A defence of the churches and ministery of Englande. Written in two treatises, against the reasons and obiections of Maister Francis Iohnson, and others of the separation commonly called Brownists. Published, especially, for the benefitt of those in these partes of the lowe Countries.

H. IACOB his 1. Reply to the 7. Reason.

THis your Seauenth Reason is: They are departed from the faith, that forbid to marry, & commaund to abstaine from lawfull meates. Also this is worse, then that: viz. to forbid the true Ministerie and to commaunde a false: which wee in England doe. Ergo wee are departers from the faith.

I denie this Antecedent, that is your Assumption, with a distinction. The Papistes forbidding of Mariage and of meates, if they had done no worse, doeth not make them departers from the faith: that is, not“ to∣tally. No more could their Hyerarchie and ceremonies simply: Neither doe these thinges make vs (the Protestants) to be such. The Papistes fall

from Christ“ wholy in other poincts, (namely

• ...1. The Papall supreamacy.
• ...2. The sacrifice of the Masse.
• ...3. Iustification by workes:

Which blessed bee God wee are farre from. Therfore the Apostle in saying, They departed from the faith, meaneth, in these poincts they erred or departed from the faith, but not absolutlie & wholie. 2. Further more touching your Proposition, if you vnderstand Paul, of Martion the Haeretike, and Tatianus, who did absolutly con∣demne Marriage and certen meates, they euen therein might wholie fall from the faith, I meane somewhat like to Balaam, Iudas, and those Apo∣state Israelites lately spoken of, namely for hauing their cōsciences con∣uicted, and seared with a whot iron. And thus are they in no comparison with vs of England, nor with the Papistes neither, if they had erred in nothing else.

F. IOHNSON his Defence of his 7. Reason.

HEre the aduersarie being not able with any colour to denie the conse∣quēt, of our Reasō neither to iustifie their present Ministerie, worship Cannons, Articles, Iniunctions, &c. (which yet he must doe, & still we call for it, if he will iustifie their present estate): yet being desperate sure, for els he would neuer haue done it, he feareth not to gainesay the Assump∣tion, that is, the very wordes and testimonie of the scripture it selfe, 1. Tim. 4.1, 2, 3. The Apostle sayth, that they which forbidde Mariage & Meates, are departers from the faith, This man sayth no. Nowe, whe∣ther of these shall we beleeue? But what colour hath this man for his de∣niall? Forsooth this: That they which doe so, doe not departe from the faith totally, and that the Apostles meaning is, that in these poincts they departe from the faith, but not absolutely and wholy. So by this mans conceite, none may be accounted departers from the faith, that depart only in some poinctes, but they which doe it totally from all. And thus then may no heretikes or Antichristes that euer haue bene, or shalbe in the worlde, be iudged departers frō the faith, because they departe from it but in some poinctes, and not absolutely from all. Thus in one word hath he iustified at once the Arians, Nestorians, Sabellians, Papistes, Familistes, Ana∣baptistes, and whom not? because they departe but in some, not wholy from all poinctes of faith. Js it not great pitie that Antichrist hath so long wanted this stour Champion, that can thus in one worde, iustifie his for∣bidding of meates and mariage, yea and his most detestable Hyerarchie, and superstitions? Nowe by this mans learning, all the Martirs & wri∣ters heretofore, that by euidence of this scripture cōuicted the Synagogues of Antichrist to haue departed from the faith, and therefore separated from them: were vtterly deceyued. Nay and the Apostles them selues were wholy mistaken, when speaking of Antichristes church and Reli∣gion, they call it a misterie of iniquitie,“ speaking lies through hypocrisie,

