THE RASING OF THE FOVNDATIONS of Brovvnisme. WHEREIN, AGAINST ALL THE WRI­tings of the principall Masters of that sect, those chiefe con­clusions in the next page, are, (amongst sundry other matters, worthie the Readers knowledge) pur­posely handled, and soundly prooued. ALSO THEIR CONTRARIE ARGVMENTS AND OBIEC­tions deliberately examined, and clearly refelled by the word of God.

Isaiah cap. 57. ver. 21. There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked.

Imprinted at London by Iohn Windet, dvvelling at Pawles wharfe at the signe of the Crosse keyes, and are to be sold at the Rose in Powles churchyard. 1588.

The chiefe conclusions in this Booke.

1 No man ought to depart the Communion, for anie open vnworthie ones resorting vnto it.

2 A faithful Christian may keepe himselfe free, from the pollution of the knowne wicked, at the Sacrament, and yet not separate himselfe. And how.

3 Open notorious offenders, not separated from a con­gregation of Christ, doe not thereupon vnsanctifie the same, so as to make it no Church of Christ.

4 It may be a true Church of God, that hath in it di­uerse corruptions, both in doctrine and practise.

5 The Church of England is not more vnsound, than diuerse vndoubted Churches haue beene, from which no separation was counsailed.

6 No man ought to separate himselfe from the Church of England, for the defectes and corruptions that are therein.

7 By fayth onely visible Churches haue their account and being in Christ.

8 Discipline is not of the essence or being of a Church.

To the right worshipfull his verie louing cousin. M. Thomas Hussey Esquire, all encrease of Chri­stian knowledge, zeale and worship.

AS I haue made you a beholder, & vsed your name in my firste conflict with this kinde of men (louing cou­sin) so in my pro­ceeding, and to the verie ende (which God shall giue whē he seeth it good) I trust, I may be bold, to continue the same course. Wherefore now againe I returne, presenting vnto you, not Glouers matters, in any of those points plainly and professedly, which then were betweene vs: but the generall and great heades of that schisme, wherein he was first ouertaken: and that specially betweene Browne (the famous achbuylder of such ruinous founda­tions) and me: though others also are not omitted where opportunitie is offered. For so haue these matters, vpon the occasion of the Admonition, growne somewhat large at length, as now appea­reth. By my former writing I had stirred (as it [Page] seemeth) the hornets nest. By this (I hope) I shall either driue them in again, or els take away their stings, so as they shall seldomer hurt any. Those 8. conclusions, wherewith you see I front the aduer­sarie, are as so manie Canons, to beate downe (through the power of God) the paper wals of his proude bulwarke. The sielie defences that he ma­keth at euery assault, & entering of his breaches, you shall iudge your selfe, in this booke, comming as it were to the very sight and view of the seue­ral actiōs. It may be, you haue alredie heard som­what, of the course and behauiour of this people. For though their ful swarme and store be (as it is most likely) in London, and the partes neare ad­ioyning: yet haue they sparsed of their companies into seuerall partes of the Realme, and namely, into the West, almost to the vttermost borders thereof. For which cause, (mee thinkes) I haue reason yet so much the more to bee confirmed in this choyce of my dedication, sith so, the rather, as by your hand and meanes, this benefit of disco­uering their iniquitie, and making knowne their poison, may more readily be communicated vnto many in those parts. And as you are now in the seruice of your prince, esteemed a worthy man to haue the leading & training of so many, to be pre­pared for the defence of your countrey and of this land, against the bodily enemy, so may that fauour [Page] be manifoldly greater, which the king of kings shall in this seruice vouchsafe you, by making you moreouer, as an vpholder and deriuer of these de­fences of his truth, into those weake parts of your countrey. Whereinto such vndermining aduersa­ries haue entred, & caried away many soules frō the common means of their saluation: namely the preaching of the Gospell, which is called of the A­postle, the power of God vnto Saluation,Rom. 1.17. to all that beleeue. And thus also, if in the mids of your weapons (as it were) you shal allot your times like­wise, to the preparing & attaining skil, weapons, and strength to fight the Lords battails against your spiritual aduersaries, happy & happy again shal you be. Your diligence, & watchfulnes in the seruice of your God and Queene in this life, shall find rest & perpetual peace & quietnes herafter. Yea your renoume increasing here on earth, shalbe much more abundantly increased, so as no earth­ly pen can describe it, namely, when the king of glory shall set a crowne vpon your head. Thinke on these things (most louing cousin) as I doubt not you do, and propound that worthy captaine Cor­nelius vnto your selfe, as a companion to walke with, or at least, as an example to imitate. And let that which others take for a reason to hold them backe, bee a double spurre vnto you in this case: Namely the generall contrarie practise of the [Page] multitude. Remember that he, that coulde not lie, hath sayde it, Narrovve is the vvay that lea­deth to life, and fevve there be that finde it. And, Striue to enter in at the narrovve gate. A worde to the wise is sufficient.2. Pet. 3.1. And hereby I hope I shall but stirre vp your pure minde (as the Apostle speaketh) which is already forwardly running in this race. Neuertheles, I haue counted it my duetie, alwayes, and by all good occasions, to put you in remembrance of these things. For your wealth and good estate both of bodie and minde, are of neere and deere accompt and price with me, as the Lorde knoweth: to whose gratious guiding and protection, I most humbly commende you, and all yours. From London, the 12. of the sixth Moneth.

Your worships euen in all the dueties of a louing kinsman, S. B.

¶To the Christian Reader, The spirit of trueth, and of wis­dome in sobrietie through Christ Iesu.

ALthough (Beloued) the iudgement and practise of some men of speciall ac­compt in the Church of God, haue to this day held this impression in me, that I esteeme the captaines and antient bearers of this schisme, vnworthie the honour of any set conflict, and publique confutation: yet is it come to passe (by the prouidence of the onely wise God) that I haue bene, parte after parte, and one occasion pulling on another, drawne (as it were) by head and shoulders through the deepe of this businesse. And the labour nowe accomplished, I am so farre from repenting, that I am in good assurance, through the mercie God, of a two-folde benefite to arise thereby: the one is, of stopping that violent streame of seducing, wherein daily such numbers of the yonger and weaker sorte of Christians are caryed out of our assemblies: principally because the zeale of such, being greater then their knowledge, becommeth an apt pray and bootie, for the instruments of deceit to practise vpon. And this agreeth with the exhortation of the Church,Cantic. 2.15. when she sayeth: Take vs the foxes, the litle foxes, corrupting the vines, whilest our vines bring foorth the first grape. the other benefite is, that hereby those impure mouthes shall be dashed, that hertofore in their malitious defence of cor­ruptions, haue made no conscience, to clothe all those, that haue duetifully vrged the proceeding of our church [Page] vnto perfection, in one liuerie, with these schismaticall spirites, that so they might purchase vnto them, both from magistrate and common people equall hatred and auoydance. This booke shal by the grace of God, testifie vnto all that make any conscience to discerne truth from lyes, that there is as much difference betwixt those, whō they in their bitternesse, woulde thus match together, as is betweene that childe, that in tender affection, re­prooueth and laboureth the refourming of his mother, whome hee seeth by her vndiscreete behauiour, to be­come a reproche among women: and him that vnder pretence of the hate of her vncomely behauiour, shoulde plucke out her bowels, and forsake her In this my tra­uaile, I haue cared, as much as I could, to husbande the time vnto the reader, and therfore haue both cut off ma­ny idle discourses (which the aduersarie woulde haue drawne mee into) and also haue so sounded the matters that I haue delt with, by al the writings, printed or other­wise, that are probably vouched theirs, as that, I hope, the godly spirit shall find me no trifler, but such a serious and sincere disputer as the weight of the cause hath required. I was (I graunt) in comparison of others, as a woman of too weake a constitution to conceiue and bring forth a­ny such child: but the Lord hath had his way & purpose herein. And as (I protest before the Lord & his holy an­gels) with much feare and trembling, I haue from the beginning applied my selfe vnto this worke: so yet in the doing thereof (through the mercifulnesse of my God) I haue bin assisted with much cōfort, and great assurance, euen in some things, that seemed at the first, so in wrap­ped, by Satan, with so many intricate folds & knittings, as could hardly or neuer by me (for I shame not to ac­knowledge my weaknesse herein) bee brought to any cleare triall and expedite dissolution.

Of mine aduersaries I rather knowe the nature then the number. Although (as it hath beene obserued) sundrie among them, from time to time, haue laboured [Page] to be leaders, and so vpon the spurre of emulation haue gallopped as hard as they could: yet without all questi­on, there is none among them that can iustly take the garland from Rob. Browne. That this schisme may worthily take the name of Browne. His writings doe foreiudge the cause agaynst all his competitors. And albeit newe maisters are risen among them, that nowe, in a fresh hote moode, condemne his coldnesse and colourable dealing, and that worthily: yet they must, euen Barow and Green­wood, with the rest, acknowledge him the shop of their store, and the steele of their strength: for arguments, ob­iections and shiftes, to colour, and (if it were possible) to vphold their crasie cause withall. Let them not disdaine (therefore) that he should beare the name, as the father of that familie and brood, which, of late yeares in a qua­rell for the Discipline, haue made that rende in the as­semblies of Englande. But some will obiect, that these that I name, agree not among themselues: and therefore cannot be accounted of one familie. I am not ignorant, that they are at oddes betweene themselues, but yet so, as that neither partie will ioyne member-like with our Churches in the woorde and Sacraments. In doctrine I knowe they differ, but diuersitie of practise was cause thereof. Barow and Greenewood nakedly discouered their profession, and are prisoners. Browne cunningly counter­feiteth conformitie, & dissembleth with his owne soule, for libertie. They fullie beleeuing, the Church of Eng­land to be no Church of God, but vtterly to be auoyded in al things, as his writings haue taught them, made con­science to separate themselues at all poynts, according­ly. He, though hee haue contriued that cup, whereby he hath thus transformed them, as into beasts, yet himselfe taking better delite in humane shapes, liketh not to en­ter with them into their lot. Hence cōmeth that grudge, quarrell and heartburning among them. They expostu­late with him as a coward, and one that shrinketh in the wetting. He againe nippeth them for their egernesse, in running before their olde maister, and thereby obscu­ring [Page] his light, as though the truth (forsooth) had first bin reuealed by them. It seemeth, they would not heare a ser­mon, to gaine their libertie. But it is manifest, that he to redeeme trouble, hath learned to apply himselfe to all times, places, and persons. Nowe in this their iarre, ma­nie strange paradoxes and grosse absurdities haue passed betweene them: arguing both sides to haue trusted in their strength, and therefore to haue beene destitute of the spirit of truth to guide their pennes. Barow and Green­wood denie, As appeareth in a writing that came from Brownes hand of this matter. that our preachers doe preach the woorde, and that they doe, or can beget fayth. They say, The wicked haue no woorde of God, no graces of GOD, no spirituall or sanctifyed graces, that they doe no good, that they may not teach, testifie, preach or counsaile anie woorde of GOD, anie religion or du­tie of religion. That they haue no kinde of promise nor bles­sing: and that there is no Communion to bee had with them in spirituall graces. They denie fayth to come necessarily, by the woorde of GOD: and say, It may bee begotten without anie promise of the woorde. Beeing demaunded, what faith doeth beleeue: They aunswere: God, without anie conside­ration of his woorde and promise. Likewise beeing asked, howe they came by their fayth, it seemeth they aunswered, as it pleased God: namely, by his spirite: but not acknow­ledging the outwarde meanes. Some of them graunt, our preachers beget fayth or beleefe of the woorde, but not the fayth of Christ. Hee prooueth it not the fayth of Christ, because it hath not good woorkes: And that also he prooueth full wisely (forsooth) because they haue euill woorkes; Which hee specifieth to be Idolatrie, Rebellion and Bondage. They say, our ministers bring a newe Gospell. That the lawe in their mouthes, and the sacrifices or presumptuous ministerie of Ko­rah, Dathan and Abiram are alike. And they make no better account of our Parish meetings, than of the mee­tings at the groaues and hill altars. O wofull men, and drunken with the wine of their owne headie conceites. Browne againe, for feare all these reproches shoulde [Page] light vppon him, because hee commeth into our Chur­ches, minseth the matter euerie where,See further pag. 135. with these ill stampt distinctions, Of the better, and woorser sort of our preachers: (wherein hee leaues his meaning doubtfull still,) and of ioyning with vs in the common graces, both worldly and spirituall, but not as in one bodie, and couenant of the Church. O mocker: Let the Lorde iudge thy hypocrisie, for no man can sounde it. Concerning the disputation of both parties in this matter if I bee asked my iudgement, this must I say: Browne hath sufficient­ly ouerthrowne the maine assertions of his young mai­sters, as hee calleth them, in proouing our preachers to haue a calling, because they bring the woorde: that they preach the woorde, because they beget fayth: For examples: in him and themselues they haue done it, ergo, &c. And that, The knowledge of reformation and discouerie of Church cor­ruptions came first to them by their preaching, ergo, &c. And as they number vp all the euils they can finde in the doctrine and practise of our preachers, to prooue they can doe no good, nor beget faith: hee contrariwise by a full floud of their true doctrine, and good fruits (whereof he ma­keth a copious catalogue) woorthily quencheth the fu­rious flame of their slaunderous tongues. Also by the sitting of the Scribes and Pharisees in Moses chaire, and the commaundement of hearing them, he verie sufficiently pro­ueth that wicked men may preach Gods worde, and be­ing in such office, charge and calling, ought to be heard. The cauils they make against these things, are such, as shew them wilfully to stoppe their eares, least the sounde of truth shoulde smite their hearts. In these pointes I testifie, that Browne hath well confuted their furie. But if one for Barow and Greenwood shoulde say these wordes vnto Browne, Though they haue well deserued to bee thus qui­ted and conuinced for their follie, yet not at your handes: I knowe not what he might well replie: for I am sure, if they had beene so well aduised, as to haue pressed him through all their controuersie, with his owne bookes & [Page] writings, they must needes haue made him as mute as anie fish. And I doubt not, but the Reader shall bee ful­ly perswaded hereof, before he come at the ende of this booke. For as for Browne, the masterworkeman of all their mad building, notwithstanding that in this place, vpon this present occasion, there want not further matter to decipher him: who maketh his religion alwayes propor­tionable to his owne humour and necessitie: and so hath euer vsed, to propound his owne last, to make all his disciples shooes by: yet will I referre the reader to the gathering of the proofe of these thinges, out of other places in this booke: & specially (amongst the rest) where I lay open his honest and well meaning subscription. Onely I will produce a testimonie or two of master Har­risons, who in his life time was bewitched by Browne, to his euident vndoing, partly, by fleeing with him into the lowe Countreys, and partly, by stretching his purse so wide, to the printing of his booke. In a certaine letter he writeth to one of London thus, concerning the diuision that fell among Browne and them beyond the seas. In deede the Lorde hath made a breache amongest vs, for our sinnes haue made vs vnwoorthie to beare his great and woorthie cause. M. B. hath cast vs off, and that with the open manifesting of so many and so notable treacheries, as I abhorre to tell, and if I should declare them, you could not beleeue me. VVhich because this sheete and many moe woulde not suffice to rehearse, I will meddle with no particular thing, to declare it. Onely this I testi­fie vnto you, I am well able to proue, that Caine dealt not so ill with his brother Abel, as he hath dealt with me. Againe to­wards the ende of that letter, hee writeth thus. Also I would admonish you to take heede howe you aduenture your selfe to be a meane, to spread abroade any of that parties bookes, except it were more tending to the glorie of God then it is. For in the first booke there is manifolde heresie: and the other vpon the 23. of Matthewe, is a patterne of all lewde frantike disorder, whose haue eyes to see it. And I do not doubt but that the Lord will yet driue him on to worse and worse, seeing he hath so notably fallen [Page] from him. Giue not your selfe ouer to be abused: the Lorde open your eyes, and giue you grace to take profite by my writing, euen as I do giue it with a well meaning minde to doe you good. Also in his treatise vpon the 122. Psalme, hee imputeth to Browne, a leaning to Antichristian pride and bitternesse. Mee thinke these testimonies from such a man as I haue na­med, should set such a brand of shame vpon his forehed, as that euerie man should abhorre the sight of him, whi­lest he continueth so to be like himself. And here perhaps the most of his sect will answere that they doe indeed ac­knowledge such thinges in him, and therefore doe also worthily shunne him for a slidebacke. O, but why doe they not withall, forsake the whole course, which God hath so cursed? yea, vpon the which, he hath set from the beginning, so leageable a print of horrible successe? not onely in the outward things thereof, which were indeede (of it selfe) too weake an argument, but also in the in­warde ruines and downefall of iudgement, to the dayly corrupting of sound doctrine, euen from worse to worse, as I haue shewed. Which beeing a proper and infallible note, that God signeth the wayes of the wicked withall, to be discerned, argueth all outward misprosperings, which accompanie it, to carie likwise the same stampe of Gods displeasure vpon them. O that you would bee wise therfore in time, and learne vnderstanding, ere it be too late. Salomon sayth,Pro. 10.11. The mouth of the righteous is a well spring of life: but violence couereth the mouth of the wicked. 1. Pet. And Peter sayth, If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not bee ashamed, but let him glorifie God in this behalfe. But withall he char­geth vs to looke to it, that none of vs suffer as a murtherer, or as a thiefe, or an euill dooer, or as a busie bodie in other mens mat­ters. If God haue made it a happie condition, to be per­secuted for righteousnesse sake, then foloweth it contra­rily, to be a cursed, and desperate condition, to suffer im­prisonment, losse of goods, or life, for disordered wayes, such as the worde of God cannot warrant. If any thinke that by applying this to the Brownists, I shall begge the [Page] question, to him (I hope) shall the reading of this booke, giue proofe ynough, to free me from all suspect of such vniust presumption. The Lord for his great mercy grant, that all of vs in the Church of England, from the highest, vnto the lowest, to whom the hearing of this controuer­sie shal come, may not onely be directed in iudgement, to the attaining of the truth herein, but withall (likewise) deepely pricked at the hearts (as the rather put in minde by the scourge of this schisme) to search out our sinnes, and humbly powre out our soules for them, before the throne of mercie: if so be, the Lord will yet heare vs, for this, and remoue our iniquities from before his presence; and so the plagues which he hath deuised against vs for the same. For our many and strange sinnes, doe procure many and strange iudgements (whereof this is not the least) to breake in amongst vs. Yea the Lord for his great mercy, grant our Magistrates sincere hearts, still to purge the Church of all offences, our ministers skilfull bold­nesse, to doe the message of God as becommeth them, euerie priuate man, humilitie, to the diligent attendance of the worde: and the whole body of this Church, a ioy­full growth, and going forwarde to the fulnesse of Christ, that so all enemies mouthes may bee stopped, and the mightie name of Ieho­uah be magnified ouer all. Amen. Come Lord Iesu: come quickely.

Faults in the print.

Pag. 4. line 7 for rites, reade remembrance. pag. 22. li. 31 read importunitie. pag. 36 li. 18. one sense. pag. 37 li. 16 such lowde. li. 20. force of it. pag 51. li. 14. dastardlike. pag. 63. li. 6. are to shewe. pag. 66. li. 10. no vse. pag. 114. li. 31. wrester. pag. 115. li. 13. thought and sickenesse.

The doubts and obiections of a cer­taine disciple of Robert Brownes, vvherein, being vrged to come to Church, the said partie desired first to be resolued.

ACcording to Christian dutie, I require you in Gods behalfe, that you will resolue mee of these doubts following, by good euident proofe and warrant out of the worde, as it is your duetie to doe.

For, where as in doubtes that may arise concerning any thing in the booke of common prayer, the pre­face annexed to the same booke, by permission of her Maiestie, not onely giueth all men free libertie, but willeth them to de­maund the resolution of such doubts, of the Bishop of the Dio­ces, or of the pastor of the parish. I therefore, for the quieting of my conscience, doe desire to be resolued, for he that doth any thing in religion with doubt of conscience, is condemned,Rom. 14.23. because hee doeth it not of faith: for whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne, and the reward of sinne is death. Set downe in writing your proofes, by euident Scriptures out of Gods word, that I may examine them by other Scriptures, and vse no sophisticall reasons, nor vaine philosophie, for I am forewarned by the holy Ghost, that we be not deceyued by such.

Among the rest, I will at this time, deale with you, but with two things: the one is, the want of gouernement and discipline, according to the rule of Gods worde. And the other is, the abuse and pollution of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, for want of [Page 2] discipline according to Gods word.

Let vs make tryall of the true gouernement and discipline of the Church of God, according to Christs commandement, to put it in vse.Matth. verses. First, to tel my neighbour his fault charitably, between him and mee alone, and so forth, by admonitions, if hee bee obsti­nate, then by excommunication, by the consent of the Church, and all to call him to repentance, and amendment of life: and we see, that neither you, nor wee, can put this in vse in your Church as­sembly, as God hath commanded. But on the contrary, you must haue sworne men, after the institution of the Papists, First to go tel the Bishop, or some of his hirelings, or Courtkeepers, & they without admonishion, will alone excommunicate, and for money will resolue by the cannon law of the Papists, before we see repen­tance, and amendment of life. Thus I see the commandement of God reiected and broken, through their traditions, which is sinne.

And also for the Lords Sacrament of the Supper, trial should bee made by the gouernement of the Church, of a sanctified people, & so to be a cōmunion of Saints, & so worthy receiuers, by tryall of their faith and repentance, and by the rule of Gods worde: the other refused for their wicked life, vntill they repent, and amend their liues. But in your assemblies or Church, from 16. or 18. yeeres old, or vpward, all are compelled by lawe to come, though he be a couetous person, a proud person, a drunkard, a defrauder of right, or oppressor, or blasphemer, which in contempt of God, in his life, and manners, maketh but a tush or a light matter of sinne, and of Gods iudgement for sinne: of which sort, are the greatest number in your parish, besides railers, and liars and such like.

And nowe I demaund, whether Christians are to ioyne, and partake as one body with them in the Sacrament, being vnrefor­med, yea, or no. Seeing we are forbidden to eate with such, or to haue felowshippe with them, by the commaundement of the holy Ghost, vnlesse it bee in worldly affaires. For proofe, Reade these Scriptures. 1. Cor. 59, 10, 11, 12, 13.2. Thes Tim 3.1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Rom. 16.17, 18. Ephe. Thes. 5 21.22. Answere me (as I haue sayd) by the worde of God only, and alone. without the iudgement of man, for I can not be resolued thereby, they are so contrary one to an other.

¶ An Answere resolutorie to the doubtes and obiections aforesaid.

THREE poyntes you put downe vnto me, whereunto you require mine answere. First, is a comparison of the true gouernement of the Church with ours. The se­cond is of disorders that fal out, at the ministration of the Lords supper. The third is your question drawne from the two former poyntes.

1 To the first I graunt you, that you say, thus farre: as namely that wee cannot redresse faultes so fully as is to bee wished.

2 To the seconde, it is vntrue that you say, the lawe compelleth all aboue xvi yeres olde (without any excep­tion) to communicate: for the lawe intendeth a worthi­nes, as may appeare, by prouiding censures for the vn­worthy. Againe, it is vntrue, that you charge vs to make a confuse mingling with open offenders without discer­ning: for both wee may, and doe debarre those that are notoriously knowne to be in life offensiue: and do both enquire, and are readie to receiue any iust and probable information, against whom-soeuer in our charge that walke inordinately. Yea, informe you vs duely, of those sinners, which you say our Parish is so ful of, and you shal not find them I trust to disquiet you at the Lordes table. If you say, we cannot performe this so throughly as by an El­dership, then I graunt so much of your second poynt also.

[Page 4]3 Herehence you aske: whether Christians are to ioyne, and partake as one body, with them in the Sacra­ment, being vnreformed. I answere that in respect of out­ward ioyning and partaking wee may, and ought not to withdrawe our selues, for the presence of the wicked. My reasons are these: first, because the presence of the wicked hindreth not the celebratiō of the riter of Christ, nor the communicating of his body and blood to the faithfull ones. I prooue that thus, if the presence of the wicked should hinder the actiō, we must grant that their presence doth it, either in respect of it selfe simply: or else in respect of vs that so iudge and esteeme of them. Now, that the very presence it selfe of the wicked hindreth not, it is clere, by the storie of the institution of the Supper by our Lord Iesus himself: who would not haue suffred that wicked Iudas to haue bene present at the celebrating of the feast, if the very presence of a wicked man could haue depriued the rest of the benefit of the action. Besides, this point should cause vs continually to doubt in the action, because there may be some hypocrite, & vnworthy recei­uer alway amongst vs, and yet his sinnes so secretly cari­ed, as the Church cannot detect him. But I suppose you will say, that the presence of the wicked hindreth the cō ­munion of the faithful, in respect of those faithfull that see such amongst them as are vnworthy communicants. I answere: First, if the making voyd the benefit of the Sa­crament depend vpon the knowledge that the faithfull haue of the vnworthynes of some that are present, then you grant me thus much, that as many of the faithful, as are not priuy to such presence, so many do soundly enioy the benefit of the Sacrament. Nowe then let vs see, howe it commeth that the rest should be depriued.

That the presence of the vn worthy, in respect of the knowledge and priuity of some of the faithful there pre­sent, cannot any way hinder the action to them, I proue it thus: and putting the case by your selfe, I say particu­larly you your self (if otherwise in Christ you come wor­thy) [Page 5] cannot be damnified by another in that a&ion. For this sentence is perpetual and vniuersall.Ezech. 18.20. The righteous­nesse of the righteous shall bee vppon him, and the wicked­nesse of the wicked shall bee vpon himselfe. You wil aske mee, but if I see one there, that I esteeme vnworthy, howe can I outwardly ioyne with him, and not be partaker with his sinne? I answere, first, our esteeming of any vnworthy, cō ­meth either by heare-say, or our own certain knowledge. That which cometh by heare-say, is to bee beleeued no further than the credit and competencie of the witnes­ses doe reach. If they haue bene truely reported, or our selues haue knowne any thing by them, then no doubt (if we haue walked wisely and faithfully) wee haue also pro­ceeded by admonitions so farre with them, as that it is sufficiently knowne, we hate their sinne.This (at least) is come to passe, that howsoeuer it fall out with them. Which course if you shal obserue, is there any more required at the hands of you a particular member? and if you haue thus walked towards them in the vprightnes of our conscience, doing the dueties of a particular member, to your fellow mem­bers, how can the presence of any vnworthy one which you see there, hinder the benefit of the communion vn­to you? For, the righteousnesse of the righteous shall bee [...]ppon him, and the wickednesse of the wicked shall bee vppon himselfe. If you obiect that we haue not an Eldershippe, and that therefore you cannot proceed by admonition in such sort as is appoynted by the word: I answere, that hindereth not, but that you may so farre sufficiently) make knowne your hatred to sinne in whomsoeuer, as may testifie against, and giue euident checke to the pro­phane presumptiō of any vnworthy ones, in your know­ledge. Neither are you herein to feare ioyning with such, (which you doe not) because they presume to the Lords table at the same time that you come. For the action is spiritual, and the ioyning spiritual, by one faith in Christ Iesus. Which faith as you haue in common onely with the faithfull, so are you incorporated vnto Iesus Christ onely with the faithfull. The rest may be said to be at the [Page 6] Communion, but yet are none of the Cōmunion, accor­ding as S. Paule saith,1. Cor. 11.22. They eat and drinke their owne damna­tion. But you wil say, as touching the outward & sensible ioining I am not to bee excused. Yes, your former prote­sting against their sinne doth clere the matter to the full peace of your cōscience, inasmuch as there is frō the Lord no further power granted to any particular mēber. But it semeth by your quotations, you wil deny this to be true. And because the places mētion separating & shūning the cōpanie of inordinat brethren, you wil gather frō thence to separate your self frō the Cōmunion, if you espie any vnworthy ones there. Indeed if you proue that euery par­ticular mēber of a cōgregatiō hath this power, then haue they far more thā I haue spoken of: but this wilbe found a chiefe thing, wherin you haue ouershot your self. By the scriptures that you quote, you say it maybe proued, That we are forbidden to eate with such, or to haue felowship with thē, vnles it be in worldly affairs. Now if your exceptiō of (world­ly affaires) be wel gathered, then this is it you would say, That those places of scripture do proue, that we are directly for­bidden to eate, or outwardly ioine with thē at the Lords table. I haue considred the places, and am sory to see you so mis­taught. I would you had drawn one argumēt out of your 6. places, that I might quickly haue seene your building. I am Perswaded, if you had heard the places but read vn­to you, without the peruers wresting of others, you wold haue vnderstood them more truly than now ye haue ap­plied thē. I returne them therefore againe to your better cōsideratiō, protesting vnto you in the feare of the Lord, that if you examine them in the humilitie of your heart, with a simple desire of the truth, you will see and testifie, that without great wrōg doing to the word of grace, you cannot conclude frō those places, that either we are for­bidden the outward ioining at the Lordes table, or else haue libertie giuē vs in worldly affaires (as you terme it) to vse familiar conuersation with inordinat brethren. For it is most certain & euident that in all those places (read [Page 7] them who will) the precept and admonition of the Apo­stle is concerning priuate conuersation and behauiour to­wards inordinat professors: there being not a syllable set downe touching our dealings in publike Churches mee­tings & exercises. But here although your euidence haue thus failed, it wilbe required perhaps at my hands, that I set down some profes to the cōtrary, to the ouerthrow of this your opiniō, & to make my last argument the strōger: which was, that a particular member hath no further to deal in this case than by proces of admonitiō. 1. Remēber that the church is the body of christ,Ephe. Cor. 12. Ephe 4.15.16. Col. 2.19. Rom. who is the head ther of. This body also consisteth of many mēbers hauing di­stinct offices & placing: which body as also euery mēber therof, receiue from the head life & increase, but so as that they be not sundred & distract, but set together by ioints & seames with loue. Now if the church be thus reckoned the body in respect of the head whervnto it groweth, & the particular mēbers, be mēbers of the same body in re­spect that they grow & cōtinue in it, & serue vnto the vse to the whole, as members do in a naturall body, consider what foloweth, & how absurd it is that you say, That a particular mēber may separate it selfe frō the whole, in consideration of some vnworthy and vnclene parts. Is it meete, that, because some (yea, let it be that the most) of the mēbers of a body be brokē, lamed, or diseased, the rest that are sound shuld forsake the vnitie of the body? were it not to destroy the whole? & (in stead of strengthning the whole against the infection of those parts) were not that to cōspire against the whole, & vtterly disable it to withstand the cōtagion of the parts? for take away knitting togither of the mē ­bers, and is not then the body destroied? whereas on the cōtrary, if the sound mēbers continue in a bodily vnitie, though some parts be long time sicke, there is possibilitie of their recouery: yea though they should not, yet may the body liue though with some inconuenience of their maime or blemish. But if you say (they being corrupt & not separate may else infect mee) and herein seeme to ground your selfe vpon that place to the Corinthians. [Page 8] Know you not, that a little leauen leaueneth the whole lumpes? I answer, the Apostle doth there vrge them to the excom­municating of the incestuous person, but stirreth no mā to depart from the Church, no not in case of so secure a negligence as the Corinthians had committed. It is one thing, that we being humbled and afflicted at the dange­rous examples of euil mēbers amongst vs, must labour to separat thē, for the better helth of the whole bodie: (and this in deed is the purpose of S. Paul to teach the Corin­thians in that place) but it is farre another thing to say as you meane, That all the sounde members must sepa­rate themselues, if the vnsounde remaine vnseparated: and of this the Apostle there giueth no inkeling, which cer­tainely had bene necessarie, if the daunger to euery par­ticular mēber should be altogether such as you pretend. For whereas you vnderstand the comparison of the lea­uen to be such, as that the remaining of vnsounde mem­bers in the Church, should be accounted of as great force to infect the whole Church, as the leauen in leauening a whole lumpe,The likenesse is in qualitie, not in equalitie. you are greatly deceyued. For those two things in that case, are compared in likenesse of nature, not in there equalitie of effecting. Like as you should say, the conuersation of two or three righteous men conuer­teth a whole companie, euen as a little salt sauoureth a whole pot full of liquor: we know it were a trueth that you should speake, but if I should therof gather that you make those two causes of equall force, in respect of their matter, to worke their effect, should I not doe you great wrong? No doubt I should. For the liquor neuer faileth to be seasoned of the salt, but it is commonly tried that the greatest number of a companie remaineth wicked still, notwithstanding the righteous. Such also, if you marke it, is the similitude of the leauen: for the effect of it followeth necessarilie in the masse of meale: but it is not of such necessitie that in a whole congregation all become vnsanctified for some. Let the Church at Corinth be an example hereof. If the whole congregation had [Page 9] bin infected, and so vnsanctified, through the remaining of that wicked man amongest them, woulde the Apostle (thinke you) haue still intituled them, The Church of God, 1. Cor. 1.1. and sanctified ones in Christ Iesu? there had bene no reason in it. What then (will some say) to what ende did the A­postle put them in minde of the effect of leauen, when he chalenged them for their negligence? euen to the ende that they being put in minde of the resemblance that is betwene the nature of leauen, & the wicked, in that both are disposed to infect that which is neere them, might haue more care to vse all the meanes that God hath put into their hands to auoide the daunger. For as the re­maining with the godly tendeth to the reforming of the wicked: so the remaining with the wicked, tendeth to the deforming of the godly, yet doeth neither of both fall out alway necessarily, especially vpon a whole com­panie or congregation. Therefore,Out of the pla­ces quoted before. seeing a Church is as the bodie of Christ, and the same bodie consisteth also of many members, euerie of which is so to exercise the of­fice of his place, as that all may concurre to the conser­uation and encreasing of the whole vnto a perfect body, it followeth necessarily, that no true member ought to separate it selfe, for any cause, so long as there is life in the bodie, and abiding with the head. For I trust you wil not say that the remaining of a knowne wicked one doth ip­so facto extingish life in the bodie, and separate the same from the heade Christ. Neither may you thinke to auoide me by obiecting, that you separate not your self from the bodie by going from one congregation to another, in that euerie faithfull congregation, in respect that Christ is the head thereof, hath this same resemblance of a bodie. For if that be a good reason, then Paule saide not well to the Corinthians, that,1. Cor. 1.12.13. to addict themselues so seuerally to diuerse teachers of the same Gospell, tendeth to the par­ting of Christ. We knowe well they all helde Christ the foundation (vnder which teacher soeuer, they professed it) yet in that, some chose Paule with neglect of the o­ther [Page 10] Apostles, some Apollo, others Cephas, and others held Christ, without esteeming the meanes of teachers, they were iustly charged to be in dāger of schisme, whi­lest they so continued. Howe then can they be excused, that forsaking the congregation, whereunto through the prouidence of God, by their dwelling, they are ga­thered and ioyned, doe consort themselues with some o­thers, as the affection of their speciall liking leadeth thē. Howe can they (I say) bee excused for beeing guiltie of parting Christ?

