Iewes, Trust not in lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are these: Ier. 7. 4. Our dispute is, in what sense Paul calleth it the Temple of God; whether as the true tem∣ple builded by Solomon, or as the false temple builded in Samaria by the Apostate Israelites, which the Prophet calleth the house of their God, Amos 2. 8. as the Apostle calleth this the Temple of God. Now faine he would have this Romish temple of apostate Papists, to be the true temple of God; and that they notwithstanding their deep apostasie, are Gods true church, under his covenant: which I de∣ny, and have before disproved; and Paul in the very same place, counteth them among those that perish, for beleeving lyes, & which shalbe damned for not beleeving the trueth, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. and Christ teacheth, that being worshipers of the beast, their names are not written in the book of l••fe. Rev. 13. 8. & 17. 8. but they shalbe tormented in fyre and brimstone for ever, Revel. 14. 9. 10. 11. and that the whorish church Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, which is drunken with the blood of the Saincts and of the martyrs of Jesus shalbe destroyed for ever, Rev. 17. 5. 6. & 18. 21. And who now, that have not their right eye blinded, wil not rather say, it is the Samaritans Temple, then Solomons; though in pretence and co∣lour, the Temple of God. And seing every true church now, is a par∣ticular congregation in one place; but the church of Rome is a

new found catholik church, spred over many nations under one head & Bishop the Pope: it can not possibly be Christs true church, having neyther the constitution, faith, worship, ministerie, order or ordinances of Christ; but of his enemie Antichrist.

Wheras I formerly wrote, * 1.100 Neyther is that (if they meane a particular church) answerable to the Temple in Israel, which was not for one synagogue, but for † 1.101 the whole nation of the Iewes, and for the ‘* 1.102 Gen∣tiles that came to the faith, through the world. To this he sayth;

*‘ 1.103 How greatly forgets he himself, and how presently, seing but a line be∣fore he sayd, the Temple figured not onely the catholik or universal church, E∣phe. 2. 21. but also every particular church by proportion, 1 Corint. 3. 16. 17. And may we not then apply it to that wherof it was a figure? &c.

Answ. No: for mine opposite granteth that the Temple was primarily a figure Christ: but so to apply it in this place, 2 Thes. 2. himself thinketh not fit. I deny not, but some where it may and ought to be so applyed: but considering that the Temple of God wherin Antichrist now sitteth is a catholik church spred over ma∣ny nations, (as was prophesied Rev. 11. 8. 9.) I think the applying of Pauls words in 2 Thes. 2. to a particular church, is neyther fit∣ting to the type, nor to the prophesie, nor to the accomplishment of it which we see at this day. The priests in Israel figured Christ chiefly, secondarily Christians, Rev. 1. 6. But to apply those things which Paul speaketh of the Priests in Heb. 10. 11. 12. to us Christi∣ans, were not onely unfitting, but heretical.

Obj. * 1.104 The Candlesticks and Lamps were set in the Temple of God: and the church of Rome was a golden Candlestick, as well as the rest of the primitive churches; and this man himself sayth definitely † 1.105 the true churches were many of them apostate when John wrote; whom yet notwithstanding Christ acknowledgeth to be * 1.106 golden candlesticks. In any of which, of Antichrist had sit, as in the church of Rome, I suppose this man would not deny, but his sitting then should have been in the Temple of God: whether it were considered as a particular candlestick it self, or a branch of the great & general candlestick &c.

Answ. 1. If the Candlesticks were churches in the Temple the church: then the Temple in such respect is the catholick church, for one particular church is not in an other. 2. I grant that the church of Rome was a golden candlestick in th'Apostles time: and I think mine opposite would not deny but then also the Bishop of Rome, was a * 1.107 starr in Christs right hand. But now the Bishop

is a starr fallen from heaven, and acknowledged to be Antichrist: why then may not the church be fallen with him, (as Paul fore∣warned, Rom. 11. 22.) and the candlestick removed from it, as wel as from Ephesus, Rev. 2. 5. except Rome have a privilege above all other cities, because it crucified Christ. 3. I grant also that the true churches apostate in Rev. 2. & 3. were still golden candlesticks, though some of them rustie: but I would have it likewise graunted me, that there were other churches but copper candlesticks, though they pretended to be golden; namely such Antichristian haeretical synagogues, as of whom it might be sayd, They went out from us, but they were not of us, 1. Joh. 2. 18. 19. And if those petty Antichrists were no golden candlesticks; much less can the great Antichrist with his synagogue, be a golden candlestick; for he farr exceedeth them in idolatrie, heresie and impietie. That An∣tichrist could sit in any true church then, as he sitteth now in the church of Rome, namely as God, and so to be beleeved with his lyes, worshiped, and obeyed; I utterly deny: for that church that so doeth, departeth from Christ the foundation, and denyeth both the Father and the Son, 1 Ioh. 2. 22. 23. and whether it be a particular church, or a more general, it skilleth not: universalitie in worship∣ing the Beast, causeth but universalitie of damnation, Rev. 13. 16. 17. & 14▪ 9. 10. 11.

Obj. Wheras he would be taught how that whorish company that worship the Beast and Dragon, can be the true catholik church and spouse of Christ: though that which J noted before be sufficient for the point in hand; yet let him first remember, how but a litle before he told us, the ca∣tholik church of the now Romish religion, as themselves describe it, hath one part therof on earth, an other under the earth, & a third part in heaven: and now here he speaketh onely of such as are on earth, and those also such as worship the Dragon and beast, Rev. 13. 4. wheras the catho∣lik church in deed conteyneth all churches & people of God from the beginning of the world &c.

Answ. By this then it appeareth, that the church of Rome lyeth apparantly, when she calleth her self the catholik church: and therfore is not the true church or Temple of God. But I would be taught in deed, how that whorish company here on earth which worship the Beast, can be the true church eyther universall or particular.

Here first he asketh whither I think there was no other churches of

Christians catholik or particular wherin Antichrist sate since th'apostasie of the man of syn, but such as worshiped the Dragon and the beast? And who then were the Tabernacle and those that dwelt in heaven, whom the beast blasphemed, and the saintes with whom he made warr 42. monethes, Rev. 13. 5. 6. 7. and of what church they were &c.

Answ. He seemeth to use the word sit in two senses; 1. for op∣pressing, blaspheming, killing the Saincts that resisted Antichrist; and 2. for quiet governing and having in subjection the wicked that beleeve and obey him: with such aequivocations his writings are too full. Such churches or persons as resisted the beast, and whom he blasphemed and killed: they were of God; and of them there is no question. But the other sort given over of God to be∣leeve lyes, and to worship the man of syn as God, like as he shew∣eth him self that he is God; they are not the true church of God, catholik or particular: and of such is the present church of Rome, now i•• question. As for the Saincts that dwell in heaven, whom Antichrist blasphemeth: they are where he is no••▪ in the true church out of which he is gone, both he and his; and therfore doth he persecute them. The scripture by him cite••, Rev. 13. 6. yieldeth a strong argument against his purpose, thus. The true Taber∣nacle, church and heavenly people, are blasphemed and warred against by Antichrist. The church of Rome now, is not blasphe∣med and warred against by Antichrist, but blessed commended & mainteyned. Therfore the church of Rome now, is not the true tabernacle, church or heavenly people.

Obj. Jerusalem came to be a * 1.108 h••••l••t, old in adulteries, and the Jewes to be a † 1.109 synfull nation laden with iniquitie &c. “ 1.110 sonns of the sorceress, the seed of ••he adulterer and the wh••re; a *‘ 1.111 rebellious people &c “ 1.112 transgressing after all the abominations of the heathens and polluting the house of the Lord, &c. yet they were stil notwithstanding the citie, people and temple of the Lord. Esai. 1. 3. & 3. 12. with Ier. 50. 28. & 51. 11 35. 36. 45. 50. 51.

Answ. One findeth a dead and stinking carkess of a man; and to prove it a living man he sayth, Such an one was so and so disea∣sed, he had the burn••ng ague, the palsie, dropsie, the gangrene & the plague: yet was he a living man, therfore this is likewise. Such is the mould of mine opposites argument. For the Papists the worshipers of the Beast are sayd of God to be dead men, Rev. 20. 4. ••. not partakers of the first resurrection; that is, * 1.113 dead in syn, not revived by Christ: now to prove them alive, examples of other

persons and peoples of Israel are alleaged; who because they were great synners, but not dead in syn, therfore these dead men under Antichrist, must be living also. He hath been answered, that the Iewes whiles they continued Gods Church though greatly cor∣rupted, are not fit resemblances of Antichrists church which the holy Ghost calleth no where Iudea, but Babylon, Rev. 17.

Wheras I sayd, † 1.114 The very word Temple (speaking of that wher∣in Antichrist sitteth as God,) leadeth us to understand Antichrists church to be but a counterfeit: shewing this reason, that the Temple in Israel was not the church or people properly, but a sacramentall signe of Gods dwelling with his people, 2 Chron. 6. 2. and of his in∣ward dwelling in their harts by faith, Eph. 3. 17. & 2. 22. so Anti∣christs temple is an outward shew of his presence with that sedu∣ced people, in whose harts he dwelleth by popish faith, and by his spirit of error carying them to damnation: &c. Rev. 13. 4. 14. & 16. 14. 1 Tim. 4. 1. 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. He answereth,

* 1.115 Then when th'Apostle sayth to the church of Corinth, ye are the Temple of God, 1 Cor. 3 16. his meaning should be according to this glose, ye are a counterfeit church. And when Christ sayd, Destroy this Temple, Joh. ••. 19. speaking of his bodie; the word Temple should lead us to understand Christs body to be but a counterfeyt.

Would any man of good understanding and affection have made such inferences upon my words? Doth not the very word God, when it is spoken of Baal, and of images made with mens hands, lead us to understand them to be but counterfeyt gods: or would any adversary, if I had so spoken of Baal and the word God which is applied unto him by the Prophet, 1 King. 18. 27. have wres∣ted my reason against the true God? But sundry such abuses I beare, and forbeare to reply unto; because my opposite cannot now heare his reproof: and to other men it would be fruitless.

Hetherto of th'Apostles phrase, the Temple of God. Now touch∣ing the Man of syn there also spoken of, mine opposer in the second proposition of his argument fore-set downe, sayth. But the Pope of Rome with his hierarchie, is (by † 1.116 their own graunt) the man of syn, of whom the Apostle here speaketh. Other proof of this position he giveth none, but sayth I grant it; which in his understanding I have not granted. For he so divideth the Pope and hierarchie, (which are * 1.117 Bishops, Priests, and Deacons,) from the church of Rome, as he maketh the one, Antichrist and Man of syn: the other Christians,

and men of grace; which how it can be, when both parties are of one and the same faith, worship, religion &c; it passeth my slender capacitie. For if the Bishops priests and deacons have one faith & religion with the people, as it is knowen they have; and the people have the true Christian faith and religion, though corrupted, yet so as they are still under the covenant of grace, and sealed of God therin by baptisme: how should not the same faith give life to the priests or hierarchie, as it doeth to the people? And then, though the hierarchie be Antichrist, the Man of syn, the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, 2 Thes. 2. 3. yet they shall also be true Christians, men of God, and children of salvation.

Now to prove it to be my graunt, he sendeth his reader to 30. pages of my book at once; that if he myss it in one, he may sup∣pose it is in an other, for not one man of many, wil read over so many leaves, for such a purpose onely. Well, howsoever I wil not make nice to call the Pope and his hierarchie, the Man of syn; yea or the Pope alone, the man of syn, because he is the head of that sinfull corporation, and the highest exalted for almightynes & holynes: yet doe I not exclude the people from this body, and give it to the Pope and hierarchie onely, as mine opposite would intimate. Nay the reader shall finde there the contrary, most expressly: for in pag. 76. I wrote thus. The Antichristian synagogue, is by the holy Ghost called a Beast, Rev. 13. 11. which signifieth a kingdome, Dan. 7. 23. it is named also a great citie, Rev. 11. 8. which noteth the largenes of that po∣litie and kingdom. Jt cometh up out of the earth, Rev. 13. 11. as being of this world, (which Christs kingdom, that cometh down from heaven Rev. 21. 2. is not:) and therfore it is called a Man of syn, 2 Thes. 2. 3. and a great whore, Rev. 17. 1. whose head is Abaddon or a Apollyon, Rev. 9. 11. the destroyer of others, and himself the son of perdition, 2 Thes. 2. 3. and they that folow him, are the children of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 12. Againe in pag. 83. I doe not onely shew mine, but mine opposers owne judgment hereto∣fore saying; She (speaking of the church of Rome) being in this for∣lorne estate, she is but a lump of syn, a man of syn, 2 Thes 2. 3. a child of per∣dition. The Beast is not one person, but a kingdom, Rev. 13. 11. Dan. 7. 23. and Mr. Iohnson himself hath acknowledged more then once, that the man of syn, is the false church (and religion) of Antichrist, compared to the body of a man, and consisting of all the partes togither. Treat▪ of the Minist. against Mr. Hilders. p. 7. Apolog. p. 109.

How faithfully now myne opposite hath dealt with me, to make it seem my graunt that the Pope and hierarchie apart from the church of Rome, is the Man of syn, all may see. As for his own former confession, he passeth it over, without approving or dis∣proving what himself hath written.

This point is of weight, to give light to our controversie, for if the whole church, Pope, priests and people, be altogither a man of syn, & son of perdition; then can not any of sound judgment, think they are a true Christian church, or under the covenant of Gods grace.

To shew this therfore; first, the scriptures sundry times spea∣keth of a whole state or company, both governours and people, as of one person, man, woman, or child: as in Hos 1. 4. 6. 9. the three children Iezreel, Lo-ruhamah, and Lo-ammi, signified the three es∣tates of the congregation of Israel, then shortly to follow. So in Rev. 12. 1. a woman signifieth the church of Christ; in Rev. 17. an o∣ther woman signifieth, the church of Antichrist; even as in Prov. 9. 1. 13. the same churches are set forth like two women, Wisdom, and the Foolish woman. In Rev. 12. 5. the Man child which the woman brought forth, meaneth a company of valiant Christians; as fur∣ther appeareth by comparing Esai. 66. 7. 8. where the Woman that travelleth, is called Sion; and the man child in vers. 7. are called Si∣ons children in vers. 8. Secondly, as Christ and Antichrist have their several churches, so these ech of them are called a man: as in Ephes. 2. 15. Christ is there sayd to make in himself, of twaine (that is, of two peoples, Iewes and Gentiles) one new man: where the whole church togither with Christ their head, is called a new man. Ac∣cordingly, Antichrist the Pope, togither with his whole church, is called the man of syn. And as in the new man the true Christian church, Christ the head hath in all things the preheminence: so in the man of syn, the Antichristian church, the Pope (Christs preten∣ded vicar) hath in all things the preeminence, exalted for power & pretended holynes. As the new man the Christian church, is to be esteemed in the state of salvation, though some secret hypocrites and reprobates closely creep in among them here on earth: so the man of syn the Antichristian church, is to be estemed in the state of † 1.118 damnation, though some of Gods elect and hidden ones are in the same, Rev. 18. 4. And this man of syn the Pope and his church, sitteth in the Temple of God, the profession of Christ (whom the Tem∣ple

chiefly figured) and of Christian religion and worship, (even as this beast or kingdome hath two hornes like the Lamb Christ, Rev. 13. 11.) that so under the shew of Christianitie, after the effectual work∣ing of Satan, with all power and signes and lying wonders (2 Thes. 2. 9. Rev. 13. 13. 14.) he may deceive them that dwell on the earth, and draw them into the lake of fyre. Thus much of the Man of syn sitting in the Temple of God. 2 Thes. 2.

Other scriptures he * 1.119 alleageth to confirme his cause, as Ma∣nasses defiling Gods house, 2 King. 21. the Chaldeans defiling the Temple, Psalm. 79. the king of Babylons sitting on the mount of the congregation, Esai. 14. The prophets visions of the Temple polluted, Ezek 8. And the prophesie of Antiochus, Dan. 11. In all which places, I acknowledge the true Temple of God, to be un∣derstood. But his error in applying this to his purpose, I have before manifested. For that Temple was not the people, but an outward ordinance of God set among his people: wheras in his understanding the Temple of God, wherin Antichrist sitteth is the people. 2. That Temple was not infected with syn, but the syn rested in the persons that worshiped in it, or came into it; as I shewed before, from Levit. 16. 16. Wheras the church of Rome is so infected with Antichrists syn, as mine opposite confesseth it to be † 1.120 in most synfull and deep apostasie, and so to be a notorious harlot and idolatress which all the people of God ought to forsake. 3. That temple merely suffred that misusage at the hands of synners, Iewes and Gentiles: even as Christ, the true Temple in his humanitie, & true Christians his members have suffred, at the hands of the Romans, of old heathens and now Antichristians. But to make that temple a type of this malignant church, which togither with her head the Pope, persecuteth Christ and his saincts, and worshipeth creatures, idols and * 1.121 Divils; is altogither amyss. For so we might conclude thus: As the Temple of God though it were defiled with the apos∣tasie & idolatrie of the Iewes and of the Gentiles, with how great abomination soever; yet continued Gods holy Temple still; and could not by any impietie become the Temple of Antichrist or of Satan: so the church of Rome, though it should be defiled with a∣postasie idolatrie prophanenesse atheisme eyther of Antichrist or of Iewes Turks or Pagans; if it should beleeve and receive the religion of Maomet or of Iulian the Apostata; yet should it continue the true church and people of God, and under his covenant of grace.

Behold what favour the church of Rome hath found above all churches under heaven: that if she receive Iudaisme or Paganisme, if she worship the Beast; the Dragon, or Divil himself by open pro∣fession, yet the abideth the church of God: for if Antiochus who set up Iupiter Olympius image in the Temple, had set up also the professed worship of the Divil; yet the Temple should have been Gods holy temple notwithstanding; and so by proportion the church of Rome must be, if this comparison of mine opposites be true. By such doctrine, the whole gospel of Christ is overthrowne. For faith and sanctimonie of life, are the summe of all the gospell: and both of them are destroyed. For though Rome be apostate and departed from the faith, as Paul foretold, 1 Tim. 4. 1. though she beleeve in a wafer cake, and worship it for her God and maker: though she beleeve to have forgivenes of synns, by the abomina∣ble massing sacrifice of her priests, by the pardons and indulgen∣ces of her popes, and to merit salvation in heaven, by wicked works which she doeth, being taught by the Man of syn: though she have many thousands of new Gods and new Christs, even so many as there be Angels and saincts in heaven, and moe too: though she be as filthy in life as Sodom, as idolatrous & malignant against Gods people as were Egypt and Babylon, (unto which the holy Ghost hath compared her, Rev 11. 8. & 14. 8.) yet so long as she wil say to Christ, but as the Divil sayd, Thou art Christ the son of God, Luke 4. 41. that is, so long as she reteyneth the profession of Christianitie; she is the Temple of God, the church of Christ, and under the covenant of salvation.

But he that justifieth the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 16. 15. and woe unto them that say concerning evil, it is good, Esa. 5. 20. Can not men put difference between Gods ordinances given un∣to a people, & the people: themselves that injoy, use or abuse those ordinances? The Temple was an ordinance given unto Israel, as were the altars and sacrifices therin: so God gave unto all the world by Noe, commandements for altars and sacrifices, Gen. 8. 20. unto Abraham he commanded circumcision, unto Christians baptisme, the Supper of Christ &c. All Gods ordinances continue in themselves holy, (till God doe abrogate them,) though men that abuse them, fall to be most unholy, and without God in the world. So the sacrifices of sheep and Oxen were in themselves Gods holy ordinances, howsoever abused by the Iewes in Ierusa∣lem,

by the Israelites in Samaria, and by the heathens in their seve∣rall lands: so circumcision, though profaned by the Sichemites Gen. 34. so baptisme and the Lords supper, though turned by Anti∣christ into abominable idols; remayned and doe remaine in them∣selves Gods holy ordinances, though men have abused them to their damnation: so the Sun moon and starrs continued Gods good creatures, though men made idols of them to themselves. To reason therfore from the creatures and ordinances, unto men which abuse them; and to gather because the creature or ordinance abideth good in it self, therfore the person that abuseth it, abi∣deth good also: or to wrest a type, as mine opposite doeth, from a creature or ordinance of old, to a most synfull people now, and make them alike holy; is an high abuse of Gods ordinances, and a taking of his name in vaine.

Of the Temple in Rev. 11.

MIne opposite * 1.122 proceedeth to speak of the Temple and court in Rev. 11. 1. 2. and to apply it to his present cause. That which he first speaketh of the word Temple diversly used, and mea∣ning not onely the house but the Court yard, or Courts: I graunt unto him. How to apply it, he † 1.123 sheweth himself uncertaine, whe∣ther more generally to the Christian church, or more specially to the church of Rome. Yet every way (sayth he) it wil folow that the state of the sayd church (of Rome) and Christians, is to be esteemed accor∣ding to the estate of the Temple at Ierusalem, and particularly with reference to the court and holy citie given to the gentiles: and therfore is to be accounted the church and citie of God, as the other were his court and citie, though pol∣luted &c. This I deny: the church or people of Rome at this day, is not answerable to the Temple or court, or city of Ierusalem in holynes: but to the gentiles, in profanenes. And I have before manifested his great abuse of that proportion, from the Temple polluted, yet continuing the Lords, and holy in it self; to the peo∣ple apostate and fallen from the Lord, from his faith and worship, to the faith and worship of Antichrist.

In sted of proofs, he offreth things to be considered: The first wherof I leave, as not perteyning to our controversie: though it may seem not agreable, that the most holy place should be omit∣ted as figuring heaven; seeing in the 19. verse, when the Temple

was opened, the Ark of Gods testament was seen in it: and the Ark, was set in the most holy place, 2 Chron. 5. 7. It is true that that place figured heaven, Heb. 9. 24. but it might also figure other things on earth, as the Temple it self, figured both Christ, and the Church, as we have formerly heard.

His second consideration is, whether by the temple of God here, may not be understood the holy place, and figuratively faithfull Christians, and more inward church of God, invisible to men, but seen and preserved of God, &c. And by the Altar and worshipers, be figuratively noted the spirituall worship and mediation of Christ, with faithfull Christians and worshipers (made Priests unto God) who wholly and onely rely vpon Christ &c.

Answ. Seing here are three distinct things, the Temple, the Al∣tar, and the worshipers: it seemeth unfit to confound the first with the last; the worshipers here are the faithful Christians, which serve God in his Temple, (as Rev 7. 15.) and upon his Altar. To make the Temple to signify faithful Christians here, when the worshipers are the faithful Christians here themselves: it ••itteth not the vision. Rather, as the Temple figured Christ in his humanitie, Joh. 2. 19. 21. God manifested in the flesh, in whom God dwelt, & in whom all doe serve the Lord; and as the golden altar of incense figured his mediation, the brazen altar for sacrifice, figured his oblation of himself for his Church: so here the measuring of the Temple, Altar, and worshipers, signifieth the restauration of Christian re∣ligion from the Apostasie of Antichrist; the Temple of God signifi∣eth Christ truely professed for his person, or doctrine of true Chri∣stianitie, & constitution of the Church therein: the Altar is the true doctrine of his oblation and mediation for us; and the worshipers are the faithfull Christians, that worship God in the true professi∣on of Christ and of his mediation and sacrifice, as in the true Tem∣ple and altar of God, contrary to the heresies and abominations of Antichrist.

His third and fourth considerations are, by the Court without the Temple, to be noted in figure the visible church & Christians. By the holy citie (Jerusalem) to be noted in figure oyther the visible church and outward state of Christians more generally, or such as are truly godly and Gods holy church more particularly. By the Gentiles to understand hethens and rebellious Jewes, that is profane and wicked Christians, the Antichristian hierarchi•• and Locusts Rev, 9. &c.

Answ. This is faultie three wayes, first in confounding persons

and other things, as one: secondly in shuffling true Christians and Antichristians as one bodie: thirdly in restreyning the gentiles or heathens (spoken of in Revel. 11. 2.) to the Pope and his hierarchie onely. 1. The thing here shewed in vision, was after the manner of Ierusalem and the Temple of old: there, the Temple was not the people, neyther were the courts, the people, neyther the citie, when it was distinct from the citizens: but they were holy places and signes appointed of God for the people to worship him in & by them. 2. True visible Christians (which he sayth are the court and citie) and Antichristians (or as he would have it the Pope and his hierarchie,) whom the Lord calleth Gentiles or heathen; he would have mixed togither as one body and church, the Antichristian heathens to be the Bishops and pastors, and the visible Christians to be the flock; and this for the space of 1260. yeres, as himself num∣breth the 42. moneths, a day for a yere. Which is contrary to the whole scope of this book of the Revelation; which sheweth the true Christians to be such as are marked and sealed of God, Revel 7. 3. &c. having his name in their foreheads, virgines, and folowers of the Lamb, Rev. 14. 1. 4. such as worship not the Beast, or his image, neyther receive his mark on forehead or hand, Rev. 20 4. whereas by his exposition, the true visible Christians are those that worship the beast, as the church of Rome doeth and have doen these many yeres. 3. That the gentiles should be onely the Pope and hierar∣chie, agreeth neyther with trueth nor type: for whether he respect the rebellious Iewes or faithless Gentiles; it can never be shewed at any time, that they were onely Priests and Levices, or Kings captaines and officers, that trode down Ierusalem, or dwelt in the court without the Temple: but people with priests, and soldjers with captaines; that strange it is from whence he should gather this interpretation. And though many of all sorts have expounded this book; yet never read I of any one, neyther doeth he cite any one man that ever was of his minde, so to interpret these things; but it was his owne singular conceyt.

As for the key which should open the dore to the understanding of this vision, namely, the commandement to measure the Temple &c. with the reed, vers. 1. this he omitteth. But with that wil I begin.

After that God, for the idolatries and other synns, of the Iewes, had delivered the holy citie Ierusalem and the Temple therin, into

the hands of the Gentiles the Babylonians, who first * 1.124 robbed the temple, and caried away all the chief men into captivitie from Jerusa∣lem to Babylon; and afterward, for further synns, broke up the Citie, † 1.125 burnt the Lords house, and the Kings house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and brake down the walls of Jerusalem round about, and caried away the rest of the people that were left in the citie: the Lord pit••ying the desolation of his church, began to restore and reedisie the same; calling his people “ 1.126 to repentance; and unto Zacharie his Prophet, by visions signified that he would *‘ 1.127 returne to Jerusalem with mercies, and his house should be built in it: and shewed him † 1.128 a man with a measuring line in his hand, to measure the breadth and length of Ierusalem, signi∣fying the reedifying of the same; and therupon called his people * 1.129 out of Babylon. He foretold him also of † 1.130 the Branch Christ, that should build the Temple of the Lord. And unto Ezekiel, then in captivity, he likeweise shewed in a vision, a “ 1.131 man like brass, with a line and a measuring reed, wherwith he measured the breadth and heighth of the building which Christ should erect; and this in all the parts therof, as “ 1.132 gates, chambers, windowes, posts, courts, tables &c; and also the * 1.133 temple, posts, dores, walles &c; likewise the † 1.134 utter court, with all things concerning the same. The end of which vision, was to signifie, that in that place he would “ 1.135 dwell in the midst of the sonns of Israel (as before he had by the signe of “ 1.136 Solo∣mons Temple;) and he willed the Prophet, that if the house of Is∣rael were ashamed of all (the evils) that they had doen, †‘ 1.137 he should shew them the forme of the house, and the fashion therof &c. and all the ordinances therof, and all the formes therof, and all the lawes therof; “ 1.138 and let them mea∣sure the patterne.

Accordingly, when God had set his Temple or Tabernacle a∣mong Christians, (as is described in Rev. 4. by the similitude of Moses Tabernacle;) and for the synns of the people, who began to revolt from the faith and to imbrace Antichrist even whiles the * 1.139 Apostles lived, and after their decease, fell more and more from Christ, as by the opening of the seales Rev 6. and by the sounding of the Trompets, Rev 8. is clearly signified: so that the Sun (wher∣with the church had been † 1.140 clothed) was become “ 1.141 black▪ the Moon, bloody; the starrs (the ministers) fallen from heaven to earth; and the heaven it self departed as a scroll tolled togither; and God for the synns of Christians (as of the Iewes of old) had delivered this rebellious people into the hands of the spiritual * 1.142 Babylon; ••••e

synagogue of Antichrist, a † 1.143 Beast (or kingdom) blasphemous, idolatrous, filthy in life, and hating the Saincts, as * 1.144 Sodom, Egypt and Rome when it was heathenish: then God in wrath remembring mercie to a remnant, the election of his grace: began againe to reedify his church. And to signify this, Iohn had in vision a mea∣suring “ 1.145 reed given him, to measure the Temple, Altar, and wor∣shipers; but not the Court, or Citie as yet, because he would renew his church by degrees. Afterward he saw * 1.146 the Citie, gates, & wall therof measured also, when the church should fully be restored.

This reed, which was of † 1.147 gold, signifieth the word of God, or scriptures; wherby all doctrines, ordinances, churches and peoples are to be measured tried and discerned, whether they be the buil∣ding of God or no. For God by his word directed Moses to make the Tabernacle and all the appurtenances, according to the pat∣terne shewed him in the mount, Exod. 25. 40. Heb. 8. 5. and so they were made, Exod 39. 42. 43. Solomon likeweise had the patterne of the Temple, and of the Courts, chambers, treasures &c, the weight of gold for the Candlesticks, tables, bowles, cups &c, as the Lord had made David understand in writing, by his hand upon him, even all the works of that patterne, 1 Chron. 28. 11.—19.

So then the commandment to measure with the reed, the Temple, Altar and worshipers, Rev. 11. 1. signified such a renewing of Christi∣anitie and professors of it, as should be according to Gods word, when they are measured and tried therby, of such as have the Apos∣tle Iohns spirit. But the Court, Citie and Gentiles treading down the same, were to be cast out, and not measured: to signify that the holy doctrines and ordinances of the gospel, abused and troden down by the Antichristian gentiles, can endure no measure or tri∣al of Gods word, but are to be rejected as profane, in their synfull abuse of them. Because as the Gentiles of old, changed the trueth of God into a lye, Rev. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. and when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, but became vaine in their imaginations, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God, into images, Rom. 1. 21. 23. therfore though they reteyned after their profane manner, many of Gods divine ordinances, taught them from Noe; yet no Prophet or man of God, ever measured their Temples, altars, sa∣crifices, Preists or people, but cast them out as wicked: so the Gentiles (the Antichristians) now, having likeweise changed the trueth of God into a † 1.148 lye, and whiles they profess Christ in word,

doe in deed * 1.149 deny him; albeit they tread down and sacrilegiously profane the holy things of God, his doctrines and ordinances of faith, worship, church &c▪ yet are they to be cast out, and left un∣measured, being such as will indure no trial by the word of God. How then doeth mine opposite seek in vaine to measure the church of Rome, and to prove her Gods true church though corrupted, and to be under his covenant of grace: when God here expressly biddeth them to be left unmeasured? How is it, that he pleadeth † 1.150 for a reformation onely, and will have no new building or plantati∣on; when Sodom and Babylon, must be reformed with fyre, that is utterly destroyed; as in the “ 1.151 types of old; so in the thing typed at this day? as it is written, she shalbe utterly burnt with syre; for strong is the Lord God, who judgeth her. Rev. 18. 8. We finde in the type, how after the Babylonians had burned the Temple, when the Iewes returned out of captivitie, they layd againe the foundation of the Temple of the Lord, and then builded it: Ezr. 3. 6. 10. 11. We find also in the Gospel, that Antichrist should destroy the Temple, even to the foundation, which is Christ, 1 Ioh. 2. 22. 1 Cor. 3. 11. And in Rev. 11. there is measuring, as for a new building: yet now we shall have (by these pleaders) Babylon reformed, and no new Temple built, or Ierusalem reedified. If any like to apply this foresayd measuring of the Temple Revel 11. to the defection of the church, rather then to the reedifying of it; I wil not strive here about: ney∣ther wil it (if so it be understood) any thing help the present state of the church of Rome, about which our controversie here is.

By this which hath been sayd, I leave it to the judgment of men of understanding, whether it be more fit to apply these Gentiles to the wicked Iewes, which whiles the true Temple, courts and citie stood; did in hypocrisie abuse Gods holy ordinances Esa. 1. as mine opposite doth apply them: or to the Gentiles of whom the Psalmist complaineth * 1.152 that they had come into Gods inheritance, defiled the Temple, layd Ierusalem † 1.153 on heapes (that is ruinous, as Mica 3. 12.) killed Gods servants, and left them * 1.154 unburied, (as here in Rev. 11. 8. 9. the dead bodies of Gods witnesses, are not suffred to be put in graves:) that had devoured Iakob, and † 1.155 layd wast his dwelling place, for the former iniquities of Israel. Seing that in Esaias dayes, there was no measuring for the new building of the Temple, as was after the captivitie of Babylon then, and in this place: nor casting out of the court, and giving of the citie to

be troden down of the Gentiles for many yeres, as Iudah was * 1.156 gi∣ven into the hand of the King of Babylon, when God † 1.157 forsook his house, and left his heritage, to be destroyed, and troden under foot, seventie yeres. But as of the destruction of the earthly Ieru∣salem by the heathen Romans, Christ sayd: Ierusalem shalbe troden down of the Gentiles, (that is, ruined, & not suffred to be built againe), until the times of the Gentiles be fulfylled, Luke. 21. 24. so of the ruine & wast of this spirituall Ierusalem, by the Antichristian Romans, he sayth, it is given to the Gentiles, and the holy Citie shall they tread down 42. monethes: after which time Iohn seeth the heavenly Ierusalem mea∣sured, that is builded againe, Rev. 21. 15. 17.

But whether we understand it to have reference to former wic∣ked Iewes (called hethens for their hethenish manners,) or to the Babylonian Gentiles: yet hath mine opposite no reason, or colour of reason, to restreyn it to the governours onely, as he doth to the Pope and his hierarchie. For they that trode in the Lords courts. Esai. 1. were the people, as well as the Preists and princes: the peo∣ple of Gomorrha, as well as the princes of Sodom, Esai. 1. 10. and they that ruined Ierusalem, were the Babylonian soldjers, as wel as the King and captaines, 2. King. 25. And he should so have applyed these Gentiles (that tread down Gods holy ordinances touching his church and worship,) to the papists (the Popes marked sold∣jers, that have the * 1.158 number of his name,) and not to the Bishops and Preists onely. For in the beasts armie, there are not onely Kings and captaines which fight against Christ and Christians, but all sorts of men, both free and bond both smal and great, which shal be slayn with the sword of Christ which proceedeth out of his mouth, and all the fowles shalbe fylled with their fleshes; Rev. 19. 17. 18. 21. So not the popish hierarchie alone, but all other of their idolatrous religion, are the Gentiles, in Rev. 11. whom the holy Ghost measu∣reth not amongst his people, but casteth out as profane treaders down of his holy things: though mine opposite measureth them as Gods true church and in his covenant, yet counteth their pas∣tors, (which are as faithfull and holy as they) to be wicked Gen∣tiles.

So the Beast which killeth Gods witnesses, Rev. 11. 7. he expoun∣deth † 1.159 the Antichristian hierarchie & Locusts: which are but the heads, hornes, and cheif members of the Beast. For as in Dan. 7. the * 1.160 Li∣on, is the kingdom of Babel, both princes and subjects; and the

† 1.161 Beare the kingdom of the Persians, and so all the rest; as is there expounded in v. 23. the fourth Beast shalbe the fourth kingdom upon earth, and the ten hornes out of that (Beast or) kingdom, are sayd to be ten kings, v. 24. so the Beast in Rev. 13. is meant of a whole kingdom, and not of governours onely. And the scripture plainly ynough cl••areth this, saying, And they of the people, and kinreds, and tongues, & nations, shal see their dead bodies &c, and shal not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves: and they that dwel upon the earth, shal rejoyce over them, and make merry &c. Rev. 11. 9. 10. So not the hierarchie onely, but popish multitudes also, doe belong to this beast and kingdome, that murdereth the witnesses of Christ. And here note, how mine Opposite himself is driven to confesse that * 1.162 the Church of God, and the Beast, doe in deed differ much the one from the other: but the Church of Rome, both hierarchie and people, are the Beast, as before is prooved: therfore the Church of God, and the church of Rome, doe in deed differ much the one from other; and mine adversarie granteth that which overthroweth his own plea.

This wil yet further appeare by this that foloweth. Whiles the ho∣ly citie lieth ruinous troden under foot by the Antichristian Gen∣tiles, which keep it from being reedified and measured so long a time, 1260. yeres: there is an other great citie which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified, Rev. 11. 8. even Ba∣bylon the great, the mother of fornications and abominations of the earth, Rev. 17. 5. which lyeth not ruinous, but is stately built, * 1.163 dekt and gar∣nished, † 1.164 glorifying her self and living diliciously, which saith in her h••rt, I sit 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Queene, and a••no widow, and shal see no sorow: and this is the great Citie (Rome) which in th'Apostle Iohns time reigned over the kings of the earth, Rev. 17. 18. but after that became a Christian citie or politie, but soon forsook Christ, and were Christians in name (being in deed Gentiles,) and a Catholik church, sitting and reigning over peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues, Rev. 17. 1••. Which albeit myne opposite before laboured to make it differ from the Church of Rome, yet I also * 1.165 before took away his rea∣sons. And here himself yeildeth so much, as wil overthrow him. For▪ Note here (sayth he) that by the great Citie, is meant not onely the* 1.166 citie it self &c. for (as † 1.167 one wel writeth) the citie is not onely the Town or peece of ground, conteyned within the comp••sse of the walls therof, togither with the Citizens and inhabitants, having order and goverment &c. but also the whole jurisdiction and goverment of the cite in all places perteyning therto.

So the streets of this citie reach farr, even to all places, under the jurisdiction therof, and comprehend sundry peoples, and kinreds, and tongues and nations, as here is sayd. Wherupon it is fitly compared to the great citie Babylon &c. Where yet observe further, that the church of Rome, being fallen into deep A∣postasie, and having the man of syn sitting therin as God, who hath the citie for his throne: the things that are spoken of this citie, are also applied to the apostatle estate of that church of Rome, and the other churches that are under the jurisdiction of the prelacie of that Sea, whersoever, and of whatsoever peo∣ple, kinred, tongue on nation they be. Which application therof J doe also ac∣knowledge, as it is observed by and according to the word of God, Rev. 11. 8. with Esai. 1. 10. Ier. 23. 14. Ezek. 16. 2.-46. Rev. 14. 8. and 17. and 18. &c. with Esai. 21. 9. and 48. 20. Jer. 50. and 51. 1.-45. Ezek. 16. 2.-35. and c. 23. Ziaoh. 2. 6. 7.

Thus farr he yeildeth: Wherupon it is evident to all that will see, how this great citie, the glorious church of Rome, that killeth Gods witnesses in it, is a farr different thing from the holy Citie, which that church treadeth down, and keepeth from being reedi∣fied, as the Babylonians having ruinated Ierusalem, kept it from being built againe, during their reigne. So then his comparing of Rev. 11. 8. with Esai. 1. 10. and Ier. 23. 14. seemeth to be an un∣equal match, by which he would make the church of Rome, as truly Gods, as Ierusalem and the Temple were Gods in Esaias time and Ieremies, when wicked Iewes likened to Sodomites and Gomorrheans, worshiped in them. For 1. Ierusalem then was standing, here it is tuined and lyeth unbuilt, unmeasured, cast out from all measuring by the reed of Gods word. 2. Sodom, and Babylon, are never in scripture called the holy citie, as * 1.168 Ierusalem is: yet here he would have that which God nameth Sodom, Egypt, Babylon; to be in deed Ierusalem. 3. Neither Esaie nor Ieremy doe call the holy Citie Sodom or Gomorrha, but the wicked people in that holy citie. Which may fall out in the truest church on earth, that there may as slagitious persons be in it, as any in So∣dom. So in the church of Christ and his Apostles, there was Iudas † 1.169 a Divil. But Antichrists citie hath no other name, then Sodom, Egypt, Babylon, and Rome, by whose power and politie Christ was crucified: and this name is given it spiritually, that is in spirit and trueth; as being no way inferiour, but beyond them rather in all impietie, cloked with hypocrisie. In deed Bellarmine pleading for the Pope, * 1.170 contendeth against Hierom, that Jerusalem might be

called Sodom, and citeth this very text Esai. 1. 10. ye Princes of Sodom: but Mr Iunius (on whom mine opposite so much relyeth, as wee shall see anone) answereth him, * 1.171 It is false. The Prophet calleth not the citie Jerusalem, Sodom or Gomorrhe; but the Princes and people figurative∣ly, princes of Sodom, and people of Gomorrhe. The comparison is made of men, not of places. Likeweise D. Whitakers answering Bellarmine to the same objection, sayth, † 1.172 Neyther doe wee ever read Jerusalem to be called Sodom, or Egypt: this agreeth much more truely vnto Rome &c. J confess that there (in Esa. 1.) the people of the Iewes are for their vices compa∣red to Sodom and Gomorrhe, as also in Ezek. 16. but yet it was not called So∣dom and Gomorrhe spiritually, but figuratively: wheras this citie is called Sodom and Egypt spiritually, that is in a spiritual respect, for spiritual lust, luxurie, blindnes, all which are found in the popish church.

But mine opposite putting no difference between the holy citie Ie∣rusalem ruined; and the great citie Babylon, Sodom, Egypt glori∣ously edified; compareth the phrase of treading the holy citie by the Gentiles, Rev. 11. with treading the Lords courts by hypocritical Iewes Esai. 1. and sayth, it may signify, besides a treading down, or un∣derfoot, a frequent continual conversing in the outward visit le church with their bodies. Which if it be granted, yet this must be granted also, that it is here cast out & not to be measured as Gods true church: which was not the case of Ierusalem and the Courts in Esaies time. And as for the phrase, it is such as may mean no frequent continual conversing at all, but a violent suppressing of the building thereof. For, (to omitt that he speaketh here of treading down the citie, and in Esay, of treading down the Courts) the Gentiles treading down the earthly Ierusalem, Luke 21. 24. meaneth not the frequenting of that place to worship God in. Neyther doth the adversaries tread∣ing down of the Sanctuarie, in Esai. 63. 18. or, of the Sanctuarie and host, (that is the temple and people of Ierusalem) Dan. 8. 13. or the treading down of the Lords portion, Jere. 12. 10. or of his vinyard, Esa. 5. 5. signify a frequenting to doe good in appearance; as did the Iewes in Esai. 1. 11. 12. 13. who came with multitude of sacrifices to honour God and that place of his dwelling. Finally, as he dutst not deny but the Gentiles in Rev. 11. were also figured out by the heathens of old, for he sayth, * 1.173 not heathens alone, as Antio∣chus &c, but synful rebellious Iewes: so he should have observed, that figures agree not in all things. For if I would prove the Antichri∣stians now to be professed heathens, and no church; because An∣tiochos,

and the Babylonians were professed heathens and no church, in comparison with the Iewes; he would deny the conse∣quence: even so his matching them with the true church of God in Iudea, because the wicked of that church were figures of them, is a very weak conclusion.