“ priuely bringing in damnable heresies, and hauing a shewe of godlines, but denying the power thereof, And Johns eyes also it seemeth were not matches, when he saith,† he sawe in the whores forehead, (that is in An∣tichristes church and Religion) a name written, A mysterie, great Baby∣lon, the mother of whoredomes, and abhominations of the earth. For we would knowe of this deepe Clerke, howe Antichristes church and religion should iustlie be accounted a mysterie of iniquitie, and truely be saide, to speake Lies in hypocrisie, also priuely to bring in Damnable he∣resies, and to haue a Shew of godlines: if they did absolutely & wholy de∣parte from the faith, and not onely from some pointes thereof? But ouer and aboue all, it seemeth by this reason, that not onely the Apostles were mistaken, in giuing vs sure markes howe to knowe false teachers and false religions, 1 Tim. 1.2, 3. 2 Pet. 2.1. 2 Thes. 2.7. 2 Tim. 3.4. Reuel. 17.5. But also Christ him selfe, when he saide,“ Beware of false Prophetes, which come to you in sheepes clothing, but inwardlie are rauening wolues. And againe Jf any shall say vnto you, Loe, here is Christ, or there, beleue it not: For there shall arise false christes and false prophets, and shall shew great signes and wonders, so that (if it were possible) they should deceyue the very elect. Nowe if they should totally departe from the faith, what sheepes clothing, J pray you, should they haue to come in? Or howe should either them selues be said to come in the name of Christ, affirming their Religion to be Christes, and shewing signes and wonders to drawe men therevnto: Or the elect to be in such vnspeakeable daunger to be deceyued by them? This might suffice to shewe the falsehood and impietie of his an∣swere: But we will note a fewe things moe therein. It being graunted him, that the popish forbidding of mariage and meates, if they were not worse, doeth not make them departers from the faith totally: yet let him tell vs, if holding neuer so manie truthes besides,“ yet forbidding these, they could by the word of God truely be saide in that estate to holde the faith of Christ, and to be true Christians. If they could not (as the Apostle "te∣stifieth) then is this answere in this respect also nothing to the purpose, but against him selfe, both for the popish forbidding of meates and marriages, and for the English Hyerarchie, and other abominations amongst them receyued from the Papistes, which vnder colour of this answere heere he would defend. Againe, where he saith, That the Papistes fall frō Christ in other poinctes besides the aforesaid, Namely, 1 The Papall suprema∣cie. 2. The sacrifice of the Masse. 3. Iustification by workes: which En∣glande nowe is farre from. Let him tell vs: First, whether in this sence the Papistes can for these be said to departe from the faith totally? If they can not, then what weight is there in this for defence of their estate, that the Papistes could not also alleadge for them selues, to witt, that in these

poinctes they departe from the faith, but not absolutely and wholy. Se∣condly, let him tell vs, whether there are not other poinctes but these three in the papistes religion, which make them in their estate to be departers frō the faith, and consequentlie false christians and false Churches? If there be (as he can not denie it) then of what weight is his answer to defende the present constitution of these people and assemblies (for whom he pleadeth) seeing there are diuers other thinges besides these, that doe and may cause, that they may not be deemed true Christiās or true Churches in that estate.

Manya heretikes heretofore haue, and at this day doe reiect these three aforesaid, are they therfore in their estate to be accounted true Chri∣stians or true Churches? So then, his manner of reasoning heere for their defence, is, as if the Adulterers, to iustifie their course of life, should al∣leadge thus: We are noe 1. Blaspemers, 2. no Persecutors, 3. No Mur∣therers, as such and such are: therefore we departe not from the way of life, but our estate and course of life is good, and such as may be continued in. But the scripture teacheth otherwise, sayinge:b Whosoeuer shall keepe the whole Lawe, and yet fayleth in one poincte, is guiltie of all. For he that sayed, Thou shalt not commit adulterie, saied also, Thou shalt not kill. Nowe, though thou doest no adultery, yet if thou killest, thou art a transgressour of the Lawe: and contrariwise. So that what soeuer sinnes the Adulterer be farre from, yet (asc Salomon saith) Hee that committeth adulterie with a woman, fayleth in heart, and destroyeth his owne soule. The same is the case of all spirituall Adulterers likewise: who (what so e∣uer sinnes they be farre from) yet in the worship of God, runne ad whoring after their owne inuentions,e embracing the bosomes of strange women, &f drinking of their cup of fornications. Thirdly, let him shewe vs suffi∣cient warrant frō the scriptures, why (setting these three aside) the other popish Hyerarchie and abominations receyued amongst them, can not bee iudged to make them in such estate, departers from the faith, and therfore false Christians and false Churches, whatsoeuer truthes they should hold beside. If he cannot (as who seeth not, that it can not be donne?) then by this also it appeareth, that his answer•• here is of no force for defence of their estate, but against it, as we haue declared before.

g Corah, Dathan, Abyram, and their partakers, were farre from the Abominations of the Heathen, they helde also al the poinctes of faith, that Moses and Aaron held, differing onely from them, and departing only from the faith, in a matter concerning the Priesthood, whereof also theyh shewed their reasons why they were so perswaded: yet will he not denie, we suppose, but that they departed from the faith, and were in this estate neither to be accounted true Israelits, nor their assemblies true Churches, with which communion might be kept. If he should, the scripture it selfe would witnesse against him herein, Numb. 16.26. Nowe compare case

with case, and tyme with tyme, and the estate of these people and Assem∣blies of England, wilbee found farre more grieuous, as we haue already shewed both in the defence of our Second Exception before, and ini other Treatises to which yet we haue receiued no answer.