To conclude therefore (for this time) since it is (as I hope) plainly prooued. First, That the presence or remay­ning of the vnworthie in a Congregation, cannot keepe backe the benefite of Christ from the faithfull of the same. Secondly, That particular members haue from the Lord no further power & au­thoritie in case of offences than by admonition: and that their chiefe regarde must be, by vnitie to prouide for the continuance of the whole congregation, which in this case is considered as the bo­die of Christ. Thirdly, That the practising and proceeding of particular members, beyond the limittes of admonition, as name­ly for some offences, to depart from one Congregation (where the reason of their dwelling requireth them to be) and ioyne them­selues to another, breedeth schisme, and diuision of Christ. It followeth of the first point, that you may ioyne with vs: and of the two latter, that you ought not to depart from vs of this Congregation, vnlesse you will shewe your selfe to bee a rebellious member to the bodie, and bee found guiltie of diuiding Christ. Of which things now I beseech you, by the mer­cies of God, to haue a due consideration.

A seconde Answere or Reioynder to Brownes replie for the doubts and obiections of his Disciple.

WHat desire I haue W. F. to withdrawe you from errour, and to bring you to the trueth, as the Lorde who searcheth the heart, knoweth at full, so no man that see­eth these my willing labours taken in the behalfe thereof, can with any charitie doubt of it. And though I haue nowe lesse hope than I had (seeing you without all iudgement to discerne the spirit of error and arrogancie, which is so nakedly seene in the framer of your replie) yet, as by the testimonie of two or three witnesses, so shal my loue of your saluation, be made ma­nifest by this my comming againe vnto you. So much therefore at the least, through the goodnesse of God, I shall gaine: if there come more, I shall receyue it as ad­uantage, & praise his most holy name for all. Beare with mee if I followe not your teachers humour in aunswe­ring, for (if there were nothing else) my time is more pre­cious vnto me.

1 Vpon my grant, that in our Churches we cannot redresse faults so fully as is to be wished, he gathereth six heresies, for errours soundeth not full inough in his la­uish mouth, but because they are without all demonstra­tion, no man is bound to beleeue him.

2 Whereas you saide, The lawe compelleth all to com­municate that are aboue sixtene yeeres olde: I answered, The lawe intendeth a worthines, & yelded this reason, because it prouideth censures for the vnworthie. Your leader saith, I fal­sifie the question, & the lawes. For the question, let that be iudged by others. And in that he chargeth the lawes to enforce a confuse mingling, with what face can he do it?A lier hath need of a good me­morie. If hee remember the 2.3.4. pages of that brainlesse an­swere to master Cartwrights letter, where amongest o­thers of like nature, are these wordes: Wee knowe that the [Page 12] lawes doe punish all outward grosse wickednesse, or suffer it to be punished, as namely idolatrie, &c. and if there bee any vice vn­punishable by the law, The lawes en­force not a con­fusion at the Lords supper. yet the lawes doe suffer either the Church, or euerie householder or gouernour, to correct (so it be not against lawe) such as are vnder their charge. Againe. Also for the discipline, in gathering the worthie from the vnworthie, the lawe appointeth it, Pag. 4. and giueth leaue to make exception, both in publique iudgement, and in Churches, against vnworthie per­sons: as against drunkennesse, fightings, murther, adulteries, stealth slanders, &c. and yet also doe giue libertie to the Church to vse their owne discipline. Let him nowe looke who is his aduersarie in this. Whereas I bid you informe vs of inor­dinate walkers that we may remoue them, he sayth: We must first haue an order of discipline established. If hee meane by an order of discipline, some kinde of order of discipline to debarre the vnworthie, then it cannot be denied, but we haue an order for it, as the answerer to maister Cart­wright, in the wordes afore rehearsed, in behalfe of the lawes, acknowledgeth: if he would not bee so shortly ta­ken, but haue his wordes vnderstood of that onely orde­ring of discipline which the worde of God setteth out, then as I reuerence that for the onely and vnchangeable ordinance of the almightie, so finde I none a greater ad­uersarie thereunto than he: nay than you all, if you all be of that iudgement hee is that wrote your replye. For (besides other thinges that I will not nowe enter into) whereas I acknowledge that in our Church, though wee haue some abilitie to withstand open prophanations, yet that the gouerning by an Eldership is far to be preferred for the expectation of a happie successe: he openeth his mouth as an enemie, but with much falshoode and folly. First hee sayth, I make an Eldershippe, a part of your se­conde point, leauing out discipline. I sayde before, wee haue vse of the discipline to remooue the inordi­nate, onely this I graunted withall, that if you should obiect, that wee haue not so good vse of it, as if it were ordered by an Eldershippe, my selfe woulde [Page 13] ioyne with you in that poynt. Nowe if hee had but so good vse of his vnderstanding, as wee haue of this dis­cipline, he would haue discerned, that I added this only to preuent such an obiection from you, and not that I thrust it into your second poynt, as to make it a part thereof. Secondly hee sayth, by Elders we meane Aldermen, as that we seeke no other but by ciuill power and authoritie to force the vnruly. Whereunto if I shoulde answere hee was madde, I should fauour him much, in mouing pitie for him: and if it be not taken so, both friends and enemies,A discouerie of Brownes Dis­cipline. must needes set a harder sentence vppon him. Againe, he taketh it not necessary, but superstitious, to stand vppon the choosing of Elders, as the state of our Church nowe standeth: and in stead thereof, hee supplyeth, that the for­ward of euery Parish put forth themselues by visiting, counsai­ling, withdrawing, comforting &c. to performe the busines. Wherin he gratifieth the enemies of discipline with this, that the fourme of Church gouernement is changeable. Besides, let the wise consider, whither that bee not appa­rantly a confused course, wherein euery one that lusteth may gouerne. Hee supposeth, considering the times, that an agreement were better than a choise. As though there can bee obedience, and so agreement, where those that gouerne are not chosen. His consideration of the times warran­teth no man to runne before hee bee called. Hee giueth another reason: that rather God may haue the praise in prouo­king and calling them, then man in choosing them. This I per­ceiue is Brownes Anarchie, and thus I ouerthrowe it. Whatsoeuer course of obedience tendeth more or rather to the praise of God then another, that same is alwayes to bee preferred before the other. But hee saith, that for men to put forth themselues to execute discipline, ten­deth rather to the praise of God, then if they be chosen: Therefore we must conclude, (if hee say true) that to of­fer our selues, is alwaies to bee preferred in this case be­fore choosing and so it shall follow by consequence, that the order of ordayning set downe by the spirit of God, is [Page 14] not the best course of all others. Also when as it is here­by intended, that the forwarde professors, vppon their owne inward motions and feelings, shall thus take vp­on them to bee Elders, and the others must so acknow­ledge them, it followeth thereuppon connexiuely, that these inward motions and feelings must be holden war­rant inough, both for them-selues to take vppon them Church-callings as also to bind other mens consciences to obey them. For if this testimonie of their feeling, bee not an authenticall warrant to the conscience, how shall either parties walke in faith?Rom. 14.2.3. So then if this bee not to leade vs into the lake of Anabaptisticall reuelations, I knowe not what can bee. But hee proceedeth say­ing: As for the names of Elders and other ceremonies in ordey­ning, seeing they are made mockeries and matters of persecuti­on, I iudge it superstition to make them vnchangeable. As the names of things are not too stiffely to bee stoode vppon, so I doubt whether the mockeries and persecution you meane, bee cause inough to alter these. Howbeit what­soeuer may bee graunted in such respects for the names, and some other outward circumstaunces,Act. 13.2.3. Act. 14.2.3. 1. Tim. Compar. with titus 1.5. 1. Tim. 3.8.9. compa. with Act. 6.5. as thinges not essential, yet touching the order of ordeyning by choise, for as much as that is the wisedome of the worde, and necessary to the auoyding of confusion, such respects can haue no force at all against it. In that hee calleth this sticking to the ordeyning of Elders, superstition, I would but haue giuen it to his rashnes, saue that hee ad­deth, that it is to make in force the Popish Sacrament of or­ders. Which bewrayeth him for a wicked betrayer of Gods trueth, in that hee yeeldeth the hard vrging of the holy ordinaunce of God, to giue maintenance or force, to the lewde and braine-sicke imaginations of man. I surcease to prosecute the absurdities of these assertions more curiously, as annoyed with the stench that flo­weth from such Gangraenes: onely, if hee shall bee your leader in this poynt also, as in others, then both you and your fellow disciples, must now at length leaue to moue [Page 15] any more quarrels about the calling of our ministers. For you heare that no solēne nor set order in their calling is necessary: yea he telleth you in plaine words: That the obedience of the worthy vnto them, is a calling by man, and the agreement of the wisest is a choosing. I cal you to witnes of this his francke gift, lest hereafter hee woulde reuoke it.

4 My answere to your question hee sayth is darke, doubtfull, shifting, vntrue, and cauelling. The three last let him take to him-selfe, my conscience is cleere: in what­soeuer seemeth darke or doubtfull, I am ready,That Christians may partake in the Sacrament with wicked ones, and not be defiled with their sinne. yea de­sirous to giue as good addresse, as the reasonable reader shall require. Your question was in this sort propoun­ded, Whether Christians may ioyne and partake as one body in the Sacrament with wicked ones? Whereby I concei­ued your iudgement to bee this, that if there bee any at the Sacrament that you knowe to bee vnworthy, you ought not then to communicate, but goe away, as fea­ring least you coulde not communicat, but bee parta­ker of their sinnes. To this I answered as deliberatly and playnely as I coulde, and so as may easily appeare, I allowe, no other ioyning with such, then as their pre­sence and eating at the same table may bee called a ioy­ning. Which I prooue wee may and ought to susteine, not securely and carelessely (as hee taketh mee) but with this condition vnderstoode (if wee can-not remoue them) which I supposed my whole drift and reasons fol­lowing must needes haue made you perfect in. So my first reason is, not as hee hath shaped it, but thus: if the presence of the wicked cannot hinder the celebrating of the remembrance of Christ, nor the effectuall cōmunica­ting of his body and blood to the faithful ones, thē may we (hauing faith,) effectually comunicate notwithstan­ding their presence. But the first is true, therfore the latter followeth. Herehence he gathereth many absurdities and grosse errors, with bringing in Traitors, infidels, Turkes, Popes to the cōmuniō. But he misrekoned in three points which caused him to erre in the sūme. First, in that hee [Page 16] vnderstandeth mee to speake of a carelesse communica­ting, which he could not haue done, if the Lord had not smitten him with blindnes, sith I afterwards plainely de­clare what dueties hath bene done of vs before commu­nicating: The second, what I answere to your question concerning dueties of vs, that is to say particular mem­bers, to do in this case, hee receiueth as though I spake of the body of the congregation, how it should be caried & ordered in the Sacraments. The third, he putteth an im­possible case, as though Infidels, Turkes, Popes, remay­ning such, should come to our communion. In all which you may see him full of that same vaine Philosophie, and Sophisticall cauilling, which you feared to find in your answere. Such is the stuffe of his third page, mingled with the most odious comparisons and spitefull collections that his heart could deuise.

5 But here if he say, I haue then pared the question, & made it more particular then it was propounded. I an­swere, it was most expedient, & for your better instruc­tion to vnderstande, and so to vse your question as it might best fitte, and be applyed to the particular mem­bers of a congregation, and so of our Parish, whereof by your dwelling you should be a member. Besides, to haue vnderstood it of a whole congregation, I had no reason, because I could not suspect you doubted my iudgement in that, to witte, whether a Church ought to debarre the knowne wicked from the communion: especially (how­soeuer you might doubt) hee that replied, had no reason at all to doubt it, seeing what high account I made of the ordinaunce of God in that behalfe. Againe, consider the busines is with you, you I say, who dwelling in our Parish do most vnkindly (as we take it) separate your self from vs. On the other side you suppose you haue cause so to do, till you can be resolued of some thinges, where­at your conscience sticketh. You choose to declare your greeuances by writing. In your writing you complayne of lacke of order amongst vs to discerne of the commu­nicants, [Page 17] and there-hence you require to bee answered. Whither it bee lawful for Christians to ioyne in the Sacraments with vnreformed ones. Whereby, who seeth not, that you propound the case for your selfe, as though if there can be a course shewed, whereby a carefull Christian may set­tle his conscience to communicate, although some wic­ked ones be present, and partake in the signes with vs, that then you would be content to ioyne with vs, or else not. Thus taking the question (whether best for your in­struction or no, I nowe referre it to the iudgement of all men:) I answered vnto it (I hope) cleerely, I am sure sin­cerely. Whereunto if this your leader would haue repli­ed with like affection to do you good, he must haue done it, taking the question in the same sense. Else if hee had nothing to say to the question so taken, what needed this prodigall expence of time? when as hee might in a worde, haue onely admonished, that I mistooke the que­stion, and so an ende. Nowe (to stoppe vp these starting holes) knowe you, that if in the question, you meane by the worde, Christians, the whole body of a Church or cō ­gregation: I answere that they ought to discerne of the vnworthy, and separate them to the vttermost of their power: and that by howe much the more they are neg­ligent in this duetie, by so much the greater is their sinne. So that herein I suppose, you and I differ not in iudgement. On the other side, if the worde, Christians, be taken (as I vnderstoode it) for particular members of a congregation, as you one, and I another, in this congre­gation or Parish, then doe I answere, as before I did, which was this in effect, That wee may and ought to commu­nicate, and not goe away, The playne sense of the question. or with-drawe our selues from the Lordes Table, though wee see some that wee knowe to bee notorious offenders, at the same time partake in the signes with vs. This was prooued by the argument a little aboue rehearsed, namely, because those wicked can-not hinder the celebrating of the remembrance of Christ, nor the communicating of his body and blood to vs that come with faith. My reason [Page 18] for that is this. If the presence of the wicked should hin­der vs, that must it doe, either simply in it selfe, or else in respect of vs that knowe them to be wicked: but nei­ther of those waies can wee bee hindered by them, and therefore not at all. That the presence of the wicked in it selfe hindereth not, I shewed in a worde, as a thing which needed no great proofe. And that it hindereth not in respect of vs that knowe them (if wee haue borne our selues wisely and charitably towardes them by processe of admonition which I vnderstoode to bee such as our Sauiour appoynteth) I proue,Matth. first by a per­petuall Cannon out of Ezechiel. Secondly, from the boundes and limittes of a particular members duetie in this behalfe. And heere in deede wee growe to the issue of that whole controuersie. I say, a particular member ought to admonishe, and at length to tell the Church, but not to with-drawe him-selfe, though the Church shoulde not separate the same vnworthy one. You I perceyue holde the contrary, namely that a particu­lar member ought to with-drawe and go away from the congregation in such a case. Howe this poynt is de­bated, commeth hereafter to bee spoken of. Here I will stay a litle to take away what hee bringeth of any shewe, against so much of myne as I lately rehear­sed.

The presence of the wicked in it selfe doth not hurt vs.6 Touching my distribution of presence simply, and in respect of our knowledge, by which I proue the vn­worthy cannot hinder the effectuall communicating of the worthy, let the godly wise iudge, whether I haue al­tered or shifted away the question, or hee rather, (bea­ring therein a brand of Gods iudgement) vnderstoode not what hee read.Pag. 4. If you doubt what I meane by the presence of the wicked. I vnderstande not their pre­sence as by-standers or lookers on, but as receiuers at the same time of the Sacramental signes of the body & blood of Christ: and this my example of Iudas coulde not but teach you. Your leader confesseth that Iudas [Page 19] eate the Passeouer, but was not at the newe institution of the communion. If it did much concerne the busi­nesse in hande, I woulde nothing feare to haue him my aduersarie in it, but that part of my diuision, as I did not there, so I will not here insist vpon, because it is of both sides confessed, that the presence of the wicked in it self,The presence of the wicked in re­spect of our knowledge of them hindereth not. hindereth nothing. The other part is, that their presence hindereth not, in respect of our knowledge of them. Your an­swere is, it hindereth in respect of our knowing and communi­cating with them, as though I also had not graunted a kinde of outwarde ioyning and communicating.Pag. 5. Your replier sayth, this is sinne, but he bringeth not one argu­ment to proue it. In deede if I shoulde so ioyne with an vnworthy one in the Sacrament, as approuing him thereby to be a liuely and sound member of the body, I shoulde sinne in calling euill good, otherwise it can be no sinne vnto mee, to mee (I say) that haue performed those dueties of reforming or remoouing him, which Christ commaundeth, and so I woulde haue you vnder­stand mee in all places. Which if you doe (as you had no other cause, if you had weyed my whole answere together) you shall finde a large acquittance for the cauilles at the place of Ezechiel, and many other debtes, which your replier demaundeth at my handes.Pag. 6. Nowe for proofe that this communicating is no sinne vnto mee at all, I will shewe you: first, that it is not the sinne of allowing him for a sounde member that is vnsound: and secondly, that there is no other sinne in it. For the first, I reason thus. If I approue him for a sounde member, neither in the sight of GOD, nor to his owne conscience, neither in the knowledge and iudge­ment of the Church, then can it no waye bee sayde, I approue him. But I doe it not by any those wayes, and there-fore not at all. That I doe it not in the sight of God, it is manifest, for he beholdeth the heart, & ther­fore knoweth that I do not so allow him. Again,That I do not allowe him for [...] worthy member. that I do it not neither to his own conscience or in the knowledge [Page 20] and iudgement of the Church, my former proceeding by the commaunded course of admonition, hath abun­dantly cleered it.Pag. 7. If you inferre, that in this sort also I may goe to Masse, if I will, you are wyde. For the questi­on is of the behauiour of a member in that body, wher­of it is a member, and not in a strange body, whereof it is no member. And so it followeth not, that because I holde my selfe bound to keepe the vnitie of that liuing body, (whereof I am a member) euen with some in­conuenience of sicknesse and vnsound partes, that there­fore I may as well ioyne my selfe to a strange body, and so become a member of Satan. Yet this is your great lea­ders Sophistrie.The reason why thus I commu­nicate. If you yet insist, vrging me with the out­ward action communicating, I answere, I doe that, not as a thing of mine owne head, or which I might at my choyse refraine, but as a duetie necessarily enioyned me of God by his prouidence through my being and pla­cing there, and iustly required of mee, by the Church or spirituall body, through that same inforcing lawe of the coherence, and being together of the partes and members, which is the expresse ordinance of God, as (amongest other places) the fourth of the Epistle to the Ephesians from the first verse, to the ende of the sixteene, and Philippians 2.4. Hebrewes 10.25. Iud. 19. doe noto­riously proue it. So that vnlesse I holde the congregati­on (whereof I am) nowe disanulled, and become no Church of Christ, for the not separating an vnworthy member (which is Anabaptisticall heresie) I cannot voluntarily either absent my selfe from their assem­blies to holy exercises,Ephes. 4.3. Ver. 15.16. 1. Cor. 1.12.13. Heb. 10.25. Iud. 19. or yet depart away being come together, without breach of the bonde of peace, sun­dring the cement of loue, empairing the growth of the body of Christ, and incurring the guilt of schisme and diuision. And thus much for the former of my two poyntes, namely, that my communicating in such sort as is saide, is not the sinne of calling euill good, or an vn-sounde member sounde. Nowe that I sinne [Page 21] not at all in it, I proue it as in my former answere,That there is no sinne in this ma­ner communi­cating. because I haue perfourmed the duties of a priuate man, or particular member, and beyond which I am commanded nothing of the Lord, nothing I say, in this course of duetie: for I ex­clude not hereby our prayers, mourning or whatsoeuer tendeth to his recouerie: but I exclude both our priuate excommunicating of him, as you doe in this replie, as al­so our owne sundering and separating from the congre­gation for his cause, which is the thing in question be­tweene vs.

Whereas I say that by our proceeding by such course, as I presuppose euery wise Christian to haue walked in, towards the offending brethren, this (at the least) shall come to passe by it, that it bee sufficiently knowne, wee hate their sinne: an vpright heart must needes vnder­stand, by that clause, (at least) an implying of some better benefite and fruite of our labours, as in refourming or remoouing him, which (being most wished of vs if we en­ioy not, yet the other neuer fayling vs (when we cannot attaine to the chiefest) must likewise content vs. Was there then any reason, or came it from the leading of a good spirite,Pag. 6. to referre that to the partes of duetie (as graunting thereby some further dueties left vndone) which in open euidence pointeth at more excellent ef­fects or fruites of our labours intended by vs. Truely I doubt whether any learned Papist, woulde so foolishly haue cauilled for his credite sake. The like shamlesse ca­uilling is also in the beginning of his 7. page.

8 But he saith,Pag. 7, If the Church bee established and refuse to debarre him, whome they confesse to bee so wicked and vnrefour­med, all are made wicked by our complaining. Nowe if hee had said: If the Church be established, and doe not debarre him, &c, I had then good cause giuen to haue made here his answere, as also if in stead of these words (all are made wicked by our complaining) he had said, that Church or spi­rituall bodie is now thereby dissolued & separated from their knitting vnto Christ. For if he meane not so, he can [Page 22] neuer conclude against me, that particular mēbers may depart their assemblies: and if he do meane so, you shall heare what I say to it hereafter.

9 In saying the action of communicating is spiritual, I exclude not al kind of outward ioyning, but shew the es­sentiall ioyning to be spiritual by faith, wherein the wic­ked cannot come neare vs. As for the outward ioyning such as it is, I haue proued it before, both dutiful & voide of the infection of their sin: yet still he vrgeth, that I war­rant him to be a companion or brother in Christ, by communica­ting with him. I denie that as before. If you aske howe then I should bee brought to communicate with him in any sort.How it cōmeth to passe that I thus commu­nicate. I answer, the Church requireth my presence as a member, I by the bond of coherence, participate with the whole, in the holy action. By so doing it falleth out in consequence, that I participate in the signes with that vnworthie one, because hee is vnseparated. Nowe (if you marke) I doe not partake with him at all, by my verie act of communicating, but onely in as much as I communicate with the Church, which being simply and absolutely a duetie (as before proued) cannot bee con­trolled, neither ought to bee pretermitted for that which hath no true appearance of euill in it (I meane in the eyes of those that haue learned to iudge righteous iudgment) And that it hath not so much as iust appearance of euill in it, vnto such is shewed alreadie by the reasons gi­uen to prooue, that there is no sinne in this manner of communicating.

10 But he cryeth, that in this wise I admitte a diuision in the Communion. I heare his crie, wishing it had more sense, and lesse opportunitie. An inwarde diuision he denieth not but there may be. Nowe what haue I sayde, whereby he shoulde finde that outward diuision he spea­keth of, when as I expresly acknowledge an outwarde ioyning. As for the ministers part, in deliuering the signes to such a one, it doeth not follow, because he deli­uereth them vnto him, that he doth it to warrant his dam­nation, [Page 23] or of set purpose to further his destruction. For ney­ther the deliuering, nor the things deliuered, but onely his vnworthie receiuing, is cause of his owne damnation. Neither is that knowledge if it be granted) that the mi­nister hath of his vnworthinesse, a warrant to withholde the signes, if most voyces haue helde him in, for that can he not doe of himselfe: onely therefore it remaineth, that hee thus farre also suffer him in the Sacrament, and waite for the time when the Lord shall either more fullie reueale him, or graciously deliuer the Church from the contagion of him.How the mini­nister may deli­uer the sacra­mēt to one that he knoweth to be vnworthie. In the meane time hee teacheth him the signe, not as hee is woorthie or vnwoorthie, but as hee is yet vndiuided from them. Hee that thinketh these thinges can neuer fall out, euen where discipline is best established, hee hath little experience, and lesse iudgement.

11 Whether I haue grieuouly abused the place to the Co­rinthes, in that sort that I haue alleaged it, let the iudge­ment be with the godly reader, as also whether your lea­der hath committed that, wherwith he chargeth me vp­on the same chapter. When he saith that Paul proueth it to be no Sacrament at all to the Corinthes, Ansvver to ma­ster C. pag 37. and not as I suppose it to bee a Sacrament to some, and not to other some. The same spirite sayth likewise in another place: Paule condemneth euen the Supper and saith: this is not to eate the Lordes Supper. His drift is to denie against mee, that any can haue hope to partake and communicate comfortably and profitably with those, amongst whom any knowne wicked ones are admitted in this action, & therefore also he saith before in his reply,In his replie. pag. 5. that if there be any open breach of the couenant by any one knowne to the rest, the sacrament is of no force. Againe hee hath these words. The communion is not a diuision that is halfe good to the one part, and halfe bad to the other part, In his replie. pag. 4. but eyther wholly good, or wholly bad. Let not the reader beleeue, that I say or suppose it to be a Sacrament to some, and not to other some. I acknowledge both sorts to receiue the sacrament, that is, the consecrated Elements, one to their comfort, [Page 24] but the other to their condemnation. And to leaue o­ther pointes that might here be examined, and to keepe to the question, the strength of the two last quoted pro­positions, standeth vpon that place to the Corinthes ta­ken in such sense as hee deliuereth it. Let vs therefore come to examine that whether it be gold or stubble. He saith,The sacrament not disanulled for the wickeds sake. Paul proueth it to be no sacrament at al to the Co­rinthians, by these two weightie arguments. First, that the forme and institution of the Supper was violated by them all. 2 That so was the end and vse And first to answere his literall abuse of Paules wordes in the 20 verse, which is this. VVhen yee come together in one, this is not to eate the Lordes Supper. Mee thinke a learned diuine shoulde not be ignorant, that this is a kinde of excessiue negation very vsuall in the scriptures, and is therefore here, like as in all other such places, to bee restrained within due re­gards of circumstances, and conferences of other scrip­tures, as within the naturall intended listes, and necessarie described compasse of the holy Ghost that vttered them. For example,Gen. 32.28. the Lord saide vnto Iacob, Thy name shal not from henceforth be called Iacob, but Israel. Againe, speaking by his Prophet,Iere. 7.22. he sayth: For I spake not to your fathers, nor commanded them, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. And Paule sayeth likewise in another place:1, Cor. 1.17. Christ sent me not to baptise, but to preach the Gospel. Let these three suffice for the rest. Now we knowe, that Iacob was called Iacob afterwarde, but not onely by that name. The Israelites were commaun­ded burnt offerings and sacrifices, but so as chiefly to be­holde in them the Messias to come. Also we knowe Paule did baptize,vers. 14.16. therefore when hee sayeth, I was not sent to baptize hee giueth vs to vnderstande, that the chiefe du­tie and charge of his Apostleship was to preach the Gos­pel, in comparison whereof, the baptising hee vsed was not to be spoken off. Nowe seeing the holy Ghost thus in other places, vseth the like generall negation, which must bee so limitted as I speake of, maruaile not though [Page 25] in this place also, he denie that to be done by the Corin­thians, which was not done as it should be, by many, or (perhaps) by the most of them. Now for the arguments which he forceth vpon the Apostle, I say, he is too bold to snatch that which the Apostle neuer meant to giue him, and that in two points. For neither doth the A­postle affirme, that the essentiall fourme of the institu­tion was violated, nor yet that the foule abuses com­mitted, were done by them all. The first I prooue thus: When Paule had said, VVhen you come together in one, this is not to eate the Lords Supper, immediatly he sheweth them the reason why: For (saith he) Euerie one in eating, ta­keth first his owne Supper, and so one is hungrie, but ano­ther druncken. Heere is nothing controlled touching the substantiall fourme of the institution (which consi­steth in the consecration and distribution of the bread and wine) but onely the disorder that was among them in disposing of themselues and vsing it, against which he opposeth the repetition of the institution, as he had de­liuered the same vnto them before, and that being done, in the 23.24.25. verses, he therehence deducteth that thing in the 26. verse, which he would afterwards, and doth apply to their reproofe, euen to the verie ende of the cause. Now, neither is that same thing any whit of the fourme of the institution, but onely touching the vse and end, wherevnto they should haue prepared and applied themselues in that action. Like as the most cleere stroke of that sentence, plainely, and onely soun­deth in these words: For as often as you shall eate this bread, and drinke this cup, you shall declare the Lords death vntill he come. The things in them disagreeable to this, and there­fore to be blamed, he declareth to be, that there was of the riche of them,Verses 21.22.28. which respected chiefely to feast and feede their bellies in that comming together, and made no difference by their behauiour, betweene the holie Supper of our Lord, and ciuill banquettings. Now see­ing the Apostle thus particularizeth these offences of [Page 26] the Corinthian communicants, and withall, specifieth nothing to be reprooued in the Ministers, touching the fourme of the institution: who is he that dares beleeue this presumptuous spirit, who careth not what he faceth vpon the word of God, to mainteine whatsoeuer his corrupt braine hath once conceiued?

The second point which I sayd he snatcheth, is, that he auoucheth these abuses among the Corinthian Com­municants, to haue beene committed by them all. Which thus I refell. To retaine all the Apostle his tradi­tions, euen as he had deliuered them to the Corinthi­ans: and yet all those same Corinth, to transgresse them in no lesse matter, then in celebrating the Lords Supper, are two things directly contrary. But the Apostle testi­fieth for them in the first,Verse. 1. therefore he chargeth them not with the latter. That he testifieth the first, appeareth, where he beginneth with this exhortation. Be yee follo­wers of me, Verse. 2. euen as I am of Christ, and immediatly subioy­neth, I praise you brethren that you remember all my things, and retaine the traditions as I deliuered them vnto you. Wher­by it is manifest, that the Apostle addressing himselfe to those points, whereof he was informed touching the vn­seemely behauiour that was among them at Praier, and at the Lords Supper, first confirmeth the minds, and ap­proueth the iudgemēts of such brethren, as had soundly vpheld the truth in those things, and afterwards deliue­reth that, which the guilty should find themselues repro­ued in. 2. That some withstood that prophane disorder, & polluted not themselues with the rest,That is, by the like euill beha­uiour. in their behaui­our at the Lords Supper, it is necessarily inferred vpō that Paule saith:Verse. 18. There were dissentions among them, euen at their cōming together at the Lords Supper. This is the first thing in that matter, whereof he sheweth his dislike, but withall, confirmeth such as held the truth, affirming that greater matters then those,Verse. 19. yea, euen heresies should grow among thē, by which they should be so far frō being damnified, that contrariwise, they should become more manifest & [Page 27] famous by thē. And as the Apostle in this verse voydeth these of the feare of that conclusion he had set down be­fore, to wit, that they came together not with profit, but with hurt, pointing the same now directly to be applied to that part which gaue the occasion of dissention. So like­wise doth he therby as manifestly declare, that he inclu­deth not all the Corinth. in the reprehēsiōs that follow. 3. If they were all alike in this offence, then were they all a disordered & wicked cōpany, and so (in all mens eyes) ten times worse in euery point of celebrating the Lords Supper, then the assemblies of England are, from which notwithstāding he laboureth thus with all his strength to draw & hold you. Now, if the Corinthiā church was fallen wholy to be a grosse disordered cōpany,Pag. 3. of his reply. and your leader holdeth plainly, that open grosse wickednes breaketh the coue­nant, it followeth that they had also broken the couenāt, & so by flat cōsequence, could not be a Church of God, whē Paul thus wrote vnto thē: which (me think) should be clearer then any candell, to make you see your leaders impudēcy: who blusheth not, by this meanes, to giue the Apostle the lye to his teeth.1. Cor. 1.2. Hence (as by the way) this may be deducted, which I aduise you well to consider.The Corinthian Church more disordred in communicating, then the English assemblies. Either the Corinth Church was now no Church of God, nor brotherhood for faithfull men to resort and keepe thē to, or else a Church of far greater disorder, in cōming together to the Lords Table, then ours of England, & par­ticularly of this congregation is, ought yet to be holden a Church of God, & brotherhod for faithful mē to resort & keepe vnto. But the first is false, saith the same Apostle in the place last quoted, therefore the latter standeth firme, & cannot be denied of any that with the least in­differency cōpareth our cōmunicating with theirs. For if you wil obiect they had the right order of discipline, & so haue not we that maketh them the greatlier in fault a­boue vs, as hauing more meanes in their hands, yet came shorter of a holy profession in outward behauior then we, and so sealeth vp my conclusion more surely to [Page 28] conuince you. But I returne againe to my former pur­pose, I hope I haue made it manifest, that neither the forme of the institution was violated by the Corinthi­ans, nor yet the abuses committed, were done by them all. And now I suppose it will not be hard to prooue, that the most vnworthie among them did also eate the outward sacrament. First, if those had not eaten the sa­crament at all, they could not haue beene charged with eating the bread, and drinking the cup of the Lord vnwoorthe­lie, without discerning his bodie, Verse. 27.29. and so to their condemnation: But they are charged so: therefore we must needes graunt they did eate it. The assumption is prooued in the 30. verse, saying: For this cause many among you are weake and sick, and many sleepe. Wherein the Apostle by these effectes, leadeth them to acknowledge the cause, namely, their sinne, such and so as he had propounded it in the 27. & 29. verses. Whereby behold, and if you will suffer the point of truth to pearce into your heart, cast out that furious spirit that saith: The Communion can not be good to one partie, and bad to another, and acknowledge by this case of the Corinthians, that manifest indignities may be committed by some, and apparant vnworthie ones may communicate with others (when they cannot be remoued) and neither disanull the sacrament, nor yet infect or make guilty all the Communicants with their sinne. Neither doth this place alone affoord this instruction for you,Iude. but euen that place of Iude also, where inueying against such filthy professors, as whose grosse sinnes could not be altogether secrete in any Church, wheresoeuer they liued, yet doth he graunt it might come to passe,Verse 12. that they should impudently thrust themselues into the Church feastes of charitie (wherein also the Lords Supper then vsed to be celebrated) though so also they should be but as spots and staines therein. In the which place neither doth the Apostle once insinuate, that the action should thereby be disanulled vnto them, nor all to be made wicked by their meanes in communi­cating: [Page 29] yea contrarywise implyeth (to the comfort of the godly) that they might by prayer through the holie Ghost, in the circumspect obseruing one another,Verses keepe both themselues and others from the contagion of all such. Now I woulde wishe you (W. F.) and all of your learning, to fixe your eyes heere a little in the meditating of these two places, and amongst other things bethinke you, what was the cause, that neither Paule in considera­tion of that great disorder in the Church at Corinth, nor yet Iude in respect of those wicked ones, which he calleth spots in the Church feastes,3. Iohn. 9.10. no nor Iohn (that I may touch you vtterly to the quick) in testifying that Church to be ambitiously vsurped vpon, ouerweyed, and there­fore corrupted in the discipline, do yet in the least syl­lable, directly, or indirectly, account those assemblies thoroughly leauened, or the couenant broken, or yet perswade any of them to withdrawe from the rest, and to gather a part. And after you haue diligently sought and considered, it may be you shall finde no cause but this, namely, that the Apostles were as farre from your leaders minde and iudgement in this matter, as Heauen and Hell are distant and deuided asunder. Now against his odious repetitions, and senselesse collections, I op­pose the plainenes and simplicitie of mine answeres: but where I call our dealings by admonition and labouring for the Church censures,Pag. 8. a kind of protesting against the sinne of the vnworthy: he mistaketh me, as though I meant, an open excepting against thē at the Lords table.