His exposition of making the Temple, altar, and worshipers to signify the invisible church of Gods elect; and the Gentiles with the Court and holy Citie to be the visible church of hypocrites: a∣agreeth neyther with this place, nor with Esai. 1. For no men can know much lesse measure the invisible church of Gods elect, as Iohn here measured the Temple, altar, and worshipers: this be∣longeth to God alone, who knoweth who are his. Neyther in E∣sai. 1. were there two distinct churches or places in Ierusalem, one wherein the faithful and elect worshiped; and another wherin So∣domites and hypocrites trode the Lords courts. Besides if so it were as he supposeth: what manner of people doth he make the church of Rome which he pleadeth for? a cōpany of Sodomites & hypocrites cast out & unmeasured of God, & of all good men. And how thē are they Gods true church, sealed with his covenāt of pro∣mise? He sayth, † 1.174 the daughter of Sion, left as a cottage in a vinyard &c. Esai. 1. 8. was the faithful church of the sealed and elect. Who ever heard of such an exposition of those words? The daughter of Sion, usu∣ally signifieth the Common wealth or church of the Iewes; as the daughter of Babel, Psal. 137. 8. vvas the Common vvealth of Baby∣lon. And as Esaie here complaineth of the calamities of the church of Iudea by former warrs for their synns; v. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. so where the Babylonians afterward utterly wasted it, Ieremie lamenteth, how “ 1.175 from the daughter of Sion, all her bewty was departed; the Lord * 1.176 had covered her with a clowd, in his anger &c. purposed † 1.177 to destroy her wall; ‘† 1.178 her elders sate on the ground; ',' 1.179 her breach was like the sea, none could heale her; ‘* 1.180 her prophets had not discovered her iniquitie, to turne away her captivitie &c. all which doe concerne the generall state overthrown by the Babylonian; & not the state of the faithful and elect onely.

He *‘ 1.181 setteth down from my former writing against Mr Smyth, my judgement touching this scripture Rev. 11. when I wrote (as he sayth) for the trueth. He traduceth me now as a quite other man: but how justly, the reader may see by the very wordes of mine which he hath set downe. For there I sayd, the cōmandement

to measure the Temple, altar and worshipers, signified the restoring or repay∣ring of Gods church and people, after some destruction, and desolation; as the like visions shewed * 1.182 to Ezekiel & Zacharie, after the destruction of Solomons temple, doe manifest: &c. There I applied the Gentiles in Rev. 11. to the Babylonians and other heathens, Jer. 12. 7. & 20. 4. Esa. 63. 18. Further I † 1.183 shewed, (but this he setteth not downe) that M. S. enought have seen a figure of those Gentiles, Rev. 11. set forth by the Psalmist, *‘ 1.184 O God the gentiles are come into thine inheritance &c. where by Gentiles are not meant the Jsraelites, but Babylonians or other heathen persecutors &c. and that Antichrists church is called †‘ 1.185 Babylon; and Christs, “ 1.186 Jerusa∣lem &c. As M. Io. then well approved of my answer to M. S. so even now he sayth still, * 1.187 I did soundly convince him. And who then wil not see, that M. I. even by his own graunt, is likewise soundly convinced. For as M. S. fetched the type of these Gentiles, from the Israelites: so doeth M I. fetch it from the Israelites in Esai. 1. and contrary to that sound conviction, wil not have it like the restoring of the Temple after the Babylonians had burnt it; but like the af∣flictions of the Iewes, whiles their Temple Courts and Citie stood undestroyed, Esa. 1. So whether of us two, be caried about of every wind, and as reeds shaken hither and thither, (as he † 1.188 intwiteth me,) I leave it unto the prudent reader to judge. As then, so still I hold the holy Citie, Rev. 11. to be meant of Ierusalem, not of Babylon: how mine opposite now hath expounded it, we have seen. As I did then, so still I hold those Antichristian Gentiles Rev. 11. to be an∣swerable to the Babylonians and other heathens, Psal. 79. Jer. 20. 4. Esai. 63. 18. he now wil have them answerable to the Iewes. I then blamed and stil doe, that men should make Gods holy courts, citie and people, to be figures of Antichristians, of their church and worship.

But mine opposite (to make his words seem to hang togither) * 1.189 sayth, that now J teach, that the Temple of God spoken of 2 Thes. 2. 4. is Antichrists Temple, church, bodie, &c. Be it so: yet of that scripture there was no controversie betwen M. S. and me: and as the house of the Lord God of Jsrael in Ezr. 1. 8. is meant of his true ten ple; but the house of their God in Amos 2. 8. and in Hos. 9 8. is meant of an idola∣trous Temple: so by the Temple of God in Rev. 11. 1. may be under∣stood his true Temple, and yet the Temple of God in 2 Thes. 2. may be understood of the Temple of Antichrist. And this I sayd upon mine opposites interpretatiō, which wil have the Temple in 2 Thes. 2.

to mean the people or church of Rome; which are in deed the Gen∣tiles in Rev. 11. the Sodomites Babylonians Egyptians that tread down the Lords holy citie, and have built a new Babel. For other∣weise, if he did understand Antichrists sitting in the Temple of God, to be his treading down of his Temple, as here he treadeth down the holy Citie, having ruined and burnt it, and keeps it from being reedified, as the Babylonians did during their reigne, I would not have contended with him about it. But then his apply∣ing of it to the church of Rome, which the Pope hath builded, honoured, garnished as a most gorgeous harlot: would be altogi∣ther unfit; and agree no better then Babylon did with Sion. But of that place 2 Thes. 2. we have spoken at large before.

Wheras heretofore he pleaded, that Antichrist doth not wholly take away the church of God, and every trueth and ordinance of the Lord: and I answered, Neyther did the Deviltake away every trueth and ordinance of God from among the heathens, but they reteyned many rites of Gods worship received from their fathers &c. First * 1.190 he blameth me as shifting &c. for not saying, the Divil took not wholly away, the church of God from a∣mong the heathens: I answer, if by church, he understand the order and constitution of the church, the heathens strayed not furder from it, then Antichrist hath by his counterfei catholik church: and whosoever wil bring them to the trial, it wil soon appeare. Or, if he understand by Church, Gods people, (as he hath now his people in this Romish Babylon, Rev. 18.) I also say, that the Divil took not away the church wholly from the heathens for God had many elect among them, whom by means he called from heathe∣nish idols, to the true faith: of whom there are many instances of sundry persons in the scriptures; and I doubt not but there were many moe, whose names are written in the book of life. The dis∣persion of Israel among the nations, might bring many heathens to the faith; as we have an instance in Esth. 8. 17.

To that which I sayd, that the Divil did not take away wholly every truth and ordinance of God from among the heathen: he answereth, it is nothing to the purpose, seing they are not the church and people of God, under his covenant neyther doe so injoy any of them.

Answ. First, I spake of the heathens of old, whiles sacrificing was Gods ordinance, as the examples that I alleaged shew. He an∣swereth of the heathens now, whose state is much worse, by refu∣sing or falling from the Gospel. Secondly, his answer is true also

of the Antichristian heathens, Rev. ••1. 2. if it be applied unto them: for they are not Gods church and people under his covenant, neyther doe they so injoy any of them: but they are in the bondage and covenant of Antichrist, as before is proved. So my answer was to purpose, & his reply is but the begging of the question.

Object. Take an instance (sayth he) in one of the particulars which he mentioned, where he sayd that the heathens reteyn baptismes or wash∣ings among them: yet when any of them leave that estate, and come to the faith and church of Christ, they are to be baptised into the Lords name &c. but so may not be doen with those that have received baptisme in the church of Rome, or any other apostate churches, when they leave such estate &c.

Answ. First, he wresteth my words, spoken of the heathens of old, which reteyned baptismes or washings whiles they were Gods ordinances: and applieth them to their washings now, when they are none of Gods ordinances. I sayd, * 1.191 the ordinances of God reteyned in other nations (besides Israel) as Altars, sacrifices &c, and al∣leaged authors, before Christs coming in the flesh: he setteth down these as my words, the heathens reteine &c. Had I thus altered the case, I should have been charged with shifting, and that justly. But I acknowledge not tho legal washings, sacrifices, altars &c. of Gentiles or Iewes to be God's ordinances now, as they were before Christs death. That which he sayth of baptisme not to be repea∣ted, I grant: and so must he have doen for circumcision among the heathens, such as reteyned it for a divine ordinance, as they did their sacrifices. I instanced † 1.192 the Colchians, Egyptians, Ethiopians; and the Samaritans, which latter Mr. Iohnson acknowledged to have still used circumcision, and yet were not Gods true Church. But this he passed over, and answereth not. Now he would bring in the heathenish washings at this day, which is a plaine tergiversa∣tion. But of Baptisme, we shall speak more hereafter.

Of Revel. 18. 4.

TO prove the church of Rome at this day Gods true church, he alleadged Rev. 18. 4, Goe out of her my people &c. I answered, These very words are taken from Jer. 51. 45. My people goe out of the midst of her, where by My people, the Church of Babylon is not meant, but the Is∣raelites, Gods * 1.193 lost sheep, scattred there upon the mountaines and hills, whom

† 1.194 first the King of Ashshur had devoured, and lastly Nebuchadnerar King of Babel had broken their bones, having * 1.195 burned Jerusalem and the temple with fyre, &c. These Israelites figuring Gods ‘† 1.196 elect, are called out of Baby∣lon, which God would utterly ',' 1.197 destroy &c. So from Antichrists church, which is * 1.198 Babylon, Sodom, Egypt, are Gods elect called out: an evident proof, that she is none of Gods church, whatsoever she pretendeth &c.

His replies are, questions. Very well († 1.199 sayth he:) But are not those words My people, the words of the covenant, as J sayd?

Answ. They are; but not of any covenant with Babylon: and consequently not with the church of Rome, which is Babylon at this day; Rev. 17. 5.

2. And were not that people now in Babylon, the church and people of God under his covenant?

Answ. They were Gods people, and his * 1.200 lost sheep there: but their Common wealth & church estate was dissolved, their † 1.201 Tem∣ple and holy citie burned, (when Babylon and Bels temple in it flourished, and was garnished with the ‘* 1.202 holy vessels stollen out of Gods temple.) The Lord had ‘† 1.203 swallowed up all the habitations of Jakob; ',' 1.204 swallowed up Jsrael, and all her pallaces; * 1.205 destroyed his places of assemblie, caused the solemne feasts and Sabbathes to be forgotten in Sion; † 1.206 cast off his Altar, abhorred his sanctuarie. ‘* 1.207 Mount Sion was deso∣late, and the foxes walked upon it. But was Babylon, (which thus abu∣sed Gods people, and burned his Temple,) Gods church? If not, how should the Church of Rome, which now is Babylon ‘† 1.208 the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, which is drunken with the blood of the Saincts: how should she be Gods church, people or Tem∣ple?

3. Had not that people also polluted the Temple of the Lord, and fallen in∣to notorious idolatrie &c. for which they were given by the Lord into the hands of the Babylonians: and were they not stil the Lords church and peo∣ple, &c.

Answ. They were, some of them, as before is shewed. And so Christians having polluted Gods temple of Christianitie, and fal∣len into idolatries and heresies, were given over of the Lord, some into the hands of the Turk (as Israel into the hands of Assur) some into the hands of the Pope (as Iudah into Babel.) And such Israe∣lites as embraced the religiō of the Assyrians & Babylonians cea∣sed to be Gods people actually, til they repented: others that re∣sisted evil and kept the trueth, as * 1.209 Daniel and his brethren; were

Gods holy people. So all in Rome and Turkie that abide in the truth refusing their abominations, are Gods holy people: the rest that have received Maometisme and Antichristianisme, are not Gods people actually; albeit many of them are Gods elect, and shal so be manifested when they come out from them. But mine opposite changeth the state of the question, turning it from Ba∣bylon it self, to Israel Gods people in Babylon; and so from the Church of Rome now Babylon, to the faithful witnesses of Christ therin; of whom none make doubt.

4. Js there not difference to be put between the people of God in Baby∣lon, and Babylon it self? &c.

Answ. Yes; which whiles it is not held unto, we are dallied with. The controversie is about the church of Rome it self, which is Ba∣bylon: the reasons given, are for Gods people (open or secret) in that Babylon. Who seeth not the deceyt? For God hath had his people in Rome, not onely when it was Antichristian, but when it was heathen: and multitudes have been killed for Christ therin, in both estates. This justifieth not, but condemneth Rome, the murderer of the Saincts.

Obj. To make this matter yet more plaine, observe Zach. 2. 6. 7. Ho, ho, come forth &c. Deliver thyself ô Sion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon. This plainly sheweth that Sion is in Babylon: not mount Sion it self &c. but the people of God, that perteyned to Sion: among whom, when God set his Temple, he sayd withall, * 1.210 I wil dwell in the midst of you: shew∣ing that the Temple was a token of his presence among them; a band of the holy and mutual conjunction that was between God and them: whether they were bound to come for to worship God, and to bring their sacrifices.

Answ. In deed this maketh the matter more plaine. For 1. here he grāteth the Temple to have been a token of Gods presence among his people; but when so I applied it in expounding 2. Thes. 2. he resisted me, and would have it there to be the people, the church. 2. This temple the token of Gods presence and band of his com∣munion with his people, God had forsaken. For his people syn∣ning in it by their idols, Ezek. 8. God in wrath sent destroyers up∣on them; Ezek. 9 But before destruction he † 1.211 marked his people on the forehead, that cried out for all the abominations. Which being doen, he * 1.212 slayed to destruction all others not marked, both old and yong, and began at his sanctuarie. Then † 1.213 scattred he coales of fyre over the citie; removed * 1.214 his glorie (the signe of his pre∣sence)

out of his Temple, and from the middest of the citie; to sig∣nifie his departure from amongst them. Then came the king of Babylon Gods * 1.215 servant (to execute his wrath) and performed the vision, in † 1.216 burning both Temple and citie, and carying the people thence into Babylon. So Moses prophesie was fulfylled, Levit. 26. 31.—36. Then both such godly ones as had not been polluted with the abominations in Ierusalem, and had been marked of God for his; such synners also as by their afflictions were brought to re∣pentance, and * 1.217 confessed their iniquitie and the iniquitie of their fathers, and had their uncircumcised harts humbled, and turned unto him with all their hart, and with all their soule; he mercifully respected them, & remembred his covenant towards them. The rest perished in their synns, being given over in just judgment, (whiles they were in that dispersion,) to † 1.218 serve other goods, wood and stone: though yet by his prophets, God warned them not to doe it, Ier. 10. So the Lord set the signe of his gracious presence in the Christian church, Rev. 4. but they soon defiled it by their idola∣tries, & heresies, for which they were chastised, Rev. 6. Wherfore God in justice ready to bring further plagues, marketh and sea∣leth on the foreheads, such as were his, Rev. 7. then his judgments came forth in greater measure Rev. 8. & by a * 1.219 beast (or kingdom) whose chief seat should be in † 1.220 Babylon, that is Rome, he suffered the “ 1.221 Saincts to be overcome, and gave him power over all kinreds and tongues and nations: that such as had not * 1.222 their names written in the book of life, should worship him; and be * 1.223 damned for ever. In which Babylon or Popish church, the Lord hath not∣withstanding his open † 1.224 witnesses, that withstand their abomina∣tions unto the death: and many moe of his elect, whom he “ 1.225 cal∣leth out in his time from that whorish church; and these are the people of God, that perteyn to mount Sion: and wil no more jus∣tifie the state of the church of Rome at this day, then Gods lost sheep of Israel, justified Babylon of old.

Obj. Note here, 1. That the people of God pollute his temple, become apostates and idolaters, and are captived in Babylon.

Answ. But note withall, that they have their temple of God, and holy citie, consumed with fyre; and are caried out of their ho∣ly land, into an other synfull nation, as before is shewed.

2. That thus now Sion is in Babylon, and consequently the Temple of God (so to speak) the people of G. the church of G. is in Babylon.

Ans. So to speak! But the speech is unproper, and God no where speaketh so. The visible Temple was burnt; and they had none with them in Babylon, but Bels temple, none of the Lords. The lost sheep, the people of God perteyning to mount Sion, (as whileere he sayd) were in Babylon. And for his figurative applying of the Temple here, to the people or church; it is amyss: it should be applyed to God himself. For so the Lord sayth by the Prophet, though I have scattred them among the countries, yet wil J be to them as a little Sanctuarie, in the countries where they shal come, Ezek. 11. 16. So the Lord, not the people, was the Sanctuarie or temple in Babylon.

3. Stil they are acknowledged of God, to be Sion, his people &c, though in Babylon.

Answ. So I alwayes and stil acknowledge God to have his peo∣ple in Babylon the church of Rome. But it should be proved (if it were possible) that Babylon is Sion; or the church of Rome, to be the church of God.

4. The Lord calleth them from thence by diverse prophets &c. 5. Being so called, they did not all come togither at once &c.

Answ. These things are true: and so for the Lords calling of his people out of Babylon now. But it is not yet concluded, (not ever wilbe soundly) that the Babylonians are Gods people; except the elect, which belong to mount Sion, though-actually in Baby∣lon.

Obj. There wilbe of Gods people yet called from thence, even then when this Babylon (the citie of Rome) shalbe burnt with fyre, and cast down, never to rise any more. Rev. 18. 4. 8. &c.

Answ. This conclusion is partly true, and partly implieth error. It is true, that there shalbe of Gods people called out of Babylon, til she be utterly cast down. But the errour implied is, that he ma∣keth Babylon the citie (not the church) of Rome: and seemeth also to restreyn it to the citie properly, and to the burning of the ma∣terial citie and houses therof. Wheras this Babylon, is the † 1.226 great Whore, who though her cheif ••ear is in Rome, yet her ecclesta••••ical jurisdiction reacheth over “ 1.227 peoples, and kinreds, and tongues, and nati∣ons. And when the “ 1.228 tenth part of that citie fell; it is not meant of the tenth part of the houses in Rome; but of people in that catho∣lik church. And when God calleth his † 1.229 people out of Babylon: it is not meant out of Rome onely, or Italic▪ but Spaine also and all other places where Poperie reigneth. Neyther is it meant in

regard of civil politie, as if the subjects in Italie, Spaine and other lands, might not remaine in those comon wealthes still; but they are called out from the heresies, idolatries and extravagant juris∣diction of the Romish church. So the civil bondage of the Iewes in the old Babylon, typed the spiritual bondage of Gods people in this new Babylon, the church of Rome: and out of it are men called, not out of the civil state, or material place. For who will deny, but Christian churches may dwel in Spaine, Italie, yea and Rome it self (if the magistrates wil suffer them,) and yet not disobey this precept * 1.230 Come out of her my people. It is a doctrine of grace, and necessarie unto salvation to come out of the church e∣state of this Romish Babylon, but to understand it of the Cōmon wealths estate, and to call men out of it, were a doctrine of rebelli∣on, contrarie to Rom. 13. 1. 1. Pet. 2. 13. 14.

Wheras I concluded, Gods covenant of grace is not therefore with her at all, for she is appointed to damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 8. 12. Rev. 18. 8.—21. but the elect that obey Gods voice calling them out of her, them hee will re∣ceive into covenant, he will be a father unto them, and they shalbe his sonns & daughters, as he hath promised. 2. Cor. 6. 17. 18. He replyeth: As if they were not already under the covenant of God, being his people: or as if they could be the Lords people and yet not be under his covenant. The Jewes knew better when they were in Babylon; and there∣vpon prayed, as in Esai. 63. 17. 18. 19. & 64. 7. 8. 9. Returne to the tribes of thine inheritance &c, we are thine &c. O Lord thou art our father &c.

Answ. The people of God in Rome, being his elect; are under his covenant in regard of his electiō, which was † 1.231 before the world began: but until they be called & come out; they appear not unto men to be under the visible covenant of Gods church, whereof Paul speaketh in the place alleaged, 2 Cor. 6. That the godly Iewes in Babylon, figured Gods elect, I before shewed from Rom. 11. 4. 5. 7. and mine opposite gainsayeth it not. That God calleth the elect his people, even before they know or obey his voice, was shewed him also heretofore, when God sayd to Paul of heathenish Corinth, J have much people in this citie, Act. 18. 10. yet Paul knew not who they were, till after they beleeved by his preaching. So Christ sayd, O∣ther sheep J have which are not of this fold, Ioh. 10. 16. speaking of the elect gentiles, whiles yet they were not sheep actually before men; but wild beasts of the wood. His comparison from Esai. 63. if it be referred to the Martyrs which the church of Rome hath imprison∣ed,

killed, banished for the trueth: is fit, and I acknowledge them visibly under Gods covenant. But referred to them that are one with the church of Rome, in her faith and religion; it is very un∣fitt. For those people of God in Babylon, were in civil bondage, but in freedome of spirit, and not servants to syn: such were * 1.232 Da∣niel, Ananias, and other saints. But these of the Romish church & religion, are in spiritual bondage to Antichrist, and so partakers of his synns, † 1.233 and in state of death, by mans judgement; till they obey their calling and come forth; though God knoweth them before to be his people, by election of grace. By this which hath been sayd, the wise may discerne, what weight there is in Rev. 18. to prove Babylon (the present church of Rome,) to be the church of God, because out of her, God calleth his people. And let all men take notice of the mayn ground of his errour, that he would have Babylon now, to be the civil state or material citie; when in deed it is the ecclesiastical or church. For God calleth not peo∣ples out of their civil states, (it is a doctrine of rebellion so to in∣terpret it, and contrary to Rom. 13:) but from their synfull ecclesi∣astical estate. All civil states, though governed by Popish yea or heathenish magistrates, are sanctified to Gods people, Act. 25. 10. 11. Rom. 13. 1. 2. &c. 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14. 17. they may lawfully continew under them, have the use and benefit of them: they are all of God, and none of them from the bottomless pit or of the Divil, as is the Beast the Empire of Antichrist, Rev. 17. 8. from which God calleth all his people.

Of comparing the church of Rome with Israel.

MIne opposite laboured to strengthen his former reason frō Rev. 18. by saying, And so Jsrael is often called the Lords people in the time of their apostasie, 2 King. 9. 6. &c. I answered, the Question was not hereby prooved. For 1. The Antichristian church is Baby∣lon, Rev. 16. 19 and 18. 2. and out of her, that is Babylon; are Gads people called, Rev 18. 4. Now to prove her Gods church, they flee to Jsrael, wheras the Gentiles were her true types, Rev. 11. 2. 9, 18. though all the wickednes and hypocrisie of apostate Israel, is also found in this Romish Babel.

His reply is, † 1.234 Let the reader judge, whether the point in hand, touch∣ing that phrase of Gods people to imply the covenant of God, be not proved by

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

the example of Jsrael.

Ans. I leave it also to judgment, whether the Question touch∣ing the church of Rome be proved hereby. As for the phrase of Gods people in that church; I never denyed it to imply the covenant of God: to some visibly, as the Martyrs of Christ killed in that church; to other some according to the election of grace, which shal appeare when they obey theyr calling, and are come out of her: as before I shewed.

Moreover (he sayth) the question was about the Temple of God, 2. Thes. 2. wherabout he alleaged that terme and estate of the people of God, Rev. 18. 4. but J flee to Babylon &c.

Answ. A plaine evasion. The question was about the church of Rome, as before I shewed from his own graunt. To justifie her to be Gods church, he alleaged 2 Thes. 2. for one proof; Rev. 1••. for an other: Rev. 18. 4. for a third: and now the state of Israel for a fourth. His other repetitions, I have answered before. I al∣wayes distinguished in Rev. 11. between the Gentiles (the Antichristi∣ans) and the holy citie and court, which they have destroyed & tro∣den under foot, and stil doe. Neyther have I denyed but the ido∣laters in Iudah and Israel, were types of Antichristians in part: but this I sayd and still say, that the more full and perfect type of them, is by the holy Ghost shewed us to be in the Sodomites, E∣gyptians and Babylonians, Rev. 11. & 17. & 18. As the Priests of Aaron were types of Christ, but Melchisedek was a more full and perfect type of him; as the Apostle proveth in Heb. 7.

Againe, if that which he striveth for, were granted him, name∣ly that Israel in apostasie typed out Antichristians; and that Israel was notwithstanding a true church: yet wil it not follow therefore the Antichristian church of Rome, is a true church also. For the apostasie and idolatrie of Rome, is farr greater then Israels, as I have † 1.235 elswhere shewed; and can easily confirme against any that shall gainsay it. 2. Mr. Io. himself maketh “ 1.236 Antiochus and his captaines, (which were of the worst sort of heathens,) to be types and figures of the Pope and his hierarchie (which are the Bishops priests and Deacons of the church of Rome,) as before we have seen. Yet would he not admitt of this conclusion; therfore the Bishops Priests and Deacons of the church of Rome are heathens; as was Antiochus. So his reasoning for Israel, though it were true; will be no sound proof for Rome. Types, figures and similitudes

hold in some things, not in all: and it is a very easy thing to de∣ceive men by figures, similies, allegories. But the plaine doc∣trines in the scripture, they are a sure ground: and if any doe wrest a type or similitude against them, it is to be rejected, what colour soever it hath. Now mine opposite reasoneth not from these doctrines; which would soon end the strife. For the scripture plainely sayth, that Antichrist, the man of syn, is the son of perdition, and all that beleeve his lyes and folow him are damned. 2 Thes. 2. 3. 10. 11. 12. That Antichrist is a lyar, denying both the Father and the Son, 1 Ioh, 2. 22. they that are of God, doe overcome him: they that are of the world, hear him. Hereby is knowen the spirit of trueth, and the spirit of errour; 1 Joh. 4. 3.—6. They that belong to the Lamb (Christ) on mount Sion, have his Fathers name written on their foreheads, Rev. 14. 1. and worship not the beast, nor re∣ceive his mark, Rev. 20. 4. but they that belong to Antichrist, and have not their names written in the book of life, doe worship the beast, and receive his mark, and shalbe tormented for ever, Rev. 13. 8. 16. & 14. 9. 10. 11. But the church of Rome beleeveth Antichrists lyes, worshipeth the Beast and his idols, receiveth his mark, and is partaker of all his abominations. Who now without open inju∣rie, to the word of God, can make this people the true church of Christ, and in the visible covenant of grace? On the other hand, my Opposites reasons are drawen from that figurative phrase the Temple of God, 2 Thes. 2. and the type of apostate Israel; and an ob∣jection cast in the way to stumble at, that else we must be baptised a∣gaine: (as if men that can not tell how to avoyd an inconvenience, must run into a mischief; to justifie those whom God cōdemneth.) And upon these and the like grounds, are his reasons framed; (as may be seen throughout his work;) with some few props of hu∣mane authoritie, to undershore them.

Though this brief answer might serve unto all his discourse a∣bout the state of Israel: yet for to help the weak reader, that might stumble at some things layd in his way; I wil annex a few moe ob∣servations.

Vnder his wonted title of † 1.237 Errours, evasions, contradictions &c, wherwith he chargeth me, this is 1. That the Temple of God 2 Thes. 2. 4. is no more Gods temple, then Ieroboams idol temples in Jsrael, and Bels temple in Babylon: yet also J sayd, it was to be understood of Gods church & people invaded and destroyed by Antichrist &c.

Answ. This his tautologie, I have before answered; and clea∣red my self both of errour and contradiction. For that Anti∣christ should destroy Gods temple and church, I proved by the example of the Babylonians burning the Citie & Temple of God, and captiving his people: and by the measuring of the new buil∣ding, Rev. 11. That this being doen, Antichrist should have an o∣ther Temple and church of his own frame, which he should call Gods and Christs; I shewed by the Beast arising from the sea, and from the earth, with hornes like the Lamb (Christ) Rev. 13. which beast is a kingdom spiritual or ecclesiastical politie, a great whore, Rev. 17. by Antichrist adified, adorned, mainteyned: which stil he pretendeth to be the ancient catholik church, and temple of God.

Now further for Ieroboam that drew Israel into syn, he “ 1.238 con∣fesseth that he was a type of Antichrist: though he sheweth not wherin. But Ieroboams syn was in making a new House (or Tem∣ple) and a new altar to sacrifice in unto God, and new priests, with new signes, as Calves to worship God by: 1 King. 12. In these things then he must be a type of Antichrist: who accordingly (if he answereth to his figure) must erect a new Temple, altar, preist∣hood and signes, differing from Christs, as in deed he hath doen. And that idolatrous house erected for the worship of the true God, not onely the Israelites, but the Prophet Amos, calleth the house (that is the Temple) of their god, Am. 2. 8. as Paul calleth the house wherin Antichrist sitteth, the temple of God, 2 Thes. 2. yet this man blameth me for comparing that Temple with Ieroboams idol temples, which Israel builded when he forgat his Maker, Hos. 8. 14. how justly, let men of judgment consider.

2. His 2. exception is about Babylon, and the Beast, that I make them one with the Church of Rome, and distinguish not Babylon from Sion. This I have before cleared: shewing that the church of Rome is the whore of Babylon, Rev. 17. and I distinguish it from Sion, which he confoundeth with Babylon, being himself in that blame which he would impute unto me. And to teach that God calleth us out of any civil state or goverment, I have formerly pro∣ed to be erroneous and seditious, contrary to the Apostles, Rom. 13. 1 Pet. 2.

3. That Antichrists Apostasie and the church of Rome with him, is much worse then Ieroboams and Israels with him; I con∣stantly affirme: and let the synns of them both be compared, and

it wil soon appear. Did Ieroboam pray unto creatures, as the church of Rome doth to innumerable, even all Saincts and Angels, and some mere fictions? Did Ieroboam hold any of those mani∣fold blasphemous heresies now holden in the church of Rome? Nay let the very Babylonians of old be taken: and I wil undertake to prove that the church of Rome is not behinde them, but in re∣spect of the light of the Gospel revealed by Christ, much worse.

4. I grant that in Pauls time the church of Rome was set in the way of God, and soon after fell into apostasie: but where he chargeth me to say, that the ordinances of God stil reteyned in that church are stollen; he wrongeth me. For I acknowledge not this church now, to be that which was in Pauls time, but a counterfeit, arisen since: a theif, partner with Antichrist, in robbing the church, (as the † 1.239 Babylo∣nians robbed the Temple,) and abusing the ordinances therof to their perdition. But then he objecteth.

Jf the church of Rome should repent &c. they should not reteyn the bap∣tisme and other ordinances of God which she hath, but must part with them seing they are stollen goods. And here he insulteth, asking the Anabap∣tists, how they can ever be thankfull ynough to me, for thus pleading their cause &c.

Answ. If the Babylonians should have repented, and joyned to the church of God at Ierusalem: they there might have had an holy and lawful use of Gods vessels, altars &c, which before they had stollen, and abused: so may these spirituall Babylonians have at this day, if God give them grace to repent, & joyne unto Sion. Here then the Anabaptists wil conne mine opposite but little thank for his gratulation.

5. He calleth it my like errour and iniquitie, to match baptisme and the other ordinances of God in the church of Rome, with the feasts worship and sacrifices of the heathen, who were * 1.240 without Christ and without God &c. These assertions he sayth are mise∣rable and Anabaptistical.

Answ. But why then doth he not refute them by the word of truth? I could as easily call his assertions miserable and Papisticall: but he would take that for no sound conviction. And had he but related mine own words (in that 85. page of my book,) the rea∣der might have seen how little cause he had to exclaime▪ ••. I spake not generally of the heathens feasts, worship and sacrifices, as he would intimate to his reader: but distinctly of those which had been or∣deyned

of God, differing from other of their own devisings. 2. I sayd, the heathens kept Gods ordinance, as well as Rome with their sacrifice of the Mass. He telleth his reader, I match the baptisme &c in Rome, with the worship and sacrifices of the heathen. Is this good dea∣ling so to change my words? But sundry such injuries I must beare. And why may we think, doth he in sted of the Lords supper, (now turned into a Romish mass) put baptisme? But because he think∣eth that he hath colour to plead for one sacrament more then for an other. In handling that point of their baptisme, † 1.241 I instanced this other seale, our Lords supper; and an other ordinance of God, Excommunication: both which he passeth over: yea every where when it cometh in his way, he shunneth it throughout his book, as in this place. He knew well, it was as a red hot yron that would burn his fingers. But of it, we shal speak more, when we come to handle their baptisme. 3. To his reason, I answer: the heathens were in deed without Christ and without God, Eph. 2. and so are these Romish Antichristians, or els the Apostle hath not given us a true rule to discerne Antichrist by, that he denyeth both the Father and the Son: 1 Joh. 2. 22. The hethens reteyned the knowledge of the true God in some mesure, as their writings manifest; and wor∣shiped ignorantly the true God whom th'Apostles preached, Act. 17. 23. so the Antichristians ignorantly worship the true God whom we preach and beleeve; and as ignorantly (by stocks and stones, and prayers in an unknowen tongue like Parrats) as did the heathens of old. The hethens reteyned a knowledge of Christ the Redeemer, figured in the sacrifices ordeyned of God: so, the Antichristians reteyn a knowledge of Christ in name, and signified in the sacraments; but as impiously doe they abuse them by hold∣ing they conferr grace ex opere operato, by the work doen, and other iniquities mixed with them, as did the heathens; and by beleeving and worshiping a Christ made of bread, they surpass the heathens in ignorance and idolatrie.

Finally, had mine opposite read Mr. Bezaes larger annotations on Eph. 2. as he read him on 2 Thes. 2. he might have seen the An∣tichristians very litle inferiour to the heathens without God, even in Mr. Bezaes judgment; which yet I suppose he would not have called miserable and Anabaptisticall, as he doeth in me.

Touching the state of Israel, in my discourse (as he calleth it) he * 1.242 confesseth I have many truthes which he also holdeth: yet some

sleightes, errors &c also mixed: which he instanceth. Seing he yeildeth the rest for truthes▪ I referr the reader to the things * 1.243 there written; which being observed, he may the better judge of our controver∣sie. As first, that we both agree, The covenant between God & man, was alwayes conditional: by the Law, if they † 1.244 did his commandments they should live by them; if they “ 1.245 continued not in all things written in the Law to doe them, they were cursed. By the Gospel, * 1.246 he that beleeveth in the Son of God hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the Son, shall not see life. And all the figurative covenants that Jsrael had, were also conditional, † 1.247 blessings promised to the obedient, and curses to the transgressors. 2. That mans breaking of the covenant, is alwayes “ 1.248 by syn; and so God never brea∣keth covenant. But by punishing and putting from him the rebellious; we may say * 1.249 God breaketh or disanulleth the covenant. Whensoever a people by syn forsake God, and refuse his word calling them to repentance: they cannot have themselves, neyther can other men have concerning them any assurance of their salvation, or that they abide in the covenant of his grace. For whoso∣ever abideth in him, † 1.250 he synneth not: whosoever synneth hath not seen him, neyther knowen him. Be it man or woman or family or tribe, which turne their hart from the Lord, to serve other gods, though they bless themselves in their harts &c. the Lord wil not be mercifull unto them. Deut. 29. 18. 19. 20. These things being plaine by the scriptures, and by him yeilded; with many other things, which I wil not here repeate: he though he could not contradict, yet intimateth notable heresie against me, Whether J doe not in some things, speak so about the covenant, as may establish the righteousnes of works, in some respect. Alwayes remembring that the covenant of God, wherof we speak is this, to Abraham, J wilbe a God to thee and to thy seed after thee; and J wilbe your God, and ye shalbe my people, Gen. 17. 7. & 22. 18. Hos. 2. 23. Zach. 13. 9. with Act. 2. 39. & 3. 25. Rom. 9. 25. 26.

Answ. As I from my hart abhorre that heresie of righteous∣nes by the works of the Law, as that which maketh Christs death in vaine, and abolisheth grace, Gal. 2. 21. Rom. 11. 6. so I trust no e∣qual reader wil gather any such doctrine frō my writings; though this man (without all proof) insinuateth it more then once a∣gainst me. 2. In repeating the covenant, he useth not plainnes, I might say, sinceritie. For those words in Gen. 17. 7. are but one part of the covenant, to weet, on Gods behalf: he should have ex∣pressed the stipulation foregoing, in vers. 1. 2. walke before me, and be thou perfect, and J wil make my covenant between me and thee: and after in

vers. 9. Thou shalt keep my covenant therfore &c. So the other scripture•• by him cited, doe not so fully express the covenant on both parts, as doth Heb. 8. 10. 11. 12. Where both forgivenes of synns, to justi∣fication, and writing of the Law in our harts to sanctification and obedience, are shewed to be the covenant of Gods grace with men.

He * 1.251 taxeth me as for error and contradiction, in seeking to perswade, that God brake the covenant on his part with Jsrael, when all the tribes were togither (Animadvers. p. 88) and yet after (in the same page,) say, that whiles Jsrael was one, they continued Gods church.

Answ. Herein he wrongeth me, (as he too often useth,) and keepeth not my words or meaning, neyther taketh away the rea∣sons from the scripture which I there set down. I spake not of The covenant in generall, as he would give his reader to understand; but of a covenant, and a condition of the covenant. And what I sayd, I proved, from Exod. 6. 4. 5.—8. J have stablished my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan &c. Then God brought them to the borders of the counttie, and sayd, Loe the land is before you, goe up and possess it, Deut. 1. 20. 21. but they † 1.252 were afrayd, and would not goe up, through their unbeleef. Then the Lord was presently * 1.253 wroth, and swore that not one of those transgressors should see that good land: neyther did they, but dyed in the wildernes, Deut. 2. 1. &c. Heb. 3. 17—19. Againe I instanced a condition of the “ 1.254 covenant on Gods part, that he would cast out the Canaanites &c, and on Is∣raels part, that * 1.255 they should make no compact with the inhabi∣tants. But when they brake covenant, and agreed with them † 1.256 for tribute; the Lord also presently brake with them, saying, J sayd, J wil never break my covenant with you &c; but you have not obeyed my voice, wherfore J say also, J wil not cast them out before you &c. Iudg. 2. 1. 2. 3. 20. 21▪ Now what sayth mine opposite to these things: are they not so? He neyther yeildeth to the trueth, neyther could stand before it: but shunning to meddle with my reasons, turneth upon me who shewed them; as the reader hath seen: and in sted of a covenant, and a condition of the covenant, setteth down the covenant, meaning the covenant of grace and salvation: wheras notwithstanding the breaking of these covenants & conditions and other the like, the people by repentance, held fast through faith the covenant of grace. For Moses † 1.257 and Aaron and many other, who for their synns could not come into the land of Canaan, yet are in heaven

through the covenant of grace. And so though some conditions of the covenant were broken, both on their part and on Gods, yet they being brought to repentance continued his church. That herein I neyther wrote error, nor contradicted my self, as he would perswade against me. And these things that fell out in Israel on both parts, touching these figurative promises: doe teach us the like touching the spiritual promises of eternal life, if men break concerning them; as in repentance, faith and holynes, without which men perish, and shall never see God; Luke 13. 3. Act. 2. 38. Mar. 16. 16. Heb. 12. 14.

He next findeth fault, † 1.258 That J shuffle togither the estates of Jsrael, when they were one body, and when they were rent in two. Also whilest Is∣rael was in the land and presence of the Lord, and when they were cast out of his house and presence. Animadv. p. 88. 89. 90. 91.

Answ. The first is a wrong imputation, as the reader may see in the place of my book by him cited. I there blame him for not distinguishing their estate, when they were one, and when they were rent asunder. And though I pass from one to an other, as I was led by answering him, yet confound I them not. But here he dealeth as in the former point: answereth not my reasons wher∣by I convinced him of misapplying his diverse respects, contrary to the words and meaning of the scriptures; and to avoyd if he could his deserved blame, checketh me, but disproveth not what I wrote. Let the reader compare what we both have sayd.

For the second, I confess I did not so distinctly handle the state of Israel whiles they were in the land, and after when they were put out, as I should and would have doen, had I fore-seen his pres∣sing of every leight thing against me. The reason hereof was, that it skilleth not for the point in controversie, (to weet their Circum∣cision) whether we respect them before they were cast out or after, for they were not circumcised the second time in eyther estate. And this mine opposite himself sheweth even in this his last book, where he dealeth against the Anabaptists. For in his Chr. plea p. 27. 28. he sayth, Circumcision once received in the apostasie of Israel, was not repeated againe at their returning to the Lord, and leaving of their idolatrous wayes &c: and quoteth among other scriptures, 2 Chron. 30 ch. and Ezr. 6. 19. 20. 21. Of which, the one speaketh of them that re∣turned in Ezekiahs dayes, whiles the Israelites were in the land: the other of them that had been dispersed among the heathens,

and returned. So I, where I * 1.259 treat of Baptisme, handle those es∣tates indistinctly: which is made a great matter against me, by him that doeth the same thing himself against others. But now, I wil speak of them a part.

The Israelites that rent themselves from Iudah, I take to be a false church; and so continued whiles they dwelt in the land. Af∣ter they were dispersed, and were no church.

The first, I shew thus. The twelve tribes by Gods institution were all one church, both in Moses time when they had the Ta∣bernacle among them, and encamped all round about it, in the order set of God, Num. 2. and after in the land of Canaan, whiles the Tabernacle stood, & when the Temple was built by Solomon: both which were signes of Gods presence and dwelling with his church. And to keep them in this unitie, he commanded all the men of Israel to come joyntly togither from all parts of the land, three times every yere, to worship him and keep their solemne feasts, in that one place which he should choose: and at all other times to offer their sacrifices there, and in no other place; and thi∣ther onely to bring their first fruits, their commanded and their voluntarie oblations; Exod. 23. 14.—17. 19. Deut. 12. 5. 6. 7. Who so did otherweise, blood was imputed unto that man, and he should be cut off from among his people; to keep the people from offring their sacrifices unto Divils, Levit. 17. 3. 4. 7.

Now when the ten tribes revolted and made Ieroboam king, then Israel forgat his maker and builded Temples, Hos. 8. 14. For Iero∣boam took counsel and made two calves of gold, and sayd unto them; Jt is too much for you to goe up to Jerusalem; Behold thy gods ô Jsrael, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt; and he set the one in Bethel, and the other he put in Dan: and this thing became a syn. And he made an house of hye places, and made priests of the lowest of the people, which were not of the sonns of Levi. And he offred on the Altar, which he had made in Bethel. 1 King. 12. 28.—33. And having cast off the Lords Priests & Levites, Ieroboam ordeyned him priests for the hie places, and for the Divils and for the calves which he had made: but such of all the tribes of Israel, as set their harts to seek the Lord God of Jsrael, went to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the Lord God of their fathers: 2 Chron. 11. 14. 15. 16. Thus of one * 1.260 daugh∣ter of Sion, (one ••hurch) there became † 1.261 two women, or daughters: the one, to weet Jerusalem (the tribe of Iudah) the Lord named “ 1.262 Aho∣libah, that is, My Tabernacle in her; the other, Samaria (the ten tribes)

he named Aholah, that is her own tabernacle. So Israel was without the true God, and without a teaching Preist, and without Law, 2 Chron. 15. 3. and the Lord was not with Jsrael: 2 Chron. 25. 7. but at their first fall∣ing away, he threatned by his Prophets, that because Ieroboam had made himself other gods, and molten images, and cast the Lord be∣hind his back, Ieroboams house should be cut off, and taken away a•• dung; and the Lord would smite Israel, and root them up out of that good land which he gave to their fathers, and would s••arter them beyond the river: 1 King. 14. 9.—15. Yet for to shew his pa∣tience towards his people, (whom he had chosen for his, above all peoples of the earth,) and for to save his elect among them, and to make the rest the more inexcusable, he forbare them ma∣ny yeres: and by all the Prophets, and all the Seers sayd unto them, Turne ye from your evil wayes, and keep my commandements & my statutes: yet they would not heare, but hardned their necks, and beleeved not in the Lord their God; but rejected his statutes and his Covenant that he made with their fathers; and folowed vanitie, and became vaine, and went after the heathen that were round about them; and left all the commandements of the Lord their God: therfore the Lord was very angrie with Jsrael, and remo∣ved them out of his sight. 2 King. 17. 13.—18.