To conclude this poinct, if their Abominations in England were farre fewer then they are, yet so longe as they reteyne that poysonfull leauen of their Hyerarchie and worship, wee must tell them as the Scripture saith, and experience teacheth: That“ a litle poyson bringeth death vnto the whole pot of pottage. A litle leauen leaueneth the whole lump. And a“ few dead flyes cause the oynctment of the Apothecarie to stinke and putrifie. Although indeed their abominations are not a few, but swarme in aboundance amongst them, some whereof wee haue rehearsed before in the defence of our First Reason, where the Reader may take a view of them.

Now in the next place, fearing belike that the euidence of the scripture we alleadged, could not by these shiftes of his be auoyded, but that still the reason deducted from thence stood strong against them, as we haue shewed it doeth: therefore he would haue vs now passe by them, and not apply this scripture to them, or their mother Church of Rome, but vnderstand it of Martion the heretike, and Tatianus, of whom he saith, that they abso∣lutelie condemning mariage and certen meates, might indeed euen ther∣in wholie fall from the faith, somewhat like to Baalam, Iudas, and those Apostate Israelites lately spoken of, namely for hauing their con∣sciences conuicted and seared with an whote iron: And thus (sayth he) are they in no comparison with them of England: Well, But first if his former answer were of any weight, it might be asked, why then the follow∣ers of Martion and Tatianus, might not likewise haue defended them thus, & said, that their departure from the faith, was but in some poincts, not wholy from all? Secondly we answer, that if this scripture was verified as he graunteth) in Martion and Tatianus, for their condemning of ma∣riage and meates, then we must needes also thinke it verified in the Ro∣mishe whoore, and her apostate children, whiche are falne into the verie sinnes, that are heere mentioned. Teh Apostle mentioneth Martion and Tatianus, no more then he doeth the whoorish Babilon, and the chil∣dren of her Fornication: but comprehendeth heere all such who so euer they be, as shall fall into this Apostasie.

Nowe moreouer, if the“ wordes of this scripture be duely weighed, & either other scriptures, or the estate of the Romish Harlott and her chil∣dren compared therewith, it wilbe founde as liuely to describe these, as ei∣ther Martion or any other that euer were in the world. First when the Apostle sayeth, that this shalbe in the latter tymes, who seeth not that it

doeth most directly poinct at the Romish whoore, though we doubt not, but Martion also and Tatianus, which liued twelue hundreth yeares since, or thereabouts, may also be comprehended therein. Secondly, when it is saide, they shall departe from the faith, thereby signifying that once they held the faith, howe plaine is this of the Romish harlot, which in the“ A∣postles time was the beloued spouse of God, and since is falne into Apo∣stacy, and become the Mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth, as the scriptures in other places witnesseth. Thirdly, whē it is said, they shall giue heede to spirits of errour, and doctrines of Deuils, how fitly agreeth this to the Romish Babilon which (as the scripture els“ where testifieth) is become the habitation of Deuils, and the hold of all foule spirits? Fourthly when it is said, they shall speake lies through hypocrisie (not to recken vp the infinite particulars that might be alleadged for proof hereof) how fitly doth this describe the Religion and practise of the man of sinne (the Romish Antichrist) which the scripture els where calleth a mistery of iniquitie: as pretending to be with and for Christ, and to draw men vnto him, when indeed it is opposed against and exalted aboue the Lord Iesus Christ, and all his holy ordinances. Fiftly, when it is said, they shall haue their consciences seared with an whote iron, how true is this found vpon the throane of the Beast, & his Kingdome, concerning which, the scripture also testifieth in“ another place that when the vials of Gods wrath shalbe powred out vpon them, and they conuinced of their impieties and obominations, they shalbe so farre from acknowledging and forsaking thē, as they shal gnaw their tōgues for sorrow, & rather thē they wil forsak their wickednes, shall fight against God and his truth, blaspheaming the God of heauen for their paines & for their sores, & not repenting of their workes. Lo here a seared conscience in the beastes kingdome. Finally, when the Spirit of God here giueth two particular instances of his apo∣stacie. 1. The forbidding of Mariage, 2. And the cōmaunding to abstaine from meates, which God hath created to be receiued with thankesgiuing. How directly doeth he in both these, as it were with the finger, poinct at the Romish Babilon and her daughters? Jn the one, that is, the forbidding of mariage, when as the Romish Babilon forbiddeth it to Priests, Friers, Nunnes, and such like, and the English her daughter, to fellowes of Col∣leges, and prentises, and both of them, to all men and women in Lent, Ad∣uent, Rogation weeke, &c. Jn the other, that is, the forbidding of meates created of God to bee receiued with thankesgiuing, when as both of them, commaund to abstaine from flesh, on their saincts eues, Emberdayes, Lent, Fridayes, and Satterdayes, throughout the yeare.