12 I say, there is no further power giuen to a parti­cular member in proceeding against the vnworthy,Pag. 9. That particular members can proceed no fur­ther then admo­nition. than by processe of admonition. Your replier vrgeth me with diuers Scriptures, which he supposeth, warrant me some further proceeding. The first is. Giue not that which is holy vnto dogs. Inasmuch as this may be brought to Church assemblies, it belongeth to the practise of the whole ioyntly, not to a particular member seuerally, and alone, like as other precepts also of Church gouernement. [Page 30] The second is,Matth. 18.18. Let him be vnto thee as an heathen and publi­can, that is to say, when the Church hath for his sinne separated him, for so his binding by the Church is set down in the next verse, with the efficacy therof, to bridle the obstinate and stiff-necked. The third is, If an Angell from heauen, or Paule preach otherwise, hold him accursed. I hold him for a cursed instrument of Sathan, and not a blessed seruant of God, whosoeuer bringeth vs another doctrine, then the Lord hath left vs in his word: but what is this to the purpose in hand? His fourth and fifth places: Be not thou partaker of other mens sinne, and follow not a multitude to do euill, Sect. 6.9. I haue answered before, where I haue shewed how far, and in what sort, we may partake with the vnworthy in the Sacrament, and haue proued it to be without guilt of their sin. The like I answere to his other two places out of Timothy. He quoteth Ierem. 1.17.18. If he meant that euery priuate man should take vpō him, as with Ieremies cōmission, either for the parts of his duty towards the Church, or the manner of cary­ing himselfe in his place, he seduceth you dangerously, for so euery priuate man may publikely denounce the iudgemēts of God against Princes, Ministers & people, & contend with them all, if they faile in their duty, yea, if they but iudge them to faile in their duty (for I trow he wil not ascribe to them such sure reuelations, as had the Prophet) and so what should an Eldership do in the Church, yea or any other gouernors, whē as if they pro­ceed not according to my expectation in any thing, I, & so any priuate man may disanull their doings. If other­wise he cite the place but for the generall doctrine that may therehence be deriued vnto all, namely, whatsoeuer the Lord cōmandeth any of vs to do (be it a matter that seeme neuer so dangerous & fearefull to vs) that we ob­serue to do it to the vttermost, without fearing the faces of any: if (I say) he quote the place for this, let him know, that whē he shall proue particular members of a Church to haue receiued such a commandement frō the Lord, as [Page 31] is heere in question, then this place of the Prophet Iere. shal make for his cause, in the meane time, I cannot but iudge the man to talke very idely. Also if he do not as impertinētly cite the 11. of the Reuel. v.4.5. it is because I lacked his treatise,In the Preface to the booke of the liues of Christians. that might make that scripture plaine & easy vnto me, & which was promised now some 4. or 5. yeres ago, in a certaine booke, the title wherof is thus stoutly subscribed: By me Robert Browne.

13 An Apostle (saith he) is but one member, VVhether a particular man can cast off a whole congre­gation. and yet might any one Apostle or messenger of Christ forsake or cast off whole Cities or Churches, that refused or withstood their message: therefore (I trow) it must be concluded, that particular members, or priuate men, may cast off whole Churches or spirituall bodies, if their execution of discipline fayle in any part. Alas, alas, that euer you should beare your selfe vpon such a rotten prop. Consider now againe the comparison, and you will euidently see the error. A­postles, that is to say, publike persons of an extraordi­narie embassage, and so of giftes, and that were not by any reason of theyr calling to settle in any one congrega­tion, are compared with priuate men or particular members, of no extraordinarie sending nor giftes, and such as by all reason of their calling, are all theyr lyfe long, (necessarie remoue of dwelling considered) to a­byde members of one congregation: these persons (I say) of so contrarie condition (which I set abroade chiefely to preuent some thyngs heereafter) are com­pared in one action, that is (in forsaking.) But as there is no resemblance betwixt the subiects, or things to be forsaken, so there is no reasonable proportion betweene the causes of theyr forsaking. The Apostles forsooke Churches or assemblyes that were without Christ; we must forsake Churches and congregations of Christ. The Apostles forsooke them for refusing the couenant offered: and wee must forsake them for vnperfect obseruing of the fruites of the couenant receyned. Be­hold the fraude, and flee from it. So hys instances of [Page 32] the Synagogs of the Iewes in Antioch & Ephesus are pow­red out like water vpon the groūd, since those were not Churches plāted in the new couenāt, & therfore none at al for Christiās to be mēbers of. And heerabouts he tra­uerseth much ground, as if he would meete me, but ne­uer walketh that way, which it was likely I would come.

14 His demaund concerning the Popish Church, whether we be schismatiques for departing from that, is fri­uolous,The Popish Church no Church of God. for that is fallen from the foundation, and hath no knitting with Christ, hauing denyed the faith. Also the decree of God touching his forsaking of her, is now for a good time gone out against her,2 King. 17. Ier. 3.3. as cleerely as in times past against the Israelites, and the one is no more within the couenant and protection of the Lord, than the other. Touching that he saith, that To denie Christes discipline and gouernment, is to denie Christ, he saith truth. But concerning the question in hand, he beggeth there­by that he shall neuer get. For vnlesse he will say, and so can proue, that what congregation soeuer faileth or is restrained, so as it doth not execute all ecclesiasticall censures, or cleereth not the sacraments from all offen­ces to the communicants, the same denieth Christ, and falleth from the foundation: except (I say) he can proue this, he hath nothing against vs towards the denying of Christ: nor yet to proue, that particular members may separate themselues from such a Church, which he ma­keth you beleeue,Pag. 10.15. to be a matter most euident. Yet I must answere him, VVhether if the Church will ioyne in the Sacrament with an vnlawfull Minister, a VVolfe, a hireling, a theefe, those amongst them that knowe and can proue him such a one, That the godly may not depart the Communion for the sinne of the Minister. may withdraw themselues? That the sinne & corruption of the Minister is no cause for the godly to withdraw frō the Sacramēt, it followeth in good proportion to be cō ­cluded frō that which hath bin hitherto disputed of the mēbers of a Church in generall.1. Sam. And heere moreouer for direct confirmation, the examples of Ely and his Sonnes may suffice vs: with whom it was lawful for the people to [Page 33] sacrifice and receiue spirituall blessings by their hande, though their liues were most offensiue, and namely the sonnes notoriously wicked. So I say of the Scribes and Pharisees, whome it was lawfull to heare.Matth. 23.2.3. Nowe if hee meane by theeues, such as leade not in by the doore Christ, hee doeth iniurie, and dealeth captiously: for they that gather not vnto Christ,Iohn· 10.4.5. but haue strange voy­ces, which the sheepe acknowledge not, those are rather the great antichristian deuourers, which bring another foundation besides Christ Iesus, and are not to be inrol­led with such as teach the doctrine of faith truly. But heere yet I muste insist a little, because I knowe that Browne in a certaine place excepteth two thinges a­gaynst this example of Elie his sonnes: One,Ansvvere to M. C. pag. 66. That the better sort of the people did withdrawe themselues from the Sacrifices, because of their sinne, and the other is, That Elie ministred and not his sonnes, when Elkanah and his wiues came to offer. I answere. Whereas the text doeth testifie, say­ing Therefore the sinne of the young men was verie great before the Lorde: for men abhorred the offeringes of the Lorde. Sam. 2.17. It gi­ueth not the least shewe of arguing, that there was nowe no offering of the Lord, for the faithfull sort to come vn­to (for the flat contrarie is auouched) nor yet that anie as in duetie, did abstaine from the Sacrifices (for then also by the whole course of Brownes doctrine, Elkanah, Hannah, and Samuel, in not abstaining, did partake with the sinnes of the Priestes, and were become wicked with them, yea and so consequently their sacrifices should haue bene accursed vnto them, so farre should they haue bene from bringing such a blessing as they did) but when it is sayde, The people abhorred the offering of the Lorde, because of the sinne of the young men: what is it? but to aggrauate the sinne of the Priestes, and shewe the extent of their ini­quitie, to reache euen to the making of the people thus to sinne. This is confirmed by Elie his woordes, when rebuking his sonnes,Cap. 2.24. hee sayeth thus (according to Tre­melius translation) Doe not so my sonnes: for this is no good [Page 34] report which I heare, that you turne away the people of the Lord. And this is that sinne,2. Sam. 12.14. Isai. 52.5. Ezech. 36.20. Rom. 2.24. which the woorde often opbray­deth vnto loose professours, that they make the name of God euill spoken of for their sakes. Nowe, that he sai­eth, touching Elies offering the sacrifices, and not his sonnes, is miserablie destitute of all probabilitie. For first the text sayeth, Elkanah and his wife went vp out of his citie euerie yeere, 1. Sam. to worshippe and to sacrifice vnto the Lorde of hostes in Shiloh, where were the two sonnes of Elie, Hoph­ni, and Phinehas, Priestes of the Lorde. If these bee men­tioned for Priestes of the Lorde in Shiloh, who shoulde doubt that they offered the sacrifices of the people that thither repared for that end, and so of Elkanah amongst the rest? And that olde Eli laboured not in those dayes, in the businesse of the sacrifices, it seemeth verie proba­ble, in that hee was not able, being about nintie yeeres olde, for the bodily labour thereof, to offer the sacrifi­ces, and in which regarde, the Priestes had leaue to cease at fiftie yeeres of their age. Hee sate (I graunt) in the Temple, sawe the seruices of the Lorde perfourmed, and blessed likewise the people, but that he offered the sacri­fices, and especially without his sonnes, by no lawfull vse of the text it can be profered.

16 Hitherto your leader hath added his poore furni­ture, to helpe you to prooue, that particular members may depart from the bodie of the Congregation for default of separa­ting the vnworthie. Now he cōmeth to bring your proofes in proportion, that he might make you still beleeue, hee doeth not seduce you. Wherein though I coulde wil­linglye forbeare him, in respect that his copie hath deceyued him, yet I suppose it may be good for him, that his insolent behauiour haue some repressing. The six places of Scripture which you quote, I sayde doe con­cerne our priuate conuersation and behauiour towardes inordinate brethren, and haue not a syllable touching our dealings in publike Church meetings and exercises. Here he thinking me to lie wide open, runneth violently [Page 35] vpon me, with the place of the Corinths, to dispatch mee at a blowe: but therein dooing, the euill spirite of ma­lice and reuenge that set him on, blinded his iudgement, that hee could not see howe sure a warde I had, till hee ranne his owne hande vpon the poynt thereof. For I said not (as hee telleth you) that none of those places haue anie thing concerning publique Church meetings, and exercises: but my speeche was, that they had not anye thing touching our dealinges in publique Church mee­tings and exercises. Wherein, if your iudgement bee so weake, that as yet you perceyue no difference, call to minde the question, which is, whether particular members of a Church, may depart or withdrawe themselues from that bo­die, if they knowe any vnworthie ones at the Lordes table. You point mee to Scriptures to prooue they ought. I aun­swere, that those Scriptures giue vs rules concerning our priuate conuersation, and touch not our dealinges in the Church. Nowe I would aske you, whetherto you referre this worde our? If you referre it to the whole bodie of the Church, then you chaunge the question, and flee your ground: but if it be suffered to haue the naturall relation to particular members, then may you see, that your lea­der hath not a little abused you. If out of the last verse of the chapter (for it was quoted thus. 1. Cor. 13.) he shall yet striue to saue himselfe in this maner, be­cause this place requireth the church to excommunicate the incestuous, which must be done by voyces and con­sent of the particular members, therefore it speaketh of particular members dealing in the church. Marke the end, and you shal see his gaine. The question is, whether parti­cular mēbers may depart frō the church, as before, or no. This place (you say) inferreth some dealing of particular mēbers in the Church. I grāt it, what shal you get by that? You wil say this, that I thē haue vniustly denied this place to haue any thing concerning particular mēbers dealing in the Church. If I haue denied any thing that might hin­der you to find the truth, thē haue I delt vniustly. But we [Page 36] see that by your gaine. For if by this obtained, your cause be neuer the better, he hath fed you then with woordes, and made you neuer the fatter. Thus you must applie it to the question, if you will endeuour to make gaine of it: If this place warrant particular members to haue dea­ling in the Church, then it warranteth them to separate them­selues in the case aforesayde, and so doe you not see yron and flaxe knitte together of a knotte? Is some dealing all dealings? Will your leader neuer vnlearne so grosse a fallation? You see nowe if I let you haue this, it doeth you no good, and for my part I will none of it, it can pleasure mee nothing. If you aske why then I made my negation so generall. I aunswere first, that in denying those places to concerne particular members in the Church, I did it not to interuert or hinder the truth, as nowe appeareth. Secondly, it is the lawfull liber­tie of any man, in reasoning to vse chaunge of wordes, so that our sense be kept, which shall easily bee (especi­ally both sides hauing sounde hearts to seeke the trueth) If the question stil be made the line to measure them by. and therefore whereas I saide those Scriptures touch not our dealings in the Church, what man of honest minde, or that had anye sparke of trueth left in him (conside­ring the question) woulde not haue vnderstoode by that worde (dealings) our tarying or departing from the Lordes Table at the sight of the vnworthie? Salo­mon sayeth,Prou. 14.1. The wisedome of the wise, is to vnderstande his way, but the foolishnesse of fooles is vnto deceite.

17 The rest of the places you quoted to proue your purpose, are not according to the copie you gaue him,The true sense of those scrip­tures vvhich commonly the Brovvnists cite to proue their separation from the communion. but these. 2. Thes. 3.14. 2. Tim. Ro. 16.17.18. Ephes. 5.7.8. 1. Thes. 5.21.22. and all these (I saye, with that to the Corinthians spoken off before, (the question beeing rightly considered and taken) make nothing for you. For in as much as any of them con­cerne our behauior in publike, so much do they appoint [Page 37] the dueties of particular mēbers, towards others ioynt­ly, but nothing of their owne departing or tarying sepa­rately. Againe whatsoeuer any of them say of separating to bee practised of particular members, there can they not bee vnderstood of Church meetings, but of priuate conuersatiō. But to iumble these things together,A dicto secundū quid ad. simpl. with­out discerning, and (as it were) to liue in that grosse so­phistication, of taking all respects for some, is (as it see­meth) your leaders ioy.

18 But hee chargeth mee (by so vnderstanding those places) with such seditious doctrine,Pag. 12.13. as may bring in re­bellion against Magistrates, put downe acquaintances of men familiarly in marriage, loose al bonds of obedience in children and seruantes, and cut off all entercourse of marchandize, and bargaining with professors. These will proue but such l [...]wde soundings, as an empty barrell e­uer yeeldeth. Paul aduertiseth Timothie, 2. Tim that in the last dayes should come perillous times, wherein men should bee louers of themselues, couetous, vainglorious, proud, &c. hauing a forme of godlines, but denying the face of it, and that therefore he should auoyde such. Iohn sayth to the elect Lady:Ver. 10. If any man come vnto you, and bring not this doctrine, receiue him not to house, neither bid him Godspeede. By which Scriptures you see par­ticular persons by name warranted to auoyde priuate conuersation with inordinate professours. This place al­so to the Corinthes, though it be written to al the Church,1. Cor. yet is it concerning particular mens practise, in their se­parate and priuate places and behauiour. And though your leader will bee loath to loose his place aboue ma­ny others,Title against par. prea. and hired lectures. Answ. to M. C. Pag 13. hecause hee hath stood so much heretofore vp­on deniall of this which I affirme thereof, yet hath hee nowe to thinke, that neither the auncientie of his error, nor the inconuenience hee dreameth of, can yeelde him strength inough to keepe it. The inconuenience shall bee met withall afterward. Here I will shewe the reasons of my iudgement out of the place.Ver. 9. I wrote vnto you (sayth Paul) in an Epistle, that you shoulde not company together with [Page 38] fornicators. Br. great place, in the Epist. to the Cor. discussed This verse you see, is of shedding, or sor­ting out our company. Then followeth, and not altoge­ther with the fornicators of this worlde, or with the couetous, or with extortioners, or with idolaters, for then you must goe out of the world. But nowe I haue written vnto you, that you compa­ny not together: If any that is called a brother be a fornicator, or couetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an ex­tortioner, with such a one eate not. In these verses wee are di­rected both what persons to shunne, and also in what conuersation or company. In appoynting the persons, hee excepteth for those that were not as yet come to re­ligion,Ver. 10. and setteth downe this rule to hold in all those, that are counted brethren in the Church. Of his excep­tion hee rendreth two reasons, first, because the number of those that professed not Christ, was then so great, as they could not auoyde them and liue in the worlde. Se­condly,Ver. 12. because Christians are not charged with their censuring, but they are reserued to Gods iudgement. Why brethren are subiect to those priuate censures (as I may speake) he giueth this reason, because we ought to looke into, and iudge one of another. The conuersation is set out by one kinde named for all, to witte, eating of meate, which is alwayes a very notable marke and fruite of familiaritie. I know your leader would haue you vn­derstand this, of eating bread at the Lordes table onely, but the 10. verse deliuereth the whole text from this in­iury. For if the Apostle would haue had them taken his meaning in this place to be directly of their meeting & companying at the Lordes Table (as you take it) what needed hee to haue excepted those that were out of the Church, and no brethren, with whō the Church neither had, nor might haue company at the Lordes Table. Yea how absurdly had he reasoned, in saying thus (for then you must go out of the world) as though he should say: if you al­together debar the wicked that are without the Church, from your company at the Lordes table, then may you as well get out of the worlde, for you cannot liue in it. [Page 39] When your leader is so grossely ouershot in such playne points, it lieth you vppon carefully to consider, whether the hand of God be vpon him in as heauy a iudgment, as fell vpon Elymas the sorcerer, for peruerting the straight wayes of the Lorde. By this that is sayd,Act. 13.10.11. I trust it is cleere ynough, that the doctrine which he calleth so seditious, is not mine, but the Lords, and therefore if it haue any such dangerous consequences, as your replier reckoneth you see that his accusation must reach higher then mee. But (alas) how doth it grieue me in your behalfe, yours (I meane) with the rest of your company? I would (if it plea­sed God) that you knewe, or could discerne rightly, with what sorowe I am sundry times affected for you when I consider (which I doe often) what numbers (as I heare of you) whereof many haue otherwise good partes in them, are so intollerably abused and ouer caryed by that wretched man. For (euen in this) doth it follow (thinke you) that if wee tye our selues to this rule of sorting our company in priuate conuersation, that then the knot of marriage should bee loosed, the bondes of obedience broken and outward acquaintances quite shaken of &c. Is there no meane betwixt these two extremities, but that we must be either vnnatural or carelesse? Surely if we should take this course in all the Scriptures, wee should make a strange religion by and by; I meane if we receiue some generall sayings of the Scripture, without their pe­culiar exceptions and declarations in other places. As for example. Thou shalt doe no manner worke on the seuenth day, and thou shalt not kill: what should the seruice and ceremonies doe in the Church, or the Magistrate in the common wealth, if these bee not limitted and declared by other special places and exceptions? And if you grant me this, that places are to be compared with places, and generals declared & vnderstood by specials, why thē shal you see this knot sone vntied, or rather that ther was no knot nor difficultie, as your leader hath mislead you. For that those places of dissorting our selues frō the wicked, [Page 40] make nothing against obedience to Magistrates, wee haue Matt. 22.21. Rom. 13.1.2. with diuers others to de­clare them. Againe, that they debarre no dueties in mar­riage. 1. Cor. with many other places that you knowe doe warrant vs.1. Pet. chap. ad 7. Matth. 5.31.32. Mark. Ephes. 5.22. &c. col. 3.18 &c. Eph. 6. 1.2 &c. Tit. 2.4.5. 1. cor. 7.21. The like also may bee sayde of children to parents, and in the rest. So that then, con­ferring these places together, we see flatly, that as on the one side, we are bound generally to shun priuate conuer­sation with vngodly ones: so on the other side, we must necessarily obserue withall, whatsoeuer speciall dueties are to bee required at our handes by any one. And thus at length it will fall out, being as from both sides resol­ued, that touching Magistrates, parentes, maried folkes, and masters, the general prohibitions of not eating, nor keeping company, must bee vnderstood of shunning the malice of sinne and seducing, yea that our doings must be with a kind of mourning, and afflictiō for their sakes, but not forbidding necessary dueties, which other bonds of commandements, doe straitly bind vs to. Touching other acquaintances and dealing with brethren, those prohibitions reach not beyond their inward familiaritie, & delightful accompanying, which is euer stained with fowle tolerations and neglect of Christian reprehensi­ons. And therefore haue we for these cases other golden rules also to guide vs by.2. Thes. 3.14.15. When as Saint Paul sayth: If a­ny man obey not this our saying in this letter, note him & haue no companie with him, that hee may bee ashamed, yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. Wee must so auoyde his company, as hee may not finde want of loue and brotherly kindnes in vs, but onely a chiefe loue of vertue, that thereby he may take shame at his sinne. To the same purpose sayth hee in another place. Let no man deceiue you with vaine woordes, for such thinges commeth the wrath of God vpon the children of disobedience: Ethes Bee not there­fore companions with them. Likewise a litle after. And haue no felowship with the vnfruitefull woorkes of darkenes, but euen reproue them rather. This conferring and resoluing of pla­ces [Page 41] together, if your leader had grace to vse, hauing also vngorged himselfe of that preiudice, whereby now his taste is made so vnsincere in al things, you may see that as in these poynts, there is no such danger as he talked of, so neither in the great question betwixt vs of ioyning with the Church, at the Lords Table where the vnworthy ones are. For the keeping of the bond of vnity in the Church,Ephes. &c. to the end of the 16. Heb. 10.25. Iud. 19. hath an expresse lawe and charge, which no generall wordes of other places, much lesse preposterous zeale, can dispence withall, or take away.

19 It seemeth to mee by a speech in his 7. Page, that he secretly giueth you this answere for that, namely if the Church at any time separate not the vnworthy, or can­not doe it, it is thereby fallen from the couenant of life,Also pag. 3. and ceaseth to bee a Church of Christ, so that you may safely goe from them I will not yet say much of this mat­ter, I had rather the author woulde recant it (if it might please God,) then that I or any other should stand to cō ­fute so grosse an error: for if he hold, that obedience and holy life are causes of our iustification, and whereby we enioy the couenant of life, and not tokens or fruites on­ly, his case is worse, then that hee can truely enioy the name of a Christian.

20 The rest of his 11.12. and 13. pages, shall receiue this answere: it seemeth the author of them was not wel in his wittes, but malice had made him as those in Bed­lem, that talke quite out of order and sense. For I pray you, taketh hee not vppon him there to proue out of your quotations, that wee are warranted and comman­ded to depart from the communion, where the vnwor­thy is not separated (for I had denied that those Scrip­tures intended any such thing. Nowe that wherein he occupieth him-selfe, in stead thereof, is to prooue (not without some prophane abuse of the Scriptures) by a sort of foolish syllogismes, that haue neuer a true assump­tion, that I am herein an heretique; the question in the meane time, which should bring forth that consequence, [Page 42] lying altogether vnprooued: the gaine that hee shall get by it, is, that hee lost the vantage of so much time, and hath put himselfe for a laughing stocke to all that shall read his writing. I speake not of his inward and higher reckonings. I pray God bee mercifull vnto him in them for his Christs sake. As for me, I will not answere a foole according to his foolishnes. Yet there is one thing which in the middest of his rage against me, hee vttereth, where­of I must admonish you.Pag. 13. The Sacrament of the Lordes Sup­per (saith he) is a Sacrament of order, or orderly communion: and addeth,Orderly com­municating is not of the es­sence of the Sa­crament. that order or orderly communion is the ve­ry fourme, matter, manner or essence, and nature there­of. As he lighteth here vppon popish phrases, so you are to feare him in substaunce: his diuinitie is sicke to the death,Mat. when he thus defineth the Sacrament of the Lords Supper. The outward matter of this Sacrament is bread and wyne, the four me is the blessing and separating of them to that vse, with their distributing to the members of the Church. Orderly communicating, is a fruit or ef­fect of gouernement, and a beautifull ornament to the Sacrament, but nothing either of matter or fourme, and therefore not of the essence of the Sacrament. Of his learned vse of logicke termes, I will here say nothing for shame, I had much rather to couer his nakednes altoge­ther, if the trueth would suffer it. Thus much for refuta­tion of his defence of your quotations. Now I will come to his cauilles at the reasons, where-with I prooue, that particular members ought to deale no further in this case, then by processe of admonition. Which wordes if you vnder­stand rightly, and as the question in controuersie will guide you, (like as afore I haue declared) you shall see his first argument full of vaine words, wherein he saith, there is more required of particular members then admoniti­on, and reckoneth vp mourning, lamentation, prayers, &c. which thing, are nothing at all in question betwixt vs. For onely this is betwixt you and mee (and which hee bringeth here in the last place) you say particular mem­bers [Page 43] may depart from the Lordes Table, for the presence of the wicked thereat, I reason against you negatiuely, and shewe what dueties are required of one toward ano­ther by order of discipline, and beyond which wee haue no commandement from God,See the 6. Sec­tion. whereby I exclude not those thinges which are not at all in question, but that which you hold in question against mee. If you had brought mee to a reasonable aduersary wee should ne­uer haue spent time in such friuolous cauillings.

22 Well, at length (I trowe) hee falleth close to the question, and will proue euen out of those places that I alledge for the vnitie and knitting together of this body, that same separation of the members, which is here in controuersie. And thus he disputeth. What places enforce an outwarde vniting in the Sacrament with the members of Christs body only, the same inforce a deuyding or refraining in the Sacraments, from those that outwardly are manifest to bee no members of his body: But all these places enforce such an out­ward vniting with members onely: Therefore they inforce a re­frayning and diuiding in the Sacrament from open wretches, which are knowne to be: no members. I may graunt you this argument in some sort, and yet you are as neere your purpose, as you were at the first. For if hee vnderstand by deuiding and reframing, the action of the whole body of the Church, then is it that, which they ought ioyntly to execute against the vnworthy, and that is nothing to the question: but if hee meane, this those places which com­mand an vniting in the Sacrament with the members of Christs body only, do by the same reason command particular mē ­bers to refraine or depart, if any open vnworthy do cō ­municate (which had bene rightly to the purpose) then his proposition is apparantly false.Eph. 1.22.23. 1. Cor. 12. eph. &c. to the 17. Col. 2.19. Rom. And I reason against him from the same places thus. If the members of a Church or spirituall body, haue no further promise of life and continuaunce in Christ, then as they (like the mem­bers of a naturall body) continue in the vnitie of the same Church or Spirituall body, then it followeth necessarylie, [Page 44] that what members so euer, separate themselues from their spi­rituall body or Church, the same doe separate them-selues from the life of Christ thereby: But the first is true, and infal­libly prooued, by those places I quoted (whereas vnitie and holding together of the members, is made the essentiall fourme of the body. Pag. 15.) Therefore the latter followeth there­of.

23 I say, that as corrupt and vnworthy members, can be no cause why those that are whole should forsake the body: so no open grosse communicantes, can bee any cause, why wee that are faith-full shoulde forsake the Church. Your leader makes you beleeue, that you hold not this question. I thinke (in deede) he knoweth not what hee holdeth. But I say vnto you, (marke it well, as it lyeth you vppon, for in your standing vppon this poynt, that particular members of a Church may depart or refraine from the Lordes table, if vnworthy ones remaine there vnseparated, it doeth necessarily fall out thereupon, that eyther you holde that particular members may forsake a Church of God, (which now I perceiue your leader renoū ­ceth:) or else that the couenant of a Church is broken before God, by the failing of any necessary poynt in practise: Which implying the couenant to bee helde by woorkes, is the high way to Popery. This thing haue I noted once or twise before.Sect. 8. & 19. And here nowe also the thirde time, the reader may see that I am not ouer hastie to take him at such aduantage. But withal I trust there appeareth good hope of victory to this side, when as the aduersary (af­ter much labour to keepe the aduantage thereof) hath nowe flatly forsaken one of his holdes: and that which remaineth for him to flee vnto, is able to kill him with the stench thereof, though no man should pursue him any further.

24 He foloweth the comparisō of mēbers of a natural body, with the members of a Church. And first hee saith that as euery particular mēber of a body, may shake of the rotten, [Page 45] and yet not forsake the bodie: so may euerie particular mem­ber of a Church. This is plaine beggerie: for no particu­lar member of a bodie can doe that of it selfe, and if it could, his conclusion therby should make but for sole ex­communication, His seconde comparison is thus pro­pounded & applied: As the members of a natural bodie, refuse to vse the seruice of the rotten ones: so ought the members of a spirituall bodie, refuse to communicate in the sacraments with such. Euery man that considereth what I haue said, seeth that he fighteth here with his shadow, and not with me, for I imploy no such members in any seruice. But to cleare his eyes, it may bee, God shall make this a me­dicine, when he shal giue him to meditate, that it is quite contrarie to his ordinance in the naturall bodie, for the whole members to forsake their places, or to refuse to nourish themselues in the vnitie of their bodie, because of some rotten ones that doe indaunger them. Neither haue his other comparings, any more worthie thing a­gainst me, though too much to bewray his owne vnlear­nednesse. For whereas he esteemeth that euerie member of a natural bodie withholdeth and keepeth away blood and nourishment from the rotten, it is manifest that hee is as ignorant in naturall things, as in diuine. For blood commeth plentifully inough to rotten members, so long as they are vnseparated, onely it nourisheth them not as of olde, but is peruerted by them to the increase of their rottennesse. Let him follow this veine no longer, if hee haue any wit in his head.

25 After this, he beareth you in hand, that hee fully satisfieth a question, which I should be readie to make in these or such like wordes: VVhat if the Church, or the rest of the bodie, will not withdrawe themselues from that dead and rotten member neither will cast it off, what shall one member doe? To this he answereth, First, That if one member doe cast it off, the rest will not be angrie. Which is the same begging he v­sed euen now. Secondly, that it is a token, the rest of the members are not so liuely, &c. which is a verie colde answer. [Page 46] If he had saide, it is a token, the rest of the members are dead with it, so as you may safely depart from them, hee had satisfied the question. This he would haue you to vn­derstand, but he durst not vtter it. For it is the fashion of an heretique, to keepe more poison in his heart, than he vttereth with his mouth.

26 The first part of his next point is beggerly. That a member cannot forsake one congregation of Christ, & goe to another, without guilt of schisme, and forsaking the bodie of Christ, I prooued in my first answere, which yet remayneth vntouched by him. His obiection that one Congregation is not the whole Church of Christ, Pag. 16. &c. is an vnlearned cauill. For euery particular Church, touching the knitting together of the members, & partaking with Christ the head,1. Cor. 12.27. through that same bodily vnitie, is in the same sort to bee considered, as the whole Church, and we can no more forsake a particular Church, and yet bee of the whole, than can a finger forsake his hand, and yet be of the bodie. Take heede therefore vnto your selfe: braunches broken off doe shortly wither, and after that become fit for nothing but for the fire.

Sect. 14.27 His obiection of forsaking the Popish Church, I haue answered before. The next is a pretie dialogue of woordes, which because hee made it for his owne recrea­tion, I will not hinder him. His oppositions are but his owne vnprooued and vnsauerie suppositions. How tru­ly he chargeth me therein with diuerse iniquities, let the godlie consider my writing, and so iudge. Whereas he soweth the seedes of newe questions, to drawe in other discourses, I am not one for his toothe, to nourishe them.