From these and other the like testimonies against this people, I gather, that from the time they departed from the Lord, from his Temple, altars and holy signes of his presence with his people in Christ; from his Priests and the lawfull sacrifices at Ierusalem, which were figures of Christ, and from the communion of their brethren the Iewes (which * 1.263 remayned the church of Christ;) and made a new Temple, altar, priesthood and church of humane and synfull institution: that this their church, Temple, preisthood and worship were false. For that is trueth which agreeth with the will and † 1.264 word of God: all humane devices in religion are lyes and vanities.

If it be ••ayd, the Lord himself rent the kingdom from Solomons son, and gave it to Ieroboam, 1 King. 11. 29. 31. and therfore this second church, was also of divine institution. I answer; though God divided the kingdom, yet he divided not the church: there might have been twelve kings over the twelve tribes, (as there were of old twelve princes, Numb. 1. 5.—16.) and▪ yet they should have been one Church. The kingdom or Civil state, is an ordi∣nance immediately under God, Rom. 13. the church or ecclesiasti∣cal

state is an ordinance immediately under Christ the mediator, and he is the head of the bodie the church, Colos. 1. 18. The civil state is above the ecclesiastical, as * 1.265 God is the head of Christ: therfore the Church is to be subject to the Magistrate, the higher power, the minister of God, though he be an heathen, Rom. 13. 1. &c. 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14. for the civil state is not taken away by difference of religion, error, heresie or any apostasie from Christ: but the ecclesiastical state is by such things dissolved, the Candlestick (the church) may be removed, and of a Church of Christ, become a Synagogue of Satan: 1 Joh. 2. 18. 19. Rev. 2. 5. 9. In their civil state, the Israelites were to be subject unto Nebuchadnezar an heathen, when he con∣quered them, Ier. 27. 6. 8. 12. but for their ecclesiastical estate they might never submitt to Nebuchadnezars church, or priests, nor offer to God upon any of his altars. So to Ieroboam as king they might be subject, without dissolving their communion in the mys∣teries of Christ, set in the Temple, altars, priests &c at Ierusalem. Thus this new church and ministerie arising from Ieroboams syn, was not of God; and therfore could not possibly be a true church, which alwayes is a divine ordinance in Christ the head of the same.

Touching their second estate, after that God had called them back unto him † 1.266 by all his Prophets, but they would not heare; and chastised them * 1.267 seven times, and seven (that is many) times for their sinns; hee “ 1.268 brought the land into desolation, and scattred them among the heathen; so † 1.269 the land did spue them out, as it spued out the heathens that were before them: the Lord did put her away, and gave her a bill of divorce, Jer 3. 8. and they were Lo-ammi, not Gods people, neither was he their God, Hos. 1. 9. they were not his wife, neither was he their husband, Hos. 2. 2. In which estate, they abiding * 1.270 without King, Prince, sacrifice, image, ephod, or Tera∣phim, were as “ 1.271 scattred sheepe, devoured by the King of Assyria: and therefore no Church, nor Common wealth, but so broken, that they were not a people. Esai. 7. 8.

The next errour he chargeth me with is; † 1.272 that I say, If they cannot prove Babylon in Chaldea to be Gods Church, when the Iewes were there captived, they shall never prove the Temple of God spoken of in 2. Thes. 2. 4. to be Gods true Church, &c.

Answ. He hath falsified my words, and not answered my rea∣son. Thus I wrote; * 1.273 Their applying of these things to our times, is not in

all poynts aright. For though in this, Antichrists synagogue and Israels doe agree, that neither be Gods true Church: yet the perfect type of Rome, as God describeth it, is Babylon, Rev 17. 18. and we should not be wiser then God. And if they cannot prove Babylon then to be Gods true Church, which was not more deep in sin then now Antichrist is, and which citie had † 1.274 promise and * 1.275 performance of mercie in Christ, at the end, they shal never prove this synagogue of Satan to be Gods true Church, which hath no pro∣mise of recovery or mercie, but prophesies and threatnings of assured destruc∣tion; Numb. 24. 24. Rev. 14. 9. 10. & 18. 8 21. & 19 20. 21. 2. Thess. 2. 8. 12.

Thus men may see what manner of replies he hath made unto me; and when he hath no other thing to say, he flyeth to his won∣ted refuge The Temple of God, and sayth our question and reasoning was about it; as if it were not about the Church of Rome, but about a phrase, that we contended. But hereof I have spoken at large.

For the word Church taken sometime largely, sometime strictly, he † 1.276 taxeth me for omitting this.

Answ. Why should I not omit that whereabout is no contro∣versie. That which Keckerman (whom he citeth) sayth of the Church largely taken, to comprehend both the elect and hypo∣crites, and strictly taken, to comprehend the elect onely, I ac∣knowledge for truth. But it is nothing to our controversie.

For his double regard of apostate Churches, and so of Israel, I yeilded to him that which was truth, and shewed wherein he missed: wherto as he replieth not, * 1.277 but referreth it to the readers judg∣ment: so do I.

I shewed † 1.278 how the Iewes at this day professing the God of Israel, and praying to him, and reading his Law in their synagogues, may be called Gods people in comparison of Pagans that know not God or his scriptures at all, but worship the Sun and Moon, and some the Divil by open profession: yet the Iewes now are not actually in the covenant of grace. And the the Turks that professe one * 1.279 immutable living, true, most wise and high God; and Christ to be sent of God with his Gospel and that he is the Breath or Spi∣rit of God; may in comparison of Julian the Apostata, and Atheists, be cal∣led the people of God and Christians, though indeed they be farr from be∣ing either. So the church of Rome, in comparison with Turkes and Pay∣nims may be called Christians, but are indeed false Christians, &c. To that of the Jewes, he answereth nothing. For the Turks, he † 1.280 maketh it nothing to the purpose, seeing they professe not Christ to be the Son of

God, made Man, that died for our synns, as the Church of Rome profes∣seth, &c.

Answ. It is to the purpose, that in divers respects, and in com∣parison with Atheists, and people that professe not God, or Christ at all: they that are not indeed Gods people, or true Christians, may be called Gods people and Christians: so his double respect•• help him nothing. And for the Church of Rome, I shewed them to be in comparison with Turks, neerer Christ; and so the doctrine there, neerer to salvation then the Mahometans: and I doubt not but God by it saveth some chosen therein: which yet justifieth not their estate to be a true Christian Church; as the reprobates in the true Church, condemne not the estate thereof.

I * 1.281 shewed by many instances, the Church of Rome to be in some things more grosse idolaters then either Iewes or Turkes, or heathens. This he being not able to deny, opposeth, † 1.282 how Jeru∣salem justified Samaria and Sodom, Ezek. 16. Jer. 3. That Tyre, Sidon, and Sodom, shal have easier judgement then Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Caperna∣um. Mat. 11. yet these cities were the Churches and people of God.

Answ. For Ierusalem, the Prophets speak of it sometime as generally wicked; when yet there were many godly, that partaked not with her synns, Ezek. 9. 4. Such as were more openly wicked then Samaria and Sodom, I deny them to be actually then in the covenant of grace to mans judgement; for the Lord appointed them to destruction, Ezek. 9. The cities of Israel in Christs time, were a part of the true Church of the Iewes: yet for refusing Christ, they should have heavier judgement then the heathens: so shall hypocrites in every true Church, have greater punishment then many heathens. But comparison should be made of Church with Church, not of some in the true Church, with the estate of a false church. And that the generall state of the Church of Rome is Antichristian, and so denieth indeed * 1.283 both the Father and the Son; is before proved. And they generally these many years, haue been more grosse idolaters then either Iewes or Turks: therefore their profession of Christ in name, will not prove them to be in the covenant of grace. God testifieth to the Churches of Galatia, Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the Law; ye are fallen from grace, Gal. 5. 4. If they that would be justified by the Law of God, and works of the same, fell from grace: much more they that will be justified by the law of Antichrist, and wic∣ked

workes, are fallen from grace, and have no benefit by Christ. But such is the generall faith of the Church of Rome, beleeving to be justified by the idolatrous workes, which they walk in as they are taught by the Man of Syn, that sitteth as God, in the Temple of God, carrying them to destruction.

Whereas to prove the Temple of God 2. Thes. 2. which he ex∣poundeth the Church of Rome, to be the true Church, he alleaged Zach. 6. 12. 13. Eph. 2. 11. &c. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Rev. 11. 19. I † 1.284 shew∣ed how he misapplied the Scriptures: he repeateth his former an∣swers, which I have formerly resuted. And now he addeth; But to put him from his shifts, let him tel us plainly, when Paul sayth, The Temple of God hath not agreement with Idols, 2. Cor. 6. 16. if yet there be idols set in the Temple of God, as was in the time of Manasseh and Antiochus, whe∣ther now it ceased to be the Temple of God or not. The Scripture sheweth it is the Temple of God notwithstanding. 2. King. 21. 7. Ier. 50. 28. E∣zek. 8. 5. 10. 16. Dan. 11. 31. 38.

Answ. I tell them plainly, that that Temple of God which the prophets speak of, had no agreement with idols; though the wic∣ked set up idols in it by force. But the Church of Rome (which these call the Temple of God) hath agreement with idols, if ima∣ges of silver and gold, wood and stone, a wheaten god in the Masse, and the man of syn which sitteth as God, be idols. For these idols the Church of Rome worshipeth and serveth most synfully: but the Temple of God which the Prophets speake of, never worshiped the Idols set up in it, nor had accord with them. But this is a shift of shifts, and a notorious sophisme in mine opposite, to reason from the materiall Temple of God then, which onely suffered that abuse; to the spirituall Temple, the Church or people now, which are voluntary agents, & worshipers of Idols. By which false argumentation he might even as well conclude, that if the Papists should turn flat Pagans of Antiochus religion, and serve his idols, and be of his faith: yet they should continue the true Church and people of God notwithstanding: because the Temple then, continued Gods true Temple, notwith∣standing all that Antiochus did thereto.

The * 1.285 next point, touching their baptisme, I will anone treat of in particular.

For his † 1.286 objection of salvation now had in the Church of Rome, &c. it was his * 1.287 second main argument for that Church, which I

have before answered: he after his manner repeateth againe and againe the same things, so lengthening his work. I referr the rea∣der to that answer I gave † 1.288 before.

Other things whereby I * 1.289 convinced his doctrine, to beat the path for all licentiousnes, contrary to the plaine Scriptures, which shew, that he that committeth sin is of the Divil; and we know that who∣soever is born of God, sinneth not, &c. 1. Ioh. 3. 8. & 5. 18. whereas (if that he plead for be true) men may be as prophane as Esau, filthy in life as Sodom, idolatrous and sinfull as the Aegyptians and Babylonians, and yet if they wil call themselves Christians, and be outwardly baptized, &c. they shalbe justified as Gods true Church, they and their seed in his covenant of grace, &c. which is to strengthen the hands of the wicked, that he should not returne from his wickednes, by promising him life. Ezek 13. 22. These and other like things, he passeth over, without word of answer. It is ynough for him to cry, the Temple of God, the Temple of God; and to insist upon phrases which may diversly be understood. Whereas the sound plea should be from the doctrines of faith and sanctification of life according; by which the Apostles teach us to discern true Christians from false. And who, that seeketh af∣ter the truth, would not rather insist upon these main grounds taught by our Saviour and his Apostles? Verily, I judge this plea∣ding for Rome, to be an exceeding great sin; because it by conse∣quence overthroweth both faith and holines: seeing misbeleevers and most synfull idolaters as ever were on earth, are justified to be Gods true Church notwithstanding, and in his covenant of grace, contrary to the whole Testament of Christ. It is to make a wide gate and broad way into heaven, and will make men secure in all syn: if they that serve the Man of syn himselfe, worship his idols, beleeve in his heresies, and walk in his wicked works, which hope to merit salvation by them in heaven: may be sayd to be true Christians, and in the state of grace.

Of the state of the Heathen.

WHereas I sayd, † 1.290 J held it presumption for any to limit God, by how smal meanes or measure of faith and know∣ledge he will save a man. Who dares den▪ but God had many elect among the heathens, after he had separated Js∣rael from them? Yea God expresly sayd, when he made Israel his peculiar

people; that yet all the earth was his, Exod. 19 5. which are the words of the covenant * 1.291 generally. Wherefore we leave Gods secret counsels to himself, as he willeth us. Deut. 29. 29. and doe consider onely the visible state of Chur∣ches, by the rules of Gods law and promises.

To this mine opposite sayth, † 1.292 What is it that he meaneth hereby? Jf by the covenant he mean the covenant of grace for salvation, whereof we treat; and think that all people of the world, in all ages and places of the earth are under it: what differeth this from the opinion of the Anabaptists and Armintans touching general redemption? Jf he speak not of the covenant of grace which is for salvation; all may perceive he speakes not to the point in hand.

Answ. My meaning is plaine, that God had his elect among the heathens, as he bath in the Church of Rome: and he could not but see what I intended. By the covenant generally with all na∣tions, I mean the same that himself alleaged * 1.293 whileare from Ke••∣kerman, of the Church largely taken: which he explaineth, the compa∣ny of all those which professe Christian religion or the name of Christ in what manner soever. And thus (sayth he) are all heretikes, schismatikes, and Arians, Papists, Anabaptists, and such like, referred to the Christian Churches▪ So if he understood himselfe, he might understand me, when I spake of the covenant generally. For such large Churches as he describeth, I hold all nations to be, when God made his speciall covenant with Israel. Noe was a Christian, and had the covenant of grace in Christ to him and to his seed, as absolutely as any Christian Church in the Apostles dayes: though the my∣stery of the Gospel was not then so clearly revealed * as it was af∣terward* 1.294 by the Apostles. But for the substance of the covenant, namely Christ, and faith in him, with obedience; it was given to Adam and his seed; to Noe and his seed, Heb. 13. 8. & 11. 1. 2 3. 4. 7. &c. And this covenant of grace in Christ, confirmed by sa∣crifices, as to us now by the sacraments. Which sacrifices all nati∣ons kept the first thousand yeers after Noe, (which was till after Moses death,) as well as the large Christian or false-Christian churches kept the sacraments. Yea let any shew, that any of the heathens (I except not the very Canaanites,) turned the sacrifices into such abominable idolatry, as the Church of Rome hath tur∣ned the sacraments. And for other synns, Antichristians are not behinde them. How freely did Abraham, Isaac, and Jakob live and publickly worship God by altars and sacrifices, in the midst of the

Caananites, Hittites, &c. Gen. 12. 7. & 26. 25. & 35. 6. ••. whereas if they had so doen (according to the true worship of the Gospel) in the Church of Rome now these many hundred yeares; they had been burned for heretickes, as innumerable of Abrahams faith have been. How religiously did the King of Ge∣rar carry himselfe towards Abrahams wife, Gen. 20. in compari∣son of the outragious adulteries and fornications by the chiefe of the Church of Rome, as all histories testifie. Yea God himself ap∣peared unto that King, and appointed Abraham to pray for him, Gen. 20. 3.—7. How honourably did the Hittites intreat Abra∣ham, acknowledging him a Prince of God, and offred him all kindnes, Gen. 23. 5. 6. &c. yet other nations were better then they, Gen. 24. 3. 4. & 27. 46. Look upon Balaam the soothsayer of Me∣sopotamia, even in Moses time: and see how he consulted with Jehovah his God, by altars and sacrifices of Burnt-offrings, such as were used in Israel, Num. 22. 8. 9. 18. & 23. 1. 2. 3. &c. and it will plainly appeare, the heathens had not more degenerated from the religion & worship learned from Noe, then the Church of Rome, hath from that which Paul taught there. Yea there was a better Church in the land of Vz (in all likelihood,) then the Church of Israel was in Aegypt, when they polluted themselves with the idols thereof, Ezek. 20. 6. 7. 8. For in Vz land, Iob was † 1.295 governour, a most godly man as was upon the earth, and a Priest unto the most high God, Iob. 1. 1. 5. 8. & 42. 8. 9. holding firme the faith of Christ his redeemer, and of the resurrection to life, Iob. 19. 25. 26. 27. and free from idolatry, Iob. 31. 26. 27. 28. And what knowledge and religion was then among the Temanites, Shuhites, Naamathites, and Buzites; the friends of Iob that came to visit him, doe shew; Iob. 2. 11. &c. and 32. 2. &c. and notwithstanding their errour in their disputation, they obtained pardon of God in Christ, Iob. 42. 7.—9. And who can tell when the golden Candle∣stickes of Christian churches were removed from those other peo∣ples. Though soon, even too soon, there was a generall apostasie among the nations after Noe, as among the nations after the Apo∣stles times. But among which of them was there a such a Man of Syn reigning at any time, as hath now reigned in the Church of Rome, these many hundred yeares? Wherefore they measure not things by the * 1.296 golden reed, which cast off those Churches of the nations, as wholly prophane and fallen from grace; and yet justifie

this notorious harlot the church of Rome, to be still in the cove∣nant of grace; whose impieties are not inferiour to any of those nations in Moses time, but rather aboue them; for her sins have rea∣ched up to heaven, Rev. 18. 5. And wheras those nations had not the word of God written, but as they learned it by voyce of men, which might more easily be corrupted and forgotten: the church of Rome having the written word, hath despised it; not suffered their children to read or heare it, lest (forsooth) it should make them heretickes: that for a man to have Gods booke, it was as much as his life was worth: so the miserable people, for contempt of Gods holy Law, have been justly given over into Aegyptian darknes, and into most abominable idolatries and heresies, which have drowned men in perdition.

Now that which mine opposite objecteth of the opinion of the Anabaptists, &c. as I reject it for a great errour; so his supposition whereby he would feoff it upon me, is injurious: If I think that all people of the world in all ages and places of the earth, are under the covenant of grace, &c. whereas I spake but of the nations in Moses time, which were not so farr fallen from God, as they were afterward, and now much more. Againe, himselfe pleadeth for the church of Rome at this day, to bee in the covenant of grace: yet I hope he would not say, that all in that church are re∣deemed; otherwise then many reprobates are redeemed, except he should think there are no reprobates. And if the Man of Syn (which himselfe expoundeth the Pope and his Hierarchie) be re∣deemed; which are the chief members of that Church: we must needs acknowledge a very generall redemption.

So where he † 1.297 chargeth me with abuse of Ezek. 16. 8. thou be∣••amest mine: and asketh me, Is this now the case and estate of all the earth with the Lord? I answer, no: it was not then, much lesse is it now. For I sayd, that then God made Israel his peculiar people, Exod. 19. 5. though generally he sayd all the earth was his. But because the earth corrupted their wayes before him, as they did before the ••loud, Gen. 6. 11. 12. therefore God separated to himselfe a peculi∣ar people to be his inheritance. And so I think mine opposite himselfe would confesse, though all that professe Christianitie be Gods Churches in his account, yet the Christian reformed chur∣ches, are Christs peculiar Churches, though all Christendom bee his in a large sense.

Yet he ceaseth not to object, that the heavens are the Lords, Deut. 10. 14. and every beast of the forrest is his, &c. Psa. 50. 10. 11. 12. shal we therefore think (sayth he;) that the beasts are the wife and Church of God▪ ••s Ezekiel speaketh of the Jewes? &c.

Answ. None but beasts would so think. The comparison in Exod. 19. 5. is not between men and beasts, but between men and men. And such men as had all within lesse then a thousand years been Gods wife, and church, and in his covenant of grace. But most of them on their parts fallen from it to idolatry, as Israel al∣so had Ezek. 20. 7. 8. and as the church of Rome, and other chur∣ches within a thousand yeares after the Apostles, have doen. The heathens then were not more fallen from God, then the church of Rome is: mine opposite pleadeth for Rome, because they were a church 15 hundred yeeres before, and Antichrist still sitteth in the Temple of God. I answer him, the heathens in Moses time were all the church nine or ten hundred yeares before, and are still called Gods people, Exod. 19. 5. He replieth, with the instance of Wild-beasts, &c. If I should so have turnd my back upon an argu∣ment, what out-cries would he have made after me?

When David exhorteth all the earth to sing unto the Lord, Psal. 66. 1. & 100. 1. speaketh he to the beasts? When Moses sayth, All the earth was of one language, Gen 11. 1. doth not he mean it of the men of the earth onely, and not of beasts? So in Exod. 19. 5. yee (Is∣raelites) shalbe a peculiar treasure unto me, above all peoples: for all the earth (that is all peoples of the earth) are mine. Where God calleth all peoples his, not onely by creation, as the beasts were his; but by covenant made with them in Noes time, when he smelled the sweet savour of his sacrifice, and promised no more to drown the world; and blessed both Noe and his sonns, and established his covenani with them and with their seed after them; and gave them a sight of his cove∣nant, his bow in the clowd, Gen 8. 20. 21. & 9. 1. 9. 12. 13. which cove∣nant, though the natural benefit of it, extended to the beasts, (as the beasts also had natural refreshing by that water out of the Rock, which to the Israelites was a sacrament of Christ, Numb. 20 8 1 (or. 10. 4.) yet unto men, (and to men onely,) it was a spiritual cove∣nant of grace by Christ, as appeareth by Esa. 54. 8. 9. 10. Rev. 4. 3. and 10 1. 1 Pet. 3. 20. 21. Now the covenant of grace, thus established with Noe, his sonns, and their seed after them; was respected of God in Exod 19. 5. when for the Apostasie of Noes seed, he of his

love made Israel his peculiar, above all other peoples: though some of the Nations were (as in charitie I judge from Iobs histo∣rie,) Gods true churches stil; and in the worst of the nations (as the cursed Canaanites) he had many of his elect, (as he hath now in the church of Rome;) which the examples of Rahab the harlot, the Gibeonites or Nethinims, Vriah the Hittite, Aravnath the Ie∣busite; and many other throughout the scriptures, doe confirme. All men (as th'Apostle teacheth from the heathens confession) are Gods ofspring (or generation,) Act. 17. 28. 29. The Gentile (as the parable shewerh in Luke 15) was brother to the Iew; and God is the God not of the Iewes onely, but also of the Gentiles, Rom. 3. 29. and if the uncircumcised Gentile kept the righteousnes of the Law, his uncircumcision was counted for circumcision, for there is no respect of persons with God, Rom. 2. 10. 11. 26. Act. 10. 34. 35. And as Paul reasoneth, Hath God cast away his people (Israel)? Far be it: for J also am an Israelite &c God hath not cast away his people which he fore∣knew: Rom. 11. 1. 2. So I reason; Did God cast away his peoples of the seed of Noes sonns? Far be it. For Rahab was a Canaanite, Aravnah a Iebusite, Vriah an Hittite; Ebedmelech an Ethiopian, Iether an Ismaelite; and thousands of these and the other nations, which were Gods people whom he foreknew, and saved of his grace in Christ. They which can not answer these things but by instancing beasts; doe want the wisdom which men of God should have.

With like successe (in another * 1.298 place of his book) he answe∣reth touching the Gentiles. For wheras I † 1.299 wrote, The ordinanoes of God which they (the Apostate Israelites) in shew reteyned, could not be unto them the fig••es and seales of the forgivnes of synns, and of life eternal; and therfore were in their use of them, false and deceytfull, as were also the ordinan∣ces of God reteyned in other nations; as * Altars, Sacrifices, Preists, tithes, first fruits, incense, meat-offrings, drink-offrings, feasts, baptismes or washing▪ ••••byntings, excommunications, prayers, vowes, and many the like, wherof all histories doe record, that the Gentiles did reteyn them▪ (* Numb. 23. 1. Pompon. Laetus de Sacerd. T••bull. l. 1. eleg. 10. & l. 2. eleg. 1. 2. Homer. Odyss. 3. & Jliad. 1. Uirgil Aen. 2. Caesar bell. Gall. l. 6.

He replieth, All is to no purpose. For if it be to shew that the Gentiles had Altars, sacrifices, priests &c none doeth deny it. But if it be to shew that these were the Lords ordinances, given by him to these nations, as circumcisi∣on was to Jsrael, for confirmation of his covenant unto them; or that circum∣cision

in Israel, was no more a signe and seale of Gods covenant, and conse∣quently of forgivenes of synns and life eternal, then those were among the hea∣thens &c▪ then all may see, that this scripture is also perverted, and that ney∣ther it nor all the writers in the world, prove any such matter. &c.

Answ. It is easy to say, the scripture is perverted; and shew no rea∣son how. I have before proved from the historie of Noe, & God: covenant of grace with his seed after him; and from the historie of Iob: that all nations had not onely Altars, sacrifices, Preists &c, but had them also as the Lords ordinances given them for confirmation of his covenant, of forgivenes of synns in Christ to come. Whence did Cain and Abel, Noe, Abram, Iakob and Iob; learn to offer first fruits, and beasts, build altars, pay tithes, make vowes &c: but from divine institution taught their fathers from God, and by the fathers to the children? Otherweise they could not have doen them in faith, as of some of them th'Apostle testifieth they did, Heb. 11. which teacheth us so to judge of the rest. And if all other nations had kept the faith as did Iob; their sacrifices had been the seales of forgivenes of synns unto them, as they were † 1.300 un∣to Iob. When they lost their faith, their sacrifices were vaine, and no seale of grace unto them. Now compare Israel in their Aposta∣sie: they made new Temples, new Altars, new Priests, new feasts and signes, which were not onely * 1.301 none of Gods ordinances, but expresly forbidden them by his written Law, Exod. 20. 4. 5. so that they were so farre from having their sacrifices, seales of forgivenes of synns unto them, as they were reputed for bloud unto them, and they were by the doom of his Law, to be cut off for offring them, Levit. 17. 4. Thus having no word of promise, they neither did nor could sacrifice of faith; but their sacrifices were abomina∣ble, as the sacrifices of the heathens: and they sacrificed to divils, not to God, as Moses and the prophets testifie, Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15.

Now for Circumcision; first it was not commanded to the Gen∣tiles, neither was it a seale of the covenant of grace to Noe and his seed; but was first commanded to Abraham and his seed, and houshold, Gen 17. and so to Israel, and such as would be of that Church, and partake of their passover, Levit. 12. Exod. 12. 44. 48. Wherefore it being not commanded to Noes sonns, such of them as were scatered farr off, and heard not of the precept to Abra∣ham: were doubtlesse in the covenant of gracefull, if they abode

in Noes faith; and were saved without circumcision as well as we at this day. Who doubteth of the salvation of the Patriarchs Sem and Heber, who both of them lived till after the ordinance of cir∣cumcision: yet is there no record that they were circumcised. Yea all the Israelites that were born for the space of 40. yeeres in the wildernes, were uncircumcised till Iosuahs reigne, Jos. 5. 2.—6. yet with them in that estate, Moses renewed the covenant, to bee the Lords people, and that hee would bee their God, as he had sworn to their fathers, Deut. 29. 10.—13. And whereas mine op∣posite boldly affirmeth, that all the writers in the world prove no such matter, viz. touching Gods ordinances given to the heathens the sonns of Noe, for signes of salvation: it will appeare otherweise, even by the greatest enemies of the heathēs, the Iewes themselves. Who though they gloried in circumcision, and the Lawes given by Moses; yet thus they write, Jt is lawful for an heathen to offer burnt of∣frings unto God in every place; and he himselfe may offer in an high place, which he hath builded. But it is not lawful (for an Jsraelite) to help him, &c. for behold, we are forbidden to offer without (the Sanctuarie, Levit. 17. And it is lawful to teach them, and to learn them how they should offer to the name of the blessed (God.) Maimony in Misn. treat. of Offring sacrifices, chap. 19. s. 16. Thus by the Hebrewes testimony, the Gentiles might law∣fully use sacrificing in their own lands, on their altars, &c. and the Iewes might instruct them to doe it aright, though they them∣selves might not doe it with them, being restreyned of God. And as for the state of grace, and salvation with God, they also say, Whosoever receiveth the seven commandements (given to the sonns of Noe) [of which I have spoken † 1.302 elsewhere, and whereof circumcision was none;] and doth them; he is of the saincts of the nations of the world; and he hath a portion in the world to come [that is, in eternall life] if he receive them and doe them, because the holy blessed (God) hath commanded them, &c. Maimony in Misn. treat. of Kings. chapt. 8. s. 11. Thus mine opposite needed not to have made it so strange, what I wrote of the state of the Gentiles, nor have called it an idle flourish; had he duly weighed their estate, as Gods word and humane writers bear witnes of it.

But this indeed is admirable (sayth he) that he should account the hea∣thens * 1.303 superstitions to bee Gods ordinances: and yet esteem the circumcision and other ordinances of God had in Israel, to be lying and deceitful signes, &c. Besides in all his bead-roule of Writers, there is no mention at all of circum∣cision,

whereabout our question is, &c.

Answ. 1. I called both the one and the other, the ordinances of God, in respect of their divine institution. The other nations that fell from God: and the Israelites that fell from God: I count them all abusers of Gods ordinances; which were not in their use of them, true signes and seales of eternall life unto them: but false and de∣ceitfull. Thus I match them alike, without respect of persons, as I am taught by the Apostle, Rom. 2. 9. 10. 11. 12. The heathens super∣stitions (if he mean things of their own devising,) I never esteemed Gods ordinances at all; no nor Romes superstitions at this day.

2 That circumcision is not in the bead-roule as he calleth it: hee need not marvell, seeing it was not commanded the heathens, as before I have shewed. It seemeth hee had a speciall fansie to cir∣cumcision above all other Gods ordinances: otherwise, why might not he think that it might be prophaned as much as any other. There was no more holines in it, then in the sacrifices. And the A∣postle sayth, Jf thou be a breaker of the Law, thy circumcision is made un∣circumcision, Rom. 2. 25. what then will it availe, that Israel had cir∣cumcision, when they broke the Law, yea were without the true God, and without Law, 2. Chron. 15. 3. and sacrificed to Divils, Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15. Finally, here he seeketh for circumcision, where it was not to be found: but within three le••es after in my † 1.304 book, I instanced some among the nations circumcised, even by his owne confession; and there he hath passed it over without answer, as if he had not seen it. Such intreatie and worse I bear at his hand with patience. Let me here adde the testimony of a learned man. Mr. Calvin (in his Sermon against idolatrie, upon Psal. 16. 4.) hath these words, There are diverse which at this day use another starting hole: for confessing that it is a detestable thing to mingle themselves with the idolatries of the Paynims, they wil not that this extend it self to the superstitions of the papacie: as though all the impieties of the Paynims had not been the corrup∣tions of the true service of God. From whence I pray you drew the Paynims all their ceremonies, but from the holy Fathers? The mischief was, that they corrupted that which was wel instituted of God. And yet al the abomina∣tions that were in the world, had this goodly cloke of the name of God, and of Religion: but this made them not therefore justifiable, neither might the faithful communicate with them.

Of Mr. Iunius iudgement for the church of Rome.

IN my brief answer to the things which mine opposite alleged from Mr. Iunius (whose treatise they have printed the second time:) he † 1.305 taxeth me for omitting many clauses in that work. But I then and still doe hold it ynough to take away the mayn grounds; which being doen, the other of lesser moment will be also found insufficient.

I shewed * 1.306 by the scriptures, the Church of Rome now, to bee an other, and not that church which was in Pauls time: therefore no just proportion to be between them. In sted of disproving that which I shewed, he (after his manner) † 1.307 asketh a question, Whether J think these (the Man of syn with his worshipers come in the place of the ancient true Church) be the Temple of God, the people of God, un∣der the covenant of God, having the baptisme of God, &c. or whether there be no such there at all, though corrupted and abused?

Answ. I have often told him, and proved by Gods word, that this present church of Rome, is not Gods true Temple or people, under his covenant, having his baptisme: but a false church arisen since, vainly pretending the church covenant and baptisme of Christ. Seeing Gods word moveth them not, let it be lawfull for me to oppose mans authority to mans. D. Whitakers answering Bellarmine, * 1.308 sayth, This church succeedeth the Apostles indeed, but as a den of theeves (doth) the house of God, and as an harlot (doth) the faithful citie. Jt reteineth the chests and coffers wherein of old the tresure was (as Chrysostom elsewhere writeth) but hath lost the treasure it selfe. Jt is no more Bethel (the house of God) but Bethaven, that is, the house of vanitie or lies. Yea Mr. Iunius himself hath thus well written of it, † 1.309 The Church of Christ is sayd to fight against the Pseudo-christian (or falsely called christian) church, over the which Antichrist ruleth. Also, when Bellarmine citeth Tertullian, marveilously praising Rome: Iunius answereth, * 1.310 Not Rome, but the Church: and not this Church, but that which then was, nee∣rer the Apostles times, which cleaved to the truth and simplicitie of Christ. The disputer would deceive, ex elenchi ignoratione. Into the same fall a∣cie doth mine opposite often run, in his dispute against me: and is therefore reproved by Mr. Iunius himselfe.

To the objection of Gods calling in the Church of Rome; bare∣ly affirmed without proof: I shewed from 2. Thes. 2. that the man

of syn sitteth there, calling all to worship him, &c. and from Rev. 18. 4. that God calleth out of her, such as shal bee saved And from Rev. 9. that their Bishops (the ordinary meanes of calling) are fal∣len from heaven, and have the key of the bottomless pit, &c. which Mr. Iunius himselfe hath applied to the popish hierarchie. Mine opposite replieth, † 1.311 that I had not what to answer, but boldly deny that God is there calling as in his Church, &c. In sted of disproving, hee fal∣leth to his wonted questioning: how then there can be salvation to any in that church, &c. Answ. It is a wearines to answer his often de∣mands. Salvation by sundry meanes cometh to Gods elect in all false churches, and in the world. How came Rahab to faith among the Canaanites? Heb. 11. 31. Iam. 2. 25. and other Gods chosen among the heathens. It is one thing for God to call by extraor∣dinarie means; another thing for him to call as in his church, by his ordinary ministerie, which is the thing that I deny in Rome, and they prove it not there.

The distinction between the papacie and the church of Rome; that is, the pastors and the flock of that church; is of no weight to prove the difference pretended: unlesse they were of divers faiths and religions. But when the priests teach lies, idolatries and he∣resies; and the people beleeve, worship and obey them, (as they doe in Rome,) they both perish together, as the scriptures witnes 2. Thess. 2. Rev. 14. 9. 10. 11.

Touching the order or rank of Apostates (to omit his trifling a∣bout his own translation of the word) he * 1.312 sayth Mr. Junius speaks this not of the whole Church, but onely of the papal hierarchie. Be it so: but what proof is brought for that he sayth. It is knowen to all that have understanding of their estate, that the church and people of Rome are apostate from the faith and service of Christ, as are their priests and hierarchie. What shall I need to bring proofes? Mr. Iohnson himselfe here confesseth, and † 1.313 prayeth all to take know∣ledge of it, that the Church of Rome, is fallen into most sinful and deep defection and Apostasie; and so is a notorious harlot and idolatress. If Mr. Iunius say otherweise, and will have the Apostasie to be in the Hie∣rarchie onely, not in the church: let them first agree between themselves, before they trouble others with their contrary pleas. Or let a third be umpier beeween them: Mr. Cartwright, who (in his second Replie to D. Whitgift, pag. 245.) sayth; J would gladly learn where the Lord hath willed us so to cast away the use of our iudgement,

that when men make open profession, that they are members of the Pope, which is Antichrist; yet we must account of them as of members of Christ. Or how this is to iudge wisely, Ioh. 7. 14.

Wheras Mr. Iunius made the papacie, or papal hierarchie to be an ac∣cident growing to the Church, apoyson in the church, a pestilence, a dropsie, a gangrene in the body. I shewed these inconveniences upon their own grant, If the hierarchie be no part of the body, but an accident, a poyson, a gangrene, &c. what shal we think of al the actions of that hierarchy, their mi∣nistration of sacramēts, making of ministers, & whole church administration? They cānot possibly be the actions of the body, of the church, neither of Christ, &c. And now what is become of their true baptisme, and ordination of mini¦sters? And how doth God cal in that Church, as before they reasoned? &c. Here mine opposite chargeth me * 1.314 with trifling and cavilling, &c. as if similitudes should hold in all things.

Answ. A similitude must hold in some things, and in that for which it is alleaged; else it is vaine: to prove the hierarchie none of the Church, this instance is brought, the pestilence, dropsie, gangrene, is none of the body, but an accident. To disprove this, I shew that such accidents can doe no natural functions of the bo∣dy: but the hierarchie doe the naturall functions of the body of the church of Rome, in teaching, ministring the sacraments, &c. therefore they are not accidents, but true members, yea the chiefe of that Church.

Object. The Apostate Jewes are compared to brass and iron, Jer. 6. 28. Ezek. 22. 18. Shal we now conclude against Iudah, to make a nullity of all the actions, ministration, and Churches estate?

Answ. It is a living body that doth actions, and not mettall: if a similie bee given of a living body, and of a gangrene or scab that consumes the life of that body; all in reason will see, that the body doth actions, the scab or gangrene doth none. But in a si∣militude from metall, there is no reason to speak of actions. But thus, the whole company is compared to a lump of metall: the godly are as pure silver, Psal. 66. 10. the wicked are as dross. Psalm. 119. 119. the fire of Gods word, and tribulation, trieth them, 1. Pet. 1, 6. 7. The Finer reserveth the pure metall, but consumeth or casteth away the drosse: thus God threatneth to doe with the Iewes, Ezek. 22. 18.—22. Here to bring in actions of a living body, is quite from the purpose; but in the other similie not. Here I would say, of drosse can be no vessell for the Finer: or, of

brass, yron, and reprobate silver, the Lord maketh no choyce for ves∣sels in his sanctuary. Of like sort are his other wrested similitudes of trees, corne, seed, &c. all which must bee fitted to their proper na∣tures.

But vvhat answer giveth he to the poynt it self? First, he break∣eth out into his charitable termes, saying, Could any Anabaptist write more Anabaptistically then thus, &c. And after sundry reproches, he replieth in Mr. Iunius name, and to my question, Can a scab or gangrene perform any action of a natural body or member? hee giveth no answer, but asketh againe, Can a body that hath a scab or gangrene, per∣forme no actions of a natural body? I answer; yes, it can. And vvhat now will it help his cause? For though the body can doe the na∣turall actions of it: yet it is not possible for the scab or gangrene to doe them. Either therefore the Pope and his hierarchie must be other then accidents, gangrenes, poyson, dropsie, &c. in the church of Rome (as in deed they are the chiefe members of that Whore) or else they can performe no ecclesiasticall action. As for his usuall refuge (when all other faile) the baptisme had in Rome, we shall speak of it in due place. Onely let it here be observed, that this baptisme is there administred by such as are not of the body or Church, (by their own graunt,) but by ulcers, gangrenes, &c. And Mr. Iunius himselfe answering Bellarmine, so urgeth it; saying of the Man of Syn (the popish Hierarchie) * 1.315 he is not properly of the Temple, for the ulcer (sayth he) is not of the body, though it be in the body. So I straine not the similitude beyond the due proportion, if Mr. Iunius his owne reasoning be good.

Object. Of Himenaeus and Philetus it is sayd, their word did eat as a gangrene, 2. Tim. 2. 17. 18. would he then conclude, that the baptisme mini∣stred by them was not true baptisme? &c.

Answ. First, it is not sayd of the men, but of their doctrine, that their word fretted as a gangrene; but Mr. Iunius maketh the very men, ulcers and gangrenes, in the body, but not of it. If the of∣ficers or members of a church teach heresie, that doctrine is as a gangrene; but the persons teaching them are truly officers or mem∣bers of that church, though synfull. But in Rome, the officers are ulcers, not of the body, in his account: so his example is not fit. Se∣condly, if they were by the Apostle delivered to Satan, as is proba∣ble by 1 Tim. 1. 20. then they and their folowers were no true Chris∣tian church, but a synagogue of Satan, to be reckned among the

Antichrists, 1 Joh. 2. 18. 19. and so could not administer true Christi∣an baptisme, to their disciples.

Obj. Where he againe denyeth any calling to be in the church of Rome, and asketh, How God doth call in that church, let him ask it of such of his followers, as have heretofore been of the Priests and members of that church &c.

Answ. He againe wrongeth me (as too often,) saying that I deny any calling to be in that church: it never entred into my hart. I hold there is some calling in the churches of Turks and Iewes, much more, in false Christian churches. I denyed that God is there calling as in his church, which they plead for: that is, God hath not there his ordinary true ministers, but Antichrists hierarchie doth call the people from God. How be it, by some whom God raiseth up of ministers or people, his witnesses whom that church murde∣reth, Rev. 11. 3. 7. and by reading the scriptures and other writings, God calleth his people out of that Babylon. Witness the late Archbishop Marcus Antonius de Dominis, who * 1.316 testifieth, that with∣out persuasion counsel or advise of any man of what sort so ever; he was, by reading the scriptures and Fathers, drawen to mislike and forsake that Roman church. And thus among Turks, Iewes, heathens, I doubt not but God calleth some from them by the light of his word and spirit. Yea not onely in the church of Rome, but by it and the ministerie of it, God calleth his elect: for as the Apostles doctrine in the true church, was to the reprobates the sa∣vour † 1.317 of death unto death, which yet is no condemnation of the true church or ministerie therof: so some groundes of Christianitie, & doctrines in the false church, (by the false ministery, erected to de∣stroy mens soules with heresies and idolatrie;) God, of his wisdom and goodnes, causeth them to turne unto the conversion and sal∣vation of his chosen; which yet is no justification eyther of that church or ministerie. Let this answer once suffice, to all his repe∣titions. And to Mr. Iunius (on whom he so relyeth) I could op∣pose Mr. Calvin (man for man) who sayth, We see the horrible confu∣sion that is in Poperie: but yet there is not any doctrine to pluck men back to God: nay rather the doctrine which is there, doth draw them quite and clean from him. And we see that the Divil hath gotten such sooting there, that all is full of trumperie and illusions, and the loving God is quite forsaken. Sermon 31. on Deut 5. 7.