Thus then we haue shewed that this scripture (which hee would turne

ouer to Martion and Tatianus) doth most fitly agree vnto, and most plainly describe the Romish Apostacy, whether wee apply it to their pre∣sent estate, or compare this and other scriptures togeather, speaking of the same Apostacy and defection. By this also which hath bone said, it may appeare, that as he saith of Martion and Tatianus, that they might be said wholy to fall from the faith somewhat like to Balaam, Iudas, and those apostate Israelites lately spoken of, namely for hauing their consci∣ences conuicted and seared with an whot iron: So also it is verified, and may be said of the Romish Babilon and her daughters. Touching which poinct of their conuicted consciences, as also of the Apostate Israelites in particuler, compared with them of Englande, see moreouer what is saide before in defence of the sixt Reason at the end thereof.

Now if seeing the euidence of this“ scripture, so full & plaine against them (as hath bene declared) he would except, that so it is in the Romish Church, but not in theirs of Englande: First by this meanes he would o∣uerthrowe his owne answere here, which hath denied it, of the popish for∣bidding of meates and marriages, and would turne it ouer from them to Martion and Tatianus: Secondly, this would not hinder but that the consequent of our Proposition and the Assumption also were good, and therefore the Argument strong and of force. Thirdly, the particulars be∣fore mentioned, (being founde in their Church of Englande) will testifie it also, to be verified of them. Lastlie, although many of the abominations of the whoores cup of Babilon be nowe cast out of England, (for which al∣so we prayse God) yet so long as they reteyne the Hyerarchie, Stinted Ley∣turgie, confusion of people, Canons, Excommunications, &c. deriued vnto them from that mother of whoredomes and abominations of the earth, wee must needes beleeue and alleadge against them the scripture and common prouerbe which sayth? As is the Mother, So is the Daughter. And he∣therto of the defence of this reason.

Nowe moreouer lett it heere be obserued, howe these men, to defende their estate, are glad to runne into the Papistes Tentes, and to take vpp their worne & rustie weapons, which haue bene of no force to defend them selues, but haue bene often & iustly turned into their owne bowels. Read the“ Reames Annotations vpon this place (1. Tim. 4.) and see if these men heere would not auoyde the euidence of this scripture against them, by the very same shift and answer, by which the detestable Iesuites there would turne it from their mother of Rome, that is, by posting it ouer from them selues to Martion and Tatianus. Read it, and note it well.

Notes

• See Rhemi-Testa. in Mat. 15.18.
• “

  Or not fun∣damētally, not simply, which words I think fitter to bee here, vsed, as in my next Reply is fur∣ther declared.
• “

  That is fun∣damentally, & simply: see in the 2. Answer following.
• Viz. in ab∣stayning from Mariage and meates.
• Pag. 49. 57.
• 2. Thes. 2.7.
• “

  1. Tim. 4.2.
• “

  2. Pet. 2.1.
• Tim. 3.4.
• †

  Reue. 17.5.
• “

  Mat. 7.15.
• Mat. 2.23.24.
• “

  See in Bales Votaries, Acts and monumēts &c. what abo∣minable filthi∣nes the forbid∣ding of mari∣age, and what superstitiō the forbidding of meates, hath wrought in the kingdome of Antichrist.
• What man fearing God durst once opē his mouth for such Diuelilh doctrines and estate.
• a

  Seruetus, Sa∣bellius, Arius, the Anabap∣tistes, &c.
• b

  Iam. 2.10.11.
• c

  Pro. 6.32.
• d

  Num. 15.39.
• e

  Pro. 5.20.
• f

  Reuel. 17.4.
• g

  Num. 16.12. &c.
• h

  verse the. 3.
• i

  In the answer to Master Hil∣dersam, and in the 9. Reasons concerning not hearing the Ministers of these assemb∣ties.
• “

  2. Kings. 4.39.40.
• 1. Cor. 5.6.
• “

  Eccle. 10.1.
• Nota.
• “

  1. Tim. 4.1, 2, 3.
• “

  Rom. 1.7.
• 2. Thes. 2.3. and Reu. 17.1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
• “

  Reu. 18.2.
• 2. Thes. 2.7.
• “

  Reu. 16.10.11.
• Let their ray∣linges, slaun∣ders, edictes, articles, iniun∣ctions, finallie their continu∣all oppositions and madnes against y^e truth and people of God, be wit∣nesses of all this.
• “

  1 Tim. 4.1, 2, 3.
• Reue. 17.1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
• Ezek. 16.44.
• “

  Rhemes no∣tations vpon 1. Tim. 4.3.