28 He would make you beleeue, that hee prooueth our Church a monstrous and false bodie, so that you may hold it safe to forsake vs, and this he will do out of mine own words, because (forsooth) I confesse it may haue vn­sound & corrupt members vnseparated, yea which we are not able to separate. By which reason, if you haue a fellō [Page 47] on your finger, which causeth mortification therein, if either you wil not, or cannot get it cut off, you are therby a monstrous & false body. But here ought to be no que­stion of deformitie, but of the being of a church. Then he chargeth me to say, that it may be a church of God, though it haue the discipline and gouernement of Antichrist, in stead of Christs, and that I confesse, we haue offices, rites orders, &c. after the popish institution. I know what I haue said, he is readie to snatch before any thing fal to the ground. But nowe vpon good cause of the question, this I answere freely. It may be a true Church of God,That it may be a true Church of God, though diuersly corrup­ted in doctrine and maners. though therein diuerse rites be corruptly instituted, and the censures and offi­ces popishly caried and ordered. If you doubt that, I will prooue it thus. VVhatsoeuer hath the essentiall partes of a Church of God, the same must needes be confessed to be a Church of God: But a Church of such gouernement and orders, may haue the essentiall parts of a Church of God. Therefore a Church of such gouernement and orders, may be a true Church of God. The first part no man that hath vnderstanding can doubt of. The seconde is also manifest thus: that whereas there are but two essentiall partes of any thing, to witte, matter and fourme: the matter of a Church is Christ the heade-corner stone, and a people who are as liuing stones to bee layde vpon him: 1. Pet. the fourme, is the comming vnto him, and beeing builded vppon him by faith: It is certaine there may be other wants and deformities, where these essentiall partes are. Now those deformities and wantes may bee both in pointes of doctrine and practise, as may plainely bee prooued by examples of the Churches of God established in all ages. For the leauen of euill and daungerous pointes of doc­trine,1. Cor. 15. ca &c. Col. let the Churches of the Corinthes about the resur­rection, also counting fornication among indifferent thinges, and the Colossians, aboute ceremoniall ob­seruation of dayes, and abstinence of meates, Gal. ca. 2. ca. 3. ca. 4. and worship­ping of Angels, testifie. Yea let the Churches of Ga­latia, generallye infected with daungerous doctrine, bee witnesse. Wantes in pointes of knowledge and [Page 48] doctrine, appeared manifestly to be in the Apostles, & the Church at Ierusalem touching the vocation of the Gen­tiles.Act. 10.11. cap. As for practise in gouerning and ordering the Churches, if we search the times, we shall easily find both deformities, & disabilities or wantes, yea euen in the hol­some censures of the Church, which are here in questi­on.1. Cor. 11.20. &c The Corinthians vnreuerent and scandalous (yea al­most prophane) comming to the Lordes table, is an ex­ample of a foule and corrupt behauiour of a Church. Of wants and disabilities in the practise of Church gouern­ment, let vs marke whether they may not be found, euen in some Church, which that most painefull Apostle Saint Paule, laboured so plentifully to make perfect: consider (I say) diligently, and you shall finde that same famous Church of Rome (where not long after Paule died for the testimonie of Christ,Philip. 1.15.16.) so weake and defectiue, in du­ties of gouernment, as that they could not separate from them such as preached Christ contentiously, and with so spitefull minds against Paule, as tended to the cutting off of so good and faithfull a guide from amongest them. You will not say, they deserued it not, nor yet that the better sort woulde not doe it, for then also their faulte was worse. You cannot say, they knewe it not, or it was secrete, for Paule was in prison, so as the knowledge ther­of coulde not come to him, but by the information of brethren:Cap. 2.20.21. yea it is manifest by the same Epistle, that the greater number of that Church, did corruptly demeane and carrie themselues in the same. Againe, that pestilent chaire of ambitious vsurpation ouer the assemblies, was crept into the Church, whereof Saint Iohn maketh men­tion in these wordes.3. Iohn. 9.10. I wrote vnto the Church, but Diotre­phes, who seeketh the preheminēce among them, receyueth vs not, wherefore if I come, I wil declare his deedes which he doeth prat­ling against vs, Discipline as much depraued in the Church where Diotre­phes was, as in the Churches of England. with ambitious wordes, and not therewith con­tent, neither himselfe receyueth the brethren, but forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the Church. First here is as much deprauation of discipline, as Browne can tell [Page 49] vs of. Secondly it is plaine, that the same Church, remai­ned then vnable to remedie it: which the Apostle signi­fieth, by purposing a time to come & rebuke him, which needed not (if the Church according to his demerite, could haue chastened him.) Thirdly, hee yet intituleth them the Church, whereby all men may see, the Apostle was farre frō Brownes mind. For he neither insinuateth, that the Church was now disanulled by such corruption, nor giueth any caueat for men to withdraw or withhold themselues from ioyning with the same, which certain­ly had bene necessarie, both for that time present, and all posterities ensuing. Consider likewise, what I haue before obserued vpon the 11. to the Cor. in the 11. sect. So that turne you which way you will, this shall bee sufficiently proued alwayes, that a Church, that is to say, an assembly consisting of the essentiall partes of a Church of God, may bee chargeable of diuerse other wantes and defor­mities both in doctrine & gouernment, which being so, the other bulwarke also which your leader had builded for you, to perswade you boldly to go from vs, is beaten downe to the ground: namely that the failing of any ne­cessarie point in the publique practise of gouernement, breaketh the couenant of a Church. Yeld your selfe ther­fore, for here must you needes be taken.

22 But nowe let vs come to applie this same generall question to our particular congregation,The Church of England hath the essentiall parts of a church of God. which if it bee tried in the essentiall parts aforsaid, shall vndoubtedly be found a Church of God, howsoeuer in some other things impure and defectiue. He excepteth (but against his owne knowledge & cōscience,Pag. 17.) that we haue no power nor or­der in vse, to separate the vnworthy. First this is no way of the essence of a Church, as I shall proue. Also I haue saide before, that we both may, and doe discerne of the Com­municants, and debarre the vnworthie. And I brought places of his owne writings that testifie the same. If hee doubt whether wee doe it, let him inquire. If the reader woulde see, where the lawe doeth warrant it, let him [Page 50] reade at the beginning of the ministration of the Com­munion in the Church bookes,In the defence of the Admoni­tion to the fol­lowers of Browne. sect 7. & there shall he see it. His sophisticall fetch in making this discipline all one with Christs power & gouernment, is bowlted out in another place. To holde the church of Englande to bee without Christs discipline, is they vnaduisednes of him that putteth all vpon the spurre, and neuer looketh at his way. To dis­cerne the worthy and vnworthy in the assemblies: to ad­monish the inordinate, to suspend & finally excommuni­cate the vnruly ones (which is the discipline wherof our question is) all men know the church of England by law professeth and dayly practiseth: therefore it cannot bee said to be without the very discipline of Christ: this ve­ry discipline (I say as touching all the parts and duties of censuring, although not ordered & administred by such a course as the worde appointeth. Which if he consider better,The Church of England not without the dis­cipline: but doth administer the same in a cor­rupt course. hee may more truely hereafter affirme, that the church of England administreth the discipline corruptly, then that it wanteth the same: & that the outward forme and ordering of the discipline is popish, but not the sub­stāce so. How much we labor according to our places, to recouer that libertie the word giueth to euery cōgregati­on, for executing the discipline, as it is vnpossible for you to report of it, that come not among vs: so it is a shame for him to define of it, that otherwise knoweth vs not.

30 But then he woulde haue vs crie out by name against those that restraine vs, yea though it cost vs our liues. I answer. All men in this cannot be tied to one rule for the maner of proceeding, neither in any other case of suffering for the truth: but euery one is to be left (brotherly stirrings vp excepted) to the particular preparations and thrusting forth of the spirit. Your leader therefore, hauing such a particular feeling of so great a charge and bond of duty, to venture his liuing & life in this case (and specially hol­ding the discipline so deare aboue vs, as he pretendeth) cannot keepe backe himselfe in this case, but with ranke cowardlinesse, and being guiltie of betraying the good [Page 51] cause: yea who ought to go before all others in suffering for this reformation, but hee onely that pretendeth to holde the same at a higher price, and to seeke for it with a more feruent zeale than all others? But we haue experi­ence sufficient of him, what great things he hath suffred, and how. And this we know, whatsoeuer he discourseth otherwhere of his fugitiue life, that although some o­thers haue bene hanged for his heresies, he hath not on­ly bene contented to let them go without his companie, but comming also to some triall of his courage before authoritie, there was not onely no shew of that Heroical spirit, which he woulde haue you see in his writings, but contrariwise shifting answeres, with subtill reseruations, shamefull and disorder like giuing backe from the trueth it selfe, and finally a most hypocriticall subscription, least hee shoulde haue felt affliction in the least of his fingers.See the defence of my Admoni­tion. Sect. 13. Of any of these (if you doubt) I will bee readie to shewe you prooues.

31 In my first answere, I shewed you the right vnder­standing of that comparison of the leauen which S. Paule vseth in the 1. to the Cor. 5. cap. that you might see,The comparison of leauen with the wicked in a congregation discussed. if that place (so commonly obiected of your leader to war­rant your separating from our assemblies) be but rightly vnderstoode, it quickeneth our care, and diligent inde­uours to remoue corruptions, but teacheth no man to forsake his Church. I gaue you to vnderstande, that the comparison is there of qualitie, not of quantitie. I speake not of like force and like nature, without re­garde of like woorking. I knowe we consider of the na­tures of things by their effects, and therefore I saide also, that Paule putteth vs in minde of the effect of leauen. The leauen in sowring the meale wherwith it is mingled, and the vngodly in corrupting those with whom they keepe companie, haue herein both a like nature, yea and their effectes when they doe come to passe, are both alike. For it is true, that when the wicked drawe others af­ter them to become also of euill conuersation, that be­fore [Page 52] were not so, the effect is like to the sowring of the meale, which before was not so: but now the measure of working of the one, and of the other, is not the same in both subiects. Which that I may helpe you the better to vnderstand, consider that the matter subiect to the sow­ring of the leauen is meale, a thing altogether and wholy disposed to receiue the impression thereof without resi­stance. But the matter whereon the wicked doe worke (in this comparison is a company consisting of two sorts of men, contrarily disposed and tempered, the one apt to be infected, & the other hauing a supernatural power to hold out their contagion. So that though the sowring that the one maketh, & the corrupting that the other worketh, be alike, yet are they not equal. For of the meale, all is infec­ted, but not all of such a cōpanie, and so is it in the com­parison that I gaue you. By the salt all the liquor is seaso­ned, but so is not alwayes a wicked company by two or three righteous men cōuerted. Againe, the leauen in one night so wreth the meal wherwith it is mingled, you dare not say, that the case is the same with a whole cōgregati­on: and yet you say more, if you hold that by warrant of this scripture, you must depart frō the sacrament, where you see vnworthy ones admitted, for so you account the whole congregation to be leauened, that is vnsanctified, in a moment. But I must further remēber you, that as in diuers places, the scripture speaketh of leauen in the ill part: so our Sauiour Christ propoundeth a similitude by the same in the good part.Matt. 13.33. Which if you applie and vrge, as farre foorth as you haue done this, you must say, that where faith & regeneration by the gospel is once begun, there do al become faithful & renued: euen as of 3. pecks of meale, all becommeth leuened. Which if you doe say, all the worlde will crie shame of you. If you feare so to abuse this place, why feare you not also in the o­ther? Moreouer, whereas your leader teacheth you to applie these woordes of Saint Paule: A little leauen leaueneth the whole lumpe, as though the Apostle had [Page 53] giuen you to vnderstande thereby, that one knowne, and so proued a wicked man, remayning vnseparated in a Church, vnsanctifieth the whole, and bringeth a nulli­ty vpon it, hee doeth too grossely and shamefully abuse, miscary and seduce you. For by leauening Paul meant corrupting them with euill manners.Chap. 5. [...]. Like as to the Galathians, hee meaneth by the same speech, the corrup­ting of that Church with false doctrine, and not the dis­anulling of either. So that if God haue yet left you the vnderstanding to make difference betweene sicke and dead, and that which is vnpure, and that which is not nowe at all, your leader can no longer misleade you in this poynt. For if hee dare auouch it, that whatsoeuer congregation is corrupt either in manners or doctrine, the same is not to bee reputed, or ioyned with, as a Church of God, we can soundly, and so may safely proue and denounce him for a Donatist, and not worthy to liue in any land of Christian gouernement. His vnsatis­fied dalyance with my comparing of salt with the righ­teous, argueth the man, either so pursued by the hande of God, that whilest hee controlleth all men, himselfe is vtterly spoyled of vnderstanding, or else of so reprobate a mynde, that hee wilfully closeth his eyes, and stoppeth his eares at those thinges that haue speciall force to af­fect the senses to the reformation of his iudgement. And after that hee hath altogether thus abused you in the scope of my comparison, least hee should leaue you any light at all in it, hee takes it to his owne stithie, and ham­mers it a newe, for so hee presumeth it shalbe fit for the schollers of his learning. The Lorde giue you eyes to see, and a heart to abhorre his most dangerous and pestilent conclusion: for thus hee teacheth you, (euen the same doctrine,Browne in [...]lat Donatisme. which right nowe I called Donatisme) that like as sweete water intermingled with poyson, is poysoned and tur­ned into the nature of poyson: so the notorious wicked openly mingled in one outward Church with the righteous, or the righ­teous with them, they become one wicked crewe together, euen all [Page 54] of them poysoned and infected together. As touching the au­thor of this sentence, I haue litle hope, as in all the rest to preuaile ought by my answering, onely for your sakes my deare brethren) that haue not as yet sounded the deepenes of Satan in him, I will herein also lende my la­bour to weigh out this matter, by the waightes of the Sanctuary. And although my 11. & 28. Sections, do suf­ficiently couer him with shame and confusion for this poynt, yet shall this bee further also euen as the nayle of Iahel, to pearce through the temples of Sisara downe in­to the earth. First, this his bold comparison seemeth to haue craued at his handes (at the least) some one exam­ple out of the Scriptures, shewing vs when or where the spirite of God disauoweth any Church for the cause of some notorious wicked ones among them. If I therefore in exemplifying against him, shall bring a cloud of wit­nesses, all of them testifiyng, as with one mouth, the flat contrary, I hope I shall enclose the trueth of this cause more strongly, then that any wylie or vndermining foxes shall bee able to enter in hereafter to violate the same.Wicked mem­bers of a Church vnseperated doe not vnsactifie the whole. And to beginne with the Churches, of which, wee haue the life and liuely voyce of our Sauiour Christ to testifie, and after that, to enquire of the Apostles, it may not bee denied me, but that in the Church of Ierusalem, the Lorde did dwell, and that there were offered the Sa­crifices, and performed the rites of his holy worshippe which he accepted at the handes of his seruantes, in the dayes of our Sauiour his comming in the flesh. Nowe in the outward body of this Church, were corrupt Scribes, superstitious Pharises, Mat. 3.20. ca. 15.3.4 Luk. 11.4.6. and epicurish Sadduces: this last sort denied the resurrection, and the two former also corrup­ted many thinges in the doctrine, and sur-charged the Iewish Church with importable burdens of traditions, being indeed the ordinary teachers of the people,Mat. 7.29. mar. 1 21.22. ma [...]. 21.15.33. &c. to the 45 cap. 22.34 35. cap. 23.2.3. &c. Luk. 1.8. Cap. 2 22.37.41. but so yet the pestilent and notorious corrupters of true reli­gion: these are in your leaders comparison to be resem­bled by the poyson: on the other side there were, though of smaller nūber, that in the middest of the same congre­gations, [Page 55] paid their vowes vnto the Lord in the simplici­tie of their heart, being in the meane time openly ming­led in one outward Church with such vnrighteous ones. Of this sort we may reckon diuers by name, as Symeon, Zacharias, Marie, Anna, & Elizabeth &c. Here therefore we should conclude, by your leaders rule, that those being the sweete water and not reseruing their worshipping of God & religious seruices to separate meetings, but per­forming them in the congregations of notorious wic­ked teachers, & very falsely instructed people, were now also impoysoned & become one wicked crewe together with the rest. But I trust you will confesse, that the scrip­tures are contrary, & so consequently, therfore that your leader doth seduce you. Again, to be as briefe likewise as I may in the rest.Reue. 2.20. Our sauiour in his own words deliuered vnto Iohn, that the Church at Thyatira had so that wic­ked Iezabel amongest them, as that they were guilty of permitting her to teach & seduce the seruantes of God, making thē to cōmit fornication, & to eate meats sacri­ficed vnto idoles. The Church at Pergamus,Reue. 2.14.15. was charged to haue amongst thē those that mainteined the doctrine of Baalam, & of the Nicolaitans. Nowe, by your leaders rule, these had also so impoysoned the rest, that not one amongst thē could be said to hold fast the faith, nor keep the name of Christ, nor serue him purely, so as to be ex­empted frō the punishmēt that should light vpō the rest,Ver. in the day that the Lord should visite: but the word of the Lord saith directly to the contrary: therefore your leader is found a blasphemous seducer in his cōparisō. And that wee may touch likewise the Apostles testimonies. When Iude acknowledgeth spots in the Church feastes,Iude ver. 12. are not those spots the wicked ones, which he there inueigheth a­gainst? If then he had approued your leaders doctrine, hee would not haue written them preseruatiue instruc­tions to keepe out their contagion (for such mingling had nowe by his rule impoysoned all) but it laye vpon his fidelitie to haue told them, that whensoeuer it should come to passe, that they so mingled, they shoulde [Page 56] count themselues no longer Churches of God, but in­fected and wicked companies euen all the sort of them. The same doe I say of the Church, wherein Diotrephes was.3. Iob. 9.10. But those Apostles writings are farre contrary here­unto. Therefore your leaders comparison is abhomina­ble.Iam. chapters. I omit to speake of the Churches which Saint Iames, not condemneth, but expostulateth with, concerning proud dispisers of the poore, vnbrideled pratlers, lippe Christians, enuious men, contentious, prouokers, vn­cleane liuers &c. which were among them. As also the Thessalonians, who had their inordinate walkers, busy bo­dies,1. Thes. 3.10.11. and such as laboured not duely in their callings. Yea herein their blame being much the greater, that they permitted such amongst them, hauing bene admonished of that matter once before.Ver. 10. And nowe I come to the Co­lossian, Galathian and Corinthian Churches: these had in the middest of them such as seduced mightily,Col. 2.16.18. Gal. 3.4.5. 1. Cor. 15.12. and pre­uailed dangerously, yea some in the fundamental points of religion, and articles of our faith. The Corinthians (tou­ching practise,2. Cor. 12.20. chap. 13.2.) had such as stirred vp strifes, emulations, anger, contentions, commotions and tumults, such as maried with infidels,2. Cor. Chap. Chap. chap. 11.15. such as with open speaches, depra­ued Pauls writings: the sounder sort being guilty of har­kening vnto, and tollerating such, as thus in their vanity and iniquity wrought his disgrace, and in his, the truths: yea, shall I say further (not as delighting to blaze the sinnes and corruptions of these Churches, but iustly in­deuouring to extinguish this Church-firebrand, which Satan, in the throng of all our heapes of woes hath hur­led amongst vs.) Besides, that I haue deliuered in the 11. Section,1. Cor 12.13.14. cap. &c. ca. 8. it is certaine, the Corinthian Church was out­wardly mixt with such as by carnal eloquēce prophaned the temple of God, vsed indifferent thinges with mani­fest offence to the weake, esteemed fornication amongst indifferent thinges,1. Cor cap. 10.7.14 20 21. and committed no obscure kinde of idolatry in eating at the tables of Idoles meates sacrifi­ced to the deuill. Nowe then if these Churches by al this [Page 57] mixing, were not become impoisoned and wicked crewes, but remayned still of reuerend account among the Churches of God, for the righteous sake, which were not heerein impeached by the wicked, then is your leaders comparison framed to the great fall of truth, and himselfe prooued to be a pernitious schismatike by it. But the Apostle cleereth the first in many places of those his Epistles, so as (I hope) no man will aske me particu­lar proofes thereof: therefore the latter must necessa­rily be graunted of all sides. And then by the way, let me obserue thys one thing: If a few holding the true wor­ship of God in synceritie, mixed with many,That no man ought to depart from the church of England for the wants or corruptions therein. bearing an outward profession with them, but otherwise of verie offensiue life, yea some notoriously wicked, and not se­parated from amongst them, haue beene notwithstan­ding rightly accounted Churches of God for faithfull men comfortably to ioyne vnto, and no man exhorted to withdraw from their assemblyes, then is there vtterly no cause for you and the rest, to disclaime the Churches of England as you do, and to separate your selues from vs, for those impurities that are amongst vs: therefore the fyrst being true, by most of the examples aforesayd, it remayneth by the latter, that you labour to the Lord for mercy, and so returne. Lastly, in my first answere touching the similitude of leauen, I inferred this absur­ditie, vpon your leaders interpretation thereof, name­ly, that so the Corinthians were vnsanctified, and be­come no Church of God, because they had not remo­ued the incestuous person. Your leader salueth that sore with fyue excuses in the behalfe of the Corinthians,Pag. 18. but indeede all will not make a plaster of a haire breadth to couer so mortall a wound. First he sayth, The wickedman remayned not among them, which is apparantly false, else why did Paule appoynt hys remoue? And touching the space of time, it will be found reasonable long, if you consider how long it must be, ere Paule being at Phi­lippi, in Macedonia, could heare out of Corinth in Achaia, [Page 58] the vndoubted truth of theyr disorder. His second ex­cuse is, They communicated not with him in the Sacraments being knowne. But it is certayne they dyd; else why dyd Paule rebuke them for miscarying themselues in the matter? [...]. Cor. 5.2.

And that they knewe of him, there is no reason to doubt, first, because if the matter had beene vn­knowne, and vnconuinced to them, they had beene still free from blame, and (as I sayd before) Paule had no rea­son to checke their security. 2. I would aske him, how Paule came to the knowledge of it? by reuelation? no, for he sayth▪ Verse. 1. It is heard for truth, or for certaine. Well, had he it by reports? they must come from Corinth, and then must you eyther say, they were some pike-thanke spyes, that without cause so accused the Church (which is great reproch to the Apostle, in that he should without cause, and yet so peremptorily, accuse them of neglect of duty) or else confesse, that they were of the faithfullest brethren, who being not able by themselues to preuayle with the Church, sought by this meanes of telling Paule to do it: and then you see, the case as cleere as may be. 3. Your leader sayth, He was not conuinced: belike, he had vowed the number of fiue, and so this must fill vp tale. His 4. excuse is, That they wanted not Christes power and discipline to seuer him being in bondage to popish disci­pline. I perceiue he is almost drawne dry: for what is this to the purpose? The Corinthians still communi­cated with him in the Word and Sacraments, in conside­ration whereof (by your leaders iudgement) it had beene lawfull for as many as made conscience of the matter, to haue forsaken the assemblyes, and then it fol­loweth, that eyther you may forsake a true Church of God, (which hold you haue alreadie renounced) or else that the Church at Corinth was now disanulled, be­come a leauened lumpe, and so fallen from Christ, which is blasphemie too abhominable, so that (whe­ther you looke forward or backward) heere that foxe, [Page 59] I meane that Heretick is taken. Fifthly, he sayth, They refused not to seuer him, but onely neglected it. Yes, it must be sayd (except when we speake fauourably) that they, in effect, refused to seuer him, else could there haue beene no iust complaynt made agaynst them to the Apostle. They refused perhaps not in playne words, but in len­ding the deafe eare to the complaynings, and securely neglecting the meanes of theyr healthie state. Howsoe­uer it was, in such sort it seemes to be, as that they that infourmed it to Paule, had no hope else to get reme­die. But if one should graunt it onely a negligence, in the meane tyme, the forwardest, and soundest bre­thren, must eyther still communicate with him, whome they would remoue, or else forsake the assemblyes: and so I haue you agayne at the same poynt you were at be­fore. Thus you see, what extremities error bringeth you into, when it is traced out to the end. If you take the comparing of the wicked, with leauen to be in quantitie, that is, that the Apostle should vnderstand the wicked to haue as thorow power and force, to make wicked a whole Church, being suffered amongst them, as hath leauen to make sowre a whole masse of meale, in which it lyeth: then was the Corinthian Church now leauened throughout, and consequently, become no Church of God, when Paule wrote his first Epistle.

32 Of all the other cauils of your leader, at my an­swere to the comparison of leauen, because (as it see­meth) you are little capable of them, and they are ea­sily iudged by all that haue some giftes of learning (both as concerning my speeche, wherein he hunteth for contrarietie, and also my Logick, which he told you would not fadge.) I aunswere heere no further, but free­ly giue it vp to the verdict of the godly learned. If your leader haue any thing empaired it, or gotten therein at my handes by his worthy Reply, let hym enioy it for hys gayne, onely this I may tell you in secrete, if hys teeth would serue hym no better for [Page 60] to eate his meate, then his Logicke doth to discusse a question rightly, you must feede him with spoone-meate, or that which is minced, if you meant to keepe him long aliue: he may freely bid fye of all Logitians, and no reproch to himselfe therein. The rest of my an­swere (he sayth) is nothing but a tedious repetition of former matters. But if you looke vpon it agayne, you shall see among other things, a playne demonstration of your schismaticall, and therefore very dangerous estate. Wherein for asmuch as he hath forsaken to defend you, let it stirre you vp to the better and earlyer considera­tion of all his other dealings: which if you shall do, with humble calling vpon the name of the Lord, I trust it will please him in mercie, to reach you his hand of conduct, to bring you out of that vast wildernesse, wherein you haue lost your selues, and make you to see those good things that concerne your stable peace, euen in this Church, though poore, diseased, and pi­teously neglected, yet such as the Lord vouchsafeth to beget and nourish to himselfe many children by.

Depart from the foolish man, when thou perceauest not in him the lips of knowledge. Prouerbs 14, 7.

¶ A Defence of the Admonition to the followers of Browne: made in reply to a raging Libell of Brovvnes, sent abroade, in sundrie written copies, against the same.

WHen I came to the knitting vp of my Confutation of Glouer, (Christian Reader) I iudged it a la­bour much tending to the benefit of many, to write some short admo­nition to his followers: whereby his vnsoundnes being vrged againe vnto them by rehearsall, and iustly aggreeued by the dangerous consequences, their hearts might be pricked (if it were possible) to seeke and to embrace the way of truth againe. In the entrie whereof, I considered the originall of their euill estate to be deriued from a for­mer fountaine, vnto which also my labour of cleansing must descend, if I would obtaine my desired fruites thereof. It is not any new thing, but of old obserued, and witnessed vnto by the written word, that the Lord,Eccles. 7.28.6. petition. Rom. 1.23.24. 2. Thess. 2.11. 2. Tim. 3.13. in his righteous iudgement, payeth sinne with sinne, and euery degree of declining from his truth, with some o­ther deeper downefall vnto Apostacie. Therefore, when I beheld and perceiued, all that I could learne, of the fiercest followers of Glouer, yea and Glouer hymselfe, to agree with Browne, in that generall of schisme, for the discipline of the Church, I sawe there other heresies,Browne the fountaine of Glouers heresies. as plagues of that transgression, which might not be re­moued, till he as the Genus, or captayne cause of them [Page 62] could happily be auoided. For this cause do I so direct and prosecute my admonition to the followers of Glo­uer, as that the first place conteineth their errours in proper from Glouer, and the second, such as they haue in common from Browne. In which last part, as I make their case all alike, so by the first, I do manifestly dissort them. Alike is their condition in this, that they both haue forsaken the brotherhood of the Church of Eng­land for the matter of discipline, and therein hold of Browne; and againe vnlike in this, that some of them onely, in their wilde wandring, meete with the hea­uie iudgement of God vnto Apostacie. Which hard estate of theirs, beeing shewed in the first part of the admonition (least they should thinke themselues safe, hauing gotten out of Glouers briars, to lye out still wan­dring with the dispersed companies of Browne) the o­ther part therefore declareth the euils that haue come vnto them by him, and that in the eares of all his follo­wers also, if so be the Lord would vouchsafe vnto any of them likewise the grace of a happy conuersion. Neither is the handling heereof so obscurely caried, but that any of wisedome might easily perceiue it: first, let the transi­tion from the former to the latter part be considered, which is in these words, immediatly after Glouers here­sies were committed to their consideration. But now to come vnto the man that first led you out into the wilde feeld of errour, are you made wiser by him, &c. This (I say) doth shew, that now only I went about to remember them of such things as they were directly abused in by Browne, the first author or beginner of their danger. And therfore it also argueth, by the proportionable law of contraries, that Brownes cause, & the venome they had receiued by him, was not touched at all in the first part. Secondly, dra­wing to a cōclusion, after I had proued the issues of both their waies to be euil, I gathered the summe in this sort. Now therefore beloued in Christ Iesu, sith your going out with this man hath had so hard euent in many of you, as to bring you [Page 63] to the vnrecouerable rocks of E. G. and leadeth euen the better sort (whom Gods iudgemēt hath not as yet hunted foorth so far) to a manifest decay of true iudgement and vnderstanding, ioy­ning thereto the fearefull companion of vncertaintie, and rest­lesse course of life, forsake, &c. What can be cleerer than these words, are to shew, that Browne in this admonition, is vnderstood as the stocke,Browne the fa­ther of a two­fold schisme. from whence already hath flowed two families, both walking towards destru­ction, but yet the one much faster then the other, so as, though a man may say truely, euery follower of Glouer, is a follower of Browne, yet cannot thereof be concluded on the contrarie, that euery one of Brownes followers is Glouers in like sort. Because some men haue frensies through extremitie of feuers, doth he that sayth such frantick men are feuerish, conclude on the contrarie that all feuerish men are franticke? let no man therefore whome God hath kept cleere from spirituall frensies (which corrupt the true vse of reason, no lesse than the bodely) yeeld captiue theyr senses and vnderstanding to so immodest a man as Browne, that he in this tempest of his disturbed and stormie affe­ctions, should by so lewd a libell, transforme them (as it were) into his iudgement. And this I meane, not onely touching the iniquitie that he chargeth me withall, for ioyning in some sort, his company with Glouers, but for the other points of my admonition also, which he ma­keth his seduced ones beleeue, to be false & slanderous. In defence whereof (I trust) those that haue their iudge­mēts seasoned with the cōmon anointing of Gods chil­drē, will see & testify, that though I haue beene by his Li­bell, all to bitten & torne, as it were with a mad dog, yet the Lord, by the soueraigne antidote of his spirit, hath preserued me, that I am not become mad also with him. And I beseech the faithful Reader, that he wil not require at my hands, replies to all that Brownes furious pen ta­keth occasion to descant vpon, nor to answere a foole ac­cording to his foolishnes: but to be cōtent, that I extend [Page 64] my defence onely to the matters of some weight, com­mitting the rest to his prudent estimation and iudge­ment.

His fyrst 29. poynts (according to his numbring) I referre to the Reader.

To the 30.

Browne dange­rously corrupt in matter of iustification.I Charged Glouer of holding this heresie: That those that haue put on Christ, haue power and strength to absteine from sinne, and keepe the commandements, and that a man is not yet iustified, but condemned, all the while he is subiect to sinne against his will. Heerein (saith Browne) I condemne as well the truth as the falshood. Because (sayth he) I could not distinguish betwixt the regenerate part of a man, (which though the man sinne, yet that part sinneth not) and the vnregenerate part, which (though the man be iustified in Christ yet it is condemned.) A man would thinke by their vtte­rance, that these things were sound Diuinitie, and of the learned vniuersally acknowledged; so as they neede no proofe, but serue heere onely to notifie my ignorance. Howbeit, there is nothing lesse (in deede) then Catho­like doctrine in them. First, where he sayth, The regene­rate part sinneth not, though the man sinne, he parteth the soule, which is a simple substance, and therefore not partible. No man speaking properly, but onely in a borrowed speach, can say. The regenerate part, or vnrege­nerate part of a man: neither when any sound writer sayth so, doth he otherwise vnderstand thereby then thus: In asmuch as a man is regenerate: or the regenerate and vnrege­nerate condition: The inner man, The outward man: The new man, The old man: which are notes or names of qualities, not of substance, nor partes. But this man quite exemp­ting some part of a regenerate man from sinning, and making another part alwayes to lye vnder condemna­tion, speaketh more improperly, then that any modest metaphor can couer his fault. Neyther can his best fa­uorites, [Page 65] seeing this inconuenience, runne to these other termes to interprete his phrase by, the blame that hee hath layd vppon me, will not suffer them. For if they say, he meant no otherwise then as Paul speaketh in these wordes. I thanke my God through Iesus Christ our Lord Nowe therefore euen I in my mind do serue the lawe of God, but in my flesh the lawe of sinne. If (I say) he vnderstand nothing else by it, then hath he said vniustly (that I condemne aswell the truth as the falsehode) whereas I haue set downe this same doctrine in my booke, & cited the very same place of Paul, to that purpose. Secondly, where hee sayth. The vnregenerate part is condemned, though the man bee iustified in Christ, it is all a like absurde, but much more dangerous. The absurdity that it hath equall with the former, is in this, that if his phrase of speech bee graunted sound, yet the distinction he offreth thereby, is in deed no distincti­on, but a playne axiomaticall contradiction. The whole is good, a part is euil. Browne is sound, his braine is sicke. Are not not here speciall contradictions? and of the same force, as if one should say, a part of the whole is not good: or Brownes brayne is not sound: which if any mā should speake, would not euery one of sense answere, that if the latter be true, the former is false, and so on the contra­ry? the like consideration receiueth his saying: for if part of the man be condemned, it cannot be said the man is iustified. And contrarywise, if the man be iustified it can­not bee said, part of him is condemned, but if any such thing were truely to be pronounced, it must thus be de­liuered: part of a regenerate man is condemned, and part is iu­stified. Againe, in that hee esteemeth a regenerate man to haue some part of him vniustified, hee holdeth him no further iustified, then so farre, as his inward renouation,A regenerate man hath no part of him vn­der condemna­tion. or inhaerent holynes hath proceeded: which neuer be­ing perfect in this life, maketh that no man is wholly iu­stified in this life, and so consequently no man to bee sa­ued in the life to come. For after death commeth iudge­ment. Here except the man can fetch fire out of Popish [Page 66] purgatorie. I knowe not howe hee will dissolue these bandes,B. holdeth a Christian iusti­fied but by his renouation. besides if a man bee iustified no further then hee is renewed, and so his iustification consist in the transmutation of inhaerent qualities, then is that false which the Church of Christ hath euer holden,Rom. 3.22.24. ca. ga. 1.4. ca. 3 cor. 5.19.21. eph. 6. Heb. 1.3. &c. that our iustification standeth onely in the free remission of sinnes, and not imputing our iniquities, through Christ: but on the contrary his righteousnesse being imputed vnto vs, as ours: this imputation (belike) serueth nowe to the vse,B. holdeth that there is some part in a Chri­stian that sin­neth not. after wee are once regenerate. Further, if there bee any part in vs that sinneth not, then is there some part in the regenerate man that fulfilleth the law in it selfe. For that which in it selfe fulfilleth not the lawe, cannot in it selfe bee exempt from sinne, and if it bee not in it selfe exempt from sinne, it cannot bee ab­solutely sayde, not to sinne. Beyond all this, if wee be iustified but in respect that wee are regenerate, and re­generation consisteth in good woorkes, it followeth that wee are iustified,B. gaue Glouer his hold. but in respect of workes. Nowe in this what difference is betwixt him and Glouer, (whom hee sayth hee confuted) let the godly learned iudge: as also whether I haue iniuriously inferred these conclusions vppon his assertions. Let this also answere his 43. number. To the rest, from the 30. to the 47. thus much onely say I, it is a wonder and astonishment that a­ny should bee found so sottish, as to admire, and addict themselues to the teaching and leading of such a sence­lesse guide and vngodly liuer.

To that which is from the 47. to the 57.