Obj. * 1.318 What difference Mr. Junius observed between the ministerie sim∣ply

considered, and the hierarchie growen in that church upon it, himself could best have shewed. This here is evident, that in one respect he acknow∣ledgeth the hierarchie to be an order or estate of apostasie in the church, an accident &c. in an other respect, he esteemeth the ministery of Gods holy things to be there, though exceedingly corrupted.

Ans. By such differences and distinctions mine opposite would cary us from the trueth, that I say not from common reason. For he granteth the church it self, the people, to be exceedingly cor∣rupted, with most synfull and deep defection and apostasie▪ yet in another respect to be the temple, the people of God. Now we have the like for the Bishops and Priests, in one respect an order of apostasie, in an other, Gods ministerie. Wherfore then have we been led a∣bout with distinctions, of the ministerie or hierarchie, from the church, the one to be the Man of syn, the son of perdition, the o∣ther to be the Temple of God? The plaine way should have been thus, The Ministers and people of Rome, are in one respect an a∣postatical church, in an other a faithfull church; in one respect the synagogue of Satan; in an other, the Temple of God. But eyther my judgment faileth me, or Mr. Iunius driveth at an other mat∣ter; let men of understanding minde his writing.

Further I answer, by like distinction, we are to put difference be∣tween the Angels that synned, or synfull men, simply considered as Gods creatures, and the poyson of syn which as an accident is growen upon them: and this is true. But shall that their being Gods creatures, free them from damnation which that poyson, that accident syn hath brought upon them? No man of know∣ledge wil so say, Even so, the Man of syn, the Pope, hierarchie & people of the church of Rome, which are all in apostasie from the faith of Christ, and service of God; can not in that estate be judg∣ed heyres of salvation, (except God turne them againe to Christ,) for the scripture hath given sentence of their damnation, 2 Thes. 2. 3. 10. 11. 12.

Against their bare affirmations to prove Rome on Gods behalf altogether a church, a company called of God with his calling by the spirit, and the holy Scripture, &c. And, that God calleth her with his calling, by his spirit and word, &c. I objected the Apostles testimony, God shal send them strong delusion, that they should beleeve lies, 2. Thess. 2. 11. and this is verified by the manifold heresies, idolatries, wherewith the whole body of that Church is poysoned, And strong is the Lord God which wil con∣demne

her, Rev. 18. 8. and with the spirit of his mouth he wil consume that lawless one, 2. Thess. 2. 8.

Mine opposite replieth, † 1.319 Might he not also thus conclude against Iudah in Apostasie, that God did not cal that Church, nor any in it, or by any of them in that estate, alleaging Ier. 5. 30. 31. & 6. 28. 29. 30. Ezek. 13. & 14. ch. And againe, As if there were no difference to bee put be∣tween the Temple of God, and that lawlesse one, 2. Thes. 2. 4. 8. nor between the people of God, and Babylon, Rev. 18. 4. 8. &c.

Answ. I deny not all calling of God in her, as he accuseth me; to it I have before answered. His comparison I deny. In Iudah were the Lords prophets and priests: in Rome, none but the hie∣rarchie, which they say is the Man of syn, no members but ulcers in the body. Let them shew me a Ieremie or Zephanie now in Rome, or a lawfull ministery of God therein; as was in Iudah, till the captivity, reckned by the holy Ghost, 1. Chron. 6. 3.—15. Let them shew me a company that abstaineth from, and crieth out a∣gainst their abominations in Rome, as was in Iudah and Ierusa∣lem, Ezek. 9. 4. or a basket of good figgs, which God acknowledged for his people, Ier. 24. 2. 5. 6. Finally, they still plead for Rome, by the name of Ierusalem; when the holy Ghost calleth it Babylon; Rev. 17. & 18. chap. Such calling as was out of Babylon, I grant unto them. As for the Temple of God, I have before answered their plea from the same.

They pleaded the publick record of holy mariage, the scripture, and the ministerie, &c. I answered, the scripture sheweth no such mariage, but doth defie her as an harlot, Rev. 17. 1. Where is the record that Christ was ever maried to the Beast that came up from the bottomless pit, Rev. 17. 8. If her having the book of holy scripture in an unknown tongue, wickedly abused to maintain her whoredomes and abhominations, and subjected to the interpre∣tation of her * 1.320 Lord God the Pope, bee a record of that holy mariage: the Iewes, which have Moses and the Prophets read and expounded in their mother tongue, have better records, &c.

Mine opposite sayth, The Scripture sheweth record of the mariage of that church, Rom. 1. 7. 8. & 7. 4. & 16. 19.

Answ. It is denyed: for this is not that church, but an other harlot arisen since, falsly boasting to be the same. 2. That church consisted of officers and people, all joyntly maried to Christ, Rom. 12. if this record will serve now for the people of Rome, it will serve also for the Bishop and ministerie of Rome, (the hierarchie) which

they confesse to be the Man of syn, 2. Thes. 2. the great Antichrist▪ so then the Scripture sheweth belike, that Christ and Antichrist have been maried together. And seeing the mariage of Christ with his Church, is by faith, Hos. 2. ••0▪ and the Pope hath still the same faith that the people hath, his mariage standeth as well as theirs. 3. The Scripture sheweth like mariage with the churches of Ephesus, Philippi, Thessalonica, and many other; which have revolted to Mahomet, as Rome hath to the Man of syn: so then we must account those Churches still maried unto Christ, by the same record. But they will deny those churches to continue the mariage; so doe I this. Besides, if he had considered the scripture, Rev. 19 7. 8. he might have seen a new mariage between Christ and his Church: which needed not have been, if the former mariage had continued undissolved, as he supposeth.

Object. Neither is it any thing that he sayth, God doth defie her as an harlot, Rev. 17. 1. For (besides that he putteth no difference between Baby∣lon and the Church or Temple of God) what wil he say to Jsrael, yea to Ju∣dah also and Ierusalem: thinks he not that God defied them also as harlots? Ier. 3. 8. 11. with Esai. 1. 21. &c. yet the scripture shewes record of ••hew mariage with God, Exod. 19. 4. 5. 6.. & Ezek. 16. 8. &c.

Answ. What difference hee would make between the Whore of Babylon, Rev. 17. and the Church of Rome whom himselfe proclaimeth to be † 1.321 a notorious harlot and idolatress, I cannot com∣prehend. Some that are dazeled, may think one thing to be two or three: I find in Rev. 17. but one notorious harlot Babylon; if they grant that she was never maried to Christ, it is all that I de∣sire. That Israel (the twelve tribes) was maried to Christ, and af∣ter ten of them became an harlot, and * 1.322 was divorced, I grant: and so her adulterous sister Iudah▪ afterward. The same I acknow∣ledge for the churches of Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, &c. But since they were divorced from Christ, and maried to Mahomet, and Antichrist; there remaineth no more record of their former mari∣age; ill they returne again to the Lord, out of Babylon unto Ie∣rusalem the holy citie, which is prepared as a Bride, adorned for her husband, Rev. 21. 2.

Of my next words, mine opposite maketh a wonderment. But it exceedeth all (sayth † 1.323 he) that he blusheth not to aske, where is the record that Christ was ever maried to the beast that came up from the bot∣tomless pit? Rev. 17. 8. To the beast! That Christ was ever maried to the

Beast! Did Mr. Junius ever say so? Or thinks he that ever it entred into his thought? Did not Mr. Junius speak expresly of the Church? Wil this man never learne to put difference between the Beast and the Church? between the Man of syn and the Temple of God? &c.

Answ. It seemeth that his wonder made him to forget him∣selfe. Sayd he not even now, it was evident that Mr. Iunius in one re∣spect acknowledged the Hierarchy to be an order or estate of apostasie in the Church; and in another respect he esteemed the ministery of Gods holy things to be there? So then, though the Hierarchy onely be the Beast (as mine opposite thinketh) and though in respect of the Apostasie it is not maried to Christ, yet in respect as it is Gods ministerie, though corrupted, it is maried to Christ. But behold how their doctrines are admirable to themselves. The ministers of the Church of Rome, are of the same religion, faith and holines with the people: the people hee will have to bee still maried to Christ; but the ministers in no weise; he cannot endure to heare of it; especially when it cometh under the scripture names of the Man of syn, or the Beast. And where he asketh if I wil never learn to put difference between the Beast and the Church, &c. I doe put diffe∣rence, though not so great as he would have me: for the Beast, and the whore that rideth him, Rev. 17. though they differ, yet are they so neerly conjoyned, that if one be maried to Christ, the o∣ther is also. But why doth he not teach from the scriptures what the Beast signifieth? I have learned from the Prophet Daniel, that a Beast, meaneth a Kingdom, Dan. 7. 23. and a kingdom by light of reason consisteth of King and subjects, of governours and people; and Mr. Iunius himselfe telleth us so, saying, * 1.324 A kingdom is a multitude of men gathered under one King. As the Christian kingdom therefore consisteth of Christ, his ministers, and people: so doth the Antichristian, of Antichrist, his ministers and people. This Beast hath seven heads and ten hornes, Rev. 17. 3. the ten hornes are sayd to be ten Kings, v. ••2. (as in Dan. 7. 24. the ten hornes out of that kingdom, are ten kings:) these kings are none of the hierarchy: wherefore the whole body of this beast conteineth more then the Pope and his hierarchy. The Lamb against whom the Beast with his hornes fighteth, Rev. 17. 14. Mr. Iunius † 1.325 expoundeth to be Christ and his Church: why may not we by like reason expound the Beast to bee Antichrist and his Church? Finally, the Beast (sayth* 1.326 Mr. Iunius * himselfe) is the Romane Empire, made long agoe of civill▪

Ecclesiastical, the chief head whereof hee maketh the Pope to be••▪ And the Beast of Rome (sayth † 1.327 he) of a civil Empire, is made an ecclesi∣astical Hierarchie. The Whore he expoundeth “ 1.328 to be the spiritual Ba∣bylon, which is Rome: so then, by mine opposites plea, neither did Mr. Iunius say, neither ever entred into his thought, that the ecclesiasti∣cal Roman Empire since the Pope was head of it, or the hierarchy, was ever married unto Christ. As for the Whore, the Church which rideth this Beast, he calleth it the * 1.329 False-Christian Church over which Antichrist ruleth, and Antichrists Church: (which title mine oppo∣site will not beare at my hand:) and that Antichristian Church which the Angel biddeth cast out, and measure it not, in Rev. 11. 12. Mr. Iunius explaineth thus, † 1.330 As if he should say, it belongeth nothing to thee to judge those which are without, 1. Cor. 5. 12. which be innumera∣ble; look unto those of the houshold onely, or unto the house of the living God. Notwithstanding all this, Mr. Iohnson would needs measure it for the true Church, House, and Temple of God: so well doe Mr. Iu∣nius and he accord together.

To a testimony which I alleaged out of D. Fulk, concerning the miserable blindnesse of people in Popery, (of which mine op∣posite sayth, he might have been better aduised,) hee to requi••e me, as he thinketh, * 1.331 alleageth a speech of Mr. Broughtons, who sayth, Millions of millions of Romes clients are saved: Brought. on Rev. 13. 18. p. 203.

Answ. Would he be content that Mr. Broughton should de∣cide our controversie touching the Church of Rome? Thus then sayth that author in the same book; † 1.332 The Popes clients are the taile of the great Dragon. * 1.333 Thence (from Rome) was the Rebellion to arise, Man of syn, Apollyon, &c. to set up, or depose states; and to have a people of his own frame; and to burne the true Temple of God. “ 1.334 The Popes power, driveth the Church, not to be seen for certaine hundreds of yeares. (The Pope † 1.335) wresteth al that is spoken of the true Church, into protection for his synagogue of Satan. * 1.336 Rome passeth al the enemies of the Church, in cruelty and idolatry. Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezar were never so hardened. The prophane Caesars did not so strictly hinder all use of Religion. Rome “ 1.337 hath farr passed the old Babel in idolatry. The Pope † 1.338 followeth al heathen superstition, in name, staffe, ap∣parel of Caesars, and Temples; setting but a face of Christianity upon them. * 1.339 All their doctrine is such, that their Temples, Masse, and dayly profession in al things, is from the unclean spirit: “ 1.340 and their whole policie is a lye. † 1.341 The Beast which is ascended out of Abyssos, that is, al his eorporations, millions of

millions, alpapists, goe from their Abyssos of black ignorance, unto Abyssos Luk. 8. whither the Divils shal come in their time to be tormented for ever & ever. These & sundry the like cōmendations doth the author allea∣ged give of the church of Rome, which mine opposite pleadeth for: and taking hold of a phrase, wresteth it for his purpose, from the mans meaning; who seemeth not to speak of the popish church, but of the ancient Christian; for these are * 1.342 there Mr. Broughtons words. And for Julius the captaine, who was so careful for S. Paul, that for his sake the li••e of the prisoners▪ were spared, Act. 27. God would not record this, but to save millions of millions of Romes clients for S. Paul: but for the unthankeful to S. Paul, and forgers that Peter was at Rome, who never came neere it; he stil reserved Pilats holiness, that Popes selfe-murder should be the reward. Was not here a testimony well alleaged? So in other pla∣ces of his book, he quoteth Mr. Brightman, and others; whose writings directly cross that which he pleadeth for in many things; as they that read the authors may see; and anone I will set downe their sayings. No marvell then if hee wrest my words; as where next he sayth, † 1.343 that that which the Apostle speaketh of the Man of sin, and of them that perish, because they receive not the love of the truth, &c. 2. Thess. 2. 9. J apply (for exclusion from pardon and certain condem∣nation) to the whole Church of Rome, and so to all the members thereof, and that for all ages that either have been, are, or shalbe, ever since the Man of syn was seated there.

Answ. I sayd no more but thus. God (if it were granted that he is the husband of this whore) hath promised her no pardon, but delivered her to Satan, to be seduced, deluded, damned, 2. Thes. 2. 9. 11. 12. I speak not here of those in Rome that have withstood her whoordoms, which have been many; nor of those, to whom at last God hath given repentance unto life, which I hope are moe; nor of other his elect: but of the whore in generall, whose dam∣nation is shewed in Rev. 17. and 18. yea th'Apostle speaketh more particularly, * 1.344 That they all might be damned, who beleeve not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. Behold how hee sayth, they all: which some evill minded man might urge against the Apostle, as mine opposite doth against me. But wise men know that the pro∣mises of life to the true Church pertain not to the reprobates that are in it: so the threatnings of death to the false Church, take not hold on Gods elect which are therein.

Object. Jf this harlot the Church of Rome, was never Christs spouse,

otherwise then all the world was by our first parents Adam and Noe: how then hath she broken the covenant of wedlock if she never were in it? how can she be called a whore in respect of Christ, any more then the heathens, that never knew God in Christ? How can she be sayd to be in Apostasie? &c.

Answ. Of the state of the Gentiles I have spoken before; and proved them to have been all in the covenant of grace in Christ: from Gen. 9. 9. &c. But they generally fell from God to idolatry, (which is whoredom) and apostasie: and were in time rejected of God: who renewed his covenant with one small nation of the Iewes, and yet saved his elect among the Gentiles also. So the Christian Churches planted by the Apostles, soon fell from God, and in time were rejected of God; some given over to Mohome∣tisme, some to poperie. Yet God hath preserved his litle Church, fled into the wildernesse, Rev. 12. and saved his elect also in false Churches. I compare these not with the Gentiles at this day, but with the Gentiles before Christs comming, whiles sacrificing was lawfull; as I am taught of God, Rev. 11. and 17. and 18. with the old Babylonians & Aegyptians. In those times Tyrus was an harlot, Esa. 23. 16. Niniveh was an harlot, Nahum. 3. 4. and so other nati∣ons then by like equitie were harlots: and Rome likewise at this day. Who knoweth not, that a woman which is divorced from her husband, (as Israel was * 1.345 from God,) for whordome, and fol∣loweth that trade still; may still be called a harlot? I deny not, but in a large kind of speech, Rome at this day, may be sayd to have been once maried to Christ, in respect of the Christian church that once was there: but so all the Gentiles were in respect of the co∣venant with Noe. Neither doubt I to say, that the Iewes even now do goe a whoring from their God; for † 1.346 Moses and the pro∣phets so speake of them, yet actually there is now no covenant be∣tween God and them. The out-cries which he maketh unto the Anabaptists to hearken, and to the Reformed Churches to hang downe their heads, &c. I omit, as the gall of bitternes which ran too fast out of his pen.

To prove them the same Church which was in Pauls time, hee * 1.347 citeth Moses prophesies of Israel, Deut. 32. which were the same people & their seed: wheras he should rather have looked on, 2. King. 17. 24.—34. and compared these with the men of Baby∣lon, Cuthah, &c. that came and possessed the Lords land, and re∣ceived some part of Israels religion with their owne old idolatrie:

for so I † 1.348 shewed the present estate of this Popish church. And the example of other churches that were in Corinth, Ephesus &c; loo∣ked upon at this day, will confirme it.

About my answer for the godly fathers of the Iewes, and wic∣ked fathers of these Antichristians, which the holy Ghost maketh to be Gentiles, Sodomites Egyptians &c. Rev. 11. 2. 8. 18. he sayth * 1.349 If J mean this of the citie of Rome, J speak not to the point: if of the church of Rome; then he objecteth Ezek. 16. 3. thy father was an Amorite &c.

Answ. His distinction between the citie and church of Rome, serveth him in no sted. It was true in Pauls time, when the citie was heathen, and a Christian church in it. But now the city is Christian Rome, the Empire is an ecclesiastical empire, as I shewed before from Mr. Iunius own grant.

The Amorites were not those fathers for whose sake the Iewes are loved: but Abraham Isaak and lakob, out of whose loynes the Iewes naturally came. But this church of Rome now, is not the child of that primitive church, eyther in nature or in grace. In place she succedeth them, and so the Mahometists in place succeed other Christian churches planted by th Apostles. And in pretence she is the same Christian church; but as Satan in pretence is an An∣gel of light.

But the strangers (sayth he) that came to Jsrael, in times of sinceritie or of apostasie, were of the church of Jsrael as well as the Iewes, though not of the same natural posteritie. 2 Chron. 15. 9. & 30. 25. 5. 6. 7. Lev. 16. 29. Num. 9. 14.

Answ. But the strangers that wasted Israel, and dwelt by force in their land, though they were taught how they should fear the Lord, by a Priest, yet were not that church, of whom Moses wrote: 2 King. 17. 24. 27. 28. So the Gothes, Vandals, Saracens, &c which overcame Italie Spaine &c and dwelt there, though the priest of Rome taught them his religion, are not the ancient church, of whom Paul wrote. Besides, he hath streyned things too farr: for diverse Christians are at this day apostate and become Iewes: can we say of them, as Paul doth of the natural Iewes, As touching the election, they are beloved for the Fathers, Rom. 11. 28. I understand that speech, of the Iewish nation in generall, not of particulars which perish through unbeleef; as also of the natural Iewes, (who refused the gospel for the time, and stil doe;) and not to concerne their proselytes, which they beget to their apostasie. For there is a spe∣cial

regard to the Iewes, because they were natural branches, though now broken off; as th'Apostle sheweth Rom. 11. 21 24.

Obj. The many changes of the Romane state, and troubles by the Gothes, Uandals, &c: these specially concerne the Romane state touching the citie & Empire &c: wheras our question is onely of the church of Rome.

Answ. As the state of the Empire is changed, yet in some re∣spect is the same, for the Beast was, and is not, and yet is, Rev. 17. 18. so is the church, and ministerie therof; it was, and is not, and yet is. A man may speak to the Bishop of Rome now, as Ezekiel did to the heathen king of Tyre, Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God, &c. Ezek. 28. 13. to weet in his predecessor Huram, which had been a proselyte in the church of Israel, 2 Chron. 2. as the Hebrewes R. D. Kimchi & Sol. Iarchi upon Ezek. 28. and some Christian wri∣ters doe expound it. So I may say to the Pope, Thou hast been a Christian Bishop, a starr in Christs right hand; because such was the Bishop of Rome in Paules time. But mine opposite himself holdeth the Pope and his hierarchie now to be the Man of syn, the son of perdition, and thought it most strange in me, that I should ask when ever Christ was maried to that Beast. Now it is as strange, that hee pleadeth for the whore of Babylon, the Antichristian church. He would exclude the hierarchie or ministerie, because of their apostasie; I also for the same doe exclude the church; for the preists and people of Rome are of one faith and religion; if the one be cut off from Christ, so is the other. It can not be denyed but they all have the mark of the Beast upon them; for to take Mr. Iu∣nius own exposition, The marke of the beast (sayth * 1.350 he) is their Chrisme, by which in their sacrament of Confirmation, they ••oke servile unto themselves, the persons and doings of men &c. and as for the signe left by Christ, (of which Chap. 7. 3.) and the holy sacrament of Baptisme, they make void &c.

Obj. He cannot shew that ever the church of Rome, ceased to be, since it was first planted, but it hath continued stil eyther in sinceritie or apostasie even to this day. Nor can he shew that the Lord hath yet put them out of his covenant, or given thm a bill of divorse, or that they have lest off to baptise in his name.

Answ. Neyther can he shew that the Ministerie ever ceased in that church, but hath stil continued eyther in synceritie or aposta∣sie: or that the Lord put the ministers out of his covenant, or that they have left off to baptise in Christs name. Yet he now excludeth

the ministers from being Christs, he makes them Antichrist, the Beast, the Man of sin, the son of perdition, &c. and is offended that I should speak of their mariage with Christ. And Mr. Iunius ma∣keth them accidents, ulcers, and no members of the body; as we have seen. 2. Neither can he shew that the churches of the Gentiles ceased to be after their first planting, Gen. 9. but continued still either in sincerity or apostasie, even till the Apostles time; and sa∣crificed still unto God, and in his name. Let him shew when old Babylon was divorced from God: and it wil as soon appeare that this new Babylon is divorced also.

Object. The Papists plead that Rome standeth not where it did on the seven hills: and the Pope sits on the other side the river, on the hil Uatic••ne, &c. Jn like sort is the answer for the church of Rome, and the changes in re∣ligion and state, &c.

Answ. Is this a fit comparison, the change of place, and the change of religion? If it be, then as a man going from England to India, is the same man still: so if hee goe from the religion in England, to the religion of the Indians, which is Paganisme, he is of the same religion that he was still. Or, to keep neerer the poynt in hand, the Bishop of Rome at this day, notwithstanding al chan∣ges of his faith and state since the Apostles time, is a true Christi∣an Bishop still: then he is not Antichrist, the Man of syn spoken of in 2. Thess. 2. as mine opposite sayth he is.

Object. Many of those people that made the invasions, became Chri∣stians themselves, and so the Church was increased. Not to speak how the ve∣ry catalogue of the Bishops of the Church of Rome giveth evidence against him. Or wil he say, that though there were Bishops of that Church, yet there was not a church whereof they were Bishops?

Answ. So, many of the Babylonians, Cuthims, &c. that inva∣ded Israel, were taught the manner of the God of Israel, and feared the Lord, and had Priests of Israel, which sacrificed for them, 2, King. 17. ••4. 25. 27. 32. 33. But what sayth the Scripture? Every one that is joyned (to Babylon) shal fall by the sword: their children also shal be dashed to peeces, &c. Esa. 13. 15. 16. And God will cut off from Ba∣bylon, name and remnant, son and nephew, Esa. 14. 22. The catalogue of Bishops (if it will doe him any pleasure) serveth for the Pope, the Man of syn, the great Antichrist, to prove him a true Christian Bi∣shop, successor of Peter, (whom they falsely put the first in their catalogue;) Now he will not have the Hierarchy to be the church,

no•• of the Church, but accidents, ulcers, gangrenes, and I know not how vile: but the people the church, that turned from paga∣nisme to the Pope, or fell with him from Christianity to popery, they are the Temple of God, the Church of Christ, in the covenant of grace. How great partialitie is this in men, to magnifie the people for their faith and religion, and to despise the Bishops and ministers, that are the chiefe teachers and maintainers of the same faith & religion, making them accidents, hang-bies, scabs, ulcers, gangrenes, and all that bad is. So his questions of the time when the Church ceased, are answered with the like, when the ministery ceased? Let the yeare be named when the true Christian ministery was abolished out of the church of Rome, and Antichrist the Man of syn come in the place: & I will answer, in the same year, the people that were fallen with him to the same idolatries, heresies, and to worship him as God in the Temple of God; ceased to bee the true Christian Church, and became a synagogue of Anti∣christ.

Object. His esteeming of the state of the church of Rome in apostasie▪ to be but as the state of the Is••••••elites, Edomites, and as Adonisedek with his Amorites and Jebusites in Jerusalem, is disproved and contradicted by him∣selfe, when he maketh them like Jsrael and Iudah in their apostasie, Ani∣madv. p. 84.

Answ. It is not contradicted by my selfe, neither can it be dis∣proved by any. For my selfe, my words (in the place which hee quoteth) are these. She (the Church of Rome) fell into apostasie soon after Pauls time, for then the † 1.351 mystery of iniquity did work, & * 1.352 many Antichrists were gone out whiles the Apostles lived. For which their aposta∣sie (like Jsraels) when they would not repent (as Christ “ 1.353 threatned some that were new fallen into such sins) the candlestick (the Church) was removed; the Church of Rome, as Paul † 1.354 forewarned, for unbelief was cut off among o∣thers; and for a punishment of their apostasie, God▪ delivered the East Chur∣ches into the hands of Mahomet, and the West Churches into the hands of that false horned Beast, Antichrist: even as Israel and Judah of old for their like syns, were delivered into the hands of the Assyrians and Baby∣lonians.

By which I shew, that as the Christians that fell to Mahome∣tisme, ceased to be Gods true Churches: so they likewise that fell to Antichristianisme. He could not deny the first, nor disprove the latter: for Paul sayth of the Antichristians, God shal send them strong

delusion, that they should beleeve a lie; that they all might be damned, &c. ••. Thess. 2. 11. 12. For the Ismaelites and Edomites, they were Abra∣hams naturall seed: so can no man prove the Church of Rome at this day, or any one in it, to be the naturall seed of the Christians of Rome in Pauls time. The Ismaelites and Edomites were fallen from Abrahams faith: the Church of Rome at this day is much more fallen from the Apostles faith taught to the church of Rome by him. Whosoever will bring them both to the triall, it will soon appeare; but this triall mine opposite every where shunneth. Mel∣chisedek was king of Ierusalem in Abrahams time, Gen. 14. and then none doubteth▪ but there was a true church. Adonisedek was king of Ierusalem in Iosuahs time, Ios. 10. both kings, both of the same citie; by name, the one King of justice, the other Lord of justice, as pretending to be the successor of Melchisedek; and not more departed from his faith, then the Pope is from Pauls.

Obj. Mr. Junius knew that there dwel Jewes in Rome, who are not of the Church; and that the natural posterity of the Saints, may become Jewes, Turkes, Pagans; and sayth, the church may at length cease to be a church, when God ceaseth to call it back, and takes away the evidence of their holy mariage, that is, the holy Scripture out of the hand of the adul∣teresse.

Answ. So Mr. Iunius knew that there dwelt Gentiles in Israel, who were not of the Church, Deut. 14. 2••. But it is well, that nei∣ther dwelling in the place, nor being of the naturall posterity, is a∣ny sure proofe that a people continueth a church. We must then have some other proof, namely continuance in the faith of Christ; which the church of Rome doth not, but is revolted to Anti∣christ and his infidelity. Where he maketh Gods ceasing to cal it back a signe of the churches ceasing: first, it is barely sayd, without proofe. Secondly, it is obscure what calling back he meaneth. For take the thousand yeare after Christ, and see what calling back had Rome. Was it by her owne ministery or hierarchy? They were the Man of syn, the ulcers of the church, they called her fur∣ther from God, but not back from syn. Extraordinary prophets at that time, I think there wil scarce be found any: but grant that there were; doth not God so call back the Iewes and Turks at this day? Doe not some turn to Christianity, and perswade others to turne? Doe not some suffer death among the Turkes, for the truth? Doe not some write bookes now to the Iewes in their own

tongue, to call them back unto God? yet are not the Iewes there∣fore the church. God called back the Gentiles from their aposta∣sie▪ by the Apostles preaching, Mark. 16. 15. and before, he sent Io∣nah to the Ninivites, yea Iudah and Israel he scattered among the heathens, who called them back from idolatry, as Daniel did * 1.355 Nebuchadnezar, and Belshazzar. And the Gentiles seated neere Canaan, had alwayes as much meanes to be called to the Lords † 1.356 mountaine, by the Israelites trading with them, as the church of Rome hath at this day. Besides the prophets that God raised up among the very Gentiles to call them from Idols unto God: as Sibylla, whose prophesies were famous among the heathen Greeks and Romans. But for taking the Scriptures out of the adulte∣resses hand: if ever church had it, Rome hath had it. For the Scrip∣tures were in a manner buried, kept in the closets of the hierar∣chy, the people might not have them in their mother tongue, nor read them, on pain of death. Were the Scriptures ever so taken out of the Iewes hand? Nay they all have them, read and study them more then many Christians. And now that Bibles are prin∣ted, and so common: how is it possible the Scriptures should bee taken out of any heretikes hands, otherwise then they have been from Rome? When God gave Israel * 1.357 the bill of divorce, did he take the Scriptures out of her hand? If not, (as in deed hee did not) then is not this a true rule, that an adulterous church is never di∣vorced, nor ceaseth to be Christs church, till the Scriptures be ta∣ken out of her hands. Mr. Iunius elsewhere hath written better, when speaking of some apostate churches of Christians, as Marcio∣nists, Ualentinians, and others, of whom Hierom sayth, They were not the Church of Christ, but the Synagogue of Antichrist: he readily † 1.358 granteth it, because they denied the fundamental Articles of the doctrine of faith. The like he granteth to Irenaeus assertion, because (sayth * 1.359 he) he spake of heretikes and schismatikes which reteyned not the truth in the foundation thereof. Now let us compare this with the former. Did God cease to call back those heretikes and schismatikes? Were there not many learned Doctors that disputed and wrote a∣gainst them: by whose meanes God still called them to repen∣tance? Or did God take the Scriptures out of those heretikes hands: when they from them and by them pleaded for their here∣sies? Thus the rule which Mr. Iunius hath given us for the church of Rome, agreeth not with himself. And if those heretical churches

were not Christian, but Antichristian synagogues: then is the church of Rome much more, which worshipeth the greatest Antichrist, the man of syn, and denyeth the foundation of Christian religion, beleeving as the Pope beleeveth, who either denyeth the Father and the Son, or els he is not the Antichrist, 1. Ioh. 2. 22. And that the Apostle meaneth not onely of open and direct denyall, but of indirect and denying in deed when by word he professeth Christ, Mr. Iunius himselfe, D. Whitakers, Mr. Brightman and others (that have answered Bellarmines 14. chap. de Rom. Pontif. l. 3.) doe soundly prove. Now as the Pope denyeth Christ, so doth the Whore of Babylon, the Romish church, holding the same here∣sies and idolatries: that if the Pope bee Antichrist, then is the church of Rome an Antichristian synagogue, and not the true church of Christ.

By this also mine opposites insultation † 1.360 against me, as if I wrote errors and contradictions unreconcileable touching apos∣tate churches, is taken away. For as I never denyed, but some a∣postate churches continued true churches, till the candlestick was removed for their impenitencie; so neither could he, nor can any truely deny, but some apostate churches are mere synagogues of Satan: as those Antichrists mentioned 1. Ioh. 2. 19. & those hereti∣cal churches whō Mr. Iunius himself denieth to be true Christian churches, because they reteyned not the foundation. And such by necessarie consequence, is the church of Rome at this day. But it it is a needlesse and wearisome labour to follow mine opposite in his tautologies and repetitions of the same things againe and a∣gaine, to inlarge his work, besides his manifold reproches.

I sayd * 1.361 of this Romane church, It is not the woman fled into the wilderness▪ Rev. 12. 14. but another woman or citie, reigning over the King's of the earth, Rev. 17. 1. 18. &c.

What then, (sayth † 1.362 he) difference is to be put between the inward parts of the Temple, and the outward; the parts measured, and the parts unmea∣sured, between Gods Temple, Altar, and worshipers therein, Rev. 11. 1. and the court of the Temple given to the Gentiles, and the holy citie trode downe by them 42. moneths, v. 2. If it be not one of these, shall it therefore be none of them? Jf it be not the inward part of the Temple, wil it f••llow it is not the outward? &c.

Answ. He should have sayd, though she be not the company of worshipers of God, whom he measureth▪ yet may she be the

company of Gentiles that tread downe Gods courts and ci∣ty, whom he casteth out as unmeasured. But he leaveth the com∣parison of persons, and runneth to things, Gods ordinances which she abuseth. Of that Scripture, Rev. 11. we have spoken * 1.363 before. Of these two women in Rev. 12. and 17. the Scriptures are so plaine, that none of good understanding can mistake the one for the other; or (as this man doth) make the one a part of the other, as if both put together, should make one Temple, one woman, one Church. When the one persecuted, flieth from the Serpent or dra∣gon, the other in the Dragons throne persecuteth, reigneth, tri∣umpheth; abusing and treading under foot Gods ordinances which belong to the persecuted woman; as the Babylonians a∣bused the vessels of Gods sanctuary, † 1.364 burned and trode down the holy citie, the place of the womans assembly.

His question, When was the time that the woman fled into the wilder∣ness? is nothing to the purpose. For whensoever she fled, seeing this other woman is not she; but the foolish waman which opposeth her selfe and her doctrines unto Wisedom, (as in Prov 9. 13. 14. 15. 1. 2. &c.) men should know, that the dead are with her, and her * 1.365 guests are in the depths of hell.

He againe injurieth me, when he sayth † 1.366 I here make the church of Rome (she that now is) to be also the court of Gods Temple, and holy ci∣tie. I make her to be the company of Gentiles (like the Babylonians of old) that tread down the holy citie: and it is hee that speaketh M. Sm. language, whiles he maketh the Jewes (not the Babyloni∣ans) to be the types of these Antichristians, as we have formerly heard. And it is his continuall fallacie in reasoning, when speech is of the persons, to flie to the things and ordinances typed by those holy places: as if Ierusalem because it was alwayes the holy citie, even when it was ruined; could give holines to the prophane Gentiles, that burned and trode it down.

I savd, The heathens in their Altars, Temples, Sacrifices, had the divine things of God among them, as wel, if not better then hath the Man of Syn and his worshipers, in their sacrifice of the Mass, and other manifold id••∣luries.

He replieth: Why sayth he not, then hath the church of Rome in her baptisme, and other divine things of God among them, though corrupted?

Answ. Behold here againe a plaine tergiversation. I compare the sacrifices of the Gentiles with the sacrifice of the Anti∣christians:

he shunneth this, and would have me speak of their baptisme. As if the Lords Supper were not as holy as Baptis∣me. But he is a frayd once to meddle with the Lords supper in Rome, (as we have seen before,) and wil have me write what he thinks good, when the reason which I bring is too hard for him. And yet he knoweth, that elswhere I speak as much of their bap∣tisme. But thus he would here evade. So I speaking of the Man of syn (which in his own understanding is the hierarchie,) and of his worshipers, the popish multitude, he tells me Mr. Junius speaketh of the church of Rome, and distinguisheth between it, and the Man of syn with his hierarchie. As if I also did not speak of that church, when I men∣tion the worshipers of the man of syn: which whiles he (by Mr. Iunius help,) would prove to be Christs true church in his cove∣nant of grace, contrary to th'Apostle who sheweth them to be in the state of damnation, 2 Thes. 2. he is forced to give ground, an∣swereth not my reason touching the Gentiles; but presently flieth to his wonted shelter, of Judah and Jsrael Not regarding the instruc∣tion of the holy Ghost, who throughout the book of Revelation, mentioneth not the Israelites, but as the sealed of God, and kept from Antichrists abominations, Rev. 7. and for the Popish multi∣tude, they are called Gentiles, Sodom, Egypt, Babylon. Rev. 11. & 17. with which when mine opposite is pressed, he flieth to Iudah and Israel for an answer; as we every where have seen.

For the Church of Rome to be the Mother of Christians, feighned to be like the true Mother, sick, swollen with the dropsie &c. wherin he * 1.367 chargeth me not to answer or confute Mr. Iunius; I have doen both: shewing by evidence of the scripture, Rev. 17. with Rev. 12. that she is not the true mother, Ierusalem; but the whore of Babylon, not sick onely, but dead in her synns Rev. 20. 5. with E∣phes. 2. 1. And Mr. Iunius himself † 1.368 calleth her, the Pseudo christian (or falsly-named Christian) church.

Mine opposite, (after that he hath againe according to his wont fled to Iudah and Israel,) “ 1.369 replieth to Rev. 20. And first, He referreth us to his answer unto the like spoken before of Israel.

Answ. There he laboured to prove it not death in syn, but death civilly, by overthrow of their estate. But that (say I) though it were true of Israel, cannot be the meaning here: for this speak∣eth of their estate, whiles Antichrist the Beast and his kingdom li∣veth reigneth and triumpheth, killing the saincts, Rev. 20. 4. 5. so

that he and his church is not dead civilly, that is, his kingdom 〈◊〉〈◊〉, not overthrowen all this while. Secondly God speaketh here of such a death, as is opposed to the first resurrection, vers. 5. but the first resurrection is from syn, Coloss. 2. 13. & 3. 1. and it is here sayd to be such, as they that have part therin, the second death hath no pow∣er on such, Rev. 20 6. but if it be but a rising from civil death, or destruction of an outward state, they should not by it be freed from the second death, which is due to such onely as rise not from death of syn. So this his answer is impertinent. Besides, even Mr. Iunius himself * 1.370 expoundeth it of them that lye dead in syn.

2. Jf this death (sayth he) be, as some think, the apostasie spoken of 2. Thes. 2. 3. we must then remember withall, that this apostasie is in the Tem∣ple of God, vers. 4. like as there was apostasie in Iudah and Jsrael heretofore: and that difference is to be put between Gods Temple and the apostasie it self. &c.

Answ. I have shewed, that this death (Mr. Iunius also assenting) must needs here be understood of death in syn, or in Apostasie, if so he wil have it named. Wheras after his manner he compareth it with th'Apostasie of Iudah and Israel, the holy Ghost (as we have heard) compareth it with Babylon, Rev. 17. But if he grant the a∣postasie in Israel, was death in syn, it wil help him nothing: for what people soever is dead in syn, they are not actually Gods visi∣ble church, til they be † 1.371 raysed in Christ. I grant him a difference between Gods Temple and the Apostasie: for if by the Temple he mean the people of God free from apostasie, such in deed are not dead: but the people of Rome now are in apostasie, and have been long; and by the sentence of God, are dead in syn and apostasie▪ therfore they are not those “ 1.372 living stones, built up to a spiritual house (on Christ the living stone) an holy Priesthood to offer up spiritual sacri∣fice: and * 1.373 for an habitation of God through the spirit: but they are dead stones built upon Antichrist.

3. Moreover (sayth he) the dead here spoken of, live againe, and reig•••• with Christ after the finishing of 1000. yeares, Rev. 20. 5. whereas he speak¦eth of the Church of Rome, as being long since damned and dead for ever: so this Scripture will be found to be against himselfe.

Answ. The words of the Scripture are these, But the rest of the dead lived not againe, until the thousand yeares were finished: this is the first re∣surrection, Rev. 20. 5. How maketh this against me? Doth it not shew they were dead, the 1000. yeares of the Beasts reigne? yet he

would have them not dead, but sick and diseased. And how noto∣riously doth he wrong me, as if I made the church of Rome dam∣ned and dead for ever, that is, as if there could be no mercie shewed to the papists, for repentance and turning to the Lord. They are onely the reprobate multitude which are damned and dead for ever. Many of that church, yea even of the hierarchie, (whom my opposite holdeth to bee the Man of syn, the son of perdition) being dead in their sins, God hath in mercie revived and raised with Christ, as he did in the churches of the Gentiles, Eph. 2, 1•• Coloss. 2. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. But such as are not raised from the death of Antichrist, and quickned by Christ, they perish for ever. And wee speake of that Church now remaining in her synfull death: unto which so con∣tinuing, no salvation is promised, but assured destruction threat∣ned, 2. Thes. 2. Rev. 14. 9. 10. 11. Thus we see how notwithstanding all his turning and winding, and backing his errour with learned mens names, these † 1.374 Gentiles the church of Antichrist, and wor∣shipers of the Man of syn, are by the sentence of God dead in sins, as were the * 1.375 Gentiles before Christ gave them life. That such of them as the Lord shall in mercie raise up out of the grave of pope∣rie▪ shall escape the second death: the rest, doe remain under Gods wrath, dead in syn, and shall die in torment.

In the end, to that which I shewed of that whores death o∣therweise, and of her burning with fire, Rev. 18. 7. 8, and of the joy which the heavenly multitude shal have at her destruction, Rev. 18. 20. & 1••. 1. 2. 3. mine opposite seemeth to assent▪ referring it to the Citie, resembled (as he sayth) by Babylon, and Babylons destruction that was of old, Rev. 18. with Ier. 50. & 51. Thus the truth hath wrung out at last an acknowledgement from him; as the feare and light of his conscience made him acknowledge at the first. For he began with the Church of Rome thus, † 1.376 acknowledging it to be fallen into most sin∣ful and deep defection and apostasie, and so to be a notorious harlot and idola∣tres. This notorious harlot the holy Ghost calleth Babylon the great, the mother of horlots, and abominations of the earth, Rev. 17. 5. which is meant of the Citie Rome, v. 18. but of an ecclesiastical state, such as is in that citie at this day. And that Babylon or church it is, whole destruction is threatned in Rev. 18. and for which there shall bee ioy, and singing Alleluiah, for that God hath judged the great wh••re▪ which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and shed the bloud of his servants, Rev. 1••. 1. 2. 3. &c. For the destruction of

this great whore (which in deed is no other then the Church of Rome) mine opposite † 1.377 sayth with me, they shalbe so farr from mourn∣ing at her funeral, as they shal rejoyce with the heavenly multitude, and sing Hallelujah, when the Lord hath given Sodoms judgement on her, and they see her smoke rise up for evermore, Rev. 19. 1. 2. 3. Of his own mouth now let him be judged; with what truth, equity, conscience, he hath pleaded for the church of Rome to bee the Temple of God; the church of God, in his covenant of grace, and to have his baptisme the seale of his covenant, even in that adulterous and most sinfull estate wherin she standeth at this day under her Pastor Antichrist, whom she honoureth and worshipeth, beleeving his lies, serving his idols, and trusting to merit heaven by the wicked works which that Man of syn hath taught her. But (that God, for a reward of his popish errour in advancing the Ministers above the church, and the pastor above his fellow ministers, gave him over to this second errour) who would have thought that a man of under∣standing would so bitterly have inveighted against me, for denying her to be Christs true Church; and that he would for defense of such a notorius harlot, have forsaken and written against his own former good testimony, which hee witnessed against her? Gods counsels are unsearchable▪ and let all that feare him, heare what the Spirit sayth unto us; Hearken unto me now therefore ôye children, and attend to the words of my mouth. Let not thine heart decline to her wayes, goe not astray in her paths. For shee hath east downe many wounded: yea many strong men have been slain by her. Her house is the way to hell; go∣ing down to the chambers of death. Prov. 7. 24—27.