The first cor­ruption where­with the admo­nition charged B. proued.3 I charge him to haue set down this doctrine: we must neuer forgiue our brother hauing offended vs, except hee first repent thereof, and seeke reconciliation. Against it I op­pose places of Scriptures which conteine some speciall contradictions thereunto, which I vnderstoode in these two poynts, first, in that his deniall of forgiuenesse is v­niuersall, [Page 67] without all exception of inward or outwarde. Secondly, it is extended vnto all kindes of offences with­out exception. The first is resisted by all the Scriptures I oppose, the second by those which require a franke and absolute forgiuenes, after the example of Gods gratious pardon to vs, like as loue couereth a multitude of sins: which things, when hee sawe I ment (as appeareth by his 31. Section) yet he cauilleth as though I did as vniuersal­ly contradict him, and so disanull the doctrine of pro­ceeding (by reprehensions) to the censures of the church in matters necessary. His answere to the purpose is, that the worde, Neuer, was not in his booke: nor inwardly was not meant: whereby hee would make you beleeue, his pro­position was not vniuersall. Such shiftes serueth him to keepe many simple ones in his snare. But the godly wise suspect him so much the more. His wordes are these,Answ. to M.C. Pag. 38. Christ hath giuen power to euery Christian to retaine the sinnes of euery brother, whom he knoweth to trespasse against him, & not to forgiue him except hee see him repent. The first contra­diction to trueth is plaine in these latter woordes. Not to forgiue him except hee repent, hee confesseth the trueth is, wee should inwardly forgiue him. Nowe, to forgiue, not to forgiue, or no forgiuenesse, some forgiuenesse, euery man seeth to bee contrary, and his proposition also to haue bene generall. Secondly, the former part put downe in these woordes, indefinitely to reteine the sinnes of euery brother is neuerthelesse too vniuersall, especially being put downe by a distribution of publique and priuate sinnes, in the next lines following, and still without any exception.Pro. 10.12. 1. Pet. 4.8. Pag. 39. Read his declar. of the ioyning together of cer­taine persons toward the lat­ter end. Circumstance also doth further inforce it, for whereas in the same place he vrgeth this practise of reprouing with so hard a penaltie, as the losse of our interest in Christ, if wee suffer our selues to be straited in the matter, what place leaueth hee for suffering, couering, passing ouer, a­ny our brothers trespasses? I would their owne practise did not too much confirme, their iudgement in this to bee corrupt.

To that which is from the 57. to the 60.

The second corruption wherewith the admon. chargeth B. proued.4 The admonition sayth, Browne teacheth, that any one of a Church may excommunicate, if the rest will not ioyne with him. For proofe, some quotations are set downe, the most were missed. His answere bringeth some faire shewes to the contrary. Indeede hee hath two notable trickes of an heretike, one is, ambiguitie of speech, and deliueraunce of his minde. The other is tergiuersation, and colourable shrinking, when hee is pressed with his falshode, what reasons I had to iudge him a teacher of such doctrine, I commit the viewe of them here to the consideration of the godly: to whom, in this and all the rest, I submit my selfe. In his booke of vn­learned and witlesse definitions,Num. 55. against the lawe of veri­tie hee defineth the kingdome of Christians to bee their office of guyding and ruling with Christ, to subdue the wicked, and make one another obedient to Christ. Nowe marke whereun­to this tendeth, hee sayth in another place (answering this obiection, that the sinne is the ministers in dis­ordered administration of the Sacraments, not ours) wee aske them, Title against parish prea. and hyred lect. &c. doeth not the Church partake with the mi­nister? and is not euery Christian a King and a Priest, to rule with Christ by open rebuke, if no other doe in season re­buke, and by with-holding those from their communion and fe­lowshippe which are without the couenaunt? and yet more clearely speaking against the Bishoppes authoritie, and rule in the Church, with disauowing their suspendings, and callinges of ministers.Answ. to M.C. Pag. 17. Nay surely (sayth hee) the least in the kingdome of God shall bee able by the woorde of God in their mouth is to plucke vp, and roote out such plants, if none other will ioyne with them. I meane they shall pro­nounce them by the worde of God, to be abhominable, and haue no fellowshippe with them in the Church: and so to them, they are vtterly plucked out of the Church. For they are kings and priests vnder Christ, to execute the Lords gouernement against such, and [Page 69] therefore ought not to loose their right, which is euen their heri­tage and gl [...]rie. Now weigh these places, with his propo­sition, as I haue put it downe, in these wordes. Any one of a Church may excommunicate, if the rest will not ioine with him. The antecedent part hee giueth in these cleare tearmes. Euerie Christian is a King and Priest to rule, &c. and The least in the kingdome of God shall bee able, &c. if none other will ioyne with them. The consequent is prooued in that euery such are abled to execute the Lords gouernment against the wicked. Of which gouernement excommunica­tion is a part, as himselfe in his diuisions declareth, num­ber. 48. Nowe in his defence hee hath but one place of speciall harbour, and that same also will fall about his eares, if it be touched. For where he hath those words. Yet we say not, that euerie one of a Church may excommunicate, Answere to M. C. pag. 28. for we ought to tell the Church, &c. Immediately foloweth, But what if the rest of the Church will not ioyne with vs there­in? Surely then as we prooued before, wee must set our selues a­gaynst them all, we must not be afrayde of their faces, as the Lord commaundeth, least he destroy vs before them. Nowe wherein seemeth this setting of our faces agaynst them to be, but (according to the nature, and original of that obiection) in our sole separation of the vnworthie? As though hee should say, If they will not doe it, then we must doe it: and so his deniall of the same before, to be expounded to holde, till time that wee haue laboured in vaine for the Churches consent. But when I vnderstood him so, I per­ceiue I did him too much fauour. For he will haue it vn­derstoode, not of separating some one member, but of separating the whole Congregation from the Church of God. For he sayth. We must set our selues agaynst them all by rebuke denouncing iudgement, and forsaking felowship. In the practise whereof it followeth,See my second answere to the question of cō ­municating with the vnworthie. that either wee our selues forsake a Church of Christ, (which he denieth in another place) or else doe separate the same congregation from the Church of Christ. In all which, it may truely bee at­tributed to him, in a plaine sense, that was ascribed to Ie­remie, [Page 70] in a mysticall sense: namely to bee a fitte man, to plucke vp, and roote out, destroy, and throwe downe, e­uen kingdomes and nations, according as in those onely wordes he vrgeth the place of Ieremie, in his answere to Master Cartwright. pag. 26.

To that which is from the 60. to the 67.

The third cor­ruption where­with the Adm. chargeth Br. prooued. 5 The Admonition chargeth him with this conclusi­on: that one default of a congregation in separating the vnwor­thy, may disanull it for being a Church. I neede not goe farre for proofe of this, if the handling of the last point be re­membred. For if one may cast off a whole congrega­tion, when hee cannot obtaine their voyces to the sepa­rating of some offendour, (and hee will not say, that a man may cast off a congregation of Christ) it is mani­fest, hee holdeth, that one default of separating the vnwoorthie disanulleth a Church. His answere hath not the strength of a rushe in it. His owne woordes are. If any one such open and manifest offence, as is open mur­ther, idolatrie, adulterie bee founde amongst anie, and they are become so negligent or wilfull, or are brought into such spiri­tuall bondage, that they will not, or can not cure such offen­dours, but that offences remaine and reigne still among them in­curable: Then the couenant is broken with them all. And this is but to feede his disciples with winde. For hee will againe at his pleasure interprete this negligence, wil­fulnesse, and bondage, to bee, whensoeuer a Congregation consenteth not to the motion of separating the vnwor­thie, as besides the places alreadie cited, these may fur­ther testifiie. In the 18. pag. agaynst Maister Cart­wright, hee sayeth, Those that holde the couenant to day, may breake it to morrowe. This is but a short time to prooue ei­ther bondage, wilfulnesse, or negligence. Againe, hee sayeth, Any grosse wickednesse committed by all, is the breaking of the couenant by all. Nowe hee will interprete it grosse wickednesse, when anie Congregation consenteth not, to the motion of one, or some fewe, for the casting [Page 71] out of any wicked one. Let these woordes bee wit­nesse. And is not this a message from Christ, Answere to M. C. pag. 30. when one or a fewe persons doe iustly rebuke a Congregation, for ouerthrowing the Lordes discipline, and treading his scepter vnder foote? And is not his scepter cast downe, and his kingdome polluted, when hee which is manifestly knowne, and prooued to deserue separa­tion, cannot bee cast out? This one defaulte of separa­ting the vnwoorthie, hee accounteth the treading vn­der foote of the scepter of Christ (yea compareth it in the same place to bee equall with Apostacie) therefore grosse wickednesse, and therefore also by his doctrine, of force to disanull a Church. Wherevpon it followeth, as the Admonition truely inferreth, that seeing Saint Paule calleth the Corinthian Church, a Church of God (notwithstanding their grossest kinde of negligence, and vile continuance in securitie, touching the separa­ting of the incestuous person) either Saint Paule was to bee blamed for so dooing, or else Browne is a daun­gerous schismatike in teaching such doctrine contra­rie to him. The mystes which hee casteth before his dis­ciples eyes, to extenuate this sinne of the Corinthians, are scattered and brought to nought in my second an­swere to the question of communicating.Sect. 21i What hee can make of this worde incurable, or any other tearmes of vauntage hee can deuise, the rest of his writings here cited being considered, let the godly reader iudge. The manifolde conclusions of heresies, which hee woulde make the reader beleeue to bee in my assertion, declare but the full swarme that lurketh in his waspish breast. My answere is, either they are no heresies, or none of mine.

To that which is from the 67. to the 72.

6 It maye plaine ynough appeare to the wise reader,The fourth cor­ruption where­with the Adm. chargeth Br. prooued. that the Admonition taketh such a course in setting downe the sixe corrupt opinions of Browne: [Page 72] as that the former (for the most part) openeth the way, and giueth light to that which followeth. So here, consi­dering what hath bene proued in the last point afore go­ing, to witte, that one breach of dutie in the practise of gouernement, breaketh the couenant and disanulleth a Church, it followeth hereof necessarily that he iudgeth, the couenant betwixt God and his Church, to bee hol­den and kept by workes. His onely answere to the pur­pose for this is,Browne hol­deth the keping of discipline, the keeping of our couenant with God. That hee calleth not discipline the couenant, but sayth, that the couenant is kept by discipline. Which is al­together as much as I lay to his charge, howsouer hee catcheth at a feather to mainteine some quarelling, as ap­peareth by my maner of setting downe the trueth op­posed to his falshoode, within fiue lines following. For there I say, Not by workes, but by faith is the couenant kept on our part. Nowe since he confesseth, as much as I meant to charge him with, and that which I charge him with is po­pish heresie, it followeth that Browne teacheth popish heresie: yet hee contendeth earnestly, Num. 69. That hee speaketh in no place, of keeping the couenāt by faith, or by works. But if he be so mad, that he vnderstandeth not practise to be workes, then is he too mad to bee talked withall. And is not (I pray you) the keeping or executing of discipline, the practise and workes of the Church?And B. is not much behind him in other places, as shall be shewed. From this ma­ner iustifying or condemning the Churche by workes, Glouer turned it to the iustification of particular Chri­stians by woorkes. Howe thinne the sheeres were that wente betweene these two, let all sounde Christians iudge.

To the 72. & 73.

He accounteth discipline the groundworke of the Church, (sayth the Admonition.The 5 corrup­tion wherewith the Ad chargeth B. proued. Har­rison calleth it the chiefe cor­ner stone, vpon the 122, Psalme.) Browne sayth, He vseth no such worde as groundworke. Let the reader iudge. These bee his wordes, in the place that I quoted. Hauing discoursed af­ter his wilde maner, against all sorts of the ordinarie mi­nisterie in England, sayth hee, The Popes olde house was de­stroyed [Page 73] in England, and they are called to builde it anewe. Tit. against Pa­rish Priests, hi­red lect. &c. last leafe. And by and by after: Let vs welcome wise gentlemen: they tooke in hand to build the Lords house, and now mo then twentie yeeres are past, in studying for the groundworke. If his hand had not bene so hastie to write, but his head more considerate to reade the leafe that was quoted, perhaps he woulde not haue denied the word, for feare of the reproch of impu­dencie: yet suspecting such a thing might bee founde in him, he addeth, Neuerthelesse, whosoeuer denieth, that the discipline, that is, the power and authoritie of Christ, is essentiall to the Church, and auoucheth that it is but an accident or hang­by, the same is an heretike and blasphemer of Christ Scilice [...], si sa­num haberes sinciput. A Church which consisteth of belee­uing 1. Pet. people, builded so by fayth, vppon Iesus Christ the heade corner stone, is in a two folde condition to be considered: the first is the verie knitting vnto Christ, wherein alone standeth the life and beeing of a Church, and in nothing else. For it is hee (saith the Apostle)Ephes. 5.23. that giueth saluation to the bodie: he maketh it through his paied raunsome Ephes. 1. Cor. 1.30. Psal. 36 7.8. Cant. 2.3. Isai. 4.3 4. and imputed righteousnesse, iustified, holy, and vnblameable, without spot or wrinkle. The se­cond is, in that by this vnion with Christ, all things of his mediation (& so of his kingly office) are in a measure, cō ­municated Ephes. 4.16, Col. 2.19. 1. Ioh. 1.3. Rom. 8.32. Apoc. 3.20.21. Psal. therunto, so as it now practiseth obedience, & holy behauior vnto the Lord, & these cōditions are no other then such as wee may beholde in euery particular christian. For first, apprehending Christ by faith, he becō ­meth one 1. Cor. 6.17. with him. Next is begun (by cōmunication) a change of the inherent qualities, to a practise of 1. Pet. Ephe. 5.1. 2. Col. 3.0.10. 1. Thes. 1.6. Psal. 17.15. holy life. Now I would knowe of that great diuine, whether a man be iustified, and so a Christian, in the apprehending of Christ, or else in the renuing of his inherent qualities,The Archpa­pists, and coun­sell of Trent hold so. If he say, By renuing, he knoweth his companions. If hee graunt it by apprehending, then his groundwoorke hath fayled him. And like as euerie one particularly is iu­stifyed for a Christian, through their onely vniting with Christ by fayth, euen so are manie together iustified for [Page 74] a Church of Christ, through such vnion with him one­ly. And then, if this vnion giue it the forme of a Church, it muste necessarilie bee a Church, before it practise discipline, because our discipline in question hath no place, but in an vnited bodie, or congregation. Nowe nothing can bee, but in respect that it hath all the es­sentiall partes of beeing.Discipline is not of the essence of a Church. Whence must needes followe, that the Church hauing first a beeing, before it exercise discipline, consisteth of all the essentiall partes, before it exercise discipline, and so discipline muste bee founde no essentiall part at all. Plentifull confirmation here­of haue wee in the Scriptures, from the practise of the Lordes chiefe instrumentes, in the planting and re­fourming of his Churches. Those three thousand soules, that were gayned at one prosperous preaching of Peter,Act. may not bee denyed the name of a Church of GOD, sith of those things, that are there recorded to bee done of them, some are onely proper to a Church, and haue no place at all in other meetings. For these being nowe baptized, are saide to haue continued in the dayly exercise of the worde, prayer, thankesgiuing, breaking of breade, and com­municating of their substance. Nowe if the censuring dis­cipline in question, had bene essentiall to their beeing of a Church, so as without it they coulde not haue done those thinges which onely perteyned to a Church, as the Apostle woulde first haue bene mindfull to establish the same, so the holy Ghost would not haue failed the set­ting downe thereof, especially addressing himselfe in that storie, to describe the memorable beginnings and framings of the Churches, as a patterne in such cases vn­to all ages ensuing. Therefore whereas the holie Ghost, voucheth it a Church, apt to exercise the word and Sacra­ments, whose very being it defineth by the onely ioynt and willing receiuing of Christ Iesus, Act. 2.38.41. preached vnto them for the remission of sinnes, without any mention making of the discipline we speake of, it is plaine inough, that he [Page 75] accounteth not of discipline as a thing without which, those conuerts could not be made a visible Church. The like is of the congregation in Samaria, Act. 8.5.6. and 12. called a Church of God. cap. 9.31. The maner of Paule, Barnabas, and others in the planting of the Churches at Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra,Act. Act. 13·43.48. Cap. doe yet further enlighten this that I haue said in the other. For, first they gathered congregations vnto Christ by the preaching of the Gos­pel in those cities, after that as they found them growne to a fitnesse, at other returnes vnto them, they furnished thē with Elders orderly elected among them. This their order (I say) declareth, that the erecting of discipline and ordeyning of Elders therefore, doth not make a Church of Christ: for that if the Apostles had so iudged, they would neuer haue deferred the establishing of it, to times after the gathering and planting of them. Yet further to confirme this thing, Paule writing thus to Titus: for this cause left I thee in Creta, Tit. 1.5. that thou shouldest redresse the things remayning, and appoynt Elders in euerie Citie, as I commaunded thee, teacheth vs, both that the Apostles gathered Churches without this discipline, and also helde them in the accounte of the Churches, before that was added to them. Which thinges prooue disci­pline, not to bee of the essence of a Church, as clear­ly as can bee wished. Nowe touching reformation of declined Churches, let vs see what some examples, in that course doe afoord vs. When Asa the first renowmed reformer of the declining Churches of Iudea began to set in hand so glorious an enterprise, he that considereth the hystorie shall see, that among other things, the disci­pline of the Church, lay as a thing cast downe, and neg­lected, as appeareth by the reformation thereof, which immediately I shall speake of. If then discipline had bene of the essence of the Church, there had not beene at that time, nor in the dayes of Abija his father, anie Church of GOD remayning at Ierusalem: but [Page 76] the latter is false, and is prooued by the protestation of Abija, alittle before he ioyned battell with Ieroboam, and the testimony of the spirit of God in deliuering that hystorie,2. Chro. 3.4.18. who sayth. That the Israelites were depressed the same time, and the children of Iuda strengthened, because they stayed vpon the Lorde the God of their fathers. Therefore the former also is false, namely that discipline is of the essence of a Church. Also if discipline shoulde make it a Church, or bee necessarie to the beeing thereof, it appeareth that notwithstanding all Asaes reformation, yet, was it as then no Church for the godly to resorte vnto, sith the reedification of discipline is ascribed, not to Asa, but to his sonne Iehosaphat,2. Chro. 19.8.11. after him. Neither may any with probabilitie coniecture, that Asa set vp dis­cipline,2. Chro. 15.17. and let it fall againe. For, to haue an vpright heart all the dayes of his life (which thing the holie Ghost testifieth of him) and to suffer that which the Lorde had made him see to bee woorthie reformation, to goe downe againe, are two thinges contrarie, and can­not bee verifyed of one and the same subiect. But nowe all men that sauoure the woorde of the Lorde, must needes acknowledge, that the Church of Iudea in Asaes dayes, was a glorious habitation of the Lorde, and the Temple at Ierusalem, a place then for his faith­full seruantes, to doe their sacrifices and seruices vnto him:2. Chro. 15.8.9. &c. insomuch as that many of the Israelites fledde from their owne coastes, to dwell in Iudea, seeing thus the Lorde to bee amongest them: So must they of like necessitie con­fesse that which therehence firmely is concluded, to witte, discipline not to bee of the essence of a Church. Lastly, to come to the woorthie Iehosaphat, who feared no slaunderous imputation of arrogancie, or singu­laritie to himselfe, neither accompted it anye im­peachment to the dignitie of his father Asa, though in repayring and beautifying the house of GOD, hee shoulde exceede him in some poyntes: consi­dering [Page 77] (I say) his course of proceeding, if discipline were necessary to the being of a Church, then all that he did in the beginning of his raigne, was worthy no com­mendation.2. Chro. For what good could hee bee said to haue done to the Church, when as all that he had done, could not (by this mans saying) gaine it the worthy name of a visible Church? for as touching the reformation of the discipline, it appeareth to haue bene about the latter end of his raigne, after the Lord had by his Prophet,2. Chr. 19.5.11. rebuked him for yelding wicked Ahab assistance in his enterprise. Wherfore, as I hope to heare of no man so impudent as to say, that the Church of Iudea was then no apparant Church of God (I meane in his time before the reuiuing of the discipline) so am I sure, that none but such as are growne to that impudency, will hereafter affirme disci­pline to be of the essence of a Church. Let all the likers of Brownes writings nowe consider, whetherto his repro­ches reach, when hee saith, that by denying discipline to bee of the essence of a Church, wee seclude Christ, and the Church of Christ, from the power, authoritie and discipline of Christ, and (as he saith other-where, that so wee make Christ a dead Christ, yea an Idoll or counterfaite Christ, Answ. to M.C. Pag. and the Church an Idol or counterfait Church: If we haue committed this thing, then these Kinges, and those Apostles are guilty thereof. But because hee seemeth to haue fortified him­selfe in this as in a Castle, let vs also euen heere make proofe of the strength of his walles. And first what mea­neth hee to say, wee faine a counterfaite Christ, and a coun­terfait Church? Is it because wee remooue discipline from the being of a Church? Why then thus hee dis­puteth.

They that holde the power, authoritie, In the place last quoted and his 72. section a­gainst my ad­monition. Brownes grea­test argument to proue disc. to be of the essence of a Church. and gouernement of Christ not to bee of the essence of a Church, doe faine a coun­terfaite Christ, and a counterfaite Church: But they that say, discipline is not of the essence of a Church, hold the power, autho­rity and gouernement of Christ, not to be of the essence.

Therefore they that say discipline is not of the essence of a [Page 78] Church, feigne a counterfaite Christ, and a counterfaite Church.

Here is Harison also vppon 122. Psal. answered for this matter.This (beloued) is indeed the maine piller, where­uppon all Brownes and Brownists schismaticall building standeth: and thus (by the grace of God) I will ouer­throwe it. First to lay the way open and auoyde am­biguitie. The woorde, gouernement, that it may beare the same sence with the worde, authoritie, where-with it is coupled as a synonymie, must be taken for the office of gouernement, and not as it is vsed sometime for the action of gouernement. For example: When one sayth, Dauid had the gouernement of the children of Israel, there hee meaneth the office of gouernement. But if hee say: Dauids gouernement replenished the Israelites with the knowledge of God, then he meaneth by gouernmēt, not the office, but the action or administration of go­uernment. Again, the word, power, may be vsed in a dou­ble sence: one whē it is vnderstood for might, strength, or efficacious force,1. Cor. 5.4. ca. 4.18.19. 2. cor. 10.4.8. cap. 13.4. Psal. 110.2. which is that the greeke word [...] expresseth. In this sense cannot power, in this place bee taken, because that kinde of power of Christ, is no other then his diuine essence, which he hath from the father by an eternall generation, in as much as hee is begotten of the substance of the father, & so is coessentiall with him. For this is a farre differing thing from his auth oritie, or office of gouernement, and therefore may not, as one thing, stand ranged with those wordes. The other is, whē the word, power, meaneth nothing else, but authoritie, iu­risdiction, Mat. 28.18. or gouernment. As where he saith, All power is gi­uen me in heauen and in earth, here the worde is not [...], but [...] And therefore signifieth not the force & might of Christ, whereby he executeth all things in his gouern­ment, but his authoritie or office of gouernement. And in this sense we admit and receiue it here, as of the same sort with those wordes wherewith it is coupled. The en­trance thus paued, I answere to his syllogisme, denying [Page 79] both proposition and assumption. His proposition car­rying the force of a conuexiue, falsely inferreth the feyning of a counterfait Christ, and a counterfaite Church, vpon the de­niall of his power and authoritie to be of the essence of a Church. For they do not thereby, as hee beareth men in hand, separate Christ and his Church from his power and gouernement. Men of meane vnderstanding knowe, that there are propper accidents to thinges which can­not be separated from them, and yet are not of their es­sence. For example, heate cannot bee separated from the fire, nor mouing from the sunne, yet are neither of those properties any part of their essence, nor doeth hee that saith, heate is not of the essence of fire, nor motion of the essence of the sunne, deny therefore the fire to be hote, or the sunne to haue his motion. And concerning these of­fices in question, touching which Browne so arrogantly challengeth M.C. to answere whether they be of the essence of the Church: I would the reader should aske of him,Pag. 35. or his friends (if he thinke it good) whether the kingdome & Priesthood of the sonne of God and man, the word incar­nate, be partes of his essence, or accidentes vnto him ra­ther: and so whether hee that shall say, they are not of his essence, doeth thereby dispoyle him of his offices? I feare not (vnlesse you take him in some desperate fit) hee will answere, no. Why then, if a thing may truely be re­moued from the essence, and neuerthelesse necessarily admitted in the Subiect, howe followeth it, that they that deny the kingly power or authoritie of Christ, to bee of the essence of a Church, doe there-fore make or feyne a Church that is without it. This be­ing voyded, let vs nowe trye, whether Christs power authoritie and office of gouerning, bee of the very essence of a Church, as hee woulde haue it.

This shall we soundly try out,This hath bene done once or twise before. Yet I must craue the rea­ders patience thus farre. by examining by the word of God, what are the essentiall causes of that which is, & truly may be called the Church of God. And first for the [Page 80] matter of a Church,The matter of a Church. I suppose it will-be readily yeelded vnto, to bee Christ the head corner stone, and Christi­ans who are as liuely stones to bee builded vppon him to a spirituall house.1. Pet. 2.4 5. Eph. For so the Apostles Peter & Paul playnely declared, according to which proportion, hee is likewise called the head, and we that beleeue in him, the members, as Saint Paul sayth, that vnder the feete of Christ God hath subiected all thinges, and hath appoynted him ouer all thinges to bee the head to the Church which is his body, Eph. 1.22.23. cap. 4.15.16. Col. ca. 2.19. Ioh. 15.5. Rom. 11. euen the fulnesse of him that filleth all in all thinges. To the same end Christ compared him-selfe to a vine, and those that beleeue in him to the braunches of the vine. Like whereunto is that of the Oliue, and the braunches grafted therein, as Saint Paul deliuereth it. The mat­ter of a Church wee haue. Let vs nowe see what may be the fourme.The fourme of a Church. Neither will it bee hard to find that, if wee consider that the setting together of prepared stones maketh the building, the vniting of the head with the members fourmeth the body, and the continuance to­gether of the stocke with the braunches, giueth the be­ing of a tree. For so is it likewise agreeable to all rea­son, that the vniting and knitting together of Christ and Christians, bee graunted the formall cause of a Church. Nowe this vnition is by two meanes, the one eternall, the other seruing but for this life. The eternall vnition is by the holy Ghost, whereby we are flesh of his flesh, & bone of his bones,Eph. Gal. 5.2.5. Ioh. 17.21.23. and made finally complete and perfect in one God through that one and only mediator betweene God and man Iesus Christ. This is peculiar and pro­per to the Catholique Church (which is the whole com­pany of the elect of God) and doth not pertaine to the members of a particular Church, as they are only consi­dered members of any particular Church, but as they are also in that regard, members of the Catholique. The tē ­poral vnition, which (as I sayd) serueth for this life, is by faith: which shall cease in the day of the reuelation of the [Page 81] Saincts of God, when we shall be possessed,Rom. 8.23.24. 1. Cor. Hebr 11.1. 1. Cor. 15.53. Iohn. 17.23. 2. Cor. 5.4. of the full fruition of all those things we hoped for, as the holie word doth testifie, for mortalitie shall be swallowed vp of life, perswasion of possession, and faith of the fulnesse of the spirit, and perfect being in God through Christ. Meane time, Rom. 11.20.21 faith is as the engrafting of the braun­ches into the stock, whereby they are vpholden, whilest that by the sappe and spirit of life proceeding there­from, they be growne and established. And as the braunch to be ingrafted, needeth those his enwrappings and bindings, to support and defend it against sundrie inconueniences, till it be able to be without them, and afterward they are of no vse vnto it: so doth faith sup­port and desend the tender conscience, against all the stormes of temptations, till there be that perfect growth in Christ, that is vtterly freed from them, at which time, in like sort, faith doth cease. But heere withall, thys faith must be vnderstood to admit a twofold conside­ration: the one in respect of Gods, the other in respect of mans beholding and iudging thereof. In regard of God, that onely is acknowledged, which is vnfeigned and sealed vp with his holie spirit of promise. But in re­gard of man, a feigned faith may also stand in the recko­ning, sith man cannot iudge of the heart, but must ther­fore accept & rest in the sound confession of the mouth, and so according to this latter consideration, hath the Reader the right vnderstanding of faith in this question concerning the fourming of visible Churches, for man to discerne of & ioyne with them. Now that faith doth engraffe and vnite vs vnto Christ, and so is the proper fourme of particular & visible Churches, I needed not at all stand heere to prooue, if there were not in this man a­gainst whom I deale, a iust suspition of fundamentall A­postacie heerein. For if he had beene indeede perswaded thereof, to this day, we should neuer by him haue beene thus brought to the proofe of the being of our Church, as now he hath prouoked vs. Therefore although this [Page 82] cause hath beene alreadie so handled by the worthie seruants of God against the common Aduersarye, as that he whosoeuer at this day shall call it into que­stion, is more worthie the sharpest discipline, then any disputation.

Yet for to stop importunate mouthes whatsoeuer, and to make cleere to the world the confutation of Brownes false conclusion heere in hand, it is requisite, that after the large labour of others, I also point at some profes for this purpose, shewing that visible Churches, in as much as they stand in the accompt of visible Chur­ches,Visible Chur­ches are vnited vnto Christ by faith only. are vnited vnto Christ by faith only. First, let all the planting of Churches, thoroughout the story of the Actes be considered, and see if the holy Ghost do not euery where testify this vniting vnto Christ by faith, and nothing else. The first three thousand soules that Peter gayned at one Sermon, are sayd to haue receyued the word,Act. 2.41. and therevpon to haue beene added vnto the Church by Baptisme. The whych receyuing of the word wherevpon they were baptised,Act. 8.36.37. cannot be otherwyse vnderstood (for the Lords wayes are one) then the same whych Phillip demaunded as the thyng by whych alone the Eunuche could obteyne the seale of a Christian, namely fayth, and so is it also expounded within two verses in the same former places of the second of the Actes, when the story sayth of the same assembly these wordes:Act. 2.44. And they that beleeued were in one place, and had all things common. But nothyng can more explayne and confirme that example, then another lyke vnto it, of the gathering of a Church by Phillip, in a Citie of Sa­maria, Act. 8.12.13. See also Act. cap. cap. cap. ca. 13.39 where the Text expressely sayth, That assoone as they beleeued Phillip which preached the things that concerned the Kingdome of God, and the name of Iesus Christ, they were Baptized both men and women. Then Symon himselfe beleeued also, and was baptized, &c. The same lykewise is the flat doctrine of the Apostles euery where. Let the louers of [Page 83] truth behold and beare witnesse. Christ (sayth the A­postle) hath redeemed vs from the cursse of the Lawe, Galath. 3.13. when he was made a cursse for vs: for it is written, Verse 14. Curssed is euery one that hangeth on tree; that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Christ Iesus, that we might re­ceiue the promise of the spirit through faith. Verse 22. But the scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne, that the promise by the faith of Iesus Christ, should be giuen to them that beleeue. VVhere­fore the lawe was our schoolemaister to bring vs to Christ, that we might be made righteous by faith, for yee are all the sonnes of God by faith in Iesus Christ. The same Apostle sayth,Verse 24. Verse 26. Eph. 3.12.1 [...]. VVe haue boldnesse, entrance, and confidence by faith in Christ. And expressely, That Christ dwelleth in vs by faith. Now iudge whether the sunne can giue thee clearer light to reade, then the playne tearmes of the Apostle, doo teach thee to acknowledge our vniting vnto Christ by faith. If any man desire to see more varietie of pla­ces, let him looke these Ro. ca. Ephes. Coloss cap. 1. Thess. 1. Tim. 1.4 Hebr. 3.6. cap. 4.2.6. cap. 11.1. Rom. 11.20.23. Iohn. 1.12. quotations, where he shall see, by the abundant testimonie of the spirit, that we are all reconciled vnto God by faith, accepted for our faith, vnited vnto a bodie, and engrafted into Christ the liuing stock, by faith. Thus then, if matter and fourme be the essentiall causes, whereof any thing con­sisteth, and whereby the being of any thing is acknow­ledged, I hope we haue heere with Ma. C. found out and proued the essentiall causes of a Church, so as no man needeth to be perplexed in discerning the beeing thereof, if he haue atteyned such a minde, as can rest in the wisedome of God.

Heere we meete with that foolishe and vayne ex­ception of Browne agaynst Ma. C. namely, That Christ is the life and essence of the Church, and not faith, which is,Pag. 35. as though faith had not direct relation to Christ, and Christ to faith in this consideration of a Church, wherein neyther can fayth bee considered without Christ, nor yet Christ as theyr head without faith. And if [Page 84] Ma. C. hauing set downe, that Christ is the foundation of the Church, and that the assemblies are laid vpon him by faith, should haue added in such expresse words, that faith is the life of the Church, were faith to be taken heere without respect of the foundation named before? Or were it a harder speech, then that which S. Paule vtte­reth,Rom. 11.20. when he sayth: VVe stand by faith. What difference is there betweene, VVe liue by faith; and we stand by faith? But Habacuck the Prophet missed not the very words,Habac. 2.4. The iust shall liue by faith. But yet cannot Browne abyde this, that by faith only the Church is vnited vnto Christ. Wherefore because Ma. C. sayth, that nothing besides faith in the Sonne of God is necessary to the very being of a Church;Pag. 34. he replyeth, saying, That then belike chil­dren, which yet through want of discretion cannot haue faith, shall be without the essence and life of the Church. O deepe Diuinitie, worthy a Cambridge degree (if I should re­quite him with his owne tearmes.) Christ hath these words,Iohn. 3.18. H [...]br. 11.6. He that beleeueth not, is condemned. And the writer to the Hebrewes, VVithout faith it is impossible to please God. What cause had Browne more to obiect this of chil­drens faith against Ma. C. his discourse of the beeing of a Church, then against these generall axiomes of Scripture touching the being of a Christian, or in state of saluation? for it lyeth as indifferently against the one as the other. And if he had whereby to be recon­ciled with those Scriptures, so as his obiection should not lye agaynst them, a little equitie would haue lead hym to haue applyed the same to Ma. C. his conclu­sion likewise. If his knowledge be no better then he sayth,All infants are not without faith as Browne supposeth. he must learne, that infants of parents that be within the couenant, are not to be accounted without all fayth, as his writing supposeth: for if they be elect, then haue they the Luke. 1.15. Iere. 1.5. spirit, and so faith in power, ha­bilitie and inclination, though not in outward profes­sion and action. Lyke as also at the same time, they can not be denied to haue reason (for as much as they haue [Page 85] a reasonable soule) although it be but potentially, and not in acte or outward gesture. If they be not elect, and so haue not the annoynting of the spirit, nor therefore any faith in the sight of God, yet receiue they so much from the faith of their parents, as to be by it accepted of the visible Church for a holie seede, and partakers of the promises, because they, iudging but as men, haue no cause at all to doubt thereof.

This man vrgeth out of Habacuck, Habac. 2. that The iust shall liue by his owne faith, but there was no cause: for it is not sayd, that infants shall be saued, or liue in the sight of God by their parents faith, but onely, that by it, they are of men to be reputed within the couenant, and of the visible Church. Yet he standeth to it, that Not by the faith of the parents, but by the promise made to the righteous and their seede, the children are reckoned in the Church. O trifeler: how are the parents within couenant, and partakers of the promises, but by faith? And how doo the promised blessings descend vnto the children, but in regard that their parents beleeued? Wherefore, this foundation will stand vnmoued against all Papists and Apostates, that particular visible Churches are vnited vnto their head Christ by faith, and by faith do they stand. And certainely it is strange, how this should be doubted of by any that esteeme themselues iustified by faith, sith one member hath not a seuerall lawe of life by it selfe: but looke by what lawe and tenure one by himselfe enioyeth the state of being in Christ, by the same also doth another, and consequently many toge­ther, euen till you haue reckoned the whole number of the Church militant.

Now for the kingly authoritie and gouernement of Christ, sith no corner of the world, no not the vttermost borders of his enemies are without it: how can his Church (whereof himselfe is the head) be imagined to be without it? And yet it followeth not,Answer to M. C. Pag. 35. because the Church, nor no action therein cannot be exempted [Page 86] from hys rule and gouernment, that therefore hys rule, authoritie, or gouernment, should be of the es­sence thereof. I haue shewed before, that though pro­per accidents, be perpetually in theyr subiects, yet are they not of theyr essence. And heere I say further­more, that if Christes power and authoritye be of the essence of all assemblyes whych are subiect vnto it, then is it of the essence of Popish and Heathenish Sy­nagogues, for hys throne is also pight in the middest of hys Psalm. 45. and 68.19. Luke. 3.17. Psalme 110. Prou. 15.3. Matth. 28.18. Ioh. 17.2. 1. Cor. 15.24.25. Rom. Philip. 1.28.29. 2 Thess. 1.9.7. cap The bounds of Christes power and gouernment not considered of Browne. enemies. Agayne, if it followe, that where Christes gouernment and authoritie is not made thus essentiall, there it may be concluded, Christ is not made essentiall: it followeth equally on the contrarie, that where hys authoritye is so made essentiall, there he is graunted to be essentiall also: and then seeing Browne will haue it to be of the essence of the assemblyes where it is admitted, he most vnwarely maketh Christ of the essence of Popish and Heathenish companyes, as I sayd before: for as much as they are all vnder hys kingly authoritye and gouernment: and as well sitteth he to direct the course of hys enemies in all poynts of theyr rage and malice to theyr owne destruction, as hys elect in the waye of righteousnesse to theyr saluation: euen so the Scriptures in all places, and namely, the last quo­tations, do apparantly testifye.

By thys that is sayd, I hope, it is cleerely proued, that Ma. C. vpon good groundes hath delyuered, that Christ is the head or foundation, and the assemblyes or particular Churches, are vnited vnto, or builded vpon hym by faith, and that nothing besides faith in the Sonne of God, is necessarye to the very being of a Church.

Also, hauing found the essence of a Church, it fol­loweth, that all thyngs else attributed therevnto (and namely Christes gouernment as occupyed in that sub­iect) are referred by the learned to the place of acci­dents, and so was it well ynough gathered by Browne [Page 87] him selfe, saue that where he interpreteth the word ac­cident, by the word hang by, he rather poynteth at the desert of an Heretick, then noteth out the nature of such an accident. Thus much to hys proposition.

His assumption beguileth with a grosser kinde of sophisme: as from the denyall of any thyng in part,Harrison also beguileth with the same falla­tion. Psal. 122. and is heere therefore aun­swered. to conclude the denyall of the same thing in the whole. For vpon the denyall of discipline, followeth not the denyall of all Christes power, authoritye, and gouern­ment, except Christ haue no further authoritye and gouernment, then is to be executed by the Elderships of Churches.

But I haue proued before, that Christes gouern­ment is absolute ouer both freends and enemies pro­fessours, and not professours of his name.

And heere further concerning his Church, I say, the administration of hys gouernment is twofold, proper,Iesa. 11.2. Psal. 45.8. Ioh. 3.34. cap. 1.16. 1. Cor. 1.30 Co­loss. 2.3. Ephes. 4.7. 1. Pet. 2.5.9. Reuel. 1.6. ca. 5.10 Christ execu­teth his gouern­ment in his Church partly by the secret hand of his po­wer, partly by the outward hand of his members. and communicated. By hys proper gouernment, I meane that which he hath reserued onely to himselfe, as not being limitted or shut vp within any boundes of lawes or orders reuealed vnto the creature, but is exe­cuted, according to his infinite wisedome, by the se­cret hand of his diuine power, and that both extraor­dinarily, and ordinarily, and both wayes to the calling and fauing of his elect, which are the true beleeuers, and to the hardening and condemning of the repro­bate, which are the counterfeite Christians. The extra­ordinary wayes are seene in hys immediat iudgements, to the confounding of the wicked, and succouring the godly. The ordinarie, by making the word of ex­hortation and reprofe, and euery thing of ordinary edi­fying, the 2. Cor. 2.15.16. sauour of life vnto life to those that are sa­ued, and the sauour of death vnto death, to those that are damned. Hence flowe calling, comfort, reioysing, and 2. Tim. 3.16.17. growing vp to perfection to the former: but re­iecting horror, continuall hardening, and 2. Cor. 2.15.16. finall per­dition to the latter. His communicated gouernment, [Page 88] is that which being limitted within the compasse of cer­tayne Lawes and Cannons of hys holy word, he hath committed to be outwardly executed by the hand of the members of particular Churches accordingly. This consisteth in their outward vsing the Word, Sacraments, &c. and in their politicall guiding, concerning both the manners and necessities of all and euery of them. This latter part onely of the communicated gouernment, which is the politicall guiding of the Church,VVhat must be vnderstood by the word Disci­pline, in all the controuersie betweene the Brownists and vs. is that same discipline, which generally all Ecclesiasticall Wri­ters speake of, and which is now with vs in question, whether it be of the essence of a Church. Let therefore the godly Reader consider, what an odious iangler Browne is, who vpon any denyall of the last and most in­feriour (though yet no base but a worthy) part of Chri­stes gouernment in his Church, concludeth a denyall of all and euery whit of his power, authoritie and go­uernment therein.Browne greatly abuseth his disciples with this sophism. So likewise Harrison vpon the 122. Psalm. And therefore where the Reader findeth in Brownes writings, Discipline and Christes go­uernment matched together, as though they were sy­nonymies, that is, dyuers wordes, but of one signifi­cation, there let hym smell thys hys Sophistry, and re­iect the lewd seducer so offering it. And though he pre­tend the place to the Corinths,1. Cor. 5.4. to approue hys phrase, saying: Paule calleth this Discipline the power of our Lord Iesus Christ, beleeue hym not. For the Apostle spea­keth not there of Christes power as it is taken for hys authoritye and office of gouernment, but for hys di­uine might, strength, and efficacious power, by which he is with hys Church to the end of the world,Math. 28.19.20. Luke 24.49. Acts 1.5.8. and promised to be in the middest of two or three that should be so gathered together in hys name. Heere­vpon,Math. 18.19.20. Paule doth not call (as he sayeth) Discipline, the power of Christ, but encourageth the Corinthians to minister the discipline of Excommunication vp­pon the incestuous person, arming them therevnto with the mighty presence of Christ, by which it should [Page 89] bee made effectuall. This double vse of the word, power, I preuented before. And nowe let Browne knowe, that whereas by alleadging the Scriptures, he shifteth, I may say, coggeth in a diuers sense, the pitfall of Homonymie, which he prepared for his reader, is discouered, and so become a snare vnto himselfe. Next, from two or three places, that set forth the efficacie of the worde, by mag­nificent and worthy titles: as 1. Corinth. 4.20. The king­dome of God is not in worde, but in power. Psalm. 110.2. The Lorde shall sende the rodde of his power out of Syon. And 1. Corinthians. 10.4. The weapons of our warre-fare are mightie through God: from these places (I say) he concludeth thus. So then, if the power of the woorde, to binde and loose, to remitte, Answ. to M.C. Pag. 34. or retaine mens sinnes, to promise life, and to rebuke and giue ouer to execration, bee taken from Christ or the Church of Christ, what remaineth but an Idoll or counterfait Christ, an Idol or counterfait Church. Here both he proceedeth in his double faced fallation last noted, conueying him-selfe by the word, power, from Christes office, to his deuine essence, whereby he accomplisheth all thinges in his go­uernement, whether by the meane and ministerie of men or otherwise, as I obserued before in the distribu­tion of his gouernement: and also heapeth vppon it, an impudent petition of the principle, as if the disci­pline being remooued from the Church, foorth-with the woorde shoulde bee without Christes power to bind and loose, to remitte or retaine mens sinnes: which is not so much to extoll the worthy discipline (as he pre­tended) as it is eyther to clogge and chaine vp Christes diuine power thereunto: or else to make discipline the diuine force, and efficacious power of Christ himselfe which is his essence. Whether soeuer of which (as one must needes) bee graunted, not Master Cart-wright, but Browne shall bee found the absurd blasphemer in this case.

The bulwarke of his cause is beaten downe, & there is not a weapon left him of any strength vnbroken, if this [Page 90] be well weyed, which is by me deliuered. And if the rea­der consider, that although the discipline bee a kind of the authoritie of Christ, yet is it not all, nor the princi­pall of his authoritie: and that although hee vse it, many times, as a chariot, for his holy worde to ride vppon, to subdue rebellious spirites: yet hee vseth it neither most chiefely,2. Cor. 1.21. 2. cor. 10.4. Heb. 1.3. cap. 4.12. Esa. 11.4. nor most ordinarily: but the simple preaching of the worde, is his continuall scepter and sword, wher­by hee saueth his people, and conquereth his enemies: beateth downe euery strong holde: pearseth to the di­uision of the soule and Spirite, and of the ioyntes and marrowe, and iudgeth the very cogitations and con­ceiptes of the heart. This, I say, if the reader consider, seeing there are no greater effectes in the whole king­dome of Christ,Iohnas. 3.5.6. 2. Sam. 12.7.13. Act. 24.25. ca. 26. [...]8. ca. 2.3.8. then these which hee executeth by his worde, yea when it is not assisted by the discipline (for the woorde may stande without the discipline, so can­not the discipline without the woorde) hee will not on­ly stay him-selfe, as in a refreshing shadowe of Christes gracious gouernement, where hee seeth the worde deli­uered and taught: but also acknowledge and testifie, that it is a most malicious deuise of Satan, practised by such instruments as Browne, vnder a quarell for the holy discipline to drawe thousandes of soules from the most ordinary and mighty meanes of Christes gouernment, and administration of his kingdome, that so lying scat­tered from the folde, they might bee out of all hope of ordinary rescue, when the deuourer shoulde find them.

Answ. to M.C. Pag 36 38.Let not Browne nowe hence-foorth aske what part of discipline may bee wanting, and the Church notwithstanding haue the essence, and name of a Church. For although Mast. Cart. not framing him-selfe to Brownes sense and writings, as with whome hee medled not in his letter, v­seth the woorde, discipline, in a larger sense, as com­prehending all the behauiour concerning a Church in outward dueties, and so (amongest the rest) the dayly [Page 91] planting and building, by the calling and offering of the woorde by the ministers, and the hearing, re­ceiuing and obeying of a people: yet Browne can-not thinke to vse the worde in that sense, sith his owne wri­tings haue bounded him and set him in a scanter com­passe, namely within the politicall guiding of a Church, which I haue lately before spoken of, as generally all his writinges, and namely his most vnlearned defini­tions and diuisions Numb. 48. doe testifie. Where defi­ning the kingdome of Christ, to bee his office of go­uernement, whereby hee vseth the obedience of his people to keepe his lawes and commaundementes, to their saluation and well-fare: hee deuideth the same in ouerseeing and trying out of wickednesse, rebuke and suparation. By which place, (vnlesse we will imagine of a discipline that hath larger limittes then the kingdome of Christ) wee see what Browne vnderstandeth by discipline. Within the polliticall guiding of a Church, therefore, must he bee contented to bee restrained, in all this disputation of discipline. And as for his busie hunting after Contradicti­on in M.C. his woordes, in saying, discipline is not of the essence of a Church, and yet for want of all discipline, Pag. 35·36. to take away the essence and name of a Church: his labour is vtterly lost, as I haue prooued before, in speaking of proper accidents. And though in wordes, hee vrge the shewe of a contradiction, without discipline there may bee a Church, and without discipline there can bee no Church. Yet is it an empty barrell without liquour. For when the reader shall haue added the word, some, to the former, and the worde, all, to the latter, that the first may bee read thus: without some discipline there may bee a Church: and the other thus: without al dis­cipline there can be no Church, he shal plainly discerne, that Browne did but dreame of a contradictiō. After those his shiftings & turnings to auoid the euidence of M C. rea­sons, & to hoodewinke his reader from the sight of thē: hee setteth on as though hee would proue the contrary [Page 92] of M.C. conclusion: namely that discipline is of the essence of a Church. Wherein when he hath spent three or foure pages,Pag. Other fourmes of Brownes rea­soning, to proue disc. of the es­sence of a Church. with many vaine and abused quotations of scrip­ture: after his wonted manner, the whole course of his arguing comes all to this, that the woorde of God giues the Church authoritie, to obserue the behauiours of the seuerall members, and to binde and loose, remitte, and retaine sinnes by ecclesiasticall censures, and so exercise the keyes of the king­dome of heauen: Therefore such iurisdiction is of the essence of a Church. A worthy Captaine of so vnworthy a schisme. Set this in a due fourme, and I thinke him-selfe (if it were possible) woulde blush for shame to see it. It is thus.

Whatsoeuer the worde of God commandeth to bee vsed of the Church, that same is of the essence of the Church:

But the woord commandeth the discipline to bee vsed of the Church:

Therefore is the discipline of the essence of the Church.

If this bee the good reasoning, let vs see whither it will bring vs.

Whatsoeuer the word of God cōmandeth to be vsed of the Church: the same is of the essence of the Church:

But the word commandeth good works to bee vsed of the Church:

Therfore good works are of the essence of the Church. Likewise.

Whatsoeuer the word of God commandeth faith to bring forth, the same is of the essence of faith:

But the word of God commaundeth that faith bring forth good workes.

Therfore good works are all of the essence of faith.

And thus it will come to passe, that euery commaun­dement being made of the essence of a Church, and of a particular Christian as a member: euery transgres­sion likewise shall ouerthrowe the Church, and the state of a Christian. His scope being seene, let vs take also a short viewe of the handling of his matter. Setting [Page 93] downe discipline, first in two points,Pag. 37. as if he woulde be­gin at the two maine heades thereof: he maketh the ga­thering of a Church one, and the guiding of it, the other: as though you might vnderstande, howe the light of the fire can be before there be fire: the vse of an instrument, before the instrument be fourmed, and the action of a liuing thing, before the same liuing thing be engendered. But in these disputes of discipline, the man must bee re­membred, that wee speake not of discipline at randon, but strictly of the discipline of a church. Which therfore, hauing continuall relation to a Church, as haue the acti­ons of a man to a man, can no more be presupposed to be the discipline of a church, before the same church be: then can, the actiōs of any man be ascribed vnto him or reported of him, before the man himselfe that should do them, be begotten. But if he will needes haue the gathe­ring of a Church to bee a part of the discipline,Brownes wri­tings hold not together. what part will he referre it vnto? For hereby we shall find him as farre at oddes with himselfe, as hee is with the trueth: His diuision of the kingdome of Christ, (which hee taketh to differ nothing from the discipline, as I haue declared) you haue heard before. What part thereof is the gathe­ring of a Church to bee referred vnto? Perhaps hee will answere the last part, namely separation. But alas poore man, hee forgot that his owne definitions haue quite de­barred him all such escape. For,Num. 48. separation (sayth he) of the wilfull or grieuous offender, is a duetifulnesse of the Church, in withholding from them the Christian Communion and felowship, by pronouncing and shewing the christian Communion to be bro­ken by their grieuous wickednesse, and that with mourning, fa­sting and prayer for them, and denouncing Gods iudgements a­gainst them. And this he calleth not separation from the pro­phane world, but separation from the Church. The same hee sayth of the other two partes: trying out wickednesse and re­buke, they be duties of the church (sayth he:) therefore the Church is presupposed first to be (say I) and so he in this dissenting both from truth, and from himselfe, sheweth [Page 94] that nothing but the spirit of lies doeth lead him.B. subtil phrase worthie to be obserued. And why doeth hee say, The Church must bee gathered of the wor­thie, and not rather of beleeuers, according to the vsuall speach of the Scriptures? Forsooth he knewe, that if hee granted the Church to bee gathered of beleeuers, there needed no more to bee saide to his confutation. He was so wise therefore for himselfe, as to choose rather a worde more impertinent, and lesse perspicuous, both to reserue a vauntage of cauilling, and to darken the light vnto his reader. In the tenth of Matthew whence he fet­cheth his phrase, Christ giueth no commaundement to the twelue to gather Churches, as lthough for that ende they shoulde enquire who was woorthie: but onely that they should carie thorow the cities of Iudea, the sound of the cōming of Messiah, for the wakening of the people, & preparing their minds to receiue their saluation, now comming so neare towardes them: and there inquiring out of the worthy is not enioyned them for gathering of congregatious in townes and cities, but for their directi­on touching the places, where they should looke for in­tertainment, whilest they taried in any towne or citie. And therefore (sayeth our Sauiour) In whatsoeuer citie or towne ye shal come, inquire who is worthie in it, and then hee saith not, gather all such together to bee a Church, but there a­bide ye, till ye go thence: as appointing them in euery towne where they come, to take vp their lodging in the house of him, whom they heard most specially to be spoken of, for an honest and religious life. The rest of his quotations here are from his purpose: they concerne not gathe­ring of Churches, but partly the behauiour in Churches, and partly euery seuerall Christians discerning of con­temners.Mala 1.13. And Malachie among the rest is fowly forced, when as because he sayeth The Lorde reiected their offerings, because they offered the scrobled, and the lame, and thesicke, and the blinde. Browne sayth, It figureth the reiecting of our Sa­craments, when dogs and swine do cōmunicate therein: when pa­pists & Atheists, drunkards, Maygamsters, blasphemers, raylers, [Page 95] fighters, and such like, are presented as sweete bread at the table of the Lord. Where he should compare the blind and lame sacrifices, with the defect and defilement that may bee in the Sacraments and seruices of the Church: hee to serue his owne turne, compareth them with the vnworthie re­ceyuers and disordered members of a Church, which was very clenly cogging. Besides that it is vntrue, that euerie vnworthy receiuer, by and by is a dog or a swine:Matth. 7.6. for the description Christ giueth of them by their properties, is such as rightly agreeth with those only, who with open malice and wilfull stubbornesse tread vnderfoot & blas­pheme godlinesse, and ragingly persecute the professors of the same:Act. 13.45.46. Such found Paule and Barnabas of the Iewes at Antioch. But such therefore is not euery vnwoorthie Communicant, or that doth deserue excommunication. His heaping vp of Papists & Atheists with the rest, shew­eth that his pen was in running, and he must needs fill vp the nūber. Finally, it is false, that they were no sacrifices, because the Lorde reproueth the bringing of such by the people, and the accepting of them by the Priest. For they keeping them to the kind of cattel that God had ordey­ned for his sacrifices, as sheepe, oxen, &c. it ceased not to be a sacrifice, although a faultie one, when they offered the lame, and the blind of those, because the fault was in the qualitie, and not in the substance. Whereas if they should haue killed a dogge, or an hogge, or an asse, then it had beene vtterly no sacrifice.Pag: 38, His corrupt opinion in vrging the retayning of euery trespasse of our brothers till wee see him repent, I haue discouered before. Nowe when hee sayeth, This libertie and power euery Christian must holde, or else hee is the seruant of men, and not of Christ: And therehence argueth from the more to the lesse?Browne maketh good workes, the essence of a Christian. If a particular Christian cannot want it, how shall the whole Church be without it, and yet be named the Church of Christ? It is ma­nifest that hee maketh the reproouing of offending bre­thren to be of the essence of a Christian, and so reasoneth from the deniall of the more probable, to the deniall of [Page 96] the lesse probable. But his reasoning is sophisticall, and the consequence popish heresie. His reason is sophistical, in that he maketh it lesse probable for a church to faile in matters of discipline, than for a christian, in his own par­ticular of monishing his brother: when as contrariwise it is more probable, because to the discipline of a Church is required a consent: and consent is neuer free from the clogges & crossings of cōtradictorie iudgements, which a particular Christian being lesse subiect vnto, it is there­fore lesse likelie, equall or probable, that hee should faile. And for more proofe, experience teacheth this euerie where. For in Churches where the discipline of Christ is either not wholy, or not soundly established, you shal al­wayes find some particular members diligent and sound in their duties this way. And I referre to the reader the consideration of many particular members of the Eng­lish assemblies in this behalfe. I said there was popish he­resie in the consequence, and the reader shall testifie no lesse, when he considereth, that if the reproouing offen­ding brethren bee of the essence of a Christian, and no man can denie the doing thereof to be a worke, it folow­eth that works are of the essence of a Christian, and con­sequently of a church, as I haue iustly charged him other where. Behold stil, whitherto his incōsiderate course doth carie him? If his disciples abhorre this, and graunt that a particular man ceaseth not to be a Christian for his de­fault in this dutie: euen so must he grant by the same ne­cessitie, that a Church ceaseth not to be a Church for her defaults in discipline. It is true, that such a christian, is a weake christiā, according to the proportion of his wants and errours, and such a Church is a diseased Church, and that according to the measure of her imperfections, but yet still a Christian, and yet still a Church, for the essen­tiall causes aforesaid.Pag. 39. He sayth, Euery particular christian is a king and Priest vnto God. This is true. But to what ende are we kings (sayth he) forsooth to holde the scepter of Gods worde, to iudge the offenders, Numb. 55. and for nothing else? No. For so it is in [Page 97] his wise definitions also. Well if this be all, when his disci­ples and he haue best learned to be this kinde of kings, (as they haue too well learned this lesson alredie,) what can they be found, but those hypocrits,Matth. 7.3.5. which spy motes in other mens eyes, but marke not the beames in their owne: and by that name, shalbe commanded of the iust iudge (with shame) at length to looke into themselues, which before were wholy occupied in the beholding o­thers. But whosoeuer will not wilfully close their eyes, if they shall suffer themselues to be remembred, that the most immediate neere and principall end, (except Gods glory which is the principall end of al ends) of christians being kings vnto God, is, to mortifie our own affections and euill lusts, and to subdue sinne in our selues, they will leaue with worthie detestation so loose a teacher, and be skilfull to espie this grosse sophisme, which almost eue­rie where he committeth, vnder colour of some part of a thing, denying the same thing wholy. And thus it fareth with him almost in euerie sentence of the page we haue in hande, If a particular Christian doe not vpholde his liber­tie and power in iudging and rebuking particular offenders, he is vtterly without the Kingdome and Priesthoode of Christ. In like maner (sayth he) if the Church doe not openlie rebuke and excommunicate: it hath no interest in the Priesthood and King­dome of Christ, and so is none of his Church. Againe, If it cannot excommunicate, it hath not the Keyes of the kingdome of heauen to binde and loose, reteyne, or remitte sinnes, By the keies, B. vnderstandeth nothing but the censures of the Church, so do Har [...] so [...]ereth is their answere and to shut the gates of heauen against anie. Which is as much to say, as a Christian must shewe the effectes of Christes Kingdome in all thinges, or else in none. And a Church if it hath it not in all respectes, it hath it in no respect. And thus (belike) because Browne is not yet so madde, as that hee will suffer no clothes vpon him, wee shoulde not beleeue diuerse of his great friendes, who say, he is madde, or out of his wittes, whereby they seeke to ex­cuse his dealings. The Church hath (as I sayde before) the woorde of God, which because it openeth comfort [Page 98] in Christ to the penitent, and shutteth it vp from the ob­stinate,Matth. 16.19. is therefore called the Keyes of the kingdome of hea­uen: as also the power of God vnto saluation to euery one that beleeueth: Rom. 1.16. 1. Cor. 1.18. called also in another place, the sauour of life to life in those that are saued: and the sauour of death vnto death in those that perish. 2. Cor. 2.15.16. These Keyes are diuersly administred, or dispensed: as generally, particularly, openly, priuate­ly, by the seuerall members, or by a ioynt number of the Church: and so either simplie, or else ioyned with some personall restraint, as suspension or excommunica­tion. Nowe where the Keyes are not all manner of wayes thus dispensed, doeth it followe, that there they are not dispensed at all? Hee needeth not tell vs, that the Church hath libertie and right by the woorde to vse them all, and so stande harping vpon this ill tuned string, that it hath power to iudge those that are within: when as this in the meane time which shoulde haue gained his cause, li­eth vnprooued: namely, if the Church vse not all her right, shee vseth none: and if shee exercise not her power of iudging euerie way, then doeth shee not exercise it any way: This (I say) beeing prooued, had put life into his cause, which nowe remayning vnprooued, maketh his impudent conclusion, wherein he boasted to haue prooued this, ridiculous.Pag. 40. That which hee calleth a fonde answere of M. Cartwright, was because it was fondly vnderstood of him. The point is explained by me before. The rest of his 37. page, being chiefly of the Corinthians discipline and abu­ses in the Sacrament, I haue made breathlesse in my dis­course of Communicating.

Thou hast heard (beloued) what this great maister can say, to prooue discipline of the essence of a Church. Let vs nowe heare him, returning to the rest of his ob­iections and cauils at M. Cartwright his letter touching this point. M. Cartwright hauing truly said, that Church assemblies are builded by faith onely vpon Christ the foundation, the which faith so being, whatsoeuer (sayeth hee) is wanting of that which is commaunded, or remayning of that which is [Page 99] forbidden, is not able to put that assemblie from the right and title of so being the Church of Christ. For that, fayth can ad­mit no such thing, as giueth an vtter ouerthrowe, and turning vpside downe of the trueth. Hereunto hee addeth. By this title of the faithfull, the Apostle in his Epistles noteth out the Churches of God: beeing all one with him to say: To the faith­full, or to the Saintes, as to the Churches of such a place. VVhat soeuer wanteth vnto this, or is more than ynough, it wanteth or aboundeth, to the disgrace and vncomelinesse, or to the ha­zarde of the continuance, and not to the present ouerthrowe of the Church. And although, besides fayth in the sonne of God, there may be manie thinges necessarie for euerie assemblie: yet bee they necessarie to the comely and stable beeing, and not sim­plie to the being of the Church. This sounde and sober doctrine of prudent distinguishing & discerning things differing in their proper kindes, thus layde downe by this reuerende man, beeing wrangled at in other things (as you haue heard) there remayneth that which Browne sayeth, agaynst his reason of entituling the Church with those tearmes, the faithfull, and of the Saints.

The Apostle indeede,The wordes Saints and faith­full synonymies in Pauls epistles. almoste in all his writings to the churches, saluteth them by the title of Saints or faith­full: as namely at Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, and Colosse, in the steade of calling them Churches of those places, as putting them in remembrance of that where­by they stoode, and had their being of a Church. Like as also writing to Timothie and Titus, 1. Tim. 1.2. Tit. 1.4. hee calleth them his naturall sonnes in the fayth, and according to the fayth, as noting by that (without anie addition of other woordes (though Browne sayeth, it coulde not bee shewed) their state and beeing in Christ. Whereas, if discipline, and iudging offendours, had beene of the essence of a Church, and of a Christian, Saint Paule woulde rather, haue vsed these or such like titles. To the Saintes and displinate ones at Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, and Colosse: and to Timothie and Titus my naturall sonnes in the Discipline, or according to the Discipline [Page 100] and iudging offenders. Act. 8.36 37. So when the Eunuch comming by the water, said, See here is water, what doth let me to be bapti­zed? Philip should not haue answered him: If thou belee­uest with all thine heart, thou mayest, but rather, If I may see thee disciplinate or indued with the power of Christ, to iudge and rebuke particular offenders, then mayest thou bee baptized. That the woorde Saintes and faithfull, are Synonyma, and signifie all one, and no differing thing in those places, it is easily proued, by that, the Apostle saluting the faith­full at Philippi, Philip. 1.1. doeth it by the title of Saintes onely. without the addition of the woorde faythfull. In like sort, directing his second Epistle, not onely to the church at Corinth, but to the rest of beleeuers also in all that prouince, hee vseth the woorde Saintes alone, to signifie them. Whereas if Saint Paul had meant any higher thing by the woorde Saintes, then hee doeth by faythfull in o­ther places, the Corinthians should not haue tolde, to whom his direction should haue perteined, since they be­ing men coulde iudge no further, than of the outwarde profession. This is made yet more then manifest, by comparing the direction of the first Epistle herewith: for there placing his titles iust oppositely, and calling the Churche at Corinth, Saintes, and the rest of professours, by the title of those that call on the name of our Lorde Iesus Christ, hee sheweth his flat iudgement to stande for the indifferent vse of those woordes: which confuteth the errour of Browne,Pag. 41. imagining the woorde Saintes to im­plie actuall holinesse, and not the profession of fayth, whereby (and that onely) euery one that holdeth it, are (in all humane iudgement) esteemed to stande vnder the sweete harbour of Christes imputation. And when I thus speake of esteeming Christians, onely by their pro­fession of the true fayth, I woulde not bee so vnder­stoode, as this garish fellowe taketh maister Cartwright, pages 6. and 7. but of such a profession as sheweth at leaste some good notes of gladnesse and willing­nesse to the woorde and meanes of fayth, though they [Page 101] be not atteined, neither to so high a pitch of knowledge, nor so set a course of holy practise, as either to subdue thē selues in all outward actions, or censure offending bre­thren in their particular trespasses. Therefore, when hee demaundeth, howe they that shewe forth a wicked and vnholy profession, shall still bee called the Saintes and Church of God? 1. Cor. ca. 11. & ca. 5 largely set downe in the latter discourse of communica­ting. His answere is ready. The Apostle called the Church at Corinth, Saints (notwithstanding their manifold vnholy practises, wherewith the ioynt assemblies were to bee charged, generally, and also the particular members se­uerally) in regarde of their present standing in the faith of Christ, who not onely taketh away the imputation of our sinnes (our sinnes, I meane, of the elect onely, in the sight of God, and of all such professours as I haue spoken of, as touching the iudgement and estimation of man:) but also by dayly degrees, carieth vs finally to the toppe of inherent perfection. For the hope whereof, and this present profession, whence that probably so ariseth, vn­till apparant appostacy breake forth, all the members of a Church are to bee reckoned Saintes and sanctified ones in Christ, like as Paul entituleth the Church of Corinth. This man saith: though Paul wrote his Epistle to the Church & Saints at Corinth, yet doth he not thereby call the incestuous per­son, or other grosse sinners, mēbers or parts of that Church. In all poynts of the question of a Church, I see, that a strange blindnes hath possessed him, in the steede of more then an ordinary knowledge, which hee pretendeth. For if the incestuous person were not a member of the church at Corinth, why did they separate him? Doth not separa­tion, or sundring, necessarily argue a vnion or being to­gether?1. Iob. 2.29. The distinction of Saint Iohn serueth not in this case: for hee speaketh of Aposttaes from the catholique faith, not of moral offenders that are to be reconciled to their places. And when he saith: they went out from vs, but they were not of vs, hee signifieth, that they were not of the catholique Church, which is the number of the e­lect: which distinction of catholique & particular Chur­ches, [Page 102] if Browne would obserue in any measure, it woulde no lesse auaile to the comfort of his owne confused con­science, then to the wel regarded peace of our Church. For a particular Church, being a conuenient number of such,The Definition of a particular Church. Act. 2.38.41. ca. comp. with cap. 9.31. Rom. 1.17. cap. 3.21.22. Philip. 3.9. Math. 13.4. as doe in one vniforme agreed, course of the out­ward ioynt worship of God, professe that righteousnesse, which is by the faith of Iesus Christ: consisteth both of the elect and reprobate, vnfeigned & counterfeit Christi­ans: being therfore rightly resembled by that net cast into the sea, that gathereth all kinds of things. And so (as touching the eye of man) all are to be accounted members of that Church, which ioyne together thus in one profession. And if open offences breake out in any, then appeareth diseased or rotting members, but yet members till they be separated: I meane still, as in the eye and iudgement of man, according as it behooueth vs to speake in all this question, of the state and condition of particular Chur­ches. The rest of his 41. page against M.C. was matter of his owne finding, like a bad husband that loues to make long haruest of a litle corne.