Of other Writers.

TO his citations of Polanus, Keckerman, &c. I answered, † 1.378 That diverse men were mistaken in judging of that rotten Church (of Rome) which would help these our opposites nothing, who have seen and acknowledged better, and now goe back. And I instanced sundry others contrary minded, as Mr. Carwright, Mr. Perkins, D. Fulk, D. Willet. Mr. Bale, all our country men, who deny the church of Rome to be the true Church of Christ.

Mine opposite replieth, * 1.379 that I say in particular of Polanus, that he was mistaken, and in this, for that he sayd that Antichrist must sit in the Temple of God, not Jewish or at Jerusalem, but Christian, &c.

wherein, as his manner is, he drepraveth both my words and mea∣ning. For I never dreamt that Antichrist should sit in the Iewish Temple at Ierusalem; but in the Christian Church falsly so called, as Mr. Iunius nameth it in Annot. on Rev. 11. But Polanus plead∣eth otherwise for the church of Rome, as mine opposite hath set down his words, Chr. plea. p. 212. And in that, I iudge he was mista∣ken, and not I onely, but many moe with me, men of greater lear∣ning, and before me; though mine opposite leaveth it with this re∣proch, † 1.380 That all (in my judgement) are mistaken hereabout, but my selfe and my followers.

And presently after, to that which I alleaged from Mr. Cart∣wright, Perkins, &c. he wisheth they had written more advisedly, and more soundly. And why? even for his former often refuted reasons, of the Temple of God, and Baptisme in that church; wherein he doth but beg the question, and answereth not them. For I named to him Mr. Perkins reasons, that the Papists doctrine doth rase the ve∣ry foundation of Religion; and his 4. arguments in a treatise for that purpose. Now to these he answereth not one word. But the Tem∣ple of God, the Temple of God, and Antichrist must sit in the Temple of God: and Martyres out of the Church of Rome; and where else, had they their baptisme? these are his common bucklers. To which I have answered before.

And now, that the Reader may further see, how not I onely, but many before me, even such as he nameth in his book for him, (as D. Whitakers, Mr. Broughton, Mr. Brightman, and others) are direct against him, I will set down their testimonies.

What Mr. Bale, Mr. Cartwright, D. Fulk, M. Perkins, and D. Willet have written, I have shewed heretofore: and them hee re∣gardeth not.

Whereas Bellarmine would conclude from the protestants graunt, that the church of Rome is Christs true Church, because it is the Temple of God, 2. Thess. 2. D. Whitakers giveth sun∣dry* 1.381 answers, the two first are these. 1. Jt may be called the church wherein Antichrist sitteth, because it was the true church of Christ before, not because now it is; &c. So Esaias sayth▪ the faithful citie was be∣come an harlot, Esa. 1. 21. where he calleth Jerusalem the faithful citie, because it had been faithful before: so we say, the Temple of God is the seat of Anti∣christ, that is, that which of old was the Temple of God. 2. The Church of Rome taketh to it selfe the name & title of the true Church, and in the opinion

of our adversartes it is the true Church. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 was a monstrous thing of old 〈◊〉〈◊〉 deny this neither was it denyed but of a very few, who straight way when they were knowen, were killed: notwithstanding it was not the true Church, but the whore of Babylon &c. These answeres when I gave, mine opposite could by no meanes endure at my hand.

The same author sayth † 1.382 a litle before. Now let us see whether the Bi∣shop of Rome hath departed from Christ, and from the faith: so that the church of Rome now, reteyneth not the form of the Apostles doctrine. Surely that is evident by all the heads of doctrine, which are in controversie between us and them. That Church succeedeth the Apostles in deed, but so as a den of theeves doe the house of God, and as an harlot doth the faithful citie. &c. And after. * 1.383 But the Pope, sayth Billarmine honoreth one true God, the Fa∣ther, Son and holy Ghost. J answer, hee honoureth him not, but blasphemeth him. He doth, I confess, as Atheists are wont to do, which wil not openly deny God, but in hart and workes they deny him: so the Pope figneth and pre∣claimeth that he honoureth the trinity, but in deed he car••h not for him. For he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father, of the holy Ghost: but the Pope honoureth not the Son, for he corrupteth his doctrine, &c. Againe, tou∣ching that particular † 1.384 before handled, whether by Babylon in Rev. 17. be meant the Citie or the Church of Rome, Mr. Whitakers sayth, * 1.385 Whereas the adversary affirmeth, that it is not the Church of Rome whlo•••• is called Babylon, but the citie, such as it was under the Emperours, it is false. For it is certain, that Rome is by Iohn in the Revelation, called Babylon, be∣cause of that Church which should be at Rome. For mention is made there of the false Prophet, as also of the Whore, which by her allurements should be∣witch the whole world. These things cannot be understood but of the Church, and are necessarily to be referred unto Antichrist.

Mr. Brightman in his book of the Revelation, expoundeth the Gentiles in Rev. 11. 2. to be the christiās that are so in name only. On Rev. 13. 8. he saith, The holy Ghost doth cry openly, that all they do wholly ••eopard and cast away their salvation, that are subject to the Pope of Rome, if so bee that they depart out of this life without repentance. And again; This Beast is worshipped of all Reprobates, with whom while thou conspirest in thy worship, who shal separate thee frō the state of reprobates? He doth not ther∣fore break off unity, who departeth from the synagogue of Rome: but he pur∣chaseth unavoydable destruction to himselfe, who cleaveth unto it, without repentance.

These and the like things sayth Mr. Brightman, one whose name mine opposite † 1.386 useth to grace his erroneous cause by. Mr.

Brovghtons testimony we have heard before.

Mr. Dudly Fenner in his Theologie, writeth thus; * 1.387 Antichrist is the head of the universal apostasie that should come, 1. Ioh. 2. 18. Ioh. 4. 2. 2. Thess. 2. 4. 5. 6. Wherupon his church is by a Synechdoche called Antichrist, 1. Ioh. 4. 3. & 2. 18. as the true Church (is called Christ) 1. Cor. 12. 12. The Antichristian church, compared to a Beast, is the aposta∣tical church, but counterfeyting the vizar of the true, which representeth the lively image of the Roman monarchie formerly doen away, and of the gover∣ment, power, amplitude & seat therof amongst all peoples; 2 Thes. 2. 4. 5. 6. 8. Revel. 11. 7. 8. & 13. 3. 11. 12.—18. Antichrist, or the False prophet is the head of the Antichristian church, the mediatour between it and the Dragon; Rev. 16. 13. & 13. 4. 11. 12. This Antichrist is an Opposer, for to defend the foresayd departing away frō the truth of Christ, (2 Thes. 2. 4. compared as touching the phrase with Dan. 8. 11.) and an Exalter of him∣self▪ first that he may lift up himself against all that is called God, or that is worshiped; that is, against all powers and majesties, both earthly & heavenly. 2. Thes. 2. 9. Dan. 8. 11. 36. Secondly, that placing his seat in the church in name called Gods, he may shew himself as God, that is, arrogate to himself the divine power, and absolute dominion of Christ: Esai. 31. 1. 2. 2 Thes. 2. 4. Dan. 8. 25.

Napier, (the Noble of Scotland) expounding the Revelation, sayth. † 1.388 But as for the outward and visible face of the pretended church, it must be rejected from God, and no care, measure nor account had by him therof; because it must be given over to Antichristian and idolatrous people, who shal subdue his holy church and spiritual Jerusalem, and tread it under foot 1260. yeres. * 1.389 Gods true church and spouse, was chased away and re∣mayned invisible and soliturie, among certaine private persons, predestinate & elect of God. † 1.390 But the rest of the people that lay dead in Antichristian errors, arose not therfrom to imbrace the word of life, ill &c. “ 1.391 But the rest, J mean the whole outward visible church, lay wholly as dead and corrupt with papistocal errours.

Of the Baptisme in the Church of Rome.

ALthough the former things against the Church of Rome, be ynough to disprove her baptisme, which is ordained of God onely for his Church, and those in his covenant, out of which Rome is gone: yet because mine opposite urgeth some speciall reasons against mee, for the same; I will also briefly answer them.

About this poynt, he hath nine reasons; in his Christian plea, pag. 27...30.

1. The first, which is against the repeating of Baptisme againe: I grant him: neither doe I hold it needfull or lawfull to repeate a∣gain the baptisme received in false churches.

2. The second, being for the same purpose, I likewise grant. As also, that there is one baptisme, as there was one circumcision: which plea of his, I would have noted, because of his contrary reasoning af∣terward. Likewise his example from Israel, whose circumcision was not repeated; I hold very fit. But let the Reader observe, how the Scriptures by him brought to prove it, are 2. Chron. 30. chap. & Ezr. 6. 19. 20. 21. of which the first was before the captivity, the o∣ther after.

3. The third, that the covenant of grace is everlasting, is also true: but should have this addition, taught of the holy Ghost, To such as keep his covenant, & that remember his commandements to do them: Psal. 103. 17. 18. For, if we deny him, he also wil deny us, 2. Tim. 2. 12. That God hath regard to his covenant in Apostaticall churches and e∣state, is also true: but barely by him set down, without shewing how. That Moses teacheth us in Levit. 26. namely, that the Israe∣lites for their apostasie and forsaking of God, † 1.392 should be chasti∣sed; and if they would not amend, they should at last be * 1.393 scattred among the heathen, and “ 1.394 perish among them: and they that are left, † 1.395 if they confesse their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fa∣thers; and if their * 1.396 uncircumcised hearts be humbled, &c. “ 1.397 then God will remember his covenant with Iakob, and † 1.398 will not cast them away, nor abhorr them, to destroy them utterly, to breake his covenant with them; but * 1.399 will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors.

4. The fourth, of Christs dying once, and our being once

baptised: I also grant.

5. The fift, that the Church of Rome was espoused to Christ, and had his baptisme in the Apostles dayes: is true. But where he ad∣deth, that she hath ever since reteined it, with other grounds of Christian religion; there he goeth too farr. For many grounds of Christian religion she hath forsaken: as all that are not Papists will acknow∣ledge. Wherefore he addeth a qualification, either for faith, or order, or both, in whole or in part. This is so large as will bring in, not onely the heathens of old, but all the old condemned heretickes in the Apostles dayes and after, yea even the very Iewes and Turkes at this day. For in part they retein the grounds of Christian religion. It is a ground of Christian religion to beleeve that there is one God: and that the very Divils (as the Apostle sayth) doe beleeve, Iam. 2. 19. But not to goe so farr, as I grant him that the Papists in baptisme retein Christs ordinance in whole or in part; so he cannot de∣ny, but also in the Lords Supper (now turned to an abominable ido∣latrous Masse,) they reteyn Christs ordinance in whole or in part; and so in other their abominations. The Pope himselfe, the great Antichrist, the son of perdition, reteyneth Christian religion in part. The image of God wherein he made man at the first, Gen. 1. 26. remaineth in all men still in part, as the Scriptures testifie, Gen. 9. 6. Iam. 3. 9. Wherefore if the reteyning of things in part, holdeth men still in the state of grace and salvation: who then shall be damned? What a wide gate is here opened into the king∣dom of heaven, that if men reteyn Christian religion, either for faith or order, or both; in whole or in part, they remain still in the church and covenant of grace: which is quite contrary to the doctrine of Christ, and of his Apostles, Math. 7. 13. 14. 22. 23. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Gal 5. 19. 20. 21.

6. His sixt reason, from the Iesuites profession made in their Rhemes Testament &c, I have before answered; it being in his se∣cond argument made for the church of Rome. And that which he addeth of their baptising with water in the name of the Father &c: is of no more weight to justifie their baptisme; then the like elements of bread and wine, and the words of Christs institution This is my body &c, are to justifie the Popish Masse to be the true supper of our Lord. Of which Mass, (to omitt that which many others have written of the abomination of it) Mr. Calvin * 1.400 sayth thus, The Mass ••n itself is a ronouncing of the death of Jesus Christ, and a sacrilege forged by

Satan, utterly to abolish the sacrament of the Supper.

7. His seventh reason, that Iewes and Pagans are turned to the popish Christian ••aith; was also refured in answer to his second reason brought for the church of Rome. The conclusion, that there needeth no repeating of baptisme, as there was none of circumci∣sion: is granted, and by me never denyed.

8. Likeweise his eight reason▪ that God hath his people in the Ro∣mish Babylon, Rev. 18. 4. under his covenant of grace; is before answered. But he should have proved (if he could) that Babylon itself (which is the church of Rome) is under the covenant of grace: that I de∣ny, the holy Ghost shewing in Rev. 17. & 18. ch. that she is under wrath, and destruction. He sayth, the children of that church should plead with their mother (as the Prophets taught and dealt with Jsrael of old, Hos 2. 2. & 3. 1. & 4. 1. 2. 12. &c) that she take away her fornications out of her sight &c. It is true, so they should: but why doth this man di∣minish from the word of God? For the Prophets words are, Plead with your mother, plead; for she is not my wife, neyther am J her husband; let her therfore ••ut away her whordomes &c, Hos. 2. 2. Thus doe I plead a∣gainst this mother church of Rome; but my opposite blameth me, and pleadeth for her, she is the wife of Christ, and not divorced▪ as before we have heard. Baptisme (sayth he) is not of her adulteries, but of Christs ordinances. True, so is the Lords supper, so is excom∣munication, not of her adulteries; but of Christs ordinances; and we reteyn them from Christ. But that whorish church hath cor∣rupted and adulterated all these and other ordinances of Christ, & turned them to abominable idolatries and lyes; for which we also plead against her: and her synfull abuse of these divine ordinances, shall nor justify, but the more condemne her.

9. To his ninth and last reason, if baptisme be renounced, then also the articles of ••aith, the Scriptures and translations: likewise mariages dissol∣ved, &c. I answer. Farr be it, that we should renounce any good thing whith the church of Rome abuseth▪ any more then Paul re∣nounced the true God, whom the Athenians ignorantly worship∣ed: Ao••. 17. 23. Whatsoever is of divine▪ institution among Papists▪ Iewes, Turks or heathens, we renounce it not; but their profanati∣on and abuse of holy things, we doe renounce. Neither can wee justifie their estate, or any holy thing in their sinfull abuse of it •• though we put difference between the things▪ which in their ow•••• nature are good, and the persons which are evill, Thus men, ma••

see how weak and without edge his reasons are to justifie the bap tisme in the church of Rome, to be in their use of it the true seale of Gods covenant of grace in Christ unto them.

Next this, he setteth himselfe to answer objections, † 1.401 The first wherof he maketh this. But * 1.402 the baptisme had in the Church of Rome, i•• not true baptisme: but an idol, and lying signe; a detestable and cursed sa∣crament; a fiction and not true Christian baptisme; “ 1.403 no better then when we wash our owne face with water dayly. &c.

Answ. That it is not true baptisme, I constantly affirme: so did Mr. Iohnson † 1.404 himselfe, whiles he stood in, and wrote for the truth. That the Papists have turned baptisme into an idoll: I have also formerly * 1.405 proved; and wil maintain, against his answers. That therefore it is detestable and cursed unto them, through their a∣buse of it, doth necessarily follow: for the sacrifice of the wicked is an abominatiō to the Lord, Pro. 15. 8. That it should be no better then the dayly washing of our face; is wrongfully imputed to us; and Mr. Cl. whom hee citeth in his margine, professeth to hold no such thing. For our dayly washing, is no religious action, nor sacra∣ment at all; but baptisme by hereticks and apostates, is a religious action after their manner, and a false sacrament, therfore neither true, neither yet none at all; as our opposite with us once professed. Apolog. p. 110. Insted of proving it true baptisme, hee bringeth reasons to shew, that if it were an idol and lying signe, it ought to be renounced, and an other received. This he knoweth the Anabaptists doe practise: so it is no conviction of, them all. But he bendeth his force now against us, and leaveth them. Let us try what he sayth.

1. Because (sayth he) idols and lying signes and fictions are not of God, but of the Divil, who is a liar, and father thereof, Ioh. 8. 44. Rom. 3. 4.

Answ. I grant that which he sayth: but he concludeth not the question. Idols so farr as they are idols and lies; are wholly of the Divill, and so farr forth to be renounced. But some idols and lies, are made of Gods true ordinances, and of his good creatures; as Paul sayth of the Gentiles, that they changed the truth of God into a lye; and worshiped and served the creature, Rom. 1. 25. Here the Gentiles lie, is to be doen away, and their idolatry renounced: but the truth of God is to be reteined, and a holy use of the good crea∣ture may be had, which they abused. So wee have renounced the popish idolatry and lies which they have brought upon Gods sa∣craments; but the truth we reteyne.

2. An idol, or such a baptisme as is no more then a dayly washing of our faces, cannot be the signe and seale of Gods true and everlasting cove∣nant, &c.

Answ. I grant it: and from his own words conclude against him; Baptisme in the Church of Rome is formerly proved to be an idoll: because they give to the creature and work of mans hands, that honour which is due unto Christ onely. Therefore it cannot bee a signe and seale of Gods everlasting covenant; by his owne grant. As for us, we reteyne no idoll, but Gods truth one∣ly, as before I shewed.

3. The signe in a Sacrament is that which is outward and visible; which in baptisme is washing with water in the name of the Lord. Jf this be a ficti∣on and lying signe, in the churches aforesayd, then is it not the Lords: and they there baptised have not then the outward visible signe, which the Lord ordained to be had of his people, and therefore are bound to get it unto them, where it may be had, Rom. 4. 11. & 6. 3. 4. Act. 10. 47. 48. &c.

Answ. 1. The first part of his reason is unperfectly set down: for washing with water is a signe of the washing away of sinns, by and in Gods institution onely; by which institution it is to bee mini∣stred to none but the faithfull and their seed, Act. 8. 36. 37. & 2. 38. 39. If it be not ministred according to this ordinance of God, it is not the signe of his grace in that abuse, though it be the thing which God in the right use hath appoynted for a signe. 2. Hee would deceive his reader, as if we held washing should be with any other creature then water, or in any other name then the Lords. These things wee know are in themselves the true ordinances of Christ; but by Antichrist turned to a lye, whiles hee falsly ap∣plyeth them to his adulterous synagogue, which Christ hath gi∣ven to his Church onely; and whiles hee idolatrously giveth that grace to the work of his sacrilegious priests, which is peculiar to Christ and his bloud. It is the true signe of the covenant of Christ which is by Antichrist turned to a lye: and if we should devise to our selves any other signe, we should be lyars like him: who hath devised, creame, spittle, and other like elements, synfully joyned with his baptisme.

4. That also is to be doen without delay, seeing the neglect of baptisme is sin, and no unbaptised may eat of the Lords Supper, &c.

Answ. It is true: and so we, if we had not been baptised with water, &c. would doe it without delay. But hee trifleth, insisting

upon the outward element, which he knoweth we had: and lea∣veth the main thing, the relation to the covenant of grace, which we had not in that Antichristian synagogue.

5. Jf any reteine an idol baptisme, &c. and presume to come to the Lords table, they eat judgement to themselves.

Answ. We reteyne no idoll baptisme: but have put away the idoll, and the lye: and reteyne the truth onely, as before is shew∣ed. The same we answer to his sixt reason, which is but a repetiti∣on and inlargement of his former, as is his manner.

7. Neither can it be thought that repentance (which still they speak of) should ever make a lye to be a truth, and idol to be Gods ordinance, &c. For though repentance findeth mercy with God for a lye, yet a lye is a lye stil, and an idol-vanity. Zach. 10. 2. Ier. 10. 8. Ioh. 8. 44. & 14. 6. & 17. 17. with 2. Cor. 6. 14. 15. 16.

Answ. It is true, of such idols and lies as the Scriptures which he citeth speaketh of; but there are other idols and lies, which by men are made of God himselfe, and of his word and ordinances, which by Gods grace upon mens repentance and faith, are resto∣red to the first truth. As, the Gentiles changed the truth of God into a lye, Rom. 1. 25. and changed the glory of the incorruptible God, into an image, Rom. 1. 23. and Israel changed God their glory, into the simili∣tude of an Oxe, Psal. 106. 20. When they repented of their changing the truth into a lye, they reteyned the truth still, and kept that God whom before they ignorantly worshiped, and of whom they had made an idoll to themselves, Act. 17. 23. So for Gods ordinances; as, if the Israelites had made idols of Jachin and Boaz (the two sacra∣mentall pillars in the Temple) 2. Chron. 3. 17. and had burnt in∣cense to them, as they did to the brazen Serpent, 2. King. 18. 4. they should have repented of, and put away their idolatry, but have reteyned those pillars still, for such signes as God had ordey∣ned them. But such pillars and posts as Israel had invented of their own heads, and set them by the Lords posts, Ezek. 43. 8. no repentance could make them the Lords posts, but they must have been utterly taken away. So in Popish baptisme, water is the Lords ordinance, by them abused and turned to an idoll: salt, oyle, &c. are Antichrists ordinances set up also for idols; these latter we ut∣terly reject, because they were never Gods ordinances in baptis∣me; the water we reteyne, having put away onely the abuse and lye of Antichrist annexed thereto. If this bee not so, then the Iewes

should not onely have repented of and put away their lye, when they used those lying words, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, &c. Ier. 7. 4. but they must have destroyed the Temple it selfe also. And whereas the Papists and other hereticks make lyes of the Scriptures, and of Christs holy words This is my body, make their idoll of Transubstantiation, and the like; they thould not onely repent of their lies, and put away their idols; but also re∣nounce Christs words, and put away the holy Scriptures; if this doctrine of our opposites be true.

8. Nor doe they in deed repent, who stil reteyne such baptisme, as them∣selves think to be an idol, &c. for true repentance bindeth us to cast away all idols, &c.

Answ. This is already answered: neither doe we reteyn such a baptisme as wee think to be an idol; but that ordinance of God which was an idol by Antichrists abuse, and is through the grace of God restored unto his former truth, that onely doe wee reteyne, repenting of our former abuse thereof amongst them. God him∣selfe (as I have shewed) was made an idoll by the Gentiles; their repentance bound them to cast away their idolatry, but to reteyn God still.

Wheras they say, * 1.406 We have gotten the Lords baptisme by comming to the Lord in true faith and repentance, who † 1.407 baptiseth us with the holy Ghost and with fire. As for the outward washing which we had, it need not be re∣peated, [as before is shewed: and we may as lawfully eat the Lords Supper, without a new washing, as the idolatrous Isralites turning to the Lord, might eat the Passover without a new cutting or circumcising. 2. Chron. 30. 1. 5. 11. 18.—25. Ezr. 6. 21.] And afterward say, † 1.408 We have renounced that Romish baptisme, as an impure idol in their abuse, [standing up in the place of Christ and his precious blood, which it is not; pretending to give grace, and wash away sinns, which it doth not] &c. they doe but shift and contradict themselves, and deceive others, and still run into errours, more and more.

Answ. Great words as if he would beare down all before him. But let us heare his proofes.

For first (sayth he) speaking of the Lords baptisme, they speake of that which is inward: whereas our question, is of that which is outward.

Answ. A good beginning. The Apostle sayth, there is one Lord, one faith, one baptisme; Eph. 4. 5. Himselfe also a little before, * 1.409 sayd against the Anabaptists, There is one baptisme, as there was one cir∣cumcision. Now against us, he would have two baptismes, one out∣ward,

an other inward. Whereas, though there bee two actions, one outward, doen by men, the other inward, doen by Gods spi∣rit: yet both are but one baptisme, one sacrament; as the outward body, and the inward soule, make not two men, but one man. A sacrament is a sacred order between the outward visible thing, and the spirituall invisible, which have a mutuall proportion and like∣nesse between them. The Apostle sayth, That is not circumcision which is outward in the flesh, but that which is of the heart, in the spirit, Rom. 2. 28. 29. If they have in Rome but the outward wash∣ing, without the inward: then have they not true baptisme, but a false deceitfull signe. Secondly, it is not true, that I spake but of the inward work onely, for I spake also of the outward; which be∣ing had in Rome, need not be repeated: as I shewed by the exam∣ple of the Israelites. Now which of us two shifteth, contradicteth, and deceiveth, I or he: let indifferent men say.

2. They spake (sayth he) of abuses in the ministration, and opinions of the Ministers thereof: whereas our question is of the thing it selfe, not of the abuse.

Answ. We speak of the thing it selfe (Baptisme) abused by the ministers and receivers; neither of which are in Gods covenant; and therefore can have no true signe or seale of his covenant un∣to them in that estate. Secondly, if it were not for abuses and opi∣nions of men, God and his truth, and ordinances, could never bee changed into lies and idols, as the Apostle teacheth us they were, Rom. 1. 23. 25. The Athenians were idolaters against the true God; whom Paul preached, and whom they ignorantly worshiped, Act. 17. 23. If one would take them in hand to excuse them, & say, Our question is of the thing it selfe (the true God) and not of the A∣thenians abuses and opinions, were it not a worthy plea? yet such we have, for Antichristians baptisme.

3. Their assertion (sayth he) implieth that they had not the Lords bap∣tisme, till they got it themselves by comming to the Lord in true faith and re∣pentance, which is plain Anabaptistry, and covert Popery and Arminia∣nisme: whereby they debase Gods grace, and exalt mans works. For it must be understood either of the inward or outward baptisme: if of the inward, be∣sides that it toucheth not the question, it implieth Popery: if of the outward, it conteyneth Anabaptistry.

Answ. Deliver my soule, ô Lord, from lying lips, from the deceit∣ful tongue: Psa. 120. 2. First he citeth as my words, till they had got it

themselves by comming to the Lord: whereas the word themselves, is of his own addition. Secondly, hee wresteth them to such a mea∣ning, as in his conscience he knew I never intended; namely, to de∣base Gods grace, and exalt mans worke, as doe the Papists and Armini∣ans. As if I thought that we came or could come to the Lord of our selves, without being † 1.410 drawn of the Father; or, as if our com∣ming to him were a meritorious work: which errours I abhorr. 3. Neither doe my words imply such a meaning; any more then our Saviours, when he sayd, Come unto me all yee that labour, &c. and J will give you rest: take my yoke upon you, &c. and yee shall finde rest to your soules: Math. 11. 28. 29. To conclude of that speech, Therefore they could come of themselves; or their comming should be a me∣ritorious work, or the like: were an openinjury to our Lords words. His two baptismes inward and outward, is before shewed to bee but'an evasion: wee acknowledge but one baptisme, Eph. 4. 5. Neither if it be understood of the outward, doth it (as hee sayth) conteyn Anabaptistrie; for the Anabaptists doe not hold that they have the outward baptisme by faith and repentance, but doe re∣peat the outward vvork, and baptise againe; vvhich I deny. So herein he hath done me double vvrong.

4. Jf they had died in infancie, they had not then had the Lords bap∣tisme, nor had been baptised with the Holy Ghost: nor any other infants there baptised.

Answ. We and all, are by nature the children of vvrath, Eph. 2. 3. and being born in Antichrists church, we had not the visible covenant of promise, vvhich is given onely to Christs Church. Al∣beit God hath his elect in false Churches, as among the Gentiles of old, and in Israel after they vvere divorced from the Lord. Jer. 3. vvhom he can save vvithout baptisme, as he did vvithout cir∣cumcision. The same is answered to his fifth obiection, of the* 1.411 same persons come to yeares. And is further cleared in the* an∣swer to his second argument for the Church of Rome; vvhere he alleaged the like things. And vvhere he sayth, Either we have no out∣ward baptisme at all, confirming the covenant of God: or else we had it before we came under the Lords covenant, and in a church divorced from the Lord. I answer; Wee had the outward vvashing vvith vvater, as the Israe∣lites had the outward cutting of the flesh, vvhen they were divor∣ced from the Lord, Ier. 3. 8. vvhich could not then confirme Gods covenant to us or them in such synfull estate. But as after, vvhen

they repented, and turned to the Lord, they had their outward cutting sanctified unto them, for a signe of his covenant, and were admitted to eat of his Passover, Ezr. 6. 21. (vvhich no uncircum∣cised might eat of, Exod. 12. 48.) so our vvashing hath been by like grace sanctified unto us, for a signe of his covenant; and vve may lawfully eat of the Lords Supper.

His 6. reason is of like na ure, touching the members of the* 1.412 Antichristian church, that they have not the Lords baptisme, being not come to the Lord in true faith and repentance, &c. This also is before spoken of in answering his reasons for that church. The Scripture sheweth them to bee departed from the faith of Christ, 2. Thes. 2. 1. Tim. 4. to bedead in syn, Rev. 20. to bee under the vvrath of God, Rev. 14. 9. 10. 11. Our opposite himself sayth of that church, She is a notorious harlot and idolatress: and of the Hierarchie (the mi∣nisters of that church, vvhich have the same baptisme vvith the people, and doe administer baptisme to that people) he sayth, they are the Man of Syn, the son of perdition, 2. Thess. 2. the Beast. Rev. 13. concerning vvhom he could not endure that vve should aske his proofe that ever they were maried unto Christ. And are such a people and Hierarchy, remaining in that estate, come to the Lord in true faith and repentance? If they have brought themselves by their idolatries, heresies, and innumerable synns, into a woeful estate: vvhat are we, that we should justifie those vvhom God condem∣neth. Let false prophets preach peace unto them, wee must not∣withstanding declare the judgements of the Lord, vvhose wrath is revealed from heaven, against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who deteyn the truth in unrighteousness, Rom. 1. 18.

7. Finally (sayth he) Wheras they say, the outward washing need not to be repeated, and yet say also, they have renounced the Romish Baptisme as an impure idol in their abuse; they use shifts, and contradict themselves. For if the outward baptisme be an Idol, why doe they reteyn it? Jf not, why have they renounced it?

Answ. I have formerly shewed, the shift and contradiction to be in himself; who pleaded against the Anabaptists, that there is but one baptisme, and now against us would have two. 2. I have also shewed, that Gods ordinance turned into an idol or lye; the lye, the idol, is to be renounced, the truth of the ordinance reteyned: so doe we.

That (sayth he) which they speak of their abuse, is a shift. Difference

is to be put between a thing abused, and th'abuse therof. The scriptures are▪ the word of God, and not an impure idol to be renounced, though they be abu∣sed by the Papists and themselves &c.

Answ. when he hath nought ells to answer, he casteth reproch∣es, and calleth my reason a shift. Would he have me so impious, as to call Baptisme, the Lords supper, or other divine ordinances, idols: unless for the syn and abuse of men, which turne them to idols, as the trueth of God, was turned into a lye by the Gentiles, Rom. 1. 25. And doe not I put that very difference which himself here putteth: how then is it a shift in me, more then in him. The scripture in it self is alwayes pure: yet popish heresies falsly gathe∣red from the scriptures, are most impure; these we reject, but hold fast the scripture. Water in popish baptisme is Gods good crea∣ture, Antichrist hath turned it and the action with it, into an abo∣minable idol, as if it gave grace, and washed away syn by the work doon of a sacrilegious priest. This abomination we reject: the creature of God, is of his grace sanctified unto us, and we re∣teyn it.

Now follow his * 1.413 other reasons to prove it no idol, but true baptisme.

1. Because an Idol, &c. is an invention of man in the worship of God. wheras Baptisme in those churches, is of the holy things of God, a true signe of his covenant &c.

Answ. The first is granted him: the latter is denyed: and he but beggeth the question. For neyther doth the church continew in Rome which th'Apostles planted: neyther doth the true baptis∣me there continew, any more then the true Supper of our Lord, (turned by them into an abominable Mass,) or any more then the true ministery, which is changed by his own grant into a man of syn, a Beast, and the great Antichrist. Or, any more then the true Cen∣sure of excommunication, which they profane against such as for∣sake their idolatrous church.

2. Els those churches should not have a mixture of Gods ordinances with their own inventions, &c but should be utterly deprived of all and every one of Gods ordinances. But they have such a mixed estate: &c.

Answ. He concludeth nothing: but should conclude, therfore it is no idol to them in their abuse, but Christs true baptisme. This I deny. And first I answer, that all the heathens had before Christs coming a mixture of Gods ordinances with their own inventions:

yet were they not therfore in the covenant of grace, neyther had they the true signes and seals therof. 2. as mens inventions are idols, so Gods ordinances may by men be turned into idols, as are the sacraments in Rome. For is not the wheaten God in their sup∣per, an Idol? what mouth wil deny it? Mine opposite pressed with it, passeth it over alwayes, as if he could not see it. That thing a∣lone, would have convinced this, and many other his reasons of like sort; if he durst have medled with it.

3. Jf their baptisme were an idol, then it should be syn in them to reteyn that baptisme still: &c.

Ans. How often shall we have repetitions of the same thing? He hath been answered: the idol ought to be put away, the ordi∣nance of God, ought to be reteyned? If the Iewes had made an Idol of Iachin, 2 Chron. 3. 17. they should have repented of their ido∣latry, but let the pillar stand. And it is the great syn of the papists, that they keep their Masse, and their popish Christening, and doe not put them away as they are idols, and restore them to their an∣cient truth, as they were Christs ordinances.

Obj. When Israel fell into defiction, the Prophets that blamed their ido∣latries, did then also reprove them for not observing religiously such of the or∣dinances of God as were still remaining among them. Amos. 8. 5. with 2. 8. 11. 12. & 5. 4. 5. Ier. 17. 21.—27. with 2. 20.—28. & 7. c. Ezek. 20. 7. with v. 12. 13. So far were they from accounting Gods ordinances re∣teyned in apostasie, to be idols, and detestable things, &c.

Answ. So we blame the papists, and all hereticks, for not ob∣serving religiously Gods ordinances, whether reteyned among them, or omitted by them. Yet were not the prophets so farr from counting Gods ordinances abused by them, detestable things, as he would pretend. Jncense was Gods ordinance, yet in Esa. 1. 13. he sayth, Incense is an abomination unto me. Sacrifices were Gods ordi∣nances, yet in Esa. 66. 3. he sayth, Hee that killeth an Oxe, is as if hee slew a man: hee that sacrificeth a Lamb, as if he cut off a doggs neck: hee that offreth an oblation, as if he offred Swines blood: he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an Jdol. For these and the like reprehensions, the pro∣phets were counted blasphemers, and persecuted and killed by the Iewes: yet were there not halfe so many corruptions in their sa∣crifices, as are in baptisme and the Lords Supper now among the Antichristians: though mine opposite counteth me a blasphemer for speaking of them but as they are. And what would he say to

the Passover, and all the sacrifices that apostate Israel offred; were they not detestable things through their abuse: When for offring them as they did, they were by Gods law to be cut off as murde∣rers, and sacrificers to Divels, Lev. 17. 3. 4.—7. Deut. 32. 17. com∣pared with 1. King. 12. 28—33. 2. Chron. 11. 15. & 13. 9. & 15. 3. And was that Passover now a true sacrament and signe of Christ unto them, and seale of the forgivenesse of their syns? If not, then neither was their circumcision: for Gods people have not one sacrament true and another false unto them in the same synfull estate.

4. Baptisme (sayth he) in the defection of Christian Churches, is as cir∣cumcision was in the Apostasie of Jsrael. But circumcision in that estate was not an idol or lying signe, &c. but the Lords ordinance, a true signe, had before their defection, and still continuedin their apostasie; as hath also come to pass in the Christian Church, concerning baptisme, Gen. 17. 7.—14. and Lev. 12. 2. 3. with 2. King. 13. 23. 2. Chron. 30. Ier. 9. 26. Ezek. 23. & 32. 24. 26. 29. 32. Also Mat. 28. 18. 19. Rom. 6. 3. 4. with 2. Thes. 2. 4. Rev. 11. 1. 2. 19.

Answ. As baptisme is answerable to circumcision, so is the Lords Supper to the Passover: all of them Gods ordinances in themselves but abused by the idolarrous Israelites, and by the Antichristians to their further judgement. Yet nothing so farr a∣bused in Israel, as in the church of Rome. Did ever the Israelites beleeve the paschal lamb to be the very naturall body of Christ, and worship it for their maker? Or did they ever add so many abo∣minations to circumcision, as Antichristians doe to baptisme? or did they beleeve that the circumcising by the worke doen, took away all their synns. If they had, then I would prove against all men, that they had turned Gods sacraments into abominable idols. If they did not, then he hath made no equall comparison. But take them as they were, I deny their facraments to have been true signes of forgivenesse of sinns unto them in that their estate. And where is his proof for this? Hee citeth many Scriptures, but not one that confirmeth this point in hand. It is true they had the outward cutting of their foreskin: and so had the Canaanites of Sichem, Gen. 34. 24. but God instituted the signe of circumcisi∣on, to be the seale of the righteousness of faith, Rom. 4. 11. Now one of the Scriptures which he bringeth for proof, sayth, All the house of Jsrael were uncircumcised in the heart, Ier. 9. 26. If they had true faith,

their hearts had been therby purified, Act. 15. 9. and consequent∣ly circumcised. But they were not circumcised in heart by faith in Christ; therefore their circumcision could not seale up to them the righteousnes of faith; and so was to them a lying signe through their abuse of it. Paul sayth, If thou be a transgressor of the Law, thy cir∣cumcision is made uncircumcision, Rom. 2. 25. They transgressed, and continued in transgression, though God called them to repen∣tance by all his prophets, yet they beleeved not in the Lord their God; but rejected his statutes and his covenant that he made with their fathers, and his testimonies which he testified against them; and followed vanity and be∣came vaine, &c. and left all the commandements of the Lord their God, and made them molten images, &c. that the Lord removed them out of his sight, 2. King. 17. 13.—18. and he gave them a bill of divorce, Jer. 3. 8. and yet they continued circumcision: which could not be to them in their idolatrous and unrepentant estate, a seale of the righteous∣nesse of saith, or forgivenesse of their synns, unlesse we will contra∣dict all the Scriptures, Deut. 29. 18.—21. Mat. 3. 7.—10. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Gal. 5. 16.—21. Rom. 8. 1—8. Rev. 22. 15.

5. The covenant of God (sayth he) is an everlasting covenant, which God continueth and respecteth even in the times of apostafie, yea and when he chastiseth the transgression thereof, &c. Otherweise the ground and conti∣nuance of Gods covenant and of the seale thereof, should depend on mans work and merit, and not frecly and wholly on Gods grace and mercie.

Answ. The first is ambiguous and deceitfull: Gods covenant is everlasting, and continued in times of apostasie; but unto whom? Not to the unrepentant or unbeleeving that are hardened in their sinns, as were the Israelites; but to them that repent, be∣leeve, and turne to the Lord; Levit. 26. 15.—40. 41. 42.—45. Deut. 29. 19. 20. Prev. 1. 23.—33. Ezek. 3. 18.—21. & 18. 10.—13. 21. 22. 23. 24. 26. 27. 28.

The second is untrue; for though God damneth unrepentant and unbeleeving synners (as in justice he needs must, because they are not in Christ,) yet doth not the covenant or seale depend on mans work or merit. For it is Gods work & grace through Christs merits onely, that men doe repent, beleeve, and return unto him, Act. 11. 18. Eph. 2. 4. 5.—8. 9. And there is no covenant between God and man, but conditionall: for without faith and holines no man shall see the Lord, Mark. 16. 16. Heb. 12. 14. Rom. 11. 20. 21. 22. 23. Though these conditions even in men, are the worke of God in

them, Heb. 8. 10. 12. Whosoever is born of God, overcommeth the world, synneth not; but keepeth himselfe, and the wicked one toucheth him not, 1. Ioh. 5. 4. 18. And they that teach otherweise, destroy the Gospel, and open a gap to all profanenesse and licen∣tiousnesse.

Jf God (sayth he) break the covenant on his part, when men break it on theirs, then should there stil be a new entring into the covenant again between God and man: and a new baptisme dayly received againe, as the signe and seale thereof.

Answ. God alwayes breaketh not the covenant on his part, when men break it on theirs: but calleth them often back unto repentance, Psa. 89. 31—34. Exo. 32. & 33. chapters. But to some that are hardned, and wil not repent, he breaketh his covenant visibly, casting them out of his church, cutting them off, Rom. 11. 20. 22. giving them a bil of divorce, Jer. 3. 8. removeth the candlestick, Rev. 2. 5. Otherweise if a man comming from Iudaisme or paganisme to the Christian faith and Church, doe againe revolt from Christ to Iudaisme or paganisme, and for obstinacie in his sin is cut off by the power of Christ from his Church: he must still be reputed in the covenant of God visibly on Gods part: which is most un∣true, seeing God on his part hath cut them off, and given them a bill of divorce. If any such returne, the covenant must be renewed, Hos. 2. 7. 19. 20. 2. Cor. 6. 17. 18. yet the seale of the covenant once gi∣ven, is not to be repeated; as a Christian revolted to paganisme, and cut off from the Church; is not when hee returneth, baptised againe. Because though he was visibly cut off even of God, for his syn: yet by his returne, it appeareth that hee still belonged to his election of grace which was to man invisible, whiles he continued cut off. Yea though he received the seale after a false manner, when it was not due unto him: yet when hee turneth to the Lord it is not repeated. As the Israelites which were circumcised after they were divorced from God, Ier. 3. 8. had no new circumcision in the flesh, when they turned unto God, Ezr. 6. 21.

6. If such were the baptisme of the Church in Rome, &c. then should it be likewise in the East Churches, and in all Churches of the world, when they fall into sin, breaking the covenant. &c.

Answ. I deny the comparison. For Rome is revolted from Christ to Antichrist, and fallen from grace, (by the Apostles rule, Gal. 5. 4.) and is become dead in syn, Rev. 20. and is not the true

Church of Christ, but a Man of syn, and whore of Babylon, 2. Thes. 2. Rev. 17. which things are before proved. Such is not the state of all Churches that syn and break the convenant: till for their hard∣nes and contempt of God, they be also cut off, as Rome is: which when they bee, then have they no true sacraments any longer a∣mong them.

7. If there, baptisme were indeed a lying signe and fiction, then would it follow that there should be no salvation for any members of those Churches, re∣teining the baptisme there received. For the signe hath reference to the cove∣nant and thing signified, and so a lying signe must have respect to a lying co∣venant. And by a lying covenant there is no salvation to any, &c.

Answ. The covenant which the Church of Rome hath made with Antichrist, is a lying covenant; and hath lying signes to con∣firme it; and God hath sent them strong delusion to beleeve a lye, that they all might be damned, who beleeve not the truth, but had pleasure in un∣righteousnes, 2. Thes. 2. 11. 12. Therefore by the covenant and seales of that Antichristian synagogue, wee cannot say, that any one by the promise of God shall be saved. But by the covenant of grace which God communicateth with his elect in that and other false churches, many are saved: but that is not the covenant of the church. Of which poynt, I have spoken before, in answer to his 2. Argument for the church of Rome. His reasons are the same, againe and againe repeated. Here further note, how by his argument, the popish Masse may bee justified, thus. If the Lords Supper or Masse in Rome, be an idol, a lying signe and fiction; then is there no salvation for the members of that Church, reteyning the Masse. For a lying signe must have respect to a lying covenant, and by a lying covenant there is no salvation to any. But the church of Rome (by mine opposites plea) is in the covenant of salvation, which is the true covenant; therefore it also hath the true signe and seale of that covenant in their Masse or Babylonish Supper. For our Lords Supper is the true signe and seale of the forgivenesse of synns, and covenant of grace, Mat. 26. 26. 28. Luk. 22. 19. 20. If hee yeeld not this, then hee must say, that they have two covenants, the one of life and salvation sealed to them by baptisme, the other of death and damnation, sealed unto them by the Masse or Supper. So they shall goe both to heaven and hell, by their double covenant.