M. C. to prooue that there may be sundry thinges necessary to the comely and stable being, and yet not simply to the being of a Church, giueth two instances from the people of Israel, which neglected for the space of 40. yeeres, the holy Sacrament of circumcision, and the Passeo­uer, (also as it seemeth) one onely time excepted, and yet cea­sed not therefore to be the Church of God, and to haue the Sanctuarie amongest them. Browne saith, this matter is shame­fully abused: Pag. 42. but we shall see anon where the shame re­steth. His maner is to speake loude, and doe little. That there was no negligence in omitting circuncision, and the celebration of the Passeouer, but a necessitie and commaundement, he would prooue thus: and first for the Passeouer, because (saith he) It was not to be kept after their comming out of Egypt, saue at some special charge of the Lorde, as Numbers 9.2. till they came into the lande of Ca­naan. Howe prooues he this? First by some testimo­nies [Page 103] of Scripture full slenderly vnderstoode:Exod. 12.25. cap. 13.5. and se­condly, by a reason taken from the ende of the Passeo­uer, which maketh cleare against him. His Scriptures testifie, that they were more then once remembred to keepe the Passeouer, when they came into the lande of Ca­naan: but he sheweth vs not, that they were onely then to keepe it, and not ordinarily before.The keeping of the Passeouer a long time neg­lected by the people of Israel. To keepe the Passeouer in the wildernesse, and to keepe it also in the lande of Canaan, are in no wise contrary: so as to argue from the affirmation of the one, to the negation of the other. But although that be so beaten vpon, to pre­uent the securitie, or forgetfulnesse of them, or their posteritie, when they shoulde come to the lande of rest, as, least they should imagine that which figured their so hastie going out of Egypt, to cease, when they shoulde be at ease: yet must the whole institution be better considered, and thereby we shall see (as our Sauiour answered touching the billes of diuorce) that how­soeuer the Israelites practised afterwardes, yet in the beginning it was not so. For the Lorde saide,Exod. 12.14. This day shall be vnto you a remembraunce, and ye shall keepe it a holy feast vnto the Lorde throughout your generations: ye shall keepe it holy by an ordinance for euer. Verse 17. Verse 24. This is repeated a­gayne, and the thirde tyme, before he maketh mention of the lande of Canaan: and when he commeth to that, he doeth not bring it in expositiuely, as with, I meane, To wit, That is to say, or any such note of further opening that, which he had spoken before: but hauing said in the 24. verse, Therefore shall you obserue this thing, as an or­dinance for thee and thy sonnes for euer, he addeth:After Tremelius translation. Be it therefore, when you shall come into that lande, which Iehouah, euen as he hath sayde, shall giue vnto you, and shall obserue this worshippe: Be it, I say, that your children asking you what this worship meaneth, you shall say, &c. al which appea­reth (as I sayd) to be no restraint of the former generall & thryse repeated commandement, but partly a further [Page 104] enforcing of the perpetuitie of the ceremonie, by so spe­ciall enioyning euen their land of rest to be subiect vnto it, and partly to teach the deriuing of the vse thereof, to the generations long after. Also when he setteth downe that day, to all their posterity and generations: it is like­ly, that either they must obserue it in the wildernesse, or else they that then liued could not keepe the commaun­dement,Num. in teaching their children the practise & instruc­tion thereof. Againe, in the 9. of Numb. it is expressely no­ted, that they celebrated it then, in the first moneth of the second yere, which was the next in order to the passe­ouer in Aegipt, the Lord (as it were) making him-selfe a gratious remembrancer of them for that time: not vpon any speciall cause, as Browne would carry it, but onely be­cause the appointed time was returned: for the word of God, in no case is silent, to giue the reasons of any speciall ex­ceptions of generall commandements. Also if it had bin commaunded in the third or fourth yere, there had bene some little colour of that he saith. This is yet more eui­dent, seeing that in the same place, the Lord commaun­deth further, that it shoulde bee kept in the appointed time, namely the 14. day of the first moneth, and calleth that, the due season thereof. Which argueth plainly, that the keeping of that feast was seasonable, before they came to Canaan.Deut. 16.5.6. And therefore also, when they came beyonde Iordan, into the lande of Canaan (although they were not come to their rest,) yet they celebrated it, euen without any speciall commaundement from the Lorde, because it was the proper time of the Passeouer. Nowe whereas Browne reasoneth, that because it figured the ha­stie going out of Aegipt, and through the wildernes, therfore they were not ordinarily to keepe it, before they came to the land of rest: hee might much more reasonably haue concluded, therfore they ought to haue kept, &c. because the oftener me­ditating, and the mo helpes wee vse in the very action of perfourming our commaunded dueties, the more likely and probable is our better performaunce of the same. [Page 105] And that circumcision was omitted by negligence,Circumcision a long time neg­lected by the people of Israel. Iosh. 5.7. it is euident in Iosh. 5, where the cause of their vncircumcision is rendered, to be, neither necessitie, nor commaunde­ment, (as Browne fableth) but the very negligence of their parents, for so the text saith: They were vncircumcised, Ver. 9. be­cause they circumcised them not by the way. And therefore af­ter, the Lord calleth this their circumcising, the taking a­way the shame of Egipt from thē: plainly casting so in their teeth, their vncircūcision, as nothing else but a tricke of Egypt, which they sauored of, as they did of other their maners of worshipping their calues &c. Neither is it any thing, that he alleadgeth, of their let of iourneying. For first this generation at Gilgal might haue pretended the same, being not yet come to their place of rest: yea better in that, they being men growne, could not iourney after it, & should thereby be in euident danger of all their ene­mies about thē. Secondly, seeing God had cōmanded cir­cuncision at a certaine day, & not limitted their iourny­ing any certaine day, they were to thinke in all equitie, that the Lord would not dispose so of the remouing of the cloud or pillar, as that they should be hurt in the o­bedience of this cōmandement. Thirdly, if they had cir­cūcised their children as they ought, at 8. daies old, & not deferred it vntil they were of age, al men may know, that the children caried of their mothers, could not haue bene hurt by their mothers trauaile with thē. Last of al we may see, that euē in the iourney, which God required of Mo­ses, & that a iourney of great importāce,Exod. 4.24.25. he required not­withstanding his childes circumcision. Which argueth, that God gaue no dispensations in this matter for iour­nying. And therefore it must be concluded, as M.C. hath rightly reasoned, that if this people omitting these ne­cessary duties, ceassed not to be the Church & people of God, it is plaine, that many necessary poynts, perteining to a sound, comely & stable being, may bee found wan­ting, & yet the Church not presently ouerthrown therby. Nowe I suppose Browne him selfe will not say, that the [Page 106] politicall guiding of a Church, by the censuring disci­pline, is greater then these twaine. And in this respect (saith M. C.) the Dutch assemblies, whereof the greatest part in high Germanie, which besides the mayme of discipline which is common to our Churches, are grossely deceiued in the matter of the Supper, are notwithstanding holden in the rowle of the Churches of God. In this respect also, certaine assemblies of our profession, which hauing the vse of the discipline permitted vnto them, and not suffered to haue the vse of the Sacrament of the Lordes supper, are not therefore when the Lordes Churches are mustered, and their names written and enrouled vp, cast out as vnfit to be in any account of the Lordes hoste. Browne saith, the Dutch Churches erre in transubstantiation: but he iudgeth it not an heresie. If he can vnderstande any difference be­tweene transubstantiation and consubstantiation, he may ac­knowledge to the correction of his rashnesse, howe well he was ouerseene when he wrote it. Then in that he ac­counteth it an error & not an heresie, he declareth what a crooked rule his affection is to iudge by: calling al things that he esteemeth amisse in my writings, heresie, (though he knowe not whether I will defende them or no when they are shewed me) and yet pleadeth for popish transub­stantiation, that it should not be condemned for an he­resie.

As for the Lutherish consubstantiation, there can not but grosse absurdities followe thereof, euen to the ouer­throw of Christs humanitie, and that it is stoutly main­teined by furious and brawling writings, and followed in the persons that withstand them, by prison & banish­ment: Browne, if he were not a very emptie vessell of all good learning and reading, woulde neuer haue made doubt of it. That there are some Churches of our profession, which hauing discipline, are withheld from the vse of the lordes Supper, If a church may be without a Sacrament, then much more without this discipline. it maketh nothing against him, but against vs, as he ima­gineth: but in deede it is such a wounde to his cause, as he can neuer cure. For if a Church maye be without [Page 107] the vse of one of the Sacramentes, and yet be a Church, howe much more may it be a Church, if it want the dis­cipline in question? Touching M. C. comparison of the bodye of man, most proper to set out the state of the Church, and a thing often vsed in the Scriptures to such purpose. Browne, being not able to escape the eui­dence of the trueth that appeared in it, passeth it ouer with a deepe silence in his answere, and onely in the margent of M. C. epistle setteth downe this worde, A fopperie, for a full confutation: wherein (me thinkes) the Reader may well allowe his wit though not his ho­nestie. M. C. his last illustration of the former reasons,Discipline to a Church as a wal to a Citie, or a hedge to a vine­yarde. is thus set downe. Was not Hierusalem after the returne from Babylon, the Citie of the great King, vntill such time as Nehemias came and builded vp the walles of the Citie? To say therefore it is none of the Church of God, because it hath not receiued this discipline, me thinkes it is all one with this, as if a man woulde say, It is no Citie, because it hath no wall: or, that it is no vineyarde, because it hath neither hedge nor ditch. It is not, I graunt, so sightly a Citie or vineyarde, nor yet so safe against the inuasion of their seuerall enemies, which lye in wayte for them: but yet are they truely both Cities and vineyardes. Agaynst this, Browne trifleth beyonde all measure. And first, as if M. C. had sayde,Pag. 43.44.45. that the walles of Hierusalem, by precise testimonie out of the Scripture, signified Discipline, whereas hee draweth the similitude but indifferentlye as from anye Citye, though Hierusalem bee named as a famous instance, in steade of all others in lyke case: and that hee doeth touching the vse of a wall, which is most apt to set foorth the effecte and fruite of the Discipline: because, as the one is the defence of a citie whereby it is continued, so the other preserueth a Church in health and stable standing. And it is most sot­tish that vpon some places of Scripture (and the chiefe of them touching onely the Catholique Church, and so [Page 108] quite from the question of a particular) by which the Church may be said to be builded in the walles of a city, to reason as though it may not therefore in any wise be compared also with the Citizens & Burgesses of a Citie, which are compassed with discipline, as with walles: see­ing Saint Paul doeth tearme them citizens of the Saintes.Ephe. 2.19. So is it more then childish, that he citeth the Psalmes for the praising of the citie by the walles and gates thereof, sith euery Grammar boy coulde haue tolde him it to be a trope of Synecdoche: a part for the whole. Againe, such is his follie in citing Nehemiah, Nehem. 2.3.5. where he knoweth not, that the maner of speach is, to debase the being of a thing, as though it were not, vpon want of some chiefe orna­ment, or speciall point of commoditie that belongeth vnto it, as also that the building of part of the citie, is cal­led the building of the citie. The praises of Ierusalem therefore taken from the walles and gates thereof, is (as I haue said) a speach, wherein the lesse is taken to note the greater, & is more effectuall then if he named the whole, or the greater parts thereof. For seeing the Lord loueth the wal so much, or the gates more then other cities, how much more the whole citie? and although he thinke it is no Church til the walles be builded, yet the reader shal obserue, that the people of God sacrificed, as in the tem­ple (which was the place only appointed for the sacrifice) when only the foundation of the temple was laide,Ezra. 3. and found therein that mercie & comfort from the Lord, for the which they solemnly praised his holy Name. And ac­cordingly is it meet for Christians in a careful endeuour of further building, to be thankful euen for the foundati­ons: though Browne can find no matter of thanks vnlesse we had all. whereas if he stil withdraw, til he find such a church, yea as that hath the walles of discipline made vp in all the parts that he respecteth, & as his best writings intend, he shall neuer ioyne with any Church, if he could liue whilest the world endureth. But to proceede to the rest of his cauils, there needeth no great remembrance to [Page 109] bring forth what a citie may be without a wall, and vine­yard without a hedge.Pol. Arist. lib. 1. And if he had conceiued of the be­ing & definition of a city, any whit more scholerlike than a waterbearer, he would with the learned, & all that be skilful in the state of things, haue defined it, by the lawes and policie, and not by the walles thereof. For if it should happen to be dismantilled, it ceaseth not therefore to be a citie. When as therefore a number of men may meete together to associate themselues by certaine lawes, and a­greements amongst themselues, without hauing a wall, it is euident that a citie may bee without a wall. Likewise let al indifferent men iudge, whether a space of ground set and furnished with plants, or hearbs, hath the substance of a garden, orchard, or vineyard, and is rightly to be cal­led so. I speake not of what course we take, in making or­chards or vineyards, but of what course may be taken in this busines, in regard of the substance of the things. And so, if a man not fearing, or not foreseeing such outwarde violences, as a fence might keepe out, doe replenish, as is aforesaide, his ground adioining to his house or other­where, for the vses of orchard, garden or vineyarde, shall they not in deed be such things, and so truely called of him? And if afterward, finding or conceiuing a discom­moditie of the want, wil he not say, I must sense in my or­chard-garden or vineyard? If Browne scorne to be taught these things of the learned, or of common sense, yet (at least) let him lay his hand on his mouth, and hearken to the prophet, by whom the Lord said,Zecha. 2.4 [...] Ierusalem shalbe inha­bited without a wall. He spake so after the maner of men, a­mongst whō that might come passe, for the deepe peace and great securitie they should haue. Now to become of a citie no citie, is no mending but declining case, but the Lord speaketh thereby, of their bettering and happier state: and therefore the want of a wall taketh not away the being of a citie. And I pray you, in a citie besieged, the walles in many breeches, through the batterie, being en­tred, tell me what it is, that the souldiors afterwards are [Page 110] said to sacke?Esay. 5. must you not say, they sacke the citie? Also Esay doth manifestly declare, that the Lord planted his vineyard, yer euer he hedged it, or did other cost vnto it. And when he magnifieth his mercy thus towardes his church, in saying that by this means, he had left nothing vndone which he could do to his vineyard, he therby de­clareth, that he had done more to it, than many that haue vineyards vse to do. And therfore more than was necessa­rie to the very being of it. Again, by the same reason that they denie it to be a vineyard, because it hath no hedge, they might denie it to bee a vineyarde because it hath no watchtower, winepresse, and such other. Moreouer when the Lord tooke away the hedge, as there he threatneth he would, I would knowe, what the enemies of the Church did tread vnderneath their feete, did they not treade the the Lords vineyard? But it may bee thought a shame to stand so long in the proofe of this which Browne is not a­shamed with tedious strife of words to denie.

When as these things, by the grace of God, are thus established, the contrarie mistes dispelled, which the ad­uersarie had cast in, to darken the trueth, and discipline founde, not to be of the essence of a Church, which is the verie knife, whereby al the sinewes of the Brownists con­tentious arme against the Church of Englande (from which they draw their disciples,) are cut asūder: yet in the knitting vp of this point, there be two things, which in as fewe wordes as I can, I woulde admonish the reader of. First,The Church of Englād by these writings not iu­stified in any of her corruptions. that although M. Cartwright in his Epistle to M. H. and I, in these my defences, doe thus farre speake to the iustifying of the Church of Englande, wherein we haue receyued that spirituall life and comfort, which doe worthily drawe out of vs these duties,Here is also Ha­rison answered, for that he sayth to this purpose vpon the 122. Psalme. yet haue wee (through the grace of God) nothing lesse in our minds, than to iustifie anie corruption that may bee espied in it. So vnworthie a burthē is it therfore that Browne laieth vpō vs, out of the Prophet, charging vs (when we auouch the Church of England, notwithstanding the defects and [Page 111] corruptions that it hath, to be yet a Church of GOD,Iere. 7.4. from which no faithfull man is to separate) as though we pleaded for and boulstred vp iniquitie and corruption by the glorious titles of The Temple of God, The Temple of God. The cases are too vnlike, for a man that is well in his wittes, to compare together. The Iewes so pleaded the prerogatiue of the Temple, to confute the Prophetes threatning of iudgements, for their sinnes and transgres­sions: as though it could not be true, that by any means God should forsake them, to whom hee had made such plenteous promises, & that so long as they kept the ex­ternal worship which God had appointed, they thought themselues not so far chargeable with their wicked ma­ners. Directly contrary both in iudgement and affection, are wee vnto them (by the grace of God) in all this busi­nes. We esteeme the state of our Church in some respects grieuous and lamentable ynough, full of prouocations of the heauie displeasure and indignation of the Lorde, which as wee acknowledge to bee most iust, if they had bene powred downe vpon vs now long ago: so wee are out of doubt they wil come, if we find not grace to turn and seeke the Lorde more dutifully, while the day of his long suffering yet endureth. And for this cause we ear­nestly beseech those rhat are the Lordes remembran­cers, not to keepe silence, neither to giue him rest,Esay. 66.6.7. Esay. 58.1. as also the Prophets whome the Lorde hath sent, to lift vp their voyces as a trumpet, to tell the people their sinnes, and Israel their transgressions. Onely withall wee ad­monish,Matth. 13.6. that whatsoeuer the Lorde hath ioyned toge­ther, no man doe separate. Which being a vniuersall precept of the eternall GOD, bindeth as well euerie particular member, to keepe the vnitie of the Church, which the Lorde hath gathered by the preaching of Christ crucified, as it doth the Church it selfe, to the ioint vse of all holie dueties and meanes of her encrease. In both of which, wee humblie craue an equall regard and consideration. Otherwise as the ministerie of him that [Page 112] crieth to the Churches,Reuel. 2.6. to repent, and bee mindfull of those things, from whence they are fallen, to strengthen the rest that are readie to die, that their workes may be full before the Lord. And to buy golde of Christ to enrich them, Reuel. and white garmentes to couer their nakednesse, As (I say) his ministerie breaketh not the heade,Psal. 144.4.5. Prou. 27.6. Luk. 10.33.34. The Church of England should be reprooued, but not forsakē. but is like that wine and oyle of the Sa­maritane, powred into their woundes, for a gratious recouerie of health: so on the contrarie, he that, seeing the mournefull estate of anie Church, tending to deso­lation and ruine, shall fall a gathering by himselfe, or a­nie way shrinke from bestowing all his strength to the vpholding and rebuilding thereof, he playeth that en­uious Onans part,Gen that abhorred the building of his bro­thers house, respecting more the spread of his own name, than making conscience of Gods holy ordinance. And as his sinne is so much greater than Onans, by how much the ouerthrow of many Churches, alreadie gathered, is greater, than the refusall to reuiue the name of one house or familie, by so much the greater iudgement also is to bee feared from the Lorde. Yet was Onans sinne re­uenged by GOD with death. The other thing that I would haue the reader perfect in, is this: that this Trou­blechurch Browne, not receyuing the loue of the trueth, touching the being of a Church in Christ by faith, but striuing for other groundes and essentiall causes thereof, which the Lorde neuer acknowledged, is (in a heauie, though iust iudgement), compassed about with a strong delusion, so as hee hath not abstained from defiling the verie couenant of life, to his owne, and all that follow af­ter him, most certaine destruction, if the balme of Gods grace bee not sent in time to heale them. For in the fore­part of his answere to maister Cartwright,Pag. he miserablie confoundeth the couenant of the lawe with the couenant of the Gospel.Rom. 5.20. Gal. 3. & 4. cap. Whereof the first hath the condition of workes a part: the other is made simplie without condi­tion of workes, if we beleeue only. He abuseth to his pur­pose a number of places, all which proue that the esta­blishment [Page 113] of the couenāt of grace hath necessarily good works ioyned withall, as effects or fruits,Browne dange­rously erreth, touching the couenant. but not as cau­ses, and so any part of the couenant, as he grossely suppo­seth. Some sentences of his I will set downe for those that haue not his bookes. It is written (sayeth hee,) walke be­fore me and be thou vpright, and I will make my couenant be­tweene me and thee. As who say, one condition and part of the couenant is, our vpright and good profession. And this profes­sion he telleth you, what he meaneth by, in another place:Def. uam. 38. where he sayth. Our profession and submission to his lawes and gouernement, is the keeping of our couenant by leading a godly and Christian life. Nowe in the same place, he defineth the couenant on our behalfe, to be our agreement and partaking of conditions with God. That he shall be our God, so long as wee keepe vnder his gouernement, and obey his lawes and no longer. As for fayth, the couenant thus beeing corrupted,Brownes faith. howe should it escape the defilement of his fingers?In his declara­ration of the ga­thering togither of certaine per­sons, etc. Therfore in a certaine place he defineth faith to be a conscience of our re­demption and happinesse in Christ, whereby wee wholy yeelde vp our selues vnto him in newnesse of life. And vpon this he ad­deth, So fayth cannot bee, except wee bee, so renued, that no o­pen grosse wickednesse bee in vs. Where indeede appeareth to bee the fountaine of all his grosse reasoning, when he denieth the profession to bee good, where it is not al­together good, without mixture of corruption. The o­pening of which things, together, in this place, (the like whereof I haue also pointed at otherwher) I doe not for the disgrace of the man, (though that withal, if he amend not, shall iustly accompanie it) but directly to disgrace falshood, and lay open the way of vnrighteousnesse, with the issue thereof, vnto his folowers. The cōmoditie of it, I hope, shall be great in two principall respects. One, that the same path of death, which he hath beaten vnto them, may be shunned of of al that loue the way of life. And the other that no man hereafter maruell (seeing this contra­rietie in points of foundation) that Bro. quarelleth with, and separateth from the Church of England, as of which, [Page 114] he is in no wise worthy to be a member. And now to cō ­clude,By Brownes Faith himselfe is prooued no Christian. in that he saith, Faith cannot be, except we be so renued, that no open grosse wickednesse appeare in vs: from his owne mouth this sentence must proceed against him, that he is no Christian. Doe you aske howe I can proue it? Let the same his assertion be the proposition, therhence I assume thus, Browne hath open grosse wickednesse in him, nowe the conclusion followeth, Therefore Browne hath not fayth. You will aske proofe of my assumption, I giue it you thus: Rayling, reuiling, and slaundering, publikely sparsed a­brode in writings agianst any, is open grosse wickednesse, but Browne hath committed these things: witnesse this his libell against me: (omitting all his other writings at this time) wherein I yeelde the iudgement to all that haue seene it, whether they haue found the like vnscholerlike scolding, such base reuiling, so peremptorie without all proofe, accusing, and vnchristian beyond all charitie, slan­dering (both me and manie) in the writings of any, the vilest heretikes in our memorie. To those that haue not seene it, let these few places, in stead of his multitude, te­stifie. His reuiling phrases are such as these, but infinitely repeated. num. 53. O blind Pharisee: or rather O froward he­retike. num. 54. Thou blind Pharise. num. 60. O false tongued man, shall not God plucke thee out of the land of the liuing? num. 78. Nay thine and thy partners hypocrisie, ioyned with enuie, out­rage, and crueltie, shall be better knowne. Thou teachest F. thy fogging Phisike, and hee teacheth thee his lying diuinitie. num. 79. The wretch careth not what he forgeth against vs. And by and by after: O caitife, thou wouldest fayne heare of it, that wee were all hanged, num. 103. Thou vnpitifull and gracelesse writer and falsifier, &c. These may giue a glimpse of his ray­ling. Nowe for his slandering. num. 34. The hypocrisie of rayling F. and Bredwell with their partners, is hidden in rich mens houses, sometimes in deceytful fastings, as though we should haue present reformation, and somtimes in delicate feastings, in bribes, gifts, shew of almes to the poore, when all goeth into their owne bellies or purses. num. 75. If all were such persecuting [Page 115] wretches as Bredwell is, they were not onely infidels, denying the fayth, but also woorse than infidels, because they yet suffered the beleeuers to dwell in the same house with them: but Bred­well and his partners would not suffer them to dwell in the same Citie with them, no not in the same Countrey, no not vpon the face of the earth. num. 77. Nay false hypocrite, this word onely is thine owne addition, &c. It is thy maner and thy partners, to force, to threaten, to make stirrings and hurlie burlies, and to driue man and wife asunder. Thine and their outrage cannot be satisfied with bloud. Thine and their raylings, slaunders and false accusations, haue brought diuerse of vs to death, some by the Gibbet, some by long imprisonment, some by flight and pursuit, some by extreame care, death and sickenesse: some by seas, some by necessitie and want, some by chaunging aire, dwelling and place. The bloud of all these shall bee vpon thine and thy part­ners heades. Three other places, to wit, num. 115.116. 117. Whether they conteyne grosse blasphemie, not on­ly agaynst men, but against GOD, and his worde, I re­ferre it to the consciences of all that haue seene them, (for, I thinke it nor good for some respects, to set them downe) and appeale to the searcher of the hearts and reines for iudgement. These things considered, I trust I may with the Christian readers consent, conclude, that there is open grosse wickednesse found in this man, from whence by his owne rule it followeth, that he hath not fayth: and so consequently is no Christian.

From the 74. to the 78.

8 So farre (saith the Admonition) he proceedeth in se­ducing, that he saith,The 6. corrup­tion wherewith the Admon­chargeth Bro. prooued. the wife ought to go away from her husband, if he will not go with her, in the case of want or bondage of this discipline. Browne sayth, I falsifie the case. as though he had onely spoken of heathenish husbands, frō whom it should be lawful for the wiues to go, when they became in danger of persecuting by thē. The reader seeth, the issue here betwixt vs to be this: whether Bro. hath taught, that wāt or bōdage of discipline, is cause suf­ficient for [Page 116] a wife to go away from her husbād. These be my prooues out of his writings. Let the reader iudge. Speaking of a place of Paul to the Corinthes, he hath these words: And therefore hee teacheth the woman which beleeueth to abide with the vnbeleeuing man, Tit. against par. preach. & hired &c. and the seruant which beleeueth, to keepe with his master, except they be froward & persecute, or the whole Church be helde there in bondage, or they cannot hold the true worship, and all Christian duties, with the sufferance of other and the safetie of their liues. For then they may flee, &c. Here his exception being disiunctiue, putteth three cases wherein the wife may goe from her husband. 1. For frowardnesse and persecuting by him. 2. For the bondage of the Church, where they dwell. 3. (As it seemeth to me) if she be in daun­ger by others. But I intermeddle onely with that, where­with I haue alreadie charged him. If we will knowe what he meaneth by the bondage of the Church, let other places of his giue the interpretation. In his answer to M.C. pag. 37. shewing howe he vnderstandeth the discipline of the Church to faile, he sayth, Though some preacher or other per­son offende, yet doeth not therefore the discipline of the Church faile, or want, except the Church be negligent, or wilfully refuse to redresse such offences, or is brought into bondage that it cannot redresse them. Here he interpreteth bondage to bee when a Church cannot redresse faults. In the 15. Pag. of the same booke, hee sheweth what hee esteemeth the cause of that bondage, in these words: What is a church without this power we speake of? yea what are those assemblies, which in stead of it, doe holde that Antichristian power of the spirituall courtes, or rather are held in bondage by it? Nowe if the wife ought to goe from her husbande, where the Church is in bon­dage, and that same bondage must bee vnderstoode, when as a Church hath not power and free libertie to censure and redresse offences, without restraint of anie spirituall Courtes, it followeth to bee his doc­trine, as I haue charged him, that a wife ought to goe away from her husbande (if hee will not goe with her) onely for the want or bondage of the outwarde disci­pline [Page 117] where they dwell. Neither doe I by that word onely adde any thing that is not his. For if the wife may goe from her husbande for this one cause amongst others, it followeth and is necessarily intended, that for this on­ly she may goe from him. His cauill at my word enforce is as witlesse: for whatsoeuer is taught as a thing giuen in charge and commandement from God, that same enfor­ceth the conscience to a practise. Whether Browne by a charge and commandement as from God, doe enforce the wife to such dealing with her husband, let these spea­ches of his be called to witnesse. [...]itl against par. pr. & hyred lect. &c. It (or the Church) must hold the true flocke, and seeke the right shepheardes, and depart from others. This is commanded to all, and therefore though the husband will not, yet the wife must doe it, or the husband, though the wife be against it. And by and by after: For we shew, that so farre we must be from hearing or receiuing of such pastours & ministers, and from dwelling in their Parishes, that the wife may not tarie for the husband to flee from them if he be vntoward. Al­so in the very place where he accuseth me for this matter, his owne wordes do againe answere for me. Browne (saith he) hath not one worde of enforcing, but onely, the husbande or wife in such a case haue libertie, and it is their duetie. Nowe, where any thing is laide vpon vs, as a duetie vnto God, what libertie the conscience hath to choose the doing or not doing of it, let all that haue any conscience iudge. His Number 78. is answered.

To the 79.

9. The admonition hath these wordes, I heare besides, that there is one among you, who whispereth already in corners, that we must not beleeue in the holy Ghost. This (I protest) was no guesse, or light coniecture of mine, but a thing testifi­ed by two sufficient witnesses vnto me: the man also I can name, if it were conuenient, and he was then in the same schisme with Browne for the matter of Discipline.

10. To that which is from the 80. to the 97. I answere not.

To that which is from the 97. to the 104.

Browne proued to be a commit­ter of the same things he con­demneth: and is contrary to him selfe in all those poyntes where­with the admo­nition chargeth him.11 The reader must vnderstande, that the admonition entreth 2. general accusations against Browne, to prooue him a man not to be followed, but forsaken: one is vn­sound and dangerous doctrine, the other, his wauering and changeablenesse. The first and most grieuous, I trust is now made manifest, the latter needeth fewer wordes: the proofe of it standeth in these iiii. poynts. 1. Whether he haue condemned the arte of lodgicke as vnlawfull for Christi­ans, and yet vsed it him selfe. 2. Whether he haue heretofore prouoked all true worshippers to flee out of England, as to auoyde the displeasure of God: and yet both dwelleth here him selfe, & hath counselled a resorting to our sermons. 3. Whether he haue subscribed. 4. VVhether his two assertions concerning disci­pline, haue in them that which is contrary, yea, or no. If these thinges be found true, then it followeth that the man is mutable also, euen as necessitie of time & place do draw & straine him. As for the first point cōcerning lodgicke, it is a wonder to see how the poore man rūneth, frō one corner to another to hide his nakednes, & when he hath all done, the best defence he hath, is that which serueth him alwaies, euen a face that cā neuer shew one token of shame or modestie in it. O desperate impudencie: doeth Bro. deny that he hath cōdemned the arte of lodgicke as vnlawful?Brownes first contradiction prooued. what can he say to induce any of his disciples to beleeue him? thus he beginneth assone as he hath gi­uen me the lie: In deed vaine lodgicke is named in the margēt, and so is vaine philosophie named by sundry writers, also vaine arts, vaine & false sciences, & that out of the scripture: yet are neither those learned writers, nor the scriptures cōdemned there­fore. He woulde haue the reader beleeue, that there is a vaine lodgicke & a good lodgicke: & that he spoke but against the vaine lodgicke. This is to please a child with a plumme, when he hath hurt him before with throwing him downe. But his vaine epethite was in deede no di­stinction of lodgickes, but onely as an ouerfilling of his furious penne, and conceited forme of his malitious vt­terance, [Page 119] for all lodgicke and phylosophie is by him con­demned, as by the grace of God, I will prooue. After that, he saith, There is a vaine arte of lodgicke, a false deceitful and contentious sophistrie, and yet a lawful and artificial vse of reason. This is absurd, to confound an arte and the abuse of an arte together: and he might aswell call heresie, diui­nitie, as sophistrie lodgicke. But hee proceedeth thus: wherefore Browne condemneth not reason (which they call lod­gicke) but the arte of lodgicke, that is, their euill order and false manner of vsing or rather abusing reason. Doe we call Lod­gicke, reason? beware (beloued) his fowling net of ma­ny meanings. The worde Lodgicke is deriued from two Greeke wores, which together signifie, To vse reason, Lodgicke and the originall thereof briefly poynted out. and so the learned vnderstand by the worde lodgicke, the rule of disputing or reasoning: not reason it selfe, but the regular vse thereof: not the actual nor habituall know­ledge, which is in euery man, according to greater or les­ser aptnes and clearnes, but a ruled course of long obser­ued precepts, for the helpe of all. And this artificiall rule of reasonīg, foloweth & expresseth (as in a sensible image) the vniuersal force of the naturall, as of the first paterne or sampler, diligētly obserued according to the motions insited in humane wits, & expressed by the vse of excellēt men. For the same vniuersal force, & particular formes of natural reasoning, drawn frō the vse of al chief wits, & stil able to be cōfirmed by the testimony of al monumēts of wisdom, sacred or prophane, this (I say) doth arte, hauing drawen the same to certaine ordered heads, propoūd, as the image of nature, to be imitated in disputing, that so a man beholding in this artificial glasse, as it were the face of his antient estate, before the finful deprauatiō (which brought in, not only that same disorder & corruptīg of our affections, but also this confuse cloudines of our vn­derstāding, which we see in euery one, more or lesse clea­red, according as they haue more or lesse laboured in re­forming it, either by the obseruatiōs of all times, which stande in arte, or els by their owne proper obseruations, which consist [Page 120] in the rawe experience of their owne short liues) might striue on still, to take away the spottes remaining: eche succeding generation, enioying herein the benefit of the formers labours. Wherehence we see both the common meanes which the Lorde hath vsed to bring this age pre­sent, the ripenes that it sheweth this way: as also howe it cōmeth to passe, that arte, which was at first but natures scholler, becommeth at length, after a sort, her scholemi­stresse. Now then, let not this lodgickebiter beguile you (beloued) with any shifting sophistrie (which is indeede all the arte he hath) by confounding reason & lodgicke together, which can neuer be taken one for the other, in a proper kind of speaking, no more then the image of a man can in proper speach, be called a man But let vs fur­ther marke his words: Browne (saith he) condemneth not rea­son (which they cal Lodgicke) but the arte of lodgicke &c. I did neuer charge him to condemne reason, but the artificial vse of reason called lodgicke: nowe if his answere be any thing to me at al, it must needes be that one of these two is meant in this his Apollo-like answere: namely, that he condēneth not natural reasoning, but artificial reasoning: or els, that he condēneth not all lodgicke or artificial reasoning, but only our lodgicke & artificial frames of reasoning. Let him choose which he wil, and his owne answere ouerthroweth him: for if he be thereby vnderstoode to condemne artificiall reasoning, he is contrary to himselfe hauing said a litle before, that there is a lawful and artificial vse of reasoning: if he say he condēneth but only our frame & arte of reaso­ning, he giueth me ynough to prooue my cause against him:In his booke of L [...]ef▪ & Diuis. Ans to M.C. pag. 44.56.57. in his couf with M.E. and M.P. in his repl. to the quest. of commu­nio. and in his Answ. to my Ad­monition. for if he auouch our lodgicke, as it standeth in vse at this day, to be vnlawful, he auoucheth the thing that I charge him withall, & then I say, why hath he vsed it him selfe? yea why doeth his answere afterward deny syllogi­sticall reasoning to be simply vnlawful? why also hath he vsed the very tearms both of our lodgicke & rhetoricke, which otherwhere so Momus-like he scoffeth at? the example of Paules fighting with beastes at Ephesus is by him [Page 121] abused, sith Paule therein vsed no course that was vn­lawfull and condemned by the word of God, but Browne vseth our Lodgicke, which himselfe hath sayd to be for­bidden in Gods Word, and therefore vnlawfull. His quarrelling at my words simply forbidden, sheweth his vn­learnednesse: for that is to be called simply forbidden, which, not in regard of circumstances, but in regard of the thing it selfe is sayd to be forbidden: and therefore, though he haue not the word simply, yet he hath the force thereof in his speech, so long as he condemneth the arte in selfe and euery part thereof. But why (belo­ued) doth he stiffely auouch, that He hath not sayd Lod­gicke is an vnlawfull arte, a heathenish foppery, &c? beleeue me, it is not because he trusteth to the goodnesse of his cause (for the places that I quoted are more plaine, then that any doubting can be left) but in that, he hath either gotten some Giges ring, to cloake his adulterating of the Scriptures, or else a bodie of such cameleonish substance, as hath sundrie colours at sundrie beholdings. For let the word Lodgicke be taken, as I haue now shewed it ought to be, and the Sunne is not clearer in his full shine and light, then that this my accusation of Brownes condemning Lodgicke, is playne and manifest. I wyll poynt a place or two for those that haue not his bookes. Did euer any godly (sayth he) professe their Lodgicke, before Christ came in the flesh, or since his comming, till the comming vp of Antichrist, was it studied and learned? was it then no­thing needfull, and is it now so needfull? Doth not Paule speake of Lodgicke in that place where he writeth of spoiling by Philo­sophie and vayne deceipt? Afterwards, dealing with the obiections made against that sense of Paules writing to the Colossians, he handleth the reuerend Beza like as a scurrilous iester, rather then as a modest diuine should do, and that because he acknowledgeth not Lodgicke to be forbidden in that place of the Apostle: these be his owne words, let the Reader iudge.Cap. 2.8. So doth he in that place to the Colossians, not as Beza would interpret it of the three [Page 122] sorts of corruptions, the first, of speculations, the second, of he himselfe cannot tell what, saue that he sayth, it standeth vpon custome and fayned inspirations: the third was of ioyning the Lawe worship with the Gospell. Thus he would poynt at Paules meaning, and doth driue another way. For Paule nameth the vanitie and deceiptfulnes of Philosophie, and sheweth, that that is after mans traditions, or the rules and principles of this world, and not after Christ: and so he doth strike at that strong tree of vanitie, which is Philosophie, and the roote thereof, which is mans traditions, or the rules and principles of their worldly artes. But Beza for one tree, hath got himselfe three, namely, speculations, customes, and inspirations, and the ceremoniall worship. In stead of philosophy, which Paule calleth vayne de­ceipt, he nameth curious speculations; as if one should aske a Hatchet, and he should giue him the helue. Paule would roote out all their philosophie; and Beza but some part, &c. A man would thinke there needeth no great labour to prooue out of these words, that Browne holdeth both lodgick and all philosophy to be forbidden in the Scriptures: but heare him further, for soone after, he taketh vpon him, out of Timothy and Iob, to reiect euery part of lodgick by name, and therevpon follow these words: But what, say they, is there no vse of lodgick? what say you then to a thing and the cause thereof? for the effect is knowne by the cause, and the cause by the effect: so they giue vs four sorts of causes, but we returne them vpon them as the spillings of their drunkennes. Againe, They demaund heere, whether definitions be vnlaw­full, we answere, that to name the kinds and sorts of things, and to name their natures, is not vnlawfull, but their idle arte of defining is vnlawfull: and to thrust their definitions as miste­ries into our bosomes, or to tearme the naming of things, or their natures whereby they are called, by the words of their vaine arte is wholly vnlawfull. It is manifest that when he wrote these things, he dissembled not (as now he doth) to pro­fesse the condemning of lodgick: else let euen his next words following the last rehearsed (wherein he preten­deth to answere an obiection against him) be called to [Page 123] witnesse. If they aske (sayth he) why me then vse the names, and haue laboured also so much in defining, we tell them, that we returne their owne weapons vpon them, not that we care for such weapons, but because they feare them so much, we haue tryed if they may dismay them in their folly, and turne them to the truth. Heere by the manner of his answere, (you see) is nothing lesse, then a denyall of condemning the arte, which is now all the refuge the snared Foxe can finde. If he could haue enioyed his supposed rest, within the har­bour of that answere, there should his Ship haue remay­ned still, but when he perceiued by the admonition, that there was a rocke for his estimation to perish vpon (be­cause this cannot be denyed, that whatsoeuer things are vnlawfull, Christians ought not vse) he rather chose this shamelesse denying of that which cannot be denied, then that he would giue glory vnto God, in acknowledging his fault, and forsaking his errour: wherein let all true Israelites iudge, whether it appeare, that the loue of himselfe and prayse of men, be more pretious in his eyes, then the loue of God, and prayse of his glorious name.