8. Finally (sayth he) the baptisme of those Churches is from heaven,

and not of men: and is derived unto us from the Apostles of Christ, through the loynes of the church of Rome, &c. Therefore is no idollor lying signe, but the true sacrament and ordinance of the Lord, Math. 21. 21. & 28. 18. 19. with Rom. 6. 3. 4. Heb. 7. 9. 10. 2. Chron. 30. ch.

Answ. I deny this his conclusion, it being but a begging of the question which he shoud have proved. It is not their baptisme which is from heaven: they are fallen from heaven, and become a Beast (or kingdom Ecclesiasticall) arisen out of the earth, Rev. 13. 11. they are gone out from the Apostolike Church, and become Antichrists, 1. Joh. 2. 18. 19. Mine opposite himself hath granted that the Pope and his Hierarchie are Antichrist, the Man of syn, the Beast; never maried to Christ. Again he sayth (in this his Chr. plea p. 3.) Jn baptisme the action is wholly enjoyned & layd upon the baptiser, and not upon the baptised. The baptizers in Rome, are the Priests, which be a part of the beast, and Man of syn: on them the whole action lyeth, as he sayth. Now is this baptisme from heaven? Did God ever bid Antichrist baptise? The whole action then of popish baptisme, lyeth upon them that are confessed by him, to be Anti∣christ: & yet this baptisme he wil have to be from heaven. 2. They were not in the loyns of the primitive Christian Church, either by nature or by grace; otherweise then all nations in Moses time, were in the loynes of the primitive Church in Noes time. 3. We have not our baptisme frō them, but from God, who hath delive∣red us from Antichrist, & given us to his son Christ; and hath so sanctified to us that baptising with water in his name, which they idolatrously and synfully abused; as wee need no other outward washing, but to be baptised by his spirit; as his dealing with such as had been circumcised in Israel, (after they were become a false church, and were divorced from him) and returned againe unto him, doth assure us; 2. Chron. 30. ch. Ezr. 6. 21. His reason may also as probably bee framed thus. The Lords Supper or Masse in the Church of Rome, is from heaven, not of men, Math. 26. Luk. 22. and is derived unto us from the Apostles of Christ, through the loynes of that Church, which have from that time reteyned and continued it to this day. Therefore it is not an idoll or lying signe; howsoever all protestants with one mouth call it justly, an idoll, an horrible idoll, an abomination, and the like. The Mini∣nistery of the church of Rome, is from heaven, and not of men, Rom. 12. and is derived to us from the Apostles, through the

loynes of that church, which have from that time continued it to this day. Therefore it is not the Man of Syn, the Beast, the Anti∣christ, as all protestants say, and as Mr. Iohnson himselfe hath pleaded in his last book, but the true ministery and ordinance of the Lord. The like may be sayd for their Excommunications, and all other divine ordinances which that church hath synfully pro∣faned. Yea the very same plea, might all the heathens have made for their sactifices and divine ordinances, which from Noe and his sonns, through the loynes of their parents were derived unto them; as before I have manifested.

Whereas I * 1.414 described the abominable manner of baptising in the Church of Rome, how heathen-like they profane Christs or∣dinance, mine opposite not being able to justifie their impiety, yet pleadeth his best, thus;

† 1.415 But will it therefore follow, that the baptisme there had is not Gods or∣dinance, but an idoll, a false and lying signe, &c.

Answ. It followeth that they in their Antichristian estate and abuse, have changed Gods ordinance into an idoll and lying signe, as the Gentiles of old, changed the truth of God into a lye, Rom. 1. 25. And have added also many lyes and lying signes of their own devising, as bad as did the heathens.

Or will it follow, because of their errours and corruptions, that the bap∣tisme there had is to be renounced, and an other new one to be received?

Answ. Their lyes and lying signes, and changing of the truth into a lye, are all to bee renounced: but the ordinance of God which he hath restored to the former truth unto those that repent and beleeve in him, is not to be renounced, and a new received; and such is the outward washing with water in his name, 2 Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. 21.

Is every thing abused or misapplyed by men, straight way an idoll?

Answ. Every thing so abused as they doe baptisme and the Lords Supper, is straight way an idoll: for divine honour is given to the creature, and work of a wicked mans hand, Exod. 20. Yea let him be a witnes against himselfe: for afterward in pag. 246. hee sayth touching book-prayer; that it is an image and similitude of spiri∣tuall prayer, which yet it is not. And so these bookes and stinted prayers pre∣scribed by man in the worship of God, come in deed to bee idols, supplying the place of the word and spirit of God, which ought not to be. Here the abuse of the book by his owne grant, maketh it in deed an idoll: for the

book may lawfully be used and read of men for instruction, as wel as written Sermons, Homilies, &c.

Doe they that are baptised, bow downe to it and worship it?

Answ. Did the infants that were offred to Molech, (Levit. 20. ••.) bow down and worship it? Or they that made their belly their God, Phil. 3. 19. did they bow down to their belly and worship it? Or, doe they that make the book an idol, as himselfe sayth; bow down and worship the book? How strangely doth hee plead: as if idols cannot be set up in, and worshipped with the heart. But they bow down & worship the bread in the Supper: will he grant that to be an idoll?

Jf that were doen unto it (sayth hee) as was unto the Sun among the Jewes; why might it not be stil notwithstanding Gods ordinance in it selfe: as the Sun was the true Sun, and Gods creature, even unto them, and in that their estate, whiles they made it an idol to themselves.

Answ. O fraud and guile in pleading for idolaters! Every crea∣ture of God is † 1.416 good, every ordinance of God is holy in it selfe: who doubteth of it? If this distinction helpeth the popish sacra∣ments, it helpeth the heathens idols of silver and gold, which are Gods good creatures in themselves. But it is a mere fallacie to rea∣son as he doth from the Sun to Baptisme; from a creature which is an absolute substance, to a sacrament which is a relation of the covenant between God and men. No idolatry, unbeleef, or o∣ther wickednes can hinder the Sun from being Gods creature un∣to men in that their synfull estate. If it bee likeweise in the sacra∣ment, then no idolatry, unbeleef, or other wickednes, can hinder baptisme and the Lords supper from being true signes and seales of Gods covenant of grace and forgivenesse of synns, unto Turks or Pagans, in their synfull estate, if they baptise with water in the name of the Lord, and eat the bread and wine in the Supper of our Lord. But he should have knowen that common received rule of all truly religious, that Nothing is in deed a sacrament, without the use ordeyned of God: as we are taught of the Apostle, This is not to eat the Lords Supper: 1. Cor. 11. 20. The water that flowed out of the rock, was the same creature of God to men that drunk of it, and to the beasts that drunk of it, Numb. 20. 11. but it was a sa∣crament to men onely, using it for a confirmation of their faith, by a divine institution, 1. Cor. 10. 4. Further, by his reason, it is un∣denyable that the Pope himselfe (whom he acknowledgeth to be

Antichrist) and all that partake with him in his Masse, notwith∣standing all their idolatry and heresie thereabout, doe eat the true sacrament, signe and seale of the forgivenesse of their synns. And why then should hee deny the Pope to bee as good a Christian as himselfe: seing all they are blessed whose synns are forgiven them, Rom. 4. 6. 7.

Let it be observed, that they baptise onely in the name of the Lord: and with acknowledgement of the Articles of the Christian saith, as in their form of baptisme may be seen.

Answ. And let it also bee observed, that they sacrifice their Masse (or celebrate their idolatrous supper) onely in the name of the Lord; and with acknowledgement of the same Articles of Christian faith, even by the Pope himselfe. Why then hath hee pleaded against the Pope and his Hierarchy, that they, they onely are the Man of syn, the son of perdition, the Beast, the Antichrist; and why wondred he so at me, when I called for proofe that Christ was maried to that Beast; seeing he hath the same baptisme, the same Lords Supper, the same beleef touching the Articles of faith, that the people of his church have. But their counterfeit profes∣sion of Christ is before discovered. And they that baptize (which are the Hierarchy) he confesseth to be the Man of syn, the Anti∣christ, they are none of the church (as we have heard) but ulcers, gangrenes, &c. what now have such to doe with the name of the Lord, or administration of the seales of his covenant. And com∣pare with this, that which himself sayth in the 3. page of his book, that the action (of baptisme) is wholly enjoyned and layd upon the bap∣tiser, and not upon the baptised. If this be so, where hath God layd the action of baptizing upon Antichrist, the Man of syn: and if God hath not layd it upon him, how can hee truely doe it in Gods name?

How will they prove (sayth he) that it is a lying signe unto them in their estate, seeing baptisme (as the other sacraments in Israel and under the Gos∣pel) hath this in it to be a signe by the ordinance of God, not at the pleasure of man. And God is the God of truth, and appoynteth no lying signes, but true. Neither can mans iniquity make Gods signes to be lying signes. Synful ther∣fore and erroneous it is so to think, if not also blasphemous so to speak.

Answ. And was it synfull and erroneous (thinketh he) in Paul, when he sayd, They changed the truth of God into a lye, Rom. 1. 25. For if mans iniquity cannot change Gods signes into lying signes:

how should it change the truth of God into a lye? And how could Ieremie have proved unto the Iewes (if mine opposite had then lived to plead for them) that those were lying words, when they sayd The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, &c. Ier. 7. 4. for had they not in deed the Temple of the Lord, his true ordinance and signe, whereof they spake? The word of God is truth, Ioh. 17. 17. How then should mans iniquity, make Gods truth to be a lye un∣to themselues, though they pervert the word unto all manner false-doctrine, errour and heresie▪ Idols are lies, Esa. 44. 20. Ier. 16. 19. 20. How can the Pope make an idoll of the bread in the sacrament, though he fall downe and worship it, and beleeve it is his maker: seeing as it is bread, it is a true thing, and Gods good creature; as it is sacramentall bread, it is a true signe by the ordi∣nance of God, who appoynteth no lying signes. Is it not blasphe∣mous now, and would he not rend his clothes as did † 1.417 Caiaphas, if he should heare one call the Popes sacrament of the altar, an idol, or a lying signe unto him in that estate? But to conclude, The sa∣craments are in deed signes by the ordinance of God, not at mans will: Gods ordinance maketh them signes of grace to the faithful receivers onely, 1. Cor. 11. 20. 29. Rom. 2. 25 Act. 8. 36. 37. If infidels and Antichrists falsly challenge and usurp Gods signes, and abuse them to open idolatry, and their own perdition; they change the truth of Gods ordinance into a lye unto themselves; and whiles they vainly think to have forgivenesse of synns by them, they add syn unto syn, and receive their own damnation.

Whereas I had * 1.418 set downe two reasons to prove the Popish baptisme false, and a lying signe unto them: mine opposite passeth them over, as too heavy for him; and cometh to † 1.419 set downe differences between Gods ordinances and mens corruptions; Gods signes, and mens errours: Mariage, meates and drinks, and the abuses of these; the scriptures, and the errors gathered from them; the Sun, Moon and Starrs, as they are creatures, and as they are made idols and worshiped of men, &c. Wherein he laboureth to prove the thing which we hold; and doth most injuriously in∣timate against us, as if we thought the contrary. Should we be so wicked as to imagine the ordinances of God, or his creatures to be evill in themselves? Farr be it from us. Nay we say, that the pa∣pists for abusing the sacraments, and turning them to lyes and idols, shall have the greater judgement: not for abusing bread and

wine and water as they are creatures onely, but for abusing them as they are sacramentall signes ordeyned of Christ, which maketh their profanation more horrible, their damnation more just. But this is a practise of many, that plead for errour; to leave the arguments which doe convince them, and to propone new questions and reasons of their owne: that they may seeme to say something, by multitude of words.

So when I shewed † 1.420 the example of the idolatrous Israelites, that * 1.421 repenting and forsaking their false Synagogues & lying signes in them usurped, they needed not a new outward cutting or circumcising, as is shewed at large in our former writings. Discovery, p. 116.—120. Apolog. p. 110.—113. He passeth over the reasons manifested in those books, as if he had never seen them: when as the one was most of it penned by him∣self. And now he pleadeth:

† 1.422 Wheras they say, that circumcision was also a lying signe, and false sa∣crament to Jsrael in their defection, how doe they prove it? where doth the Scripture teach it? will they have us take it on their bare word, and beleeve that their saying are Oracles? &c.

Answ. He might have seen reasons in the books before cited, besides those that I have set down. But thus in seeking to wound us, he hath smitten through his own sides, as if himselfe when he wrote those things in our Apologie, would have had men beleeve his bare word, and that his sayings were Oracles. Whereas, if ever hee wrote soundly in his life, he did it in that Apologie, as all men of good judgement may perceive. Further now to answer him, I say, that I spake of their lying signes, which implyed their Passover and sacrifices, as well as their circumcision. And those being so pro∣faned, as for them they were by Gods Law to bee cut off as mur∣derers, Levit. 17. as sacrificers to Divils, not to God, Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15. & 15. 3. were they then true signes unto them of Gods grace and fauour, and forgivenesse of their synns in Christ? The Scripture teacheth, they could not be partakers of the Lords table, and of the table of Divils, 1. Cor. 10 21. In particular, for their circumcision, I proved it thus, † 1.423 True circumcision was the seale of the righteousness of saith, Rom. 4. 11. Jsrael in their apostasie were fallen from the faith Hos. 11. 12. they were without the true God, without Priest to teach, & without Law, 2. Chron. 15. 3. and how then could they have the true circum∣cision the seale of the righteousness of saith, and forgivenes of their sinns in that sinful estate. Thus I shewed Gods words (not mine own) for oracles.

He asketh, if we wil be wiser, and more righteous then God himself, who accounted them stil to be his people, under his covenant, and himselfe to be their God, and upon this ground called them to repentance, &c.

Answ. All this notwithstanding, whiles they continued unre∣pent and unbeleeving, and * 1.424 hardned their necks against the Lord their God; &c. their circumcisim (by Pauls doctrine) was made uncircumcision, Rom. 2. 25. their sacrifices were an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 15. 8. And hee might have seen in the Scriptures, that though Israel were divorced from the Lord, Ier. 3. 8. and not his people; or wife, nor he her husband, Hos. 1. 9. & 2. 2. yet they are in respect of their former state, their continuall profession, and the future mercie towards them, called Gods people still, even till Christs time, Esai. 11. 11. 16. Amos. 9. 14. That he should not urge a phrase (as his manner is,) against the plain doctrines of the Scrip∣ture.

Obj. What wil they say to the circumcision of Judah in their apostasie, &c. was it also among them none of Gods ordinance, but an idol? &c.

Answ. It was Gods ordinance, though abused by the unwor∣thy receivers, as before is shewed. But he from a false church, and Babylon, fl••eth to Sion the true Church corrupted; which is his perpetuall fallacie. If Iudah, or any Church in the world had doen with the sacraments as Rome hath doen, they had changed them into idols, contrary to the 2. commandement. But Iudah never did so with circumcision and the Passover; he sheweth no word of God to prove it.

Obj. Have the gates of hell more prevailed against the Christian Church since Christs coming, then they did or could against the Church of the Iewes before his coming in the flesh? Mat. 16. 18.

Answ. This old popish reason, hath been often answered by ma∣ny Writers against the Antichristians: and is of no more force for Rome turned to Antichrist, then for Ephesus, Corinth, and other churches turned to Mahomet. For what priviledge (besides a po∣pish dreame) had Rome above Ephesus? Should it, (because it cru∣cified Christ, and is therefore cursed above all cities,) have prero∣gative above Ephesus, wherin was a church (in Pauls time) which was the ground and pillar of truth. 1. Tim. 1. 3. & 3. 15. yet is that church long since cut off: but Romes church must continue, for her good service to Divils and idols, Rev. 9. 20. and for worshiping the Beast, Rev. 13. He might have seen in Rev. 12. that the woman

the Church perisheth not, though she be fled into the wildernesse, from the presence of the Serpent, and synagogue of Antichrist. His other repetitions again and again; are before answered.

Obj. The ordinances of God may in any churches become unprofitable to men by their own sinns, circumcision may be made uncircumcision to such as break the Law, &c. Rom. 2. 25. 26. so baptisme now. But shall we there∣fore say, that they are not in such churches, to such persons, the Lords ordinan∣ces, nor his true signes and sacraments, but idols and lying signes, &c. Was the Lords table in the Church of Corinth, a table of Divils; or the Lords Sup∣per an idoll or lying signe, &c. to such as eat it unworthily? Was it not the Lords ordinance, and true sacrament, though sinfully abused by them? &c.

Ans. The Lords ordinances abide alwayes the same, and holy in themselves, howsoever abused by Christians, by Antichristians, by Iewes, Turks or Pagans, to their perdition. Neither is there a like degree of abuse in all; neither doth every abuse make a thing an idoll: but when the honour due to God alone, is given to a creature, then it is made an idoll: and so I have proved is doen in the church of Rome; to which proofs he answereth not. I instan∣ced † 1.425 the Lords Supper in Rome, whereof they have made an abo∣minable idoll, worshiping a peece of bread as their maker. Mine opposite will never mention or meddle with this, but shunneth it as convinced in conscience. And from Antichrists church, runneth to the Christian Church in Corinth; and asketh if the Lords ta∣ble there, were a table of Divils? I answer, No; not then in Corinth, but now in Rome, they have made it by their idolatrous Masse, a table of Divils: and as Moses sayd of Israel, they sacrificed to Divils, not to God. Deut. 32. 17. so say I of these Antichristians, their sacrifice of the altar is a sacrifice to Divils, not to God. This he should have disproved, if he could have doen it; and not to leave the persons and things whereof wee dispute, and run to others. So the Lords baptisme, they have turned into an idol▪ ascribing the gift of grace (which onely is Gods) to water, words and works of men: that as the Gentiles turned the truth of God into a lye, Rom. 1. these * 1.426 Gentiles also have turned the truth of God, and of his sacra∣ments into lyes. And as the Lords incense and sacrifices were an abomination to him, from the hands of wicked sinners. Esai. 1. 13. Prov. 15. 8. so the Lords sacraments are an abomination to him, from the hands of Antichristians. And as hee doth, so ought all his people to esteeme of them; and not to regard † 1.427 lying words of

such as cry nothing but the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the sacraments and ordinances of the Lord; to deceive Gods people, and to harden the synners in their wicked works.

Wheras I distinctly * 1.428 shewed the idolatry committed in Anti∣christs baptising of his subjects, partly by perverting the holy signes, as the Israelites did the brasen serpent, ••. King. 1••. 4. partly by inventing signes of his owne, as crosses, exorcismes, &c. Mine opposite first † censureth the things I wrote to be notable shifts, er∣rours,* 1.429 contradictions, abuse of scriptures, vain distinctions, and odious as∣sertions. Such grace hath flowed from his tongue and pen.

1. Observe (sayth he) a needless distinction of idols, nothing helping for the question in hand.

Answ. The distinction is true and needfull to discern the truth of the question, against his clamorous reproches, as if I called Gods ordinance in it self considered, an idoll.

2. Jf they mean (sayth he) that baptisme there had is an idol of both sorts, they doe the more increase their errour.

Answ. I doe so meane: yet is there no increase of errour: I heare his bold words, but no proof.

3. They speak of crosses, exorcismes, &c. whereas we speak of the bap∣tisme it selfe.

Ans. So doe I: but of popish baptisme, mixed with Christs or∣dinances and Antichrists together. All parts of a thing put toge∣ther, make the whole: and it is deceitfull dealing to dazel mens eyes with the whores golden cup, and to passe by the abomina∣ble ingredients, the fornications that are in it, when both are joy∣ned together, Rev. 17. 4.

4. They speak of the abuse, our question is of the thing it selfe, notwith∣standing their sinful abuse.

Ans. Our question is of popish baptisme, which cannot bee rightly handled without looking to their abuses: for how should we judge of the heathens worship and sacrifices, if wee looke not upon their abuses, as Paul doth in Rom. 1. The same I answer to his 5. exception, of their opinions and errours. Take away the errours of actions, and what fault can we finde with any?

6. If the Romish baptisme be a lye in the right hand of all that receive it: then of infants; then also in their own right hand that were baptised there. Not to speak of the Martyrs, &c.

Ans. There is no respect of persons with God. Bee they old or

yong, better or worse: syn is syn in all. Though Gods grace in Christ, purgeth syn from his elect, which remaineth in the repro∣bates.

His 7. 8. and 9. exceptions, are vain; and repetitions of former things, without conviction. If Bellarmine or any speak truth, wee may speak it with them: so Paul speaketh with the heathen Poets, Tet. 1. 12. 13. Act. 17. 28.

10. Jf they mean the true sacraments in Christs Church, seale not up to Gods people, forgiveness of sinns, it is an errour: if they meane that they doe not themselves take away sinns, and conferr grace, they use shifts, and keep not to the poynt of the relation here spoken of, and as it is appoynted to bee by the Lord himself.

Answ. The first I grant him; and hee knew well it was not my meaning. The latter I have proved, that they being under Gods wrath, 2. Thess. 2. have no seale from God of forgivenesse of synns in that estate. And their doctrine of conferring grace by the work doen, is hereticall and idolatrous: which he not being able to gainsay, puts it away (as his manner is) with a shift.

11. From Gods sentence of condemnation touching Antichrist and his adhaerents, they reason to Gods baptisme never condemned by the Lord, but still continued in the Church and Temple of God, where Antichrist sitteth.

Ans. Of his own mouth let him be judged. Wee reason onely of Antichrist and his adherents, the Whore of Babylon, or a∣dulterous church, which hee sayth are condemned of God. How then doth God give them the signe and seale of grace & forgive∣nesse of synns? Gods baptisme wee condemne not, neither our Lords Supper: but Antichrists Christening and Masse, we deny to be Christs baptisme and supper. Hee still beggeth the question which he should prove. And let him take away Antichrist and his adhaerents; and the church of Rome, whereof we reason, wil be vani∣shed as smoke, and come to nothing: as take away Christ and his adhaerents, so there will bee no Christian Church, nor sacraments to be found.

12. From the brasen serpent, which was but a temporary and extraordi∣nary signe, the use whereof was ceased when it was thus perverted, &c. they reason to baptisme, which is an ordinary signe, whose use still continueth, and may never be taken away or destroyed, to the end of the world.

Ans. We reason not from the one to the other: but by the abuse

of the one, we shew the abuse of the other. And what is this in him but a shift, to plead the temporarinesse of that signe? For if they had burnt incense to it in the wildernesse; or if they had burnt in∣cense to the † 1.430 Cherubims, or brazen Bulls, or pillars which were continued signes, they had made idols of them nevertheless. O∣therweise the wheaten god in the Popish supper is no idol: seeing the use of the Lords Supper continueth to the worlds end, as well as baptisme. And hitherto of the shifts as he calleth them; wherein how he hath shifted in sted of answering by the word of truth, the wise reader may see. Like these are his * 1.431 catalogue of Errours.

1. That the baptisme had in the church of Rome is an idol, &c.

Ans. 1. This is proved by the 2. commandement, Exod. 20. whiles they ascribe divine honour to the creature. 2. It is proved also by his owne assertion, that bookes of prayer, read for prayer, are idols; as before I shewed from his words in his last book. 3. He sheweth not one word to prove it an errour in me: but sayth, Of which more hereafter. Thus vain tantologies are his arguments to oppose the truth which he calleth Errour.

2. That whereas idols are of two sorts, both the kinds are in Popish bap∣tisme. Jf it be as the brazen serpent, that from an holy signe was perverted to an idol, it should presently be destroyed, as 2. King. 18. 4.

Answ. I deny his inference. If they had burnt incense to the Temple, should it have been destroyed. The brazen serpent was named but for an instance, to shew that holy signes may be made idols by wicked men. This doctrine hee being not able to con∣vince; leaveth it, and would evade by the destroying of it. As if all idols must bee destroyed. The heathens made idols of the Sun, Moon, Starrs, Beasts, Fishes, Mountaines, Lakes, &c. Must all these therefore be destroyed? If men make an idol of their King, as did the Babylonians, Dan. 6. 7. must the King presently be destroyed? whoever heard of such divinity? That which hee addeth of the Popes crossings, exorcismes, &c. is before answered: for he sayth, Our question is of the baptisme it selfe; as if those were not a part of Popish baptisme. He would have wicked mens actions separated from all their synns, errours and wickednes in doing them. So in deed I could justifie all idolatry in the world: for take away the errour and syn of an action, and that which remaineth must needs be good.

3. They say not they have renounced the abuses and kept the baptisme it

selfe, &c. but say they have renounced that Romish baptisme, as an impure idol in their abuse. If they have in deed so doen, then here again is notable er∣rour and Anabaptistry. And now then what outward baptisme have they remaining to themselves?

Ans. Neither doth Solomon say, the abuse of the wickeds sa∣crifice is an abomination, and except the sacrifice as holy: but he sayth expresly, The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 15. 8. He was answered before to his two baptismes outward and inward, that the Apostle (and elsewhere himselfe) maketh but one baptisme, Eph. 4. 5. And the outward part thereof we reteyne as now sanctified to us of God; as the outward cutting of the idola∣trous Israelites was to them that repented, 2. Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. 21. which again he putteth off till afterwards.

4. Note also that the brazen Serpent was not in deed an idol: but an holy ordinance of God, which in time came to be idolatrously abused, &c.

Ans. He sayth all things, but proves nothing. It was in deed an idol, and an holy ordinance idolatrously abused also. These things stand well together. The Sun was in deed an idoll to them that worshiped it: and yet it was a good creature of God also idola∣trously abused. The bread in the sacrament is in deed an idoll to Papists that worship it as their maker: yet is it also in it selfe, Gods ordinance idolatrously abused: so is popish baptisme. Hee might even as wel say, that Reubens fact in lying with his fathers concu∣bine, was not in deed adultery; but an abuse of Gods ordinance of mariage, or a defiling of his fathers bed, Gen. 35. 22. & 49. 4.

5. Moreover, the brazen Serpent was but a temporary ordinance, &c.

Ans. This was the twelft of his shifts before: now hee repeateth and multiplieth it among his Errours. I refer the reader to my for∣mer answer.

6 That the Romish baptisme is an impure idol in their abuse, standing up in the place of Christ, and his precious blood, which it is not, pretending to give grace, &c. which it doth not. But the baptisme in the church of Rome is Gods ordinance, had and planted there by the Apostles, &c. These are the errours and abuses of men about it, not the nature of the baptisme it selfe. O∣therweise all that have received it, ought to renounce it utterly, and to get an other outward baptisme, &c.

Answ. This also was before objected and answered: and it is a world to see how he wearieth his reader with repeating worthlesse reasons. Sacrificing among the heathens I have before proved was

Gods ordinance. So was the Lords supper in the church of Rome in the Apostles time: so was excommunication; so was the Mini∣stery of Bishops, &c. These have been continued in Rome with their baptisme: may we not say therefore the Masse is an idoll, or that the Bishop the Pope of Rome now is an idol and Antichrist? Of our getting an other baptisme (which is the usuall foot and base of his arguments) we have before spoken that which he could not take away.

Obj. Wil these men say, that we can without sin reteine any thing, and not utterly reject it, that standeth up in the place of Christs precious blood? &c.

Ans. We cannot indeed without syn reteyne it, while so it stan∣deth: neither doe we so reteyn it; far be it from us. Neither might the Gentiles reteyn the lye, which they had made of the truth of God, Rom. 1. 25. But when the lye was doen away, and God resto∣red to them his former trueth, that they were to reteyn. The ido∣latrous Israelites, if they had set up their own blood of circumci∣sion in place of Christs blood; might not without syn have retey∣ned it whiles so it stood. Yet repenting of their idolatry, they might keep the outward signe without repeating it: even so we in this case.

Obj. Errors and abuses of men may hurt themselves: but cannot change the nature of Gods ordinance in it selfe.

Answ. Not in it selfe I grant, considered without their abuse: but togither with their abuse, Gods ordinance of sacrifice, incense, &c. is an abomination to him, Prov. 15. 8. Esa. 1. 13. So baptisme and the Supper now in Rom, are abominations to the Lord.

Obj. Mans unbeleefe cannot make the faith of God of none effect. God is true, though every man be a lyar, Rom. 3. 3. 4.

Ans. What may we think would he conclude from this Scrip∣ture? To cite a place, and leave it doubtfull what hee inferreth, is to deceive the reader. If he intend (according to the question in hand) that the sacraments are seales of grace and of salvation un∣to men, whether they beleeve or doe not beleeve: it is a notable errour overthrowing the Gospel; and establishing the popish he∣refie of grace ex opere operato, by the work doen. The Scriptures teach, touching Gods vvord and promise, that it profiteth not them that heare it, if it be not mixed vvith faith in them, Heb. 4. 2. if men beleeve not, they shall not be established, Esai. 7. 9. but shall be damned, Mark. 16. 16. they shall not see life, but the wrath of

God abideth on them, Ioh. 3. 36. Neither is the faith of God, by mens unbeleef, made without effect. For his truth and faithful∣nesse is confirmed as well in damning unrepentant & unbeleeving synners, as in saving those that repent and beleeve. When the righteous turneth from his righteousnes, and committeth iniqui∣tie; he shall dye in his iniquity; and yet the way of the Lord is e∣quall; as sayth the prophet; Ezek. 18. 24. 25. 26. Again, as all men naturally are lyars, and doe faile and break covenant on their part, by syn; which God never doeth: so if they continue in syn, and turne not to the Lord by repentance and faith, they all perish, Luk. 13. 3. 5. Rom. 8. 6.—10. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Jude v. 5. But let men repent, and turn from their transgressions, so iniquity shall not be their ruine, Ezek. 18. 30. Otherweise it would follow, that after men are entred into covenant with God, & are baptized: though they fall frō Christ to Antichrist (as the church of Rome hath doen) though they fall to Mahomet (as many East churches have doen;) though they turne to be Iewes or pagans, and so dye, yet they shall be sa∣ved; for their unbeleef cannot make the faith of God of none effect. But so to expound this Scripture Rom. 3. were to turn judgement into wormwood, unto the destruction of mens soules. And if mine opposite would not gather some such thing from it; what will it help his plea for the baptisme of the church of Rome, which is the whore of Babylon, whom God hath devoted unto de∣struction, except they repent. Rev. 17. & 18. chap.

Obj. The Jewes in Christs time and before, holding justification by cir∣cumcision, & workes of the Law; set these up in the place of Christ & his pre∣cious blood, &c. Should we therfore say, that circumcision was then an impure idoll in their abuse? &c. Or should wee not rather learn to put difference be∣tween Gods ordinance in it selfe, and between mans abuse thereof, &c.

Ans. Whensoever Iew or Gentile, held justification by circum∣cision, sacrifice, or works of the Law: they made their sacraments, sacrifices, and workes idols, impure idols to themselves in their a∣buse. And it is admirable, that men teaching religion, should bee ignorant, that whatsoever creature or work of man is put in the place of God and Christ; it is therby made an idol: though Gods ordinances, and the workes of his Law in themselves are alwayes good; but turned to idols, are alwayes evill, and an abomination to the Lord, as is before proved. What mouth can deny, but the Pa∣pists are idolaters in praying to Saints and Angels? If idolaters,

then they serve idols: if they serve idols in so praying; then the Saincts and Angels are idols to them in their synfull abuse. Yet who knoweth not that the Saincts and Angels in heaven, are bles∣sed and holy, and not Idols in themselves. But this is mine op∣posites continual fallacie wherby he would deceive his reader; that because Baptisme and the Lords supper, are Gods holy ordinan∣ces in themselves; therfore the Papists that worship them as Gods, have not made them idols to themselves. And under this shelter of falshood he shrowdeth himself when he hath nought else to answer: repeting it I know not how often.

7. That the Romish baptisme is a lye "in the right hand of all that so* 1.432 receive it. Where the Prophet speaketh of idols, that by nature are no Gods &c. Jf the Romish baptisme were in the nature of it no baptisme &c, then should it without question be renounced as a very idol in deed. &c.

Answ. Belike then, he would have us take it for no lye, but for a truth, that popish baptisme giveth grace, and washeth away syn by the work doen. Neyther is it a lye, but truth, that bread in their Mass is very Christ really & properly, as he died on the cross. To apply Esa. 44. 20. against these things, is to hold an errour. Wel, let my errour continue with me: for I trust I shall alwayes hold that they are lyes in the right hand of all that so receive them. And as the prophet speaketh of thē that by nature were no Gods: so doe I. For neyther is water in Baptisme, not wine in the Masse, Christs blood naturally: neyther can they doe that which onely Christs blood effecteth. And how ever there is difference between the idols of false Gods, and the idols of the true God; yet the scripture calleth them all Divils, Deut. 32. 17. 2 Chron. 11. 15. 1 Cor. 10. 20. so I call them all lyes. And where he sayth, if it were in the nature of it no baptisme; he might have knowen, that Gods true ordinance of baptisme, turned into a lye, maketh it a lying baptisme, and yet some baptisme it is, though not the true. Wherof the lye being put away, and the truth restored of God unto us; there need no o∣ther renunciation, as before I have proved. His other repetitions and questions of the same thing; need no further answer.

Obj. How wil he shew, that baptisme is so received as standing in the place of Christ &c. seing they are infants usually that receive it there &c.

Answ. Even as he wil shew against the Anabaptists, that bap∣tisme is truly and rightly received in Christian churches: where they are infants usually that receive it. For as the covenant of

Christ is to parents and their seed: so the covenant of Antichrist is to parents and their seed; even the covenant of destruction; that their babes be dashed against the Rock, Psal. 137. 9. Esa. 13. 16. The infants of Iewes, are Iewes; the infants of Turks are Turks; the in∣fants of Christians are Christians: so the infants of Antichristians are Antichristians.

Obj. Considering also their profession of Christ, and baptising with water in the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost; and that this alone is in deed the baptisme of that church; the other things being but erroneous opinions, and synfull additions &c.

Answ. We have before considered that the profession of that church, is all one with the profession of the Pope, who eyther is not Antichrist, or else he denyeth both the Father and the Son, (as the Apostle sayth, 1 Joh. 3. 22.) how ever in word he confesseth both. 2. As they baptise with water in the name of the Father &c: so they consecrate their Supper or Mass with bread and wine, and the words of Christs institution, Mat. 26. why doth he not also af∣firme, that their Mass is no idol, no lye, in the hands and mouthes of them that receive it as their maker, and eat their God, more profanely then the heathens. 3. It is untrue that that alone (which he mentioneth) is in deed the baptisme of that church: in deed it ought to be, but so it is not. He might as well say, their praiers to God, are the onely prayers of that church; for by divine institution so it should be; but it is knowen they pray also to innumerable crea∣tures. 4. I grant the other things, are but erroneous opinions, and synfull additions: and he also must grant, that all the idolatrie of the heathens, condemned in Rom. 1. were but erroneous opi∣nions and synfull additions; contrary to the covenant which God had made with them in Noes dayes, Gen. 9. 9. 10. 11. &c. Were it not for erroneous opinions, and synfull additions; all men now should be in that perfect estate wherin at first we were created. Eccles. 7. 29.

8. That the Romish baptisme is such, as the saying of the Apostle is ve∣rified in it, an idol is nothing in the world, 1 Cor. 8. 4. &c. Jf so, then the bap∣tisme of that church, hath no relation to God, nor any divine institution, re∣presentation, or signification in it, &c. Then it ought of necessitie to be rejected &c.

Answ. If th'Apostles doctrine be true of idols, that they are no∣thing, 1 Cor. 8. 4. he ought not to kick against it, or me for alleging it. To his inference I answer, it hath no true relation unto Gods

covenant (which is not with that Antichristian church,) but a false pretended relation it hath: as their other sacrament of the Mass or supper; where also there is a lying relation to Christs sacrifice, which they blasphemously renew, crucifying dayly the Lord of glorie. To his conclusion, he hath oft been answered: we reject the idol wholly; and reteyn onely the truth, so farr as God by his word hath sanctified it unto us: without eyther grosse Anabaptistry, or notorious blasphemie, which with open mouth he chargeth us, & would fray the simple with.

9. That water (the material thing) in popish baptisme, is as the gold and silver (that is the matter) of the idols spoken of, Psal. 115. 4. wher as the use of water in baptisme is appointed by the Lord and stil to be reteyned, Ioh. 1. 33. &c. but the use of gold for idols, is forbidden, and utterly to be abandoned, Exod. 20. 23. Deut. 7. 25. 26. &c.

Answ. He corrupteth my words. I † 1.433 sayd, An idol for the matter and workmanship is somthing (Psal. 115. 4.) but for the relation unto God, it is nothing. So Popish baptisme as touching the material thing is somwhat, the salt, water, oile, are Gods creatures: the outward action is the work of the hands of an idolatrous preist; and this work remayneth, as did the work of the idolaters circumcising in Jsrael. &c. This he maketh an errour in me▪ which all that have knowledge, wil easily see to be trueth. But the use of water in baptisme, (sayth he) is appointed by the Lord. True, unto the Christian church it is so: but the use of water in popish idol baptisme, or of bread and wine in the Popish mass, was never ap∣pointed by the Lord: this was the point he should have proved. As God sayd to the Iewes, bring no more vaine oblations, incense is an a∣bomination unto me, Esa. 1. 13. so sayth he to the Antichristians, make no more vaine baptisings, the Masse is an abomination to me. Mine opposite sayth, the use of gold and silver for idols is forbidden: very wel; and is not the use of water, bread and wine for idols forbid∣den also? The use of gold to make the images of Cherubims was commanded, Exod. 25. 18. but if the Gentiles had made themselves golden Cherubims, they had been idols and syn to them, for God commanded them not. So water, bread and wine, are comman∣ded the Christian church, in her sacraments: but to the Antichris∣tian church God commandeth not these, til they repent & turne to Christ; then and not before may they use them for holy signes. Psalm. 50. 16. 17. Prov. 21. 27. & 9. 13. 17. 18. In this, his tenth er∣rour or exception is also answered; which is about the very same

thing: but that he delyteth in multiplication.

11 Touching the relation, (which is the mayn thing in a sacrament) that it should seale up unto them the forgivenes of synns, and (as they blasphemously say) quite take away synns, and conferr grace; so it is a vaine idol, and nothing. But the Sacraments in their relation are not onely seals but signes also: Gen. 17. 11. Rom. 4. 11. &c. Now (by their assertion) the baptisme aforesayd shew∣eth nothing at all to the mind, and so is a vaine idol and nothing: and that which it sheweth to the eye, is but as the gold and silver of the heathens idols: which if it were true, then in deed there should be nothing of Gods ordinance▪ nothing of a true sacrament, &c. And can they then blame the Anabap∣tists? &c.

Answ. That there is no true relation in the popish baptisme, is sufficiently proved; the persons being Antichristians, out of the covenant, and without promise in that estate. That they have the true material things, of washing with water in the name of the Fa∣ther &c, I have alwayes granted; though these materials are abused by them to idolatrie, as the Iewes abused their sheep and bullocks to abominable sacrifices. That of the gentiles silver and gold, is true also touching the matter, which is Gods good creature: fur∣ther comparison I made not, though he corrupted my words.

Object. Whether think they that the baptisme received in the truest Churches, doe seal up to hypocrites the forgivenes of their synns? If they think not, whether they wil say, that the baptisme of those churches hath not the re∣lation which is the mayn thing in a Sacrament. Jt is generally held that † 1.434 Si∣mon Magus who was baptised by Philip, was an hypocrite, and that his bap∣tisme did not seal up unto him the forgivenes of his synns: wil they therfore say, that the baptisme ministred by the Euangelists, had not the relation &c? Be∣sides that thus the relation of the sacramentes should depend wholly upon man, and not upon the Lord or his ordinance at all.

Answ. To passe over his forme of writing, how he asketh ques∣tions, when he should prove or convince: I answer, his question is from the matter in hand, and so is deceitfull. We speak of the out∣ward visible church of Christ and ordinances belonging therto; also of the visible Antichristian church and ordinances there abu∣sed. He leaveth this, and runneth to hypocrites, which men can not discerne; and whom therfore we must leave unto God, among o∣ther secrets, Deut. 29. 29. To reason from the one of th••se to the other, would bring all confusion; for hypocrites are lawfully ad∣mitted into the Church; as was Iudas, Simon Magus and many o∣ther:

if upon this ground, open Antichristians, idolaters, unbe∣leevers, may be admitted also: then the church and the world, shal be one confused Babel. To his question I answer; baptisme in true Churches administred as th' Apostles and Euangelists did: ••ealeth up to all, the forgivenes of their synns; unto the judgment of man; and they should greatly syn, and profane Gods ordinance, to baptise any other. Simon Magus when he was baptised, it is testified that he beleeved, Act. 8. 13. so by the ordinance of Christ, he was to be baptised, Mat. 28. 19. neyther knew they him to be an hypocrite when he was baptised, til afterward. Thus are we bound by the rule of love, to beleeve that all rightly baptised in the Chris∣tian church, have the seale of forgivenes of synns, and are buryed with Christ by baptisme, and that by one spirit, we are all baptised into one body, Rom. 6. 3. 4. 1 Cor. 12. 13. And so mine opposite beleeving the church of Rome to be Christs true church, and to have his true baptisme, was bound also to beleeve them all to be of one body and one spirit with himself, til they manifest to him the contrary: which seing they have not doen by all their idolatries, heresies & impieties; it is not to be thought that ever people which wil call themselves Christians, could doe it. As for us, we know the co∣venant of Christ is not with Antichrist, or his whoreish church; though therin God hath many elect: but we know that his cove∣nant is with the true Christian church, and all the members of it, although therin be many hypocrites and reprobates; both which are manifested in time by their fruits. We walk by the rules revei∣led to us of God: secret things are not for us to judge of, until they be manifested.

Where he concludeth, that thus the relation of the sacraments should depend wholly upon man, and not upon the Lord at all: it is a ca∣lumniation without all colour of proof. The relation is by mutu∣al consent, the Lord offring his son Christ for salvation to all re∣pentant beleeving synners: we by grace having obteyned faith, doe therby apprehend Christ for our saviour, as in the word, so in the sacraments.

His next demaund about our selves and our baptisme had in Rome; is a thing againe and agayn answered, without running in∣to Anabaptistrie, whither he would so sayn drive us.

12. These men, erre not a litle, when they say that (popish) baptisme hath not the relation of a sacrament to them, but is a vaine idol and nothing, be∣cause

they say of it, that it quite taketh away synns. Shall mens erroneous say∣ings and opinions make a nullity of Gods ordinances, signes and seales? Can not God be true, though they be lyars? &c.

Answ. Here is an other repetition of that which he forealleged in his 6. reason or errour; which I there refuted. Mens erroneous sayings, opinions, and doings, doe disanull to themselves all Gods promises, signes and seals: which are onely conditionall, if men repent, beleeve and obey; which grace God giveth to all that are Christs. And if men beleeve not nor obey, and so be damned: their damnation impeacheth not Gods truth at all, but confirm∣eth it; for he hath sayd of such, that they shalbe damned. Mar. 16. 16. Joh. 3. 36.

Obj. Besides the relation in a sacrament, there is also to be regarded the commandment of God, who hath appointed it to be observed in the church. As Christ who was without syn &c, yet in obedience to the Law, was cir∣cumcised and baptised. &c. Therfore it should be syn in the church of Rome, if they should reject baptisme and not keep it. Which doth plainly evince, that it is not a vaine idol and nothing, (for then it were not syn but their dutie to cast it away; and not to keep it at all) but that it is the Lords ordinance &c.

Answ. The first is true, for without the word and command∣ment of God, it could be no seale of his covenant, or have any relation at all therto. The second is a deceytful reason, concluding from the holy commandment of God, to the unholy keeping of it in Rome. It should be syn in them to reject baptisme & the Lords supper professedly: it is syn in them, to keep them as they doe pro∣fanely. It were better for a man never to be baptised or eat the Lords supper all his life, then to communicate with the church of Rome in eyther of these, as they profane them: for we may not doe evil that good may come therof, Rom. 3. 8. So his plaine eviction that it is not a vaine idol in their abuse of it, is but a plaine fallacie: let him apply it to the other Sacrament, and it wil appear. Anti∣christ hath transformed the Lords supper, into an abominable massing sacrifice, and therin worshipeth a wafer cake for his maker and redemer: this he durst not deny to be a notorious idol. But his reason (if it be good) wil prove it no idol: thus. It should be syn in the church of Rome if they should reject the Lords supper and not keep it. Which doth plainly evince that the Lords sup∣per in Rome (though changed by them into a wicked Mass) is not an idol, for then it were not syn, but their duty to reject it. The

refutation herof is this; Rome and all nations syn, that doe not beleeve aright in Christ, and keep all his ordinances. The more that they openly renounce Christ or any of his ordinances, the more they shal adde unto their syn. Yet in that they keep them not aright▪ but have changed the truth of God * 1.435 into a lye, and his holy ordinances into idols; they are also great synners, for which if God give them not repentance, they are under wrath and dam∣nation, 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Of this point, I have spoken † 1.436 before, in answer to his 6. reason for the church of Rome.

His 13. and last errour, is but a repetition of former matters, about the brazen serpent, Gods ordinances and creatures consi∣dered in themselves &c, to which I have before answered; shewing that it helpeth the Papists no more to clear them of idolatry herein, then the heathens of old, who made idols of creatures and ordi∣nances, which in their own nature and first institution, were good and holy. And hitherto of his errours wrongfully imputed unto us.

To these, by his figure of repetition and multiplication, he hath added from the former grounds, Contradictions, Abuse of scriptures, Uaine distinctions and Anabaptistical assertions: all which being but the same things turned and repeated, and by me before cleared; I count it needless labour to make the same answers againe, to his empty calumniations.

Of Circumcision in Israel.

THe reason why we repeat not the outward work of baptising with water againe, such as have been baptised in false churches; is the example of the Israelites: who after their falling from God and from the Church, and after the Lord had given them the “ 1.437 bill of divorce, when they repented and turned to the Lord, were ad∣mitted to the Passover, without any new cutting or circumcising in the flesh: 2 Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. And because I denyed them in such estate to have true circumcision (which is the signe and seale of the righteousnes of faith, Rom. 4. 11.) mine opposite as his man∣ner is, chargeth me with very erronious and ungodly assertions, and ma∣keth a longsome discourse of the state of Israel, and of words and phrases used concerning them. And unto ten lines of mine, (in Animadv. pag. 70.) he giveth an answer of above 30. pages (in his Christian plea▪ pag. 65. to pag. 96.) to blinde his reader with

many words. I wil briefly shew the insufficiencie of his answers.

And first, that Israel after they departed from the Lord, his Temple, altars, sacrificers, and church; and made new Temples, altars, sacrificers, signes and a new church of their own divising; that Israel I say, from that time was not a true church, I have be∣fore * 1.438 shewed my reasons in handling the state of the church of Rome.

Mine opposites † 1.439 first colourable reason, is from such scriptures as stil name them the Lords people, and the Lord to be their God, and to remember the covenant of their fathers Abraham &c, 2 King. 9. 6. &c. and 13. 22. 23.

Answ. I have heretofore “ 1.440 answered, that this Argument, They are called the Lords people, therfore they are his true church; is not to be granted. For 1. Things are named in scripture sometimes, as they have been before, though they be not so still: as Abigail is called the wife of Na∣bal, though he were then dead, and she maried to David, 1 Sam. 30. 5. So∣lomon was begotten of Uriahs wife, wheras she was then Davids, Mat. 1. 6. Jesus was in the house of Simon the Leper, Mat. 26. 6. so named, because he had been a Leper &c. 2. They were so called in respect of their profession, that they would be so estemed and named: though in deed they were without the true God, 2 Chron. 15. 3. as, O thou that art named the house of Jakob &c. Mic. 2. 7. 8. Thirdly, in respect of their calling unto him, and his co∣venant afterward, though for the present they were none of his: as, Jn that day, J wil marie thee (Jsrael) unto me for ever &c. Hos. 2. 18. 19. 20. 23. Thus the Gentiles were called Christs sheep, because they should after be brought into his fold, Ioh. 10. 16. and God had much people in Corinth an heathenish ci∣tie, Act. 18. 10. 1 Cor. 12. 2. And the Jewes to this day are Gods people, and beloved, not for their present state which is cursed, but for the promise that they shal hereafter be graffed againe into Christ, Rom. 11. 11. 20. 23. 25. 26. & 9. 4. with Esa. 59. 20. 21. Ezek. 34. 23.—30. Hos. 3. 5. Fourthly, * 1.441 in comparison with the Philistines and other heathens, they were called the people of the Lord; because they never renounced their God in name and professedly, but pretended the contrary. Fiftly, † 1.442 that God did not present∣ly cast them off, in respect of calling them to repentance, and of their dwelling in the land, or as the scripture sayth (in 2 King. 14. 27.) of putting out the name of Israel from under heaven. For his covenant was to punish them by degrees (Levit. 26. 16. 18. 21. 24. 28. 33.) and at last if they repented not, to scatter them among the heathens, til their “ 1.443 uncircumcised harts should be humbled▪ and they rued their former syn▪ and then he would 〈…〉〈…〉

his first covenant, and so receive them againe to grace in Christ. Vnto which I now add this sixt, that God called himself the God of Jsrael, and them his people, because of many among them that were in deed his; both such as yeilded not to Ieroboams idolatrie, but went to Ierusalem to sacrifice, 2 Chron. 11. 16. and seven thousand in Js∣rael, which bowed not the knee to Baal, 1 King. 19. 18. and such also, as erring at first in simplicitie, were by the Prophets brought to repentance: though the general state of the land never repented, but went on in their syn, til the Lord cast them out of his sight, as is testified in 2 King. 17.

His * 1.444 next chief ground is the comparison of Iudah, who like∣weise for sook the Lord, and sometime became more corrupt then Israel: so that if Israel were not in trueth Gods people and church, then Iudah was not.

Answ. I have shewed how Israel might be called Gods people still: and why I judge them not to be Gods true Church. For Iu∣dah, they changed not the constitution wherin they were set of God, made no new face of a Church, no new Temples, preists &c as did Israel. Therfore they did wickedly in the true Church, as often times greater impietie is committed in † 1.445 the Church, then among the heathens: yet the state of the church & of the heathens may not be compared; though the punishmēt of such as transgress in the Church, and repent not, shal be worse then the heathens, Mat. 11. 20.—24. Secondly, the defection of Iudah was not generall like Israels, (though sometime the scriptures speak generally, when many are corrupted,) but even then when for their synns they were caried into Babylon, there was a godly company, compared to a basket of good figgs, Ier. 24. 2. 5. 6. 7. which had cried out for all the abominations, & were marked and reserved of God, Ezek. 9. 4. &c▪ Thirdly, the state of Iudah was often times reformed by many good Kings, as Iosiah, Ezekiah, Iehosaphat and others; the people brought to repentance, and the covenant renewed: but never so in Israel, by any king that there reigned, from their first apostasie, to the captivitie. 2 King. 17. Fourthly, for the wicked troupes in Iudah, that refused admonition, persecuted their brethren, killed the Prophets, mainteyned idolatrie; for which the godly left their synfull communion; I hold them not Gods true Church, or in his covenant of grace. Because the covenant was alwayes conditional, (if men repent and beleeve) as I have before proved, and mine op∣posite

himself hath granted. This may suffice, to his often re∣peated reasons, which are deduced and varied from the groundes aforesayd.

Touching 2 Chron. 15. 3.

IShewed from the Prophet Azariahs speech to Asa and all Iudah; that Israel was without the true God, without teaching Priest, and without Law, 2 Chron. 15. 1. 2. 3. and therfore could not in that estate be judged to be in the covenant of grace.

Mine opposite † 1.446 laboureth to bring Iudah it self also within this estate: but that hath no colour with it. The distinction of names, Iudah and Israel; the state of Iudah under Solomon, Roboam, Abijah, and Asa, (though corruptions were come in,) plainly shew∣eth it otherweise; and I leave it to the readers judgment. 2. he granteth, it may well be understood of the 10. tribes, and sheweth good reasons for it: how then doth he take away the weight of the rea∣son, that Israel being without the true God, without a teaching Priest, (Gods true ministerie) and without Law, could not in that estate be Gods true church, in his covenant of grace▪ or have the true seales therof unto them? He fayrly denyeth the conclusion, Jt wil not prove (sayth he) that circumcision or the other ordinances of God had in Jsrael or in Judah, were false and deceytfull signes &c. Jf it would, then it might be ur∣ged against Iudah also; and where then was circumcision? &c. I answer; If there were no circumcision but among them that were without the true God, without his ministerie, and without his Law: then was there no true circumcision in the world. For if we consider the first institution of circumcision, Gen. 17. and the Apostles doctrine of it, in Rom. 2. 25. 28. 29. & 4. 11. and the doctrine of Christian baptisme now, answerable to circumcision of old: it is impossible that that people should have the true seale of righteousnes and salvation from God in Christ, that are without God, and without Christ. No colourable excuses or distinctions wil here availe•• except men can prove an absolute promise of salvation whether men repent & beleeve or no: whether they be in God and Christ or no: Which is contrary to all the scriptures. Wherfore this one testimonie is ynough to overthrow all his long plea for Israel; as if they in this synfull stare, unrepentant, continued stil actually in the covenant of grace and state of salvation. And what colour maketh he, a∣gainst

this plaine scripture? He first speaketh of forsaking God, what it meaneth, and how it is spoken of the Iewes in the Prophets: namely of forsaking his Law, Temple, Worship, and service: and not simply of so dealing with the Lord himself, as the bare words and letter it self. might seem to imply.▪ For even in the defection of Israel, when Ieroboam set up the calves, yet stil they intended to worship the Lord that brought them out of the land of Egypt &c. 1 King. 12. 28.

Answ. First observe, how here he would not have the bare words and letter▪ of the scripture to be insisted upon: yet is it his continuall practise, and onely colourable reasons. For the Temple of God, 2. Thes. 2. and the people of God, are his mayn grounds for the church of Rome, and of apostate Israel. 2. He omitteth the words which I cited, that Israel was without the true God &c: and speaketh of an other phrase, of their forsaking the Lord; to ease his burden, which he found too heavy. 3. It is granted him, that by forsa∣king the Lord, is meant the forsaking of his Law, Temple, Worship and service: and not that they did professedly renounce God, but stil pretended and intended to serve the true God: what would he inferr hereupon? This maketh the more against his plea for them. The scripture sayth, they were without the true God, without teaching Priest, without Law: this was true, eyther in their own account, or in Gods; not in their own account, for they thought they stil re∣teyned the true God, (even as the heathens of old, hereticks, An∣tichristians and Iewes at this day, perswade themselves that they serve the true God;) therfore they were such in Gods account. Now Gods judgment is alwayes according to trueth, when mans judgment erreth, and deceiveth himself. Thus then, though Isra∣el thought themselves the true church, and to have the true God (as mine opposite also thinketh and pleadeth for them;) yet in the Lords account, which is trueth, they were without the true God, and without Law. So mine opposite hath the Israelites own erroneous judgment to help him; I have the Lords judgment & his Prophets, against both him and them.

He then referreth us to his former book, where he shewed di∣verse respects, how on their part they brake the covenant, but the Lord brake it not on his part, but called them to repentance &c. To which book of his I gave answer, and have in this also before shewed, how he yieldeth me the mayn ground; namely that the co∣venant of grace is conditional onely, if men repent and beleeve▪

Which seing the scripture witnesseth that Israel did not, 2 King. 17. 13. 14. 15. 16. &c; they remayned still without the true God, without teach∣ing Priest, and without Law; til the Lord cast them out of the land, and scattred them among the heathens, which were without God and without Law, before them. And now what could their cir∣cumcision, Passover, sacrifices &c availe them; but seale up their further judgment, who had rejected the true God, but falsly re∣teyned and abused the signes of his favour, to their condemnatió.

Touching Ier. 3. 8.

GOD testifieth of adulterous Israel, J put her away, and gave her •• bill of divorce, Ier. 3. 8. Then was she no longer his wife, nor he her husband: but the covenant of her spirituall mariage was disanulled even on Gods part also. Yet the Israelites kept circum∣cision the signe and seale of his covenant, but by usurpation, not by right: so it was in their abuse of it, no true signe or sacrament unto them.

To this he † 1.447 answereth, that the Prophet sp••k•• this in Josiahs dayes, at which time Jsrael was caried captive into Assyria. So this place is not to the point of the question, of their state from Ieroboams time, all the while they abode in the land.

Answ. First he takes it for granted, that by the bill of divorce is meant their putting out of the land: which though I should grant him (as I will not deny it, but leave it to further considera∣tion,) yet it is to the question in hand touching their circumcisi∣on which they stil reteyned, and were upon repentance received to the Passover, without any new circumcising in the flesh, Ezr. 6. 21. and he himself * 1.448 urgeth this very place of Ezr. 6. against the Ana∣baptists, to prove they need not baptise againe: the same by as good right, doe I urge against him. Yea and suppose that I erred in judging of their estate while they were in the land: yet this their estate after, is ynough to prove my cause; namely that Circumcisi∣on, and so baptisme usurped by false churches, or by them that are no church (as Israel now were † 1.449 no people,) need not be repeat∣ed. Wheras he pleadeth if Rome be not the true church, & have not the true baptisme, we are to be baptised againe. Now that in Ezr. 6. was many yeres after Israels captivitie, or divorce; for it was after Iudahs captivitie, and returne after 70. yeres. When * 1.450 Gy∣rus,

to whom the Lord God of heaven had given all the kingdomes of the earth, proclaimed the peoples returne throughout all his king∣dome. At what time, as those that had been caried to Babylon, returned, Ezr. 2. to the number of 42. thowsand and moe: so af∣ter in Darius dayes Ezr. 6. when the children of Israel which were come out of captivitie, kept the Passover with joy, for that the Lord had turned the hart of the † 1.451 King of Assyria unto them, all such as had separated themselves unto them, from the filthynes of the hea∣then of the land, to seek the Lord God of Israel, did eat with them: Ezr. 6. 21. So they of Israel that had been captived in Assyria, and returned to the Lord, were received without any new circumci∣sing, as they were also before in Ezekias dayes, 2 Chron. 30. Which example being in the dayes of Ezra and * 1.452 other prophets, & writ∣ten in the scriptures for † 1.453 our instruction: is a sufficient ground for us now to doe the like, whom the Lord hath brought out of the Antichristian Babylon and Assyria, that we may eat the Lords sup∣per, and injoy other his ordinances, without any new baptising with water.

The bill of divorce, he * 1.454 expoundeth to be the putting of them out of the land of Canaan, as out of the Lords house or presence; from Hos. 9. 3. 15. 17. 2 King. 13. 23. A woman divorced, is termed (hee sayth) one that is cast out, or thrust forth out of her husbands house, Ezek. 44. 22. Thus some think excommunicats to have a bill of divorce &c. and then also, they are not to be esteemed as put out of the covenant of the Lord, but from his house and family, til they repent. So as upon their repen∣tance, they ought to be received againe into the Lords house, without any new baptising of them againe, which yet should be, if they had been put out of the covenant of the Lord. For baptisme is the signe of our entrance thereinto: &c.

Answ. By this it appeareth, he takes the bill of divorce, for no putting out of the covenant; but out of the house, out of the land of Canaan onely. Which if it be so, then the mariage of Israel, was no taking into the covenant but into the land of Canaan. And this agreeth well with the Anabaptists, who hold that Israels cove∣nant, was not the covenant of grace, but a carnal covenant & pro∣mise of the land of Canaan. It is knowen, that the bill of divorce, disannulleth the covenant of mariage, as appeareth in the Law in Deut. 24. First by the name C••rithuth that is Cutting-off, secondly by the lib••••ty thereupon following, that she may marry another man; thirdly by the just cause therof which is whordome, Math. 19. 9.

fourthly, by the consequent therof, that a man having so put away his wife for whordome, he also may without danger of adulterie marie an other woman; which cannot be unless the covenant of mariage be disanulled; Mat. 19. 5.—9. Fiftly it is confirmed by the copie of the bill of divorse used in the common wealth of Isra∣el, as appeareth by their ancient records, in these words; * 1.455 Jn such a day of the week &c, J▪ N. the son of N. have voluntarily &c, dismissed & left and put away thee, even thee N. the daughter of N. &c. which hast been my wife heretofore, but now J dismiss thee, and leave thee, and put thee away, that thou mayst be free, and have power over thyne own soule, to goe away, to be maried to any man whom thou wilt &c. Sixtly, it is testified by the Apostle writing to the Israelites, the strangers scattred throughout Pon∣tus, Galatia &c, 1 Pet. 1. 1. and saying to them. Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obteyned mercie, but now have obteyned mercie, 1 Pet. 2. 10. Wherby it is evidently pro∣ved, that their divorce was from the Lord, and from being his peo∣ple, or partakers of his mercie in Christ.

Now wheras he gathereth from Ezek. 44. 22. that a divorced woman is called Gerusha, that is Cast out, or thrust forth, which he ex∣poundeth from her husbands house: he might have seen better in the Law of Moses, (to which the Prophet there hath reference) where the like commandement is given, in Levit. 21. 14. which a litle be∣fore, in vers. 7. is explained by God himself, Gerusha meishshah, that is, cast out or put away from her husband; according to which Law, and phrase, Israel was divorced and cast out, not onely from the Lords house and land, but from the Lord himself. Moreover he might have seen, in Deut. 24. 1. the bill of divorce in the womans hand, and her sending out of her husbands house, to be distinct things, one fo∣lowing upon an other. Againe, a woman may of her self goe out of her husbands house, & play the whore in an other mans house, yet is she not therby divorced: as for example Michal Davids wife, was by her father Saul, adulterously given to Phalti, 1 Sam. 25. 44. so she was out of Davids house, and had an other husband in whose house she remayned: yet David that had not given her a divorce, required her as his wife, and she was taken by Abner from her se∣cond husband, 2 Sam. 3. 14. 15. 16. Wherfore the bill of divorce or of cutting off is not from the house onely, but disanulleth quite the covenant of mariage; so as they cannot without a new mariage be reunited. And the Lord, (as if he purposely would prevent all

such vaine pleas for Israel) useth in Ier. 3. 8. both the word put how away, and the word divorce, and this also in the forme plural, thus, and I gave unto her, the bill of her divorces (or, of her cuttings-off:) as if he would teach us, that whatsoever divorce or cutting off belonged to such an adulterous wife, he had given unto her; and so not from the land but from the Lord also she was divorced. As yet further appeareth by Hos. 2. 2. plead with your Mother, plead; for she is not my wife, neyther am I her husband; but if he had onely put her out of the land, he was her husband stil, contrary to that which the Prophet teacheth. And contrary to the Apostle, who writing to the disper∣sed of Israel, which had not obteyned mercie, but now have obteyned mer∣cie, 1 Pet. 2. 10. hath reference to that Prophet, who promised, I wil have mercie on her that had not obteyned mercie; and I wil say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, thou art my God: Hos. 2. 23.

His applying this divorce to excommunication, is as strange. Excommunicates he wil have to be as put out of the house and church, but not out of the covenant. Wheras excommunicates are (by our Saviours doctrine) as heathens and publicans, Mat. 18. 17. and heathens are not in the covenant. Againe by Pauls doctrine, excommunication is the delivering to Satan, 1 Cor. 5. 5. 1 Tim. 1. 20. what that meaneth, we may learne by the contrary, in Act. 26. 17. 18. I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darknes to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgivenes of synns &c. Wher the power of the Gospel is shewed, in turning men from Satan to God, wherupon they repenting and beleeving, receive forgivenes of synns: so on the contrary, when men syn, and joyn obstinacie with it, and wil not repent; they are by the power of Christ delivered from God unto Satan againe, that is, are of the world where Satan is prince; and in that estate, deprived of the pro∣mise of the forgivenes of their synns, til they turne againe unto the Lord.

Where he sayth, upon their repentance they may and ought to be received, it is true, so ought the Turks and heathens: for God as he never made absolute covenant but conditional; so he never gave absolute bill of divorce, but conditionall; for who so repent∣eth and beleeveth in Christ shalbe saved. And wheras he sayth, if they had been put out of the covenant of the Lord, they should be baptised a∣gaine: it is marvel how he could not see himself herein, to be a very

Anabaptist, or that which is worse. For if a man be baptised in the true church, as was Simon Magus, and fall from the faith of Christ, to become a Iew, or a Turk, or a paynim; and for his obstinacle & blasphemie be justly excommunicated: this man he thinketh, doth continue stil in the covenant of grace; for he is but cast out of the church or house, not out of the covenant. Who ever heard such doctrine, that the covenant of grace should be continued to most wicked synners, excommunicated for turning to Iudaisme or Pa∣ganisme? Much lesser syn it were to err with the Anabaptists and baptise againe, then to hold such an heresie. If he hold it not, but would grant that such are out of the covenant: then he sayth, they should be baptised againe, when they returne; and so he that hath so busily set a snare to catch us in Anabaptistrie, is fallen himself into it, or into a worse.

Now to deliver our soules from both these extremities, we are to observe the difference between the reveiled covenant made with every particular visible church, and the unreveiled estate which is in Gods secret counsel touching all the members of the catholik church the company of those that are predestinated unto life: for many are out of the covenant reveiled, which yet are Gods elect. As the Ephesians whiles they were heathens, dead in synns, were to all mens judgment, without Christ, without God in the world, and strangers from the covenants of promise, Eph. 2. 1. 12. who after they were called to repentance and faith, were no more strangers and forrey∣ners, but fellow-citizens with the Saincts, and of the houshold of God, Ephes. 2. 13.—19. in which estate they were in Gods counsel before, being chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, Ephes. 1. 4. On the contrary many reprobates enter into the cove∣nant of the church visible, and as Simon Magus, doe beleeve and are baptised, Act. 8. 13. they beleeve for a while, and in time of tentation, fall away, Luke 8. 13. Hereupon it cometh to pass, that the church not knowing certainly who are elect, and who not, but judging every tree by the fruits that appeare; receiveth into the covenant and baptiseth all that profess to repent and beleeve in Christ unfeynedly: yet afterward seing them to break the covenat and forsake Christ and wil not be reclaymed, casteth them out, and delivereth them to Satan: in which estate, they cannot be sayd to continue in the covenant, or in the state of salvatiō; though the election of some of them standeth sure with God. Who when

he of his grace giveth them repentance, they are restored againe to the church; and then it appeareth that they fell for a time, but are raysed againe of God. And because when they were first baptised, they were not baptised into that particular church onely, but are counted baptised into the catholike church, and into Christ, his death and burial, Rom. 6. 3. 4. therfore though they renew the co∣venant, yet their baptisme is not renewed; for then it is manifested to the judgment of man, that the seed of God (though for the time it was not seen) remayned in them, and therfore their syn was not unto death, 1 Joh. 3. 9. And this the Apostle teacheth us from God, saying. This is my covenant unto them, when J shall take away their synns. As concerning the Gospel, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers. For the gifts and calling of God, are without repentance, Rom. 11. 27. 28. 29. Where we see, that while mens synns are not (by promise of God) taken away, they are not in his covenant, (as is confirmed also by Heb. 8. 10. 12.) And in that Gods gifts and calling (concerning his elect) are without repen∣tance; they are to be restored into the covenant, when they turne unto the Lord, without any repeating of their outward baptisme.

Where he addeth this reason, For baptisme is the signe of our entrance into (the covenant) and the Lords seale of his so receiving and admitting of us: as circumcision was unto the Iewes; Though it may in some sense be admitted which he sayth: yet not as he intendeth and urgeth it. For first, Abraham was in the covenant of grace, and justified by faith in Christ, before he received circumcision, Gen. 15. 6. Rom. 4. 3. And after that, he received the signe of circumcision, a seale of the righteousnes of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised, Genes. 17. Rom. 4. 10. 11. Secondly the children of Abraham were borne in the covenant, and holy, 1 Cor. 7. 14. Ezr. 9. 2. and borne unto the Lord, Ezek. 16. 20. but were not circumcised til the eight day, Levit. 12. and such infants as dyed before the eight day, died not out of the covenāt: not to speak of the women in Israel, which were in the covenant without circumcision in the flesh. Thirdly, Moses sayd to men women and children, ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God, &c. that thou shouldst enter (or pass) into covenant with the Lord thy God; Dent. 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. Yet all which had been borne within 40. yeres before, were uncircumcised, and so continued till Moses was dead, Ios. 5. 2.—7. By all which it appea∣reth that men may otherweise enter into the Lords covenant, then

by Circumcision, or by baptisme now come in sted therof. How much more then, if they have been baptised before, and fallen from the covenant; may they enter into it againe, without a new baptising with water? His other tautologies, I omitt: being be∣fore answered.

But he thinks to have help from Jer. 3. 12. 13. 14. where God cal∣leth Israel to returne unto him, and he will not cause his anger to fall upon them; and sayth, Turne o backsliding children, for I am maried unto you; and I will take you one of a citie, and two of a familie and will bring you to Sion. Where amongst many observations, these are the chief, 1. That God dealt otherweise herein then a man doth with his wife whom he putteth away, and she become another mans; as he shewed in Jer. 3. 1. 2 That these words The Lord thy God, are words of the covenant, Genes. 17. 7. 3 ^ly. That he sayth, J am maried unto you; which the best * 1.456 writers ex∣pound to be the covenant of grace. 4. That he would take them one of a ci∣tie, and two of a familie, teaching that they should not stay one for an other; & though the body of the people should remaine obstinate, yet if a few returned he would receive them: which sheweth the stability and eternitie of his cove∣nant, as Gen. 17. 7. which he performeth, if but a fewe be made partakers of that grace, as Rom. 11. 1.—5.

Answ. He erreth himself, and causeth to erre, in not observing the scope of this scripture; nor the conditions propounded: and in not distinguishing the times, past, present, and to come; nor the covenant of the Law, and the covenant of grace.

The scope of this scripture Jer. 3. 6. &c. is to shew 1. the transgres∣sions of Israel and Iudah; under the covenant of the Law: 2. the punishments inflicted for the same; 3. and a promise of another covenant of grace which God would make with them in Christ. Israel played the harlot, Ier. 3. v. 6. God called her to repent, but she repented not, v. 7. then God put her away, and gave her a bill of divorces, v. 8. yet Iudah her sister, feared not but played the harlot also, and dissembled, so that Israel justified her self more then Iudah, v. 8. 9. 10. 11. Then God seing them bothe to be co∣venant breakers, promiseth of his grace, a new covenant to be made with them in Christ; which he proclaimeth first to Israel, if they repent, acknowledge their synns, and turne unto him, v. 12. 13. and so speaketh of his mariage with them, to weet with the remnant of them, one of a citie and two of a family, whom he would bring to Sion, v. 14. unto whom he would give faithfull pastours.

v. 15. not as under the Law, and rudiments therof, for the most excellent signes therof, even the Ark of the covenant of the Lord, should not be remembred or visited any more, v. 16. But Ierusalem, the Lords throne (the Christian † 1.457 Church) should be for the Gentiles of all nations, v. 17. and for the Iewes, and for the Israelites walk∣ing togither, v. 18. Then sheweth he the signes and fruites of his grace in them, manifested by their calling upon God, as their Fa∣ther in Christ, v. 19. their weeping and supplication for their for∣mer synns, v. 20. 21. the Lords promise of mercie to them that returne, and their acceptation of his mercie offred, v. 22. shewed by their humble confession of their synns, and just punishments, v. 23. 24. 25.

The same argument is in Jer. 31. both touching Israel & Iudah, where after many promises, he speaketh of a “ 1.458 new Covenant with Israel and Iudah, not like the covenant made with their fathers, when he brought them out of Egypt, which they brake, though the Lord was an husband unto them: but a covenant, that he would * 1.459 write his Law in their harts, and forgive their iniquitie; which Paul expoundeth to be the new Covenant or Testament now con∣firmed by Christ, Heb. 8. 8. &c.

Now to apply these promises which concerned future times & graces in Christ, to that present time whē they were in their synns, unrepentant, unbeleeving, unforgiven; under the bill of divorce, and put away from the Lord: is quite to mysse of the mark which the prophet aymeth at. For though he speaketh to Israel as a bo∣dy or corporation which continueth through many ages: yet not those persons then living, but their posteritie are meant▪ for they perished in their synns (save some few that turned to the Lord) but their after generations found mercie. Neyther can we deny (if we rightly observe th'Apostles doctrine in Rom. 11.) but those and the like promises made by the prophets, doe belong to the Iewes even at this day (though for the present they are without the co∣venant in their owne persons:) for when the † 1.460 fulnesse of the Gen∣tiles is come in, all Israel shalbe saved (sayth he) as it is written▪ There shall come out of Sion, the Deliverer, and shall turne away ungodlynes from Iakob. And this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their synns. As concerning the Gospel, they are enemies for your sakes, but as touching the election, beloved for the fathers.

The conditions propounded he observeth not, namely, * 1.461 Return

thou backsliding Israel, and J will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: † 1.462 Onely acknowledge thine iniquitie &c. But pleadeth as if they in that rebellious estate, were still in their persons, in the covenant of grace visibly; though God, because they returned not, “ 1.463 had given them the bill of divorce. Contrary to the gospell, which sayth, If we say that we have fellowship with (God), and walk in darknes; we lye, and doe not the trueth. If we confesse our synns, he is faithfull and just to for∣give us &c. If we say, that we have not synned, we make him a lyar, and his word is not in us. 1. Ioh. 1. 6. 9. 10. Now this was Israels state, they walked in darknes, and synns; and * 1.464 left all the Commandements of the Lord their God, they would not turne from their evill wayes, nor * 1.465 hear the Lords prophets, nor beleeve in the Lord their God; but * 1.466 walked in all the synns of Ieroboam, they departed not from them, until the Lord removed Israel out of his sight. And if any of them after their dis∣persion, returned to the Lord, they were then received: so also were the Gentiles that turned to him, and so the Iewes at this day, that come unto Christ.

He distinguisheth not the times. For their mariage with the Lord, which he sayth the † 1.467 best writers expound of the covenant of grace: if he referr it to the future time of Christ; is true; but then it will nothing help those unrepentant synners divorced from the Lord: for by the bill of divorce, the mariage is dissolved, as before is proved. If he referr it to former times, it agreeth not with the scope of the prophesie, as I shewed: but if that be granted him, then his best writers wil hardly prove it to meane the covenant of grace; for better then they, doe shew it to be the covenant of the Law, even Ieremie himself and Paul his expositor. For Ieremie in chap. 31. v. 32. useth the same word Baalti, J was maried to them: when he speaketh of the old covenant made when they came out of Egypt, which was the covenant of workes, not of grace; though they were then also in the covenant of grace, as they were in the faith of Christ. And Paul expoundeth that word Baalti, (according to the Greek version) J regarded them not, Heb. 8. 9. which is quite contrary to mine opposites purpose. But it is usual in the Prophets, to speak of things to come, as already doen; as Esaias prophesying of Christ sayth, Unto us a child is borne, Esai. 9. 6. who was not borne til many yeres after. And so here the Greek version (so much ap∣proved in the new Testament) expoundeth this word * 1.468 Baalti, J am (or was) maried; futurely thus; For J wil rule over you; and wil take you

one of a citie and two of a familie, and bring you into Sion: so it is a pro∣phesie of a future mariage with Christ: and accordeth to the Apos∣tles writing unto that people, saying, ye are an holy nation, a peculiar people, &c: which in time pass••, were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obteyned mercie, but now have obteyned mercie. 1 Pet. 2. 9. 10. When was the time that Israel were no people, nor obteyned mercie; unless when Lo-ammi, and Lo-ruhamah were borne, Hos. 1. 6. 9. and Ephraim was so broken, that it was not a people, Esai. 7. 8. Thus Peter testifying they were no people, (by which name Moses calleth the Gentiles when they were estranged from God, Deut. 32. 21.) and Paul saying that God regarded them not, or cared not for them, because of their breach of covenant, Heb. 8. 9. doe overthrow all my opposites plea for them, in their most synfull and unrepen∣tant estate.

That which he sayth from Jer. 3. 1. that God dealt otherweise herein, then a man doth with his wife whom he putteth away &c: helpeth him not. First, he should say, then a man might doe with his wife, for it was syn for such a man to returne to his wife, it polluted the land, Jer. 3. 1. the reason wherof was, the man by unjust divorce, had caused his wife to be defiled, as the law closely teacheth, Deut. 24. 1.—4▪ which fault cannot be imputed to the Lord. Secondly, the Lord dealeth likeweise with the Gentiles, when they turne from their adulteries, he receiveth them according to his former cove∣nant and spiritual mariage with Noe and his seed, Genes. 9. 9.—16. Esai. 54. 1. 4. 5. 9. 10. So the promise being conditional, benefited not them that would not returne unto him.

The last point, of the stablenes of Gods promise, though but a few are made partakers of it, Rom. 11. 1.—5. is true: and concerneth as well the Gentiles as the Iewes; for in all ages, God brought some of the Gentiles into his grace, as the whole historie of the scripture sheweth. Wherfore it is marvel how he could so * 1.469 insist upon the promise made to the Iewes, & to their children in Act. 2. 39. wher∣as the promise of grace in Christ perteyned also to the Gentiles as is testified by all the Prophets: Deut. 32. 43. Psal. 117. Esa. 19. 24. 2••. & 49. 1. 6. Ezek. 4••. 22

And wheras next † 1.470 he digresseth to speak of Iudah, and from Esa. 54. 4. compared with Ier. 51. 5. would shew how in one respect they were forsaken, and bare the reproch of widowhood, (to weet by their cap∣tivity in Babylon) and in an other respect, they were not forsaken as a wi∣dow

of the Lord, who yet remembred his covenant to shew them mercie; he foloweth his own wisdom in expounding the scriptures, & regar∣deth not the wisdom of God who elswhere hath opened that pro∣phesie, after a heavenly manner. The prophet Esaias in chapt. 53. foretold of Christ and of his suffrings; and in chap. 54. he pro∣phesieth of the Christian church: and beginneth, * 1.471 Sing joyfully ô barren (woman) thou that didst not beare &c; for moe are the children of the desolate, then the children of the maried wife, sayth the Lord. This argument he goeth on to inlarge, shewing the former † 1.472 shame and reproach, which this barren desolate woman had, for her widowhood; & the contrary comforts that she should receive from her “ 1.473 maker her husband the Lord of hosts. Here are two women intimated, one that hath an husband and children, an other barren, desolate and in widowhood: whose estates God would change, as Anna prophe∣sied, The barren hath borne seven, and she that had many children is wexed feebl••▪ 1 Sam. 2. 5. This barren woman, Paul interpreteth to be, Je∣rusalem which is above, the mother of all us Christians; For it is written (sayth he) Rejoyce thou barren &c. Gal. 4. 26. 27. the fruitful woman was the earthly Jerusalem, the church under the Law, (answerable to Agar the bondwoman,) in bondage with her children, vers 25. For the Iewes church was (in their legal policie) under the Law, as an husband: til being made dead to the Law, by the body of Christ, they were maried to an other, that they might bring forth fruit unto God, as the same Apostle teacheth, Rom. 7. 1. - 4. Now this heavenly Ie∣rusalem consisteth as well of * 1.474 Gentiles as of Iewes; and this wo∣man bringeth forth children conceived by the immortal seed of the word, the gospel: wheras before the church under the Law, brought forth many Ismaels, children of Agar, servants, not free borne, to be cast out with their mother, Gal. 4. 30. Whether now is it safer to take this mans exposition of the earthly Ierusalem, the mother of the Iewes; or to folow the Apostle, expounding it of the high Ierusalem, the mother of us all? But it would require a vo∣lume, to goe through his many allegations out of the Prophets: where he worketh upon advantage of words and phrases, neglect∣ing yea contrarying the mayn doctrines of the gospel, whiles he pleadeth for open obstinate and unrepentant idolaters, yea and such as were divorced from the Lord, that they continued not∣withstanding in the covenant of grace in that estate.

Touching Hos. 2. 2.

WHeras the Lord testifieth of Israel, that she was not his wife, nor he her husband: and willeth her therfore to put away her whordomes, left he stript her naked &c. Hos. 2. 2. 3. Mine opposite laboureth by comparing the prophesies before, in ch. 1. and after in ch. 3. &c, to prove that this was not meant til Israel was put out of the land. And yet that putting out of the land, he maketh to be the stripping of her naked; which was an effect and reward of her former estate. And mixing the several prophesies togither, (wheras in the 23. verse of the 2. chapter, the Lord speaketh of the dayes under the Gospel,) he giveth this conclusiō, * 1.475 Thus now she is a wife, and not a wife: she is a wife, but a wife of whordoms, Hos. 1. 2. she is not a wife, that doth demeane her self loyally as she should, but hath her adulteries between her brests: Hos. 2. 2. And after a longer dis∣course, he inferreth, † 1.476 But what is this to the point of the question in hand, which is not touching the condition afterward, but concerning their circumci∣sion and estate, from the time of Ieroboams apostasie, whiles they were yet in the land. &c.

Answ. He keepeth his wont, to pretend the question other∣weise then it is. The point was indefinite about the circumcision of Israel in their Apostasie. These were his own words, “ 1.477 The bap∣tisme of the church of Rome, is true baptisme, as the circumcision in Israels apostasie was true circumcision, and not to be repeated againe. And if it be not a true baptisme, it is a false baptisme &c. He referred us not by any scripture, to their apostasie before or after they were put out of the land. I answered him in a few lines, and * 1.478 shewed him from 2 Chron. 30. & Ezr. 6. 21. that there was no repeating of circumcisi∣on, therfore not of baptisme. Those two scriptures he himself † 1.479 al∣so now urgeth against the Anabaptists: the latter wherof speaketh of a time long after their captivitie. Then I briefly referred him to 2 Chron. 15. 3. Ier. 3. 8. Hos. 2. 2. & 13. 1. to shew their synfull estate to be such, as that “ 1.480 the ordinances of God which they in shew reteyned, could not be unto them the signes and seales of forgivenes, and of life eternal; and ther∣fore wire in their use of them false and deceytfull. Thus neyther he nor I, put any difference of their estate; though now he pleads it for ad∣vantage. But it is sufficient for to end our controversie, if the things I speak of, be after their captivity: for then returning with repentance, they were not recircumcised: so we, if we be baptised

in false churches, need not be rebaptised. So he hath written ma∣ny leaves to plead for the whore Israel; but where shall we find this soundly concluded, which I denyed, that when they were not the Lords wife, nor he their husband; then in that estate (were it before or after their captivitie, let him take his choise,) their circumcision sealed unto them forgivenes of synns, and life eternal. This not being pro∣ved, he hath led his reader into a wood, where it would weary any man to folow him in his windings: and yet in the end, he shall not find that which his soule thirsteth after, touching their circū∣cision, when they were no longer the Lorde wife. Now to his dis∣tinction, she is a wife, and she is not a wife: take it at the best, she is a wife of whordoms, a wife threatned to be stripped naked &c. Where is the promise of forgivenes of her synns, unless she repen∣ted? And where is the testimony of her repentance? No where, (til Christ made the remnants of their posterity his wife, and his people, after they had been no people, 1 Pet. 2. 9. 10.) but whiles they were in the land, they grew more hard, unbeleeving and unrepen∣tant, 2 King. 17. 13. 14. 15. &c. But when she had the bil of divorce, Ier. 3. and was indeed not his wife, nor he her husband, but he had stript her naked, and sent her among the heathens her companiōs: where now was the seale of the forgivenes of her synns, she abiding unrepentant? This is the thing that should be shewed, which is not to be seen in all his large discourse.

And what help findeth he at the hands of the Chaldee para∣phrase which he * 1.481 citeth thus, Rebuke the congregation of Israel, and say unto her, that she submitteth not her self to my worship, therfore neyther doth my † 1.482 Word accept of her prayers: until she shall remove her evil works &c. Wil this prove true circumcision among them? First it appeareth that the Paraphrast understood this of them whiles they were in the land, otherweise then he, which referreth it to their after state. Secondly, in that synfull estate whiles they worshiped or served not the Lord, but Idols (as after the Chaldee speaketh,) the Word of God, that is Christ (as himself expoundeth it) accepted not their prayers. And could they then offer any true sacrifice or administer true sa∣crament, when God testified that Christ was not their mediator, to accept their prayers? Seing it is certaine, that no man cometh to the Father but by him, Joh. 14. 6. Thus men may be overseen sometimes, to cite authors on their side, which eyther say nothing, or look quite an other way.

Touching Hos. 13. 1.

THe last placé which here I cited was Hos. 13. 1. where Ephraim offended (or synned) in Baal, and dyed: whence I judged their es∣tate to be dead in syn.

To this mine opposite * 1.483 sayth, the same terme and phrase is used by Christ, of the church of Sardis. Thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead, Rev. 3. 1. Should we now inferr hereupon, that therfore baptisme and the other ordinances of God, in the church of Sardis, were but in shew reteyned therin, and could not be unto them the signes & seals of the forgivenes of synns and of life eternal: and therfore were in their use of them false and deceyefull, a•• were the ordinances of God, reteyned among the Gentiles? Would any man of heart and understanding, endure such blasphemie? Sayth not the Scripture, that the church of Sardis, was one of the seven golden candlesticks? &c.

Answ. A man of understanding, wil discerne things that differ, and be caried by judgment, not by affection. The syn of Sardis, was secret hypocrisie, the syn of Ephraim was open idolatrie: the death of Sardis was discerned of Christ, (who searcheth † 1.484 the heart & reines:) the death of Ephraim, was discerned of men, who can judge but by the works. Sardis had a name among the churches, to be alive: when for the most part they were dead before God; though some things remayned which are but ready to dye, vers. 2. and a few among them, were worthy ones, and undefiled, vers. 4. Ephraim was openly knowen to be fallen from God to Baal, by the Pro∣phets, and by the church of Iudah. Hypocrites in all true church∣es, are dead before God, though alive before men. So Simon Magus was alive in the judgment of the Apostolik church, and baptised therin, Act. 8. when before God he was dead. His bap∣tisme was true baptisme so farr as men could judge: though to himself before God, he received * 1.485 judgment therby, not being a worthy partaker. But had he been an open worshiper of Baal, and baptised or circumcised among the Baalists; it could not by men have been judged a true signe and seale of the forgivenes of his synns, he remayning unrepentant. They that should so affirme, should themselves not be farr from blasphemie, before men of un∣derstanding, that know upon what conditions the covenant of grace is made between God and men. They in Sardis that were dead, that is without true faith, (for by † 1.486 saith, the just doth live,)

could not by the sacraments or by any ordinance in the church be partakers of Christ, of his death or resurrection before God: so their baptisme was to them * 1.487 no baptisme. And had they been so discerned of men, their baptisme should so have been judged by men. As the Canaanites in Sichem, † 1.488 their circumcision was un∣circumcision, before men; and not the signe and seale of the “ 1.489 righ∣teousnes of faith, when they had no faith: for the unbeleever re∣mayneth in the state of damnation, Mar. 16. 16. and the baptisme that saveth, is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God, as th'Apostle suyth; 1 Pet. 3. 21.

That which he further annexeth, that I say their reasons from Isra∣el, might well serve for the times wherein John lived, when the * 1.490 true chur∣ches were many of them apostate: wherupon he noteth, my contradicting of my selfe &c. was a mistaking, that I distinguished not the state of Iudah, which was a true church corrupted, from Israel a false church: and so the true churches apostate in th'Apostles time, Re∣vel. 2. & 3. from the false churches also in those times, 1. Ioh. 2. 19. Into which oversight I fell, by their citing undistinctly, Jer. 3. and Esai 50. the one speaking of Israel, the other of Iudah; as is to be seen in their Advertisement pag. 107. wherto I gave answer, in A∣nimadvers. p. 103.

Secondly, he pleadeth, if Hose. 13. 1. be understood of death in syn, yet let it be well considered, wh••ther it will therfore follow, that Circumcision now in Israel was not the Lords signe and seale of his forgivenes of syn, but a false and deceitfull signe in their use therof, and no better then the ordinances of the heathen. For Christ sayd, Let the dead bury their dead &c. Luke 9. 60. was circumcision then among the Iewes, a false and deceitfull signe in their life therof &c.

Answ. He runneth into his former errour: the Iewish church in Christs time was a true church, and Christ communicated in their Temple and sacrifices: Israel when they served Baal, was a false church: and no man might awfully communicate with their Temple and sacrifices. Christ speaketh not of the Church gene∣rally, but of such as he knew to be hypocrites and dead, though seeming alive: we speak of Ephraim generally, open offenders, ser∣ving Baal, and dead in the judgement of the Saincts. The same I answer to his next instance of the church of Ephesus, which then when Paul wrote, was not the house of Baal, but of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth, 1 Tim. 3. 15. Moreover he citeth not

my words sincerely▪ I spake of the seale of forgivenes of synns 〈◊〉〈◊〉 them: neyther did I say, no better then the ordinances of the heathen, which the reader may understand, the ordinances devised by the hea∣thens themselves; but I sayd, in their use of them false and deceitfull; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 were also the ordinances of God, reteyned in other nations; as altars, sacrifices &c. touching whose estate I have spoken of before.

Thirdly he excepteth, that Baals worship was first instituted by Achab, about 60. yeres after Ieroboam, and great difference was between Ieroboams calves, and Baals idolatrie &c.

Answ. It is not material to our question, who spake of Israels circumcision in their apostasie in generall, before and after they were out of the land; as before I have manifested. 2. I acknow∣ledge Achabs syn was greater then Ieroboams, and false churches may grow worse and worse: yet Ieroboams calves, were also Divils, as the holy Ghost calleth them, 2. Chron. 11. 15.

Fourthly he instanceth, the 7000 in Israel, that bowed not the knee to Baal: 1. King. 19. 18. asking, what we shall say to these? were they not cir∣cumcised? or had they not the circumcision that was then in Jsrael? or was it not to them the Lords seale of forgivenes of synns? &c.

Answ. The instance is good, to clear the controversie, by the help of other scriptures. In Rom. 11. Paul speaking of the rejection of the Iewes, sayth, Hath God cast away his people? Farr be it: For I al∣so am an Israelite &c. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Then speaking of Elias prayer against Israel▪ and Gods answer, J have reserved to my self 7000. men, who have not bowed the knee to (the image of) Baal. Even so then (sayth † 1.491 he) at this present time also there is a remnant, according to the election of grace: &c. By this we are taught, 1. That if a few, or any one of a people be reserved of God, though the multitude be cast away; yet it cannot be sayd absolutely, that God hath cast away his people. And this may lead us to under∣stand, why God called Israel his people in their apostasie; because some he kept from falling into it, some he brought out of it by re∣pentance. 2. That those are in deed Gods people, whom he foreknew: the rest are cast off. Now those which are foreknowen of God, are described thus, that he also did predestinate them to be confor∣med to the image of his sont▪ them he also called; them he also justified▪ them he also glorified▪ Rom. 8. 2••▪ 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ Thus are we led to judge who are Gods people, when we see their calling▪ justifying▪ and gloryfying▪ that is their sanctification▪ ••▪ Cor. 3••▪ ••8. by which i•• charitie we are to

judge of their predestination, and estate in grace. 3. That as the remnant of the Iewes, which imbraced the gospel, were the election of grace, that is the people whom in charitie we should judge to be elected of God according to his grace; and the others are blinded, hardned, cast off, til God give them repentance: so in Is∣rael, they that kept themselves from the cōmon idolatrie of Baal, inwardly and outwardly, and reteyned the true service of God, were his election of grace, and to be judged his true people; the others that synned in Baal, were dead; til God gave them repen∣tance unto life. Thus the Apostles exposition and application of those 7000. in Israel; may help us to judge of their estate aright. And not because circumcision was unto them the seale of grace and of forgivenes of synns; to conclude, that therfore it was like∣weise to them that served Baal: for so we should prostitute Gods grace and the seals therof, to such as God condemneth and re∣jecteth.

Fiftly he instanceth the worship of Baal by Iudah, Ier. 7. Judg. 2. &c. Wherto I answer (as before) that Iudah in her constitution remayned a true church, though corrupted: Israel being a false church, as hath been manifested. Neyther was the defection uni∣versall and open as in Israel. As for such in Iudah as so fell from God, and would not be brought to repentance, the Prophet tel∣leth them they trusted in lying words, when they sayd, The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord &c. Ier. 7. 4. 8. the Lord threatneth to cast them out of his sight, and forbad his Prophet to pray for them, Jer. 7. 15. 16. So their circumcision became unto them uncir∣cumcision, Rom. 2. 25.

To this he objecteth, Though mans idolatrie &c may make Gods sa∣craments improfitable to himself; yet can they not make them lying and de∣ceitfull signes, but that in the Lords ordinance they are unto all and therfore also unto them, his true signes and faithfull seals (on his part) of forgivenes of synns and life eternal. For, shall the infidelitie of man, turne the truth of God into a lye? God forbid.

Answ. I have before answered, that all Gods ordinances are in them selves, and on his part, holy faithfull and true. They are true seals of forgivenes of synns, but to such as are worthy parta∣kers of them, in faith; otherweise they seale judgment unto men: 1 Cor. 11. 27. 28 29. And it is not his ordinance, that open and ob∣stinate idolaters and wicked men, should administer or receive

them, Ezek. 44. 9. Numb. 15. 30. 31. Levit. 7. 20. Psalm. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1••. 17. That men may turne the truth of God into a lye. the Apostle plainly teach∣eth, Rom. 1. 25. so may they the truth of his ordinances, into lyes. But the truth of God, as it is in himself, or his faithfulnes, is un∣changeable: & if men beleeve not, or sanctifie him not, they perish by the judgment of God, which is according to trueth; and his faithfulnes suffreth him not to save such, unless he make them first new creatures and beleevers; Joh. 3. 36. 1. Joh. 5. 10. 12.

Sixtly, he expoundeth Israels death in Hos. 13. 1. to be (by the exposition of sundry writers) not death in syn, but slayn for their synns; or their estate overthrowen, or neer utter destruction. &c.

Answ. Both may be true; that first they were dead in syn, and after destroyed civilly for their syn. Gods judgmēts are according to mens deserts; he destroyed not the Amorites, Egyptians, and other nations, til their iniquitie was full. Gen. 15. 16. Wherfore to condemne the exposition which I gave, because an other con∣sequent folowed upon it, as the ruine of Achabs house, or the like; is no fitme argument. And to his many expositors whom he ci∣teth, I oppose one greater then all, even th'Apostle in Rom. 11. before spoken of: who sheweth the election of grace to be in the 7000 that worshiped not Baal: and not in the multitude of the Baalists. And if they were not of the election of grace, then were they dead in syn, though he and many say the contrary.

Finally he alleageth the sayings of the Prophet before and af∣ter, The Lord found Iakob in Bethel, and there he spake with us, &c, Ther∣fore turne thou to thy God &c. Hos. 12. 4. 5. 6. 9. And, yet am J the Lord thy God, from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no God but me. I did know thee in the wildernes &c. Hose. 13. 4. 5.

Answ. I have before shewed, that the prophets speak to Israel, as a corporation or body, which after a sort continueth one and the same through many generations; when yet, as touching their particular persons or generations, they are different & contrary; as godly fathers in the state of grace and life, may beget wicked children without grace, and in state of death. Ezek. 18. 9. 10. 13. 14. 17. 18. &c. So the King of Tyre had been in Eden the garden of God, (a proselyte in the Church) Ezek. 28. 13. not that heathen king then living, but his predecessor Huram, long before. 1. King. 5. So Paul speaketh of the Iewes cast away of God, as the same peo∣ple, till their last calling, Rom. 11. And I doubt not, but a man

preaching to convert them at this day, might apply unto them the like sayings, I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt, thou shalt know no God but me: J led thee in the wildernes &c. But alwayes in such ge∣neral phrases, the promises of grace belong onely to such as be∣leeve and turne to the Lord: the others that remaine hardned, shall perish.

And hitherto of his exceptions against the scriptures which I cited: although (as I shewed) if they had continued Gods true church in the land; yet whē they were for obstinacie in their synns cast out of it, had the bill of divorce, were not the people or wife of the Lord: their circumcision could be no seale from God unto them of forgivenes of synns, & eternal life, in that estate.

That which after he prosequuteth touching the heathens state, I have answered before. And as for his other exceptions or repe∣titions touching Israel; they are such as are before answered; and it is not a thing so necessarie to be insisted upon, touching their estate before they were cast out of the land; seing their circumcisiō in the ages folowing, (when th'Apostle testifieth they were not a people, or partakers of Gods mercie, 1. Pet. 2. and when all doe acknowledge they had the bill of divorce, Ier. 3.) was not repea∣ted when they came againe to the Lord, Ezr. 6. 21. Here therfore I will end; and leave the things that have been controverted, to the discreet censure of the judicious reader.

THat it may appeare how it is no new thing that we teach touching the Sacraments, and the falshood of them in the church of Rome: I will here annex a few things, out of the Theses of Zach. Ursinus Doctor of Theologie in Heidel∣berg: which are added at the end of his Catechisme set forth by D. Pareus; among the Miscellanea Catechetica.

Of the Sacraments, Theses publickly disputed at Heidelberg, the 23. of August, anno 1567.

1. God from the beginning, hath adjoyned signes or rites un∣to the promise of grace: which in the Church, are usually named Sacraments.

2. And Sacraments are signes of the eternal covenant between God and beleevers; that is to say, they are rites commanded of God unto the church, and added unto the promise of grace, that by them as by visible and sure testimonies, God may signifie and testifie, that unto them that use these symbols in true faith, he communicateth Christ and all his benefits, according to the pro∣mise of the gospel; and so may confirme in them, the confidence of the promise; and that the church may by these visible notes, be discerned from all other sects &c. Gen. 17. 11. Exod. 20. 10. & 31. 14. Ezek. 20. 12. Deut. 30▪ 6. Col. 2. 2. 11▪ 1 Cor. 5. 7. Ioh. ••. 19. Heb. 8. 9. 10. Mar. 16. 16. &c.

3. Rites which are not commanded of God, or not instituted to this end, for to be signes of the promises; are no Sacraments.

8. The lawfull use of the sacraments is, when they that are con∣verted (to the Lord) doe keep those rites which God cōmanded, to those ends for which they were instituted sacraments of God. Proof. That onely is the lawful use, which agreeth with the di∣vine institution. And the institution comprehendeth these cir∣cumstances of persons, rites, and ends. If these therefore be vio∣lated, the signes are abused, Esai. 1. Jer. 7. Psal. 50.

9. In this use, the things signified, are alwayes received togi∣ther with the signes: Mark. 16. 16.

10. But out of the use instituted of God, which is not without conversion (unto him); the ceremonies have no respect of a sa∣crament, neyther are Gods benefits (signified by them,) received with the signes. Proof. The signes of the covenant, confirme nothing to them which keep not the covenant, or which substitute other things in their place; or which referr them to another end. But Sacraments are signes of the covenant, wherby God bindeth himself to give us forgivenes of synns and life eternal freely for Christs sake: and bindeth us to shew forth faith & new obedience. Therfore they confirme not Gods grace to those which use them without faith and repentance, or that use other rites, or to an o∣ther end then God hath instituted. Moreover it is superstitious and idolatrous, to attribute the testimonie of Gods grace, eyther to the outward work without the promise, or to a work divised of

men. Therfore this abuse of the Sacramentes, hath not▪ Gods grace joyned with it, neyther confirmeth it to any▪ as it is sayd, in Rom. 2. 25. Circumcision profiteth if thou keep the Law: but if thou be a transgressor of the Law, thy circumcision is made uncir∣cumcision.

11. The godly, doe receive the signes unto salvation; the wic∣ked, unto condemnation: but the things signified, can onely the godly receive unto salvation. 1 Pet. 3. 21. 1 Cor. 10. 16. Esa. 66. 3. 1 Cor. 11. 17.

12. Yet in the elect, though they have received the sacrament unworthily, the fruit foloweth at length after they are converted. Proof. The promise, and the signes of the promise which hath the condition of faith added to it, are confirmed, whensoever the con∣dition is performed. And such is the promise, which is signified and confirmed by the sacraments. Therfore whether faith (which beleeveth the promise and signes) cometh eyther in the use, or af∣ter the use; the promise and things signified are received. Ezek. 16. 69.

Objections against the Theses of the Sacraments and the solutions of them, by D. Zach. Vrsinus: in publik dis∣putation Anno. 1567.

Object. 4. against part of the tenth position. The papists sacraments are doen without regeneration. And yet they are Sa∣craments. Therfore they may be without (mens) conversion (to God.)

Answ. The second proposition may be denyed, touching them that are not converted. For to such, the sacraments are no sacra∣ments, that is, signes of grace; especially seing they turne them in∣to mere idols. But they are made sacraments unto them, that is, signes of grace, when (the Papists) are converted. And if they ne∣ver be converted, they never become sacraments unto them.

Instance to an absurditie. They that deprave the wordes and the forme of the institution, they overthrow the substance of bap∣tisme. The Papists doe the first, therfore also the latter. Wherup∣on their baptisme is no baptisme; and we which were baptised in the papacie, must be baptised againe.

Answ. For the first, they doe overthrow the substance of bap∣tisme,

namely to themselves, and to those which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 unto 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and are not converted but not unto those, which acknovvledging their errours are converted, and doe joyne themselves unto the Church of Christ.

Object. 6. against the twelft position. That which brings con∣demnation▪ brings no fruit▪ The unworthy▪ usurpation of the sa∣crament brings condemnation▪ by the 11▪ position. Therefore it brings no fruit.

Answ. I grant all, before conversion: but after it, the unwor∣thy usurpation, becometh worthy.

Jnstance. Condemnation foloweth not conversion. The fruit of the sacrament received unworthily, is condemnation, by posi∣tion 11. Therfore the fruit foloweth not those that are converted.

Answ. We grant it, touching condemnation. But we speak here of the fruit of the sacrament unworthily received, which be∣fore conversion vvas condemnation, because of the unworthy re∣ceiving: but after conversion, it is changed into a good and saving fruit.

Hitherto Ursinus. Whereunto I will adde this saying of Mr. Calvin, in his 111. Sermon upon Deuteronomie, (on Deut. 18. 22.) And what (sayth he) is to be sayd of their sacraments? Jt is evi∣dent that they be mere witcheries in the Popedome, so as Jesus Christ is driven a great way off by them: and men make idols of the visible signes and liveless creatures, and Sa••a•• hath so imbrued the wretched world with his illusions, that men▪ are become stark beasts.

FINIS.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Prov. 28. ••
• † 1.2

  2 Thes. 2. 3▪
• “ 1.3

  v. ••.
• * 1.4

  Psal. 141.
• † 1.5

  Ier. 50. 4••▪
• † 1.6

  v. 28.
• * 1.7

  Rom. ••. ••.
• † 1.8

  Animad∣••••rs: p. 76.
• * 1.9

  Animad▪ pag. 77.
• † 1.10

  Christian Plea p. 12••
• “ 1.11

  Chr. pl•••• p. 141.
• † 1.12

  p. 242.
• “ 1.13

  Adverti••▪ p. 58. 59.
• * 1.14

  Advertis▪ p. 5•• 59
• † 1.15

  Animad▪ p. 77. 78. &c.
• † 1.16

  ••nimad.
• * 1.17

  ••••s. ple•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.18

  vers. 12.
• † 1.19

  v. 7.
• * 1.20

  v. 11.
• † 1.21

  2 Thes. 2. 3.
• * 1.22

  Dan. 7. 23.
• † 1.23

  Chr. plea ••. 121.
• * 1.24

  II.
• * 1.25

  Ibidem.
• * 1.26

  Ibid. p. 128
• † 1.27

  Chr. plea p. 122.
• * 1.28

  Rhemes ••nno••. on 1 Tim. 2. ••.
• * 1.29

  Ceremon. Rom. l. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 7. c. De con∣secrat. agn. Dei.
• * 1.30

  Iam. 2. 19.
• * 1.31

  1 Cor. 13. 3.
• † 1.32

  Lib. 6. c. 3.
• “ 1.33

  Lib. 1. ch. 14.
• * 1.34

  Christian▪ plea p. 122.
• † 1.35

  2 Cor. 2. 16.
• * 1.36

  Chr. plea. pag. 122.
• * 1.37

  Chr. plea p. 122. 12••▪
• * 1.38

  M••t. 24. 24.
• † 1.39

  2 Pet. 2. 4. 5.
• * 1.40

  Chr. plea, p. 123,
• * 1.41

  Rev. 17. 18.
• † 1.42

  Ibidem
• * 1.43

  Ibid. pag. 123. 124.
• † 1.44

  pag. 124.
• * 1.45

  Exod. 34. 28.
• * 1.46

  ••hr. plea, ••ag. 120.
• ” 1.47

  Chr. plea, 124. &c.
• * 1.48

  Animadv p. 76,-106▪
• * 1.49

  Exod. 3. 5.
• † 1.50

  Rō. 11. 20.
• ” 1.51

  Ioh. 4. 21.
• * 1.52

  Bellarm. ••e Chr. ani∣〈…〉〈…〉a, l. ••. c. 11.
• * 1.53

  Christi plea pag.
• * 1.54

  Chr. plea, p. 58.
• † 1.55

  Animadv. ••ag. 79
• * 1.56

  Chr. plea. ••ag. 149.
• * 1.57

  Animad. ••ag. 79. Eph. 3. 17. ••2. 22. 1. ••or. 3▪ 16. Rev. 13. 4. ••. &. 16. •• 1. Tim. 4. •• 2. Thes. 2. ••. 11. 12. ••. Thes. 2. 4.
• * 1.58

  2 Thes. 2▪ 7.
• † 1.59

  Chr. plea p. 150. 15••.
• * 1.60

  pag. 152.
• * 1.61

  pag. 150.
• † 1.62

  Rev. 9. 20.
• * 1.63

  Rom. 1.
• * 1.64

  Chr. plea ••••g. 142.
• † 1.65

  Chr. plea ••••g. 146.
• * 1.66

  pag. 143.
• * 1.67

  1 Pet. 2. 5.
• † 1.68

  pag. 14
• * 1.69

  2 Thes. 2. 7.
• † 1.70

  1 Tim. 3. 16.
• * 1.71

  Animadv. ag. 79. 80.
• * 1.72

  † Pag. 147.
• * 1.73

  1 Sam. 28.
• † 1.74

  Ezek. 28. 13.
• “ 1.75

  Amo. 2. 8.
• * 1.76

  Rev. 13. 6.
• † 1.77

  Rev. 17. ••▪
• * 1.78

  Eph. ••. 1. 2▪
• † 1.79

  Act. 26. 18.
• * 1.80

  Col. 1. 13.
• † 1.81

  Gal. 2. 4.
• “ 1.82

  2 Thes. 2. 11.
• ‘* 1.83

  vers. 10.
• *‘ 1.84

  2 Pet. 2. ••▪
• “ 1.85

  1 Job. 2. 19.
• † 1.86

  2 Pet 2. 2.
• ‘† 1.87

  Rev. 19. 19.
• * 1.88

  Animad. pag. 80.
• † 1.89

  Psalm. 79. Dan. 8. 11. 13. & 11. ••6. Ier. 52. ••2. 13. Lam. ••. 7. 9.
• “ 1.90

  Chr. plea pag. 159.
• * 1.91

  Rom. 1.
• † 1.92

  Rev. 9. 20. & 18. 2.
• * 1.93

  Answ.
• * 1.94

  M••talepsis
• * 1.95

  Revel. 17
• † 1.96

  Chr. ple▪ p. 152.
• † 1.97

  Chr. plea pag. 152.
• † 1.98

  Chr. plea ag. 154.
• † 1.99

  Chr. plea pag. 154.
• * 1.100

  Animadv. ••g. 78.
• † 1.101

  Deut. 16. 16.
• ‘* 1.102

  1 King. 8. ••. 4••. Ioh. ••. 20. Act. 8. 27.
• *‘ 1.103

  Chr. plea ••g. 155.
• * 1.104

  Pag. 156.
• † 1.105

  Animadv. pag. 103.
• * 1.106

  Rev. 1. 11. 2. 20. & ••. 1.
• * 1.107

  Rev. 1. 20.
• * 1.108

  Ezek. 16. 2. 35. &c. & 23. 2.-43. &c.
• † 1.109

  Esa. 1. 4. 5. &c.
• “ 1.110

  Esa. 57. 3. 4. 5.
• *‘ 1.111

  Esa. 65. 2. 3. &c.
• “ 1.112

  2 Chron. 36. 14. &c.
• * 1.113

  Eph. 2. 1.
• † 1.114

  Animadv pag. 79.
• * 1.115

  Chr. plea pag. 158.
• † 1.116

  Animadv p. 76.-106▪
• * 1.117

  Con••ll▪ Trident. sess▪ 23. can. 6.
• † 1.118

  2 Thes. 2. 10. 12.
• * 1.119

  Chr. plea 125. 126.
• † 1.120

  Chr. plea ••ag. 120.
• * 1.121

  Rev. 9. 20.
• * 1.122

  Chr. plea ••27. &c.
• † 1.123

  ••ag. 128.
• * 1.124

  2 King. 24 13. 14. 15. 16.
• † 1.125

  2 King. 25 4. 9. 10. 11.
• “ 1.126

  Zach. 1. 3. 4.
• *‘ 1.127

  Zach. 1▪ 8. 16.
• † 1.128

  Zach. 2. 1. 2.
• * 1.129

  vers. 6. 7.
• † 1.130

  Zach. 6. 12.
• “ 1.131

  Ezek. 40. 2. 3. 5.
• “ 1.132

  vers. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. &c.
• * 1.133

  Ezeh. 41. 1. 2. &c.
• † 1.134

  Ezek. 42. 1. &c.
• “ 1.135

  Ezek. 43. 7.
• “ 1.136

  2 Chron. 6. 2. & 7. 12. 16.
• †‘ 1.137

  Ezek. 43. 11.
• “ 1.138

  vers. 10.
• * 1.139

  2 Thes. 2. 7. 1 Joh. 2. 18. 19. & 4. 1. ••••2. 3.
• † 1.140

  Rev. 12. 1▪
• “ 1.141

  Rev. 6. 12. 13. 14.
• * 1.142

  Rev. 17.
• † 1.143

  Revel. 13
• * 1.144

  Rev. 11. 8.
• “ 1.145

  Rev. 11. 1.
• * 1.146

  Revel. 21. ••. &c.
• † 1.147

  Rev. 21. 15.
• † 1.148

  2 Thes. 2. 1••.
• * 1.149

  1 Ioh. 2. 22
• † 1.150

  Chr. pl•••• pag. 137.
• “ 1.151

  Gen. 19 24. 25. Ie•• 51. 58. 6••
• * 1.152

  Psalm. 75 vers. 1.
• † 1.153

  vers. 2.
• * 1.154

  vers. 3.
• † 1.155

  vers. 7. 8
• * 1.156

  Jer. 20. 4.
• † 1.157

  Ier. 12. 7. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.158

  Revel. 13. ••. 18.
• † 1.159

  Chr. plea ••••g. 131.
• * 1.160

  vers. 4.
• † 1.161

  vers. 5.
• * 1.162

  Chr. ple pag. 159
• * 1.163

  Rev. 17. ••
• † 1.164

  Rev. 18. ••
• * 1.165

  p. 40 &.
• * 1.166

  “ Chr. ple pag. 154.
• † 1.167

  Mr. Bagh man on R•••• 16. 19.
• * 1.168

  Mat. 4. 5. ••ith Luke ••. 9.
• † 1.169

  Ioh. 6 70. ••1.
• * 1.170

  De Rom. ••ont. l. 3. ••. 13.
• * 1.171

  Animadv in Bellarm. Cont. 3. l. 3. c. 13. note 13▪
• † 1.172

  Cont. 4. An. Pap••. sit Antich quest. 5.
• * 1.173

  Chr. plea pag. 1••9.
• † 1.174

  Chr. plea. ••ag. 130.
• “ 1.175

  Lam. 1. 6. &c.
• * 1.176

  Lam. 2. 1.
• † 1.177

  vers. ••.
• ‘† 1.178

  vers. 10.
• ',' 1.179

  vers. 13.
• ‘* 1.180

  vers. 14.
• *‘ 1.181

  Chr. plea ••ag. 133.
• * 1.182

  Ezek. 40. ••. Zach. 2. 2.
• † 1.183

  Defence Script. p. 1▪
• *‘ 1.184

  Psalm. 7▪
• †‘ 1.185

  Revel. 1▪
• “ 1.186

  Revel. 2▪
• * 1.187

  Chr. pl▪ pag. 145.
• † 1.188

  Chr. p•• pag. 134.
• * 1.189

  ibid. p. 1▪
• * 1.190

  Chr. plea pag. 165.
• * 1.191

  Animadv pag. 76.
• † 1.192

  Animadv pag. 75.
• * 1.193

  Jer. 50, 6.
• † 1.194

  Ier. 50. 17.
• * 1.195

  Ier. 52. 13. ••4.
• ‘† 1.196

  Rom. 11. ••. 5. 7.
• ',' 1.197

  Ier. 51. 25.
• * 1.198

  Rev. 18. 2. & 11. 8.
• † 1.199

  Chr. plea pag. 166.
• * 1.200

  Jer. 50. 6.
• † 1.201

  2 King. 25. ••.
• ‘* 1.202

  Dan. 1. 2.
• ‘† 1.203

  Lam. 2. vers. 2.
• ',' 1.204

  vers. 5.
• * 1.205

  vers. 6.
• † 1.206

  vers. 7.
• ‘* 1.207

  Lam. 5. 18.
• ‘† 1.208

  Revel. 17. ••. 6.
• * 1.209

  Dan. 1. 8. & 3. 18.
• * 1.210

  1 King. •• 13. Psalm. 132. 13. 1••
• † 1.211

  Ezek. 9.
• * 1.212

  vers. 5.
• † 1.213

  Ezek. 10.
• * 1.214

  Ezek. 1•• 18. 19. 11. 22. 23.
• * 1.215

  Ier. 25. 9.
• † 1.216

  2 King. 25. ••.
• * 1.217

  Levit. 26. p. 41. &c. King. 8. 46. ••. &c.
• † 1.218

  Deut. 28.
• * 1.219

  Rev. 13.
• † 1.220

  Rev. 17.
• “ 1.221

  Rev. 13. 7.
• * 1.222

  vers. 8.
• * 1.223

  Rev. 14. 9. ••. 11.
• † 1.224

  Rev. 11, 3. 20, 4.
• “ 1.225

  Rev: 18. 4.
• † 1.226

  Rev. 17. 1. 5.
• “ 1.227

  Rev. 11. 8. 9.
• “ 1.228

  Rev. 11. 13.
• † 1.229

  Rev. 18.
• * 1.230

  Rev. 18.
• † 1.231

  Eph. 1. 4.
• * 1.232

  Dan. 1. and 3. 18
• † 1.233

  Rom. 6. 1. 20. 2 Pet. 2. 19.
• † 1.234

  Chr. ple•• pag. 171.
• † 1.235

  Arrow. ag. lolat. ch. 3. & 5.
• “ 1.236

  1 Mac∣ab. 1.
• † 1.237

  Chr. ple••▪ pag. 172.
• “ 1.238

  Chr. plea pag. 161.
• † 1.239

  2 King. 2••
• * 1.240

  Eph. 2. 1•• 12.
• † 1.241

  Animadv. ••g. 73. 74.
• * 1.242

  Chr. plea ••g. 174.
• * 1.243

  Animad pag. 87. &
• † 1.244

  Rom. 10.
• “ 1.245

  Gal. 3. 1••
• * 1.246

  Ioh. 3. 3••
• † 1.247

  Levit. 2•• Deut. 28.
• “ 1.248

  Lev. 26. 1▪
• * 1.249

  Zach. 1 10. Psal. 8▪ 39.
• † 1.250

  1 Ioh. 3. ••
• * 1.251

  Chr. plea ••ag. 175.
• † 1.252

  v. 28. 26. ••2.
• * 1.253

  v. 34. 35.
• “ 1.254

  Exod. 34. ••0. 11.
• * 1.255

  v. 12. &c.
• † 1.256

  Iudg. 1. ••7. - 33.
• † 1.257

  Num. 20. ••2. Deut. 32. ••0. 51. 54.
• † 1.258

  Chr. pl•• pag. 175.
• * 1.259

  Animadv. ••ag. 70.
• * 1.260

  Psal. 9. 14.
• † 1.261

  Ezek. 23. 2.
• “ 1.262

  vers. 4.
• * 1.263

  Hos. 11. 12.
• † 1.264

  Ioh. 17. 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪
• * 1.265

  1 Cor. 21. 3.
• † 1.266

  2. King. 17 3. 14.
• * 1.267

  Lev. 26. 8. 24. 28.
• “ 1.268

  v. 32. 33.
• † 1.269

  Lev. 18. 8.
• * 1.270

  Hos. 3. 4.
• “ 1.271

  Ier. 50. 17
• † 1.272

  Chr. plea pag. 175.
• * 1.273

  Animadv. 91. 92.
• † 1.274

  Psal. 87. 4.
• * 1.275

  1. Pet. 5. 13.
• † 1.276

  Chr. plea pag. 176.
• * 1.277

  Chr. plea pag. 177.
• † 1.278

  Animadv pag. 93.
• * 1.279

  Alcoran Azoar. 2. 3. 67. 31.
• † 1.280

  Chr. plea pag. 178.
• * 1.281

  Animadv. pag. 94.
• † 1.282

  Chr. plea pag. 178.
• * 1.283

  1. Ioh. 2. 22
• † 1.284

  Animadv pag. 94.
• * 1.285

  Chr. plea pag. 179.
• † 1.286

  Ibid. p. 18
• * 1.287

  pag. 121.
• † 1.288

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 6. 7. &c.
• * 1.289

  Animadv. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 96.
• † 1.290

  Animadv. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 97.
• * 1.291

  Ezek. 16
• † 1.292

  Chr. plea pag. 181.
• * 1.293

  Chr. plea pag. 178.
• * 1.294

  † Rom. 16. 25. 26.
• † 1.295

  Iob. 29. 7. ••.-25.
• * 1.296

  Rev. 21. 15
• † 1.297

  Chr. plea pag. 181.
• * 1.298

  Chr. plea pag. 94 95.
• † 1.299

  Animadv. pag. 70.
• † 1.300

  Iob. 1. 5. •• 42. 8. 9.
• * 1.301

  1. King. 12 ••.—33.
• † 1.302

  Annot. o•• Gen. 9.
• * 1.303

  * Chr. ple•• pag. 9••.
• † 1.304

  Animadv. ••g. 75.
• † 1.305

  Chr. pl•• p. 183. 1
• * 1.306

  Anima•• pag. 68.
• † 1.307

  Chr. pl•• pag. 188.
• * 1.308

  Contr. 4. An papa Antichr. quast. 5. ••.
• † 1.309

  Iun. anno on Rev. 11.
• * 1.310

  Animad•• ad Appen•• de sum pon•• c. 6. not 7.
• † 1.311

  Chr. plea pag. 188.
• * 1.312

  Chr. plea pag. 190.
• † 1.313

  Chr. plea pag. 120.
• * 1.314

  Chr. plea pag. 191.
• * 1.315

  Animadv. ••n Bellar. de Antichr. l. 3. ••. 13. not. 3.
• * 1.316

  In Consil. sue Profect.
• † 1.317

  2 Cor. 2. 1••.
• * 1.318

  Chr. plea p. 195.
• † 1.319

  Chr. plea pag. 195.
• * 1.320

  So called, Extrav. in Ioan. 22. c. cum inter in glossa.
• † 1.321

  Chr. plea pag. 120.
• * 1.322

  Ier. 3. 8.
• † 1.323

  Chr. plea pag. 196
• * 1.324

  Animadv in Bellar. d•• eccles mili∣tante, l. 3 c. 13. not 7.
• † 1.325

  Annot. on Rev. 17. 14.
• * 1.326

  † In. annot. on Rev. 11. 7 & 17. ••.
• † 1.327

  Annot. on Rev. 13. 12.
• “ 1.328

  In Annot. ••n Rev. 17. 4▪
• * 1.329

  ••n Annot. ••n Rev. 11. 1
• † 1.330

  Annot. i-••idem.
• * 1.331

  Chr. plea ••ag. 197.
• † 1.332

  Brough. on Rev. 8. p. 79.
• * 1.333

  Ibid. p. 96. 97.
• “ 1.334

  pag. 159.
• † 1.335

  pag. 240.
• * 1.336

  pag. 254.
• “ 1.337

  pag. 229.
• † 1.338

  pag. 258.
• * 1.339

  pag. 247.
• “ 1.340

  pag. 308.
• † 1.341

  p. 3••. arg. on c. 11.
• * 1.342

  Pag. 203▪
• † 1.343

  Chr. plea pag. 197.
• * 1.344

  2. Thes. 2▪ 12.
• * 1.345

  Ier. 3.
• † 1.346

  Deut. 32.
• * 1.347

  Chr. plea ••••g. 198.
• † 1.348

  Anima•• p. 102. 103
• * 1.349

  Chr. plea pag. 199.
• * 1.350

  Annot. on Rev. 13. 16.
• † 1.351

  Thes. 2. 7▪
• * 1.352

  Ioh. 2. 18▪
• “ 1.353

  Rev. 2. ••.
• † 1.354

  Rom. 11. 21. 22.
• * 1.355

  Dan▪ 4. 27. ••▪ 5. 18.—4.
• † 1.356

  Deut. 33. ••.
• * 1.357

  Ier. 3.
• † 1.358

  Animadv. Bellarm.
• * 1.359

  Eccles. ••lit. l. 3. c. 4▪ •••• 9. Jbid. c. 5. •••• 10.
• † 1.360

  Chr. plea p. 202. 203.
• * 1.361

  Animadv. pag. 103.
• † 1.362

  Chr. plea pag. 203▪
• * 1.363

  Page 52, &c.
• † 1.364

  2 King. 25. Psa 79. 1.
• * 1.365

  vers. 18.
• † 1.366

  Chr. plea pag. 205.
• * 1.367

  Chr. plea pag. 206.
• † 1.368

  In his an∣not. on Rev. 11.
• “ 1.369

  Chr. plea pag. 207.
• * 1.370

  Annot. on Rev. 20. 5.
• † 1.371

  Rom. 8. 8. - 11.
• “ 1.372

  1 Pet. 2. 4. 5.
• * 1.373

  Ephes. 2. 21. 22.
• † 1.374

  Rev. 11. ••
• * 1.375

  Ephes. 2▪
• † 1.376

  Chr. plea pag. 120
• † 1.377

  Page. 208.
• † 1.378

  Animadv. ••. 105.
• * 1.379

  Chr. plea ••ag. 208.
• † 1.380

  Chr. plea p. 209.
• * 1.381

  * Whitak. controv. 4. An papa Antichr. ••. c. 3.
• † 1.382

  ••hitake∣ibid.
• * 1.383

  ••bidens.
• † 1.384

  Pag. 40. ••c.
• * 1.385

  Cont. 4. q. c. 2. l. 1.
• † 1.386

  Chr. plea ••ag. 213.
• * 1.387

  Lib, 9. c. 1••.
• † 1.388

  Paraph. p•• Revel. 11. 2.
• * 1.389

  Paraph. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Rev. 12. 5.
• † 1.390

  Paraph. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Rev. 20. 5.
• “ 1.391

  Ibid. hist
• † 1.392

  v. 16—28.
• * 1.393

  v. 33.
• “ 1.394

  v. 38.
• † 1.395

  v. 39. 40.
• * 1.396

  v. 41.
• “ 1.397

  v. 42.
• † 1.398

  v. 44.
• * 1.399

  v. 45.
• * 1.400

  In his ser∣mon against idolatry, on Psa. 16. 4.
• † 1.401

  Chr. plea pag. 30.
• * 1.402

  The An•• baptists. •• H. A. An•• madv. p. 68-72. 71-75.
• “ 1.403

  Mr. Cl.
• † 1.404

  Apol. pag▪ 110.
• * 1.405

  Animad p. 68. 69. 7••▪ 73.
• * 1.406

  Animadv. ••••g. 70.
• † 1.407

  Mat. 3. 11 •• Cor. 12. ••. Pet. 3. 21.
• † 1.408

  Page 72.
• * 1.409

  Chr. plea ••ag. 27.
• † 1.410

  Iob. 6. 44.
• * 1.411

  5
• * 1.412

  6.
• * 1.413

  Chr. plea pag. 34.
• * 1.414

  Animad•• p. 68. 69.
• † 1.415

  Chr. plea p. 37.
• † 1.416

  Gen. 1. 31.
• † 1.417

  Math. 26. ••.
• * 1.418

  Animadv. ag. 69.
• † 1.419

  Chr. plea ag. 38.
• † 1.420

  Anima p. 69.
• * 1.421

  2. Chro. Ezr. 6. 21
• † 1.422

  Chr. p••e p. 39.
• † 1.423

  Anima•• p. 68.
• * 1.424

  2. King. 17 3. 14 15. 6.
• † 1.425

  Animadv▪ p. 73. 74.
• * 1.426

  Rev. 11. 2.
• † 1.427

  Ier. 7. 4. 8. 9. 10.
• * 1.428

  Animadv. p. 72. &c.
• * 1.429

  * Chr. plea pag. 42.
• † 1.430

  2. Chro. 3. 10. 17. & 4. 3. 4.
• * 1.431

  Chr. plea pag. 44.
• * 1.432

  ••sa. 44. 20.
• † 1.433

  Animadv. pag. 72.
• † 1.434

  Act. 8. 13.
• * 1.435

  ••m. 1. 25. ••es. 2. 11.
• † 1.436

  16. &c.
• “ 1.437

  Jer. 3.
• * 1.438

  p. 71. ••
• † 1.439

  Chr. •• pag. 58.
• “ 1.440

  Anim•• p. 81.
• * 1.441

  Animad pag. 93.
• † 1.442

  Animad pag. 89.
• “ 1.443

  Lev. 2•• v. 41. 39. 4••
• * 1.444

  Chr. plea ••g. 60.
• † 1.445

  1 Cor. 5. 1.
• † 1.446

  Chr. pl•• pag. 65.
• † 1.447

  Chr. plea pag. 68.
• * 1.448

  Chr. plea p. 27. 28.
• † 1.449

  Esai. 7. 8.
• * 1.450

  Ezr. 1. 1. 2. &c.
• † 1.451

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 6. v. 22.
• * 1.452

  Ezr. 5. 1.
• † 1.453

  Rom. 15. 4.
• * 1.454

  Chr. plea ••ag. 69.
• * 1.455

  Thalmu•• in Gittin ch. 9.
• * 1.456

  Pseator Calvin &••
• † 1.457

  Hebr. 12. 2. Rev. 4 2. &c.
• “ 1.458

  v. 31. 32.
• * 1.459

  v. 33. 34.
• † 1.460

  Rom. 11. v. 25. 26. 27. 28
• * 1.461

  Ier. 3. 12.
• † 1.462

  vers. 13.
• “ 1.463

  vers. 7. 8.
• * 1.464

  •• King. 17. 16.
• * 1.465

  v. 13. 14.
• * 1.466

  v. 22. 23▪
• † 1.467

  P••s••ator▪ Calvin.
• * 1.468

  Ier. 3. 14.
• * 1.469

  Chr. plea pag. 72.
• † 1.470

  Chr. plea pag. 73.
• * 1.471

  vers. 1.
• † 1.472

  vers. 4.
• “ 1.473

  vers. 5.
• * 1.474

  Ephes. 2▪ Gal. 3. 28.
• * 1.475

  Chr. plea ag. 78.
• † 1.476

  pag. 84.
• “ 1.477

  Advertis. pag. 54.
• * 1.478

  Animadv. pag. 69.
• † 1.479

  Chr. plea pag. 28.
• “ 1.480

  Animad. p. 70.
• * 1.481

  Chr. plea pag. 86.
• † 1.482

  Christ.
• * 1.483

  Chr. plea pag. 88.
• † 1.484

  Rev. 2. 23.
• * 1.485

  1 Cor. 11. 9.
• † 1.486

  Rom. 1. 17.
• * 1.487

  Rom. 2.
• † 1.488

  Gen. 3.
• “ 1.489

  Rom. 4.
• * 1.490

  Rev. 2. 3. ch.
• † 1.491

  vers. 5.