To the 104.105.106.

12 The second point, wherin the admonition proueth his vnconstancy, is this:Brownes se­cond contra­diction proued. that he once held it a tempting of God, for any that followed his course, to tarry in Eng­land: and since againe, both himselfe is returned, dwel­leth heere, heareth our Sermons, and hath by priuate writings counsailed others so to doe. These contrarie courses (I say) considered with this, that notwithstan­ding hys later practise, the man remayneth of the same iudgement against the English assemblyes, which he helde before, when he passed the Seas, and called hys chickens after hym: let the godly iudge, whether his footesteppes may sauoure of the guiding of Gods spirite, and so argue that same assurance in the con­science,Rom. 14.5.23. which the Apostle Paule calleth for in all our actions, yea or no. Hys aunswere for thys is lyke the [Page 124] former, euen with a cauterized conscience, denying that, which he knoweth to be true. The bare quotations in the admonition made him bold: but he ought to haue remembred, that there might come a day, wherein they should be enlarged, and set downe to his shame. Now, that he prouoked to flee out of England, let these his words be first considered: Therefore thus saith the Lord, Titl. against disordred prea­ching at Paules &c. England by Brownes wri­tings is Aegipt, but by his pra­ctise Ierusalem. In the same title. I feed not my flocke at Paules Crosse in London, or S. Ma­ryes in Cambridge, or in your English parishes. O yee my sheepe, goe yee not thither, as though there were my folde, and there I rested, and fed my flocke, for there be Shepheards and flocks also that follow them, whith are not of Christ, for they hold of An­tichrist. Also he sayth, If in all England or in some more fa­mous places of England, whether great Cities or Vniuersities, or the Court it selfe, we see not the Kingdome of God maintai­ned, but persecuted, and the true worship of God refused, a false worship and idoll seruice wilfully suffered, and many Popish abhominations vpheld and established, from thence the Lord doth take away his kingdome, as it is written: The kingdome of God shall be taken from you, and giuen to a nation which shall bring foorth the fruites thereof. Yea, none may continue to preach the truth vnto those, when once they haue boldly testified it, and they put it from them, &c. Afterward he sheweth his mea­ning more cleerely thus: In Aegipt the whole Church was in bondage, and it wholly departed, yet did Pharao giue leaue there to worship God rightly, but answere was made, it is not meete so to doe in this place: for loe, can we sacrifice the abho­mination of the Aegyptians before their eyes, and they not stone vs? so also in England, though the Magistrates should giue vs leaue to worship God rightly, yet the true worship and reforma­tion of the Church is abhomination to the Bishops, and other wicked Preachers and people, and what stirrings and hurly bur­lyes would they make? but they say, we must abide such troubles. In deede, we must heare them, when we cannot auoyde them, and in auoyding them, we must take heed to hold still a good consci­ence: but we tempt God, as did many of the Iewes, if when we may go out of Aegipt, and auoide such troubles, we will not, or [Page 125] murmure against it. Yet if this be not playne ynough,Decl. of gathe­ring and ioy­ning together of certaine per­sons, &c. that he vnderstandeth England for Aegipt, let him re­member where he confesseth, He was accused of false do­ctrine (by his owne company) because he sayd, that Eng­land was as Aegipt, both for the outward bondage and oppres­sion of the Church, by Popish forcing, lawes, and penalties, and for all kinde of wickednesse, and because he sayd they did sinne, which had a full purpose to dwell still in England, when the Lord did call them away, and they had libertie to depart. Now when he accompteth them called away, his owne penne also hath instructed vs, namely, in these his words follo­wing. Yea though the Magistrate giue them leaue there to dwell as they liked, yet the lawes and disorders abiding still the same, they could not there tarrie. Also in another place:Title against disordred preaching at Paules Crosse. &c. but if it be sayd, what if some desire the truth, must they also be for­saken? I aunswere, that if they desire the Kingdome, and sell not all they haue to buy it, and the place where it is, and will not come and dwell there (now that was beyond Sea where he was at that time) they are vnworthy thereof. It is come to passe vpon those as it is written, that they desire to see one day of the Sonne of man, and cannot see it. If the whole Church (which you must vnderstand to be those of his iudgement) be persecuted, it ought wholly to flee, and if lawes be made against all, though as yet they be not executed on some, yet the perse­cution is generall, and they are called away. Now Browne shall doo well to tell vs, what bands of lawes were then so straight, and now relaxed, that they should then flee out of England, as out of Aegipt, and now dwell with vs againe, as in Ierusalem. Till he shew vs this, he must be contented to haue it written as in great letters vpon his forehead: A wauering minded man is vnconstant in all his wayes.

To the 107.

This concerneth the third argument, which the ad­monition 13 vseth to proue Brownes leuitie and change­ablenesse. What can be more contrarie,Brownes third contradiction proued. and therefore [Page 126] absurd, then to condemne the Church of England for no Church of God, as also the officers (that take on them & execute the gouernmēt thereof) for prowd Prelats, Anti­christiā vsurpers, & such as we may not medle with: and yet himselfe whē he is brought to the triall, to subscribe, allow & approue all this? doth the Reader think it reaso­nable, that this man should beare himself vpō the names of Wickliff, Luther, & Caluine, as though they had euer cō ­mitted such things? I speake not neither as reproching any mā that returneth frō errour to a sounder mind (for I would if it were Gods wil, that might be seen in Brown) but, I speake to the worthy detestation of him, that not changing his iudgemēt, only for feare of trouble, practi­seth & ratifieth the same things, which he hath so bitterly prescribed against vnto all men, in publike writings. Yea & whilest he doth this, and hath withal his owne hand of subscription extant against him, yet still seduceth, & ca­rieth away frō the ordinary assemblies, as many as he cā. The state of which persons so led out by him, if we con­sider but a little, as they exceedingly proue it, so we shall not a little see it to be greeuous & lamentable. For how vtterly vnlike is he to that good Shepheard, that giueth his life for his Sheepe? and (if his doctrine were good) how al­together like is he to that hireling Shepheard that whē he hath led his Sheep out of the fold into the plaines, there chargeth thē to abide all dangers, shifting in the meane time any way for his own safety? must not that wo cleaue fast vnto him,Math. 23.4. Luke. 11.46. that was denoūced against those that laid importable burthens vpō other mens shoulders, but thē ­selues touched thē not with the least of their fingers? full many of his poore disciples lie in prisons, whilest he laugheth at liberty, and, touching that, for which they suffer, addeth aflictiō to their bands, by all his behauior. Browne cōfesseth his subscribing, but yet with brasen face demandeth what was amisse therin: euen this verely, that his own writings, & daily practise are as directly against it, as black, to white, hote, to cold, and nay, to yea. And heer his immodest daring, & vngratious tearmes enforce [Page 127] me to lay him open,Browne a sub­scriber, and yet a detester of the Church of Eng­land. wheras my adm. had somwhat vnne­cessarily spared him. The Bishops ciuil authority (saith he) Br. did acknowledge lawfull in his subscription, & their magistra­cie to be obeied. This is sufficiēt against himself: yet he hath clipped the cōpasse: for the words are, I do humbly submit my self to be at my Lord of Cant. commandemēt, whose authority vnder her Ma. I wil neuer resist nor depraue, by the grace of God &c. Heere is not ciuill authority only (as he would helpe it) but the authority that he hath vnder her Ma. which al mē know is as well ecclesiasticall as ciuil. This Br. promised neuer to depraue, but he hath falsified his promise & sub­scriptiō, in that he hath not hitherto by publike writing recāted those bookes, which therfore liue as the expresse image of his mind, to teach the contrary. Some places I will rehearse, that all may see how Br. thinketh of the Bi. procedings, & of their authority it selfe. In his declaratiō of gathering his scismatical church, telling how he with­stood Harisons entring into the Ministery by the Bishops meanes, these are his words: When he (that is Harison) had talked with R. B. and shewed him the matter wherabout he went, he receiued this answer, that it was vnlawfull to vse M. Green­hams help or any mans else for the Bish. authorising. So he shewed him, how he had dealt cōcerning the Bishop, and was so far from seeking licence, ordaining, or authorising at his hāds, that he ab­borred such trash & pollutions, as the marks and poyson of An­tichrist. And speaking of their fourme of ordaining, O worthy outward calling (saith he) Do not the Bishops pray whē they make ministers, and shall we condemne their praiers? for the foxe is a father in the church whē he praieth for grace: are not our ministers duly examined? they are posed by M. Exam. Title against parish prea­chers, and hired lect. &c. Beware ye priests that you cā speake Latin, & in any case forget not your Cathechisme, &c. Then followeth, Breath vpon thē ye Bi. and giue thē your gratious spirits, which ye call the holy ghost, so shall they be those good spirits like frogs that come out of your mouths to make battaile against vs. Kneele downe ye preachers, that the B. may ordaine you sitting in his chaire: his holy hāds shal blesse you, they are washed frō bloud as was Pilates, & as the nose of a wolfe which wil rauen no more. Then must you take your licenses [Page 128] in parchment, and pay well for them: prepare a boxe for your waxe, print your message therein, and keepe touch with the Bi­shop, least he open your boxe, and your calling flie away: behold, this is their outward calling. In another place he hath these words:Titl. against disordred prea­ching at Paules Crosse, &c. We say therefore, O yee Prelates, not by your Lodgicke Oracles, but by the word and doctrine: is Paules Crosse Ieru­salem, or is the Lords name there? is not your name sounded there, as by the blast of a Trumpet? my Lord Bishop there con­trolleth, in his name the Preacher standeth vp, as the VVolfe doth in a visard, he hath the Bishops name in parchment, for that is his licence, it is a theeues quittance though he came in by the windowe, it is the scourcoasts passport, though he roaue out for his pray. My Lords face is in the waxe, a print and marke of holynesse, who can preach without it? It is the seale of ghostly message. Three such seales haue threefold grace, but the money which buyeth them hath that grace seuen hundreth fold. Is this now the Lords name, when his Gospell must hang on parchment, or on the name and markes of those Romish beasts? Is this his name, when his glad tidings ceasse, except the parchment hold, and his message misseth except a waxemarke giueth it? Is this Ierusalem where such Bishops raigne, or should we call it the throne of the Lord? is it not rather the seate of iniquitie, to which (as the Prophet saith) the wicked do approch? &c. And a little after, Now therefore yee Preachers, because yee sub­scribe that the Lords gouernment is wanting, and yet set vp o­ther Lords, or suffer them in his place, and because you cannot, neither will you preach, but by their good leaue and licence, therefore you cannot preach my word. VVhat do you at Paules Crosse, or what should my messengers do there? do not there the Bishops as also in your parishes, tread downe the Lords Sanctua­rie? and are not the people as they ouer whome the Lord did ne­uer beare rule? yet you say the Bishops gouernment is tolle­rable, and take the teeth of those VVolfes, for a discipline to the Sheepe. Againe, within few lines; This is now the throne of the Bishops, which in the dioces, parishes, and cathedrall Churches, is lift vp against Christ. From it doth come foorth their lawes and iniunctions, by which all men euen small and [Page 129] great, rich and poore, free and bonde are made to receiue a marke in their hand, or in their forehead. For all are made thralles and slaues to their pollicie, to build the Church, and to worshippe God after their deuisings, &c. Nowe yet more apertly (if it were possible) to shewe how he depraueth their very au­thoritie, I must trouble the reader with mo of his pla­ces. In his declaration, telling of his owne authorizing by the Bishops, among other like he hath these words, that he thought it lawful, first to be tried of the Bishops, then al­so to suffer their power, though it were vnlawful, if in any thing it did not hinder the truth, but to be authorized by them, to be sworne, to subscribe, to be ordained, and receiue their licensing, he vtterly misliked and kept himselfe cleare in those matters: how­beit, the Bishops seales were gotten him by his brother, which he both refused before the officers, and being written for him would not pay for thē: and also being afterward paid for by his brother, he lost one, and burnt another in the fire: and another being sent him to Cambridge, he kept it by him, til in his trouble it was de­liuered to a Iustice of peace, and so frō him as is supposed, to the B. of Norwich. Yet least his dealing in this manner should encou­rage others to deale in worse manner, he openly preached against the calling and authorizing of preachers by Bishops, and spake it often also openly in Cambridge, that he taught among them, not as caring for, or leaning vpon the Bi. authority, but only to satis­fie his duty and cōscience. Also in the same discourse he hath these words, This he (that is himself) iudged not only to be a­gainst the wickednes of the Bi. but also against their whole power and authority: for if the authority of the Church, and of the for­wardest brethren or elders therein, be aboue the Bi. how should it not follow, but that the Bi. may be cōmanded, accused & char­ged by the Church, yea also discharged and separated as is their desert? but now because of their popish power and canon lawes, they haue lift vp their authority more high, then the Church cā take accompts of them: and not only by force do thrust out and trouble whom they list, but also raigne as Lords & Dukes in their dioces, their authority must needes be vsurped. And a little space after he saith thus of them, that They rule by three sorts of lawes, as by the ciuill, the canon, the common lawe, which [Page 130] are three kingdoms vnto thē, or as the Popes triple crowne: and by pretēding the fourth law, which is the word of God, they ouerrule too too much. Title against disordr. pr. at Paules Crosse. &c. Agreeably with this, he saith in another place; Behold, cā they be Ierusalē, which is called the throne of the lord, whē there the Bi. sit as in the throane of Antichrist? What throne hath Christ, but by his gouernment, which they say is wanting? and what is the throne of Antichrist, but that Lordship in their dioces, with such sway of popish officers, & with such romish tra­ditiōs? A little after, VVhat shal we answere? they say, they call no preachers to preach, but God, the Church, the Queene, and people agree to receiue them: so their parishes are churches, and those great assemblies are the flocke of Christ, for they are faire cages, though the birds are vncleane: knowe you not an honest woman? for she doth loue fornicators, so may you knowe the true Church, for she loueth such Prelates: O church of price, O the fa­mous church of England. Tell ye the church, that is, tell ye the Bi. of the dioces, the church can giue him authority, to authorize both the church it selfe and the Gospell, as if God should intreate such a Prelate to be good vnto him, &c. And by and by after. Yet is this church of England the piller and ground of truth, for the Bi. ouerride it: they are the truth, and it is the ground, it is the beast, and they are the riders: it stoupeth as an asse for thē to get vp, the whip of their spiritual courts, and the spurres of their lawes, and the bridle of their power, do make it to carie thē. VVe giue, say the Bi. then we take say the Preachers: hold, take you authority, but on this condition, that you preach no longer then we list. Marke you this (say the preachers) for we haue no autho­rity but by the bishops, and if they giue it vs, why may they not take it away? so the theefetaker doth please the theefegiuer, and the yong wolfe wanteth, whē the old wolfe is angry. Lastly, thus he writeth in another place of his declaration. Now, wher­as they mingle ciuill and church offices, it was answered by the word of God, that such mingling was flat Antichristianitie: for Christ himselfe refused to be a ciuill Iudge and diuider of lands, and forbad his Apostles to meddle in such manner. Luke. 12.14. Luke. 22.25. Againe it is written, No man that goeth on warfare, entangleth himself with the affaires of this life: 2. Tim. 2.4. for if once ecclesiasticall persons, as they call them, get ciuill offices, they become that second beast, which [Page 131] is Antichrist: for they get the image of the first beast, which is, Reu. 13.15. the power and authority of wicked Magistrates, that confirme their authority: so they giue a spirit to the image, that it should speake, that is, their church lawes and orders, hauing got ciuill power, both to deceiue men by shew of Religion, and to force them with threates and penalties: Now would I knowe of the reader, what it is that Browne by these places hath spared vnto any Bishop in England, or left vndepraued in their authority. Furthermore, for the vnlawfulnes of medling with, or complaining to their courts & officers, behold how vehemēt he is, as in all his dealings.Answer to M.C. Page 16.17. Also because the iudges and officers of the court do wrest Gods law by their popish canon law, and respect persons, & take rewards, which is forbiddē in Deuteronom. (and by their profession they must needs do so, or else they cannot hold their office) how shall any make complaynt vnto them for church matters, which can be counted none of the Church? And seeing Christ hath commanded to complaine to the church against the sinner, how shall Christes ordinance be broken, by complaining vnto such wretches? Furthermore, seeing the scripture sheweth that the church hath nothing to do to iudge those that are without, 1. Cor. 5.2. how shall any complaine of such a number of wicked men, as neuer were worthy to be counted the Church. Againe, 1. Cor. 6.1. seeing no godly man may seeke iudgemēt vnder the vn­iust, as Paule sheweth, if he haue a matter against a brother, why should we seeke to such for iudgemēt? Again, because those canon officers are strāgers, neither knowne to the churches, nor dwelling among thē, no maruaile though Christ say, Iohn. 10. that his sheep will not follow nor seeke to strangers, but will flee frō them. Moreouer, 2. Cor. 11.20. be­cause they bring the churches into bondage (as it is written) be­cause they deuoure, because they take their goods, because they exalt thēselues, and as it were smite the people on their face, & cast thē in prison, they do all these things besides the church go­uernment, and therefore ought to be reiected, & in no case to be suffered. So he concludeth, Thus it is manifest by the word of God, that such prowd Prelates, and Antichristiā vsurpers, haue no authority nor power of the church, neither is their suspēdings to be counted suspensions by the Church, nor their calling of Mi­nisters, a calling by the Church. Hauing then thus condēned [Page 132] our Bishops authority, & disauowed as vtterly vnlawfull to meddle with their courts and officers. How strange is this, that he seeth not his subscription to the B. autho­rity to haue gainesaid all his writings? yea, how mon­strous is it, that he should thus fetter other men frō any way, vsing, or applying themselues to their courts & offi­cers, and yet himselfe, of late, being iustly called in que­stion,Called S. Too­lies in South­warke. by the Minister of the parish where he dwelt, for not communicating according to the order appointed, made his speedy recourse to a Doctor and iudge of such courts, and by his meanes, cut off and forestalled the in­tended proceeding of the minister & congregation there against him. O worthy Captain & guide of so vnworthy a schisme. But perhaps his Proctors will pleade for him, that his subscription and late practise, haue now cancel­led all his former writings,Browne stripped of all excuse. so as they cannot henceforth in any equity be vrged against him. No, no, let thē know that I hold him heere faster, than that all of them can be able to wring him out of my hands. I answer therefore, that since the time of his subscription, first, he hath writ­ten,In his reply to my answere to the question of communicating. that which is against both the Bi. and their authori­tie, as in these words: Thus your writing condemneth you of iniquity, that speake not one word in the He supposed he had spoken it to our mini­ster. pulpit, against the re­straint by popish discipline, that ye cannot separate. How sore do you labour, and how much do you suffer, that dare not speake a word by name against those officers and courts, neither name nor protest openly against those wicked, against whom you would haue vs protest particularly and by name. And by and by after. But why labour you not also to charge them openly, though it cost you your life and liuing? Also in his Libell against my admoni­tion,Numb. 20. he hath these words: Thou hast written it heeretofore, that there is no Aegipt in England, and hast thou now found vs out to be in Aegipt. Doest thou not perceiue, that thou and thy partakers, abusing your knowledge to persecute those which are come out of Aegipt, are worse then Aegipt, yea princes of So­dome, and people of Gomorrha? looke thou to it, that thou remain not in Aegipt. Thou hast confessed that we were once come out of Aegipt, thou canst not say so of thy selfe, if still thou iustifie thy [Page 133] Aegiptian doctrine & pollutiōs, as is to be seen by thy pamphlet. Let the reader now bethinke him what Bro. calleth Ae­giptian doctrine, sith my booke containeth no doctrine, but the doctrine of the church of England, and so it was iudged & alowed by authority. Also whether he accompt Englād as Aegipt, which he would deny in another place, & whether he exclude the Bishops frō the number, whē he calleth me, & all my partakers, that do persecute him and his followers, Princes of Sodome, and people of Gomorrha. Again, when my admo. demandeth what gaine their de­parting frō our church heer in England hath gotten thē: he denieth not, that they are departed, but answereth thus: We haue gained, by fleeing from persecuting wolues, Numb. 28. not wealth, nor bellycheere, nor fauour in the world, but losse, impri­sonment, all maner euil speaches, and death it selfe. Nay, he is so far frō recanting his former course, as that he thundreth iudgements, and inuocateth vengeance (euen the bloud of all those of his sect that haue died any way by pursuite of law) vpō the heads of all those, that haue been meanes and partakers to their trouble: these are his words:Numb. 77. It is thy manner, and thy partners, to force, to threaten, to make stir­rings and hurly burlies, and to driue man & wife asunder: thine and their outrage cannot be satisfied with bloud: thine & their railings, slander, & false accusations, haue brought diuers of vs to death, some by the Gybbet, some by long imprisonmēt, some by flight and pursuite, some by extreame care, thought, & sicknes, some by Seas, some by necessity and want, some by changing aire, dwelling & place, the bloud of all these shall be vpō thine & thy partners heads. These places are sufficiēt, being writtē since his subscription, to proue, that he still continueth to op­pose himself against the authority & gouernment of our Bishops, as also to the vnity & peace of our Church. Se­condly, to those that obiect his subscriptiō, to cut off the allegation of his former writings against him, I answere, that Brown hath in writing since his subscription, iustified all his former cause & doctrines in euery point, & there­fore hath again cancelled his subscription, and reuiued all his bookes. This I lay down by his own euidēt words [Page 134] in two places of his libell against my admo. let the Rea­der consider & iudge.Numb. 3. Glouers popery (saith he) or popish he­resies, being long ago by many diuines refuted, needed not Bred­wells childish refutation, wheras the cause wherin Bro. hath stood as yet is refuted by none. Now the places aboue cited shew, that a chiefe part of Bro. cause, is touching the authority & proceeding of the Bishops, which he vtterly detesteth. And seeing then he auoucheth his cause, to stād as yet vn­refuted, he intendeth not that his subscriptiō should any whit empaire the same (for then he could not say so) but meaneth therfore, that the Bi. authority shall still be hol­den in no better case, then his books haue left it. Againe he hath these cleere & full words, both for himselfe, and his followers,Numb. 77. None of you all can shew any fault, false doctrine or wickednes in vs. By this time therefore (I beleeue) the reader seeth, that I haue left this wauering weathercock, as naked of all defence to couer his shame, euen as is my naile, according to the prouerb. But now let vs looke fur­ther also into his subscrip. He confesseth, that secondly he subscribed, that where the word of God is duly preached, and the sacraments accordingly ministred, there is the Church of God. But he dissembleth & keepeth from the reader another fourme of words for that article, which was offered him thus. 3. Do you acknowledge the Church of England to be the church of Christ, or the church of God? and wil you promise to cō ­municate with the same in praiers, sacramēts, & hearing of the word? and wil you frequent our Churches according to law or no? to this he subscribed affirmatiuely. Heere againe, let the craftie foxe turne him which way he wil, and he is taken. For howsoeuer he would maintaine quarelling vpō the first forme of words, of Preaching the word duly, & mini­string the sacramēts accordingly: yet whē as he bound him­self to frequent our Churches according to lawe, he hath at one gripe choaked all his former writings. Let the congrega­tion of Toolyes Church in Southwarke testify,Or, Olaues. whether for almost this two yeares space, that he hath bin Schoole­maister there, & dwelt amongst thē, he haue at any time cōmunicated with them in the Sacra. and whether vpon [Page 135] their late vrging of him thereunto, he hath not (to de­feate them) remoued his dwelling into another parish, & left a troublesome stinke behind him in their Church. Yet some perhaps will obiect, that he doth sometimes cōmunicate with our assemblies in the word. Heare the word (sometimes) I confesse,How Browne sometimes heareth our Sermons. but communicate with vs therein, I deny that he doth. How doth he heare? as a cen­sor to iudge, not as a brother to learne: as the Spider go­eth likewise to the flower, but not to gather hony, as the Bee: and thus the Deuill also may be said to cōmunicate in the word with vs. I confesse I speake vehemētly, but I protest, the loue of God constraineth me: for before his subscrip. Brown being about Stamford, was earnestly intrea­ted of M. Far. & M. Har. Londoners, that forasmuch as he had graunted thē, it was not vnlawful to heare the Word in our assemblies, that he would by some writing, per­swade his followers at London thereunto, seeing they did at that time vtterly cōdemne hearing with vs. They ob­teined his letters, which (as they testify) perswaded indeed to hearing in our assemblies, not as children addressing thēselues to the sincere milke of the word, to grow ther­by: nor as mē plowing vp the furrowes of their harts, to receiue the seed of the holy word to a perfect rooting in thē: but in stead of these, other cōditiōs of their hearing were put down, as trying, looking into, & iudging of the doctrine & behauiour of the preachers, and that so they might come, as by occasion & in the way of protestation for such respects. Also he gaue them a special exceptiō of preachers, which ouerthrew the whole matter: for when they were to auoid all that opposed themselues to their course, what a doubtfulnes must he needs bring vpō thē to heare any? sith as they haue wickedly condemned our assemblies for no Churches of God, so we cannot choose but hate and pursue them, as enemies of all true peace & sacred vnity, saying with the Prophet Dauid, Psal. 139.21.22. Do not I hate them O Lord that hate thee? and do not I earnestly contend with those that rise vp against thee? &c. Now also since his subscription, in his Libell against me, he putteth downe [Page 136] his distinction of hearing in these words: VVhile they raile & resist the truth (for so he taketh his way & doctrine only to be) we may heare them as enemies, Numb. 105. but ioyne with thē as brethren we dare not. And now I suppose you see, how he heareth our Sermons, and will graunt vnto me, that this is not to communicate in the word with vs, although he had giuen his hād & promise therunto. But alas, who would iudge otherwise of this matter, if he haue but a little loo­ked into Browns bookes? which he stoutly iustifieth to be without false doctrine or fault. Euery where in thē hath he disclaimed both our praiers, preaching & Sacraments as none of the Lords, and therfore how shall he be taken (what shew so euer he maketh) to cōmunicate with vs in any of them? two or three places of his infinite number wil I shortly set down, and so leaue this point also to the readers further consideration.Title against parish prea­chers, and hired lect. &c. But indeed (saith he) is the Lords message a blind reading of seruice? and though they preach, yet is that the Lords gold which they bring? when they take and leaue the flocke as the wicked bishops appoint them, and neither can nor wil plant or refourme the church? haue I sent them, saith the Lord, or cōmanded them, whē they cause my people to erre, by their lyes, & their slatteries, saying, ye are his people & church, though ye be polluted & abhominable? haue these dumme dogs & tollerating preachers my letters & seales? I neuer gaue them (saith the Lord) they are stollen & counterfaite: yea, they haue the seales and licenses of their wicked bishops, and if they haue my message, why hold they their peace at the wicked B. dischar­ging, as if they had his message only? be it therfore, O ye Prelates, that ye put Moses seate for Moses doctrine, can you preach the Lords word & doctrine, or minister his sacramēts? to preach some truth as wicked mē may do, & to preach the Lords word of mes­sage is not al one for his message cānot be without his gouernmēt. Then a little after, Ye haue not yet (saith he) cast off the yoke of Antichrist, and receyued all things concerning my kingdome and gouernment. Therfore because ye haue not planted & buil­ded my church saith the Lord, that it may be visible, nor purged & clensed it frō open abhominations, both ye & all the works of your hāds with your praiers & sacra, are vncleane & accursed. [Page 137] Within fewe lines after this, yet forsooth, it is made great wickednes not to heare these preachers, for they sit in Moses seat, and are not blinde guydes: Nay, they sit in the seate of Anti­christ: and if they were blinde, they shoulde not haue had this sinne, &c. Againe within fewe lines, But yet these wicked preachers rise vp against this, and cry out that they haue the chiefe, they haue the worde and the Sacraments, and as for the gouernement and discipline, it is but an accessary and hangby, needefull in deede, but yet they may be without it, and be the Church of God notwithstanding. But for this matter looke the 16. verse and the meaning thereof. In this place we say, that their preaching is not the word of message from God, neither may we partake with them in the Sacraments. But in steade of a thousand other places, heare him as patiētly as you may, this one sentence, against all kinde of communicating with our assemblies of Englande, thus blasphemously barking. They hold still the Priesthoode of Antichrist, Titl. against disordr. preach. at Paules crosse, &c. which is the tollerating and dispensing with wickednesse, by such wicked preachers to make Christ and Belial agree. Therefore thus saith the Lord, I feede not my flocke at Paules crosse in London, or Saint Maries in Cābridge, or in your English parishes, O ye my sheepe, goe ye not thither, as though there were my folde, and there I re­sted and fed my flocke, &c. Sith he still iustifieth all his do­ctrines and dealings to be fautles, let him and his friends nowe see, howe they can reconcile these things with his subscription.

His 4. interrogatorie was this, VVill you promise also quietly to behaue your selfe, and to keepe the peace of this church: and that you will not preach nor exercise the ministerie, vnlesse you be lawfully called thereunto? To this also hee answered affirmatiuely, and that he would perfourme the same ac­cordingly. The latter part of this interrogatorie, Browne confesseth in his answere to my Admonition: but the former part he hideth in his bosome. His proud chalenge will not suffer him nowe, to shrowde him selfe from shame in neither. First therefore, to beginne with the former part, hauing bounde him selfe by the thirde [Page 138] article to frequent our assemblies according to lawe, and to ac­knowledge the same Church of Englande, (which doeth con­sist of these assemblies) to be the Church of God. Now doth he in the fourth place, tye him selfe to the good behaui­our towardes this Church, which hath necessarie relation to the Church before so mentioned. This I so lay downe, that the slipperie shifter should not thinke to escape me, by drawing an interpretation from these wordes, to his conuenticles at his pleasure. There be 3. notes of diffe­rence, that will not suffer these wordes, this church, to be vnderstoode of his conuenticles. 1. That the title of the Church of Englande, can not without great insolencie, be attributed to any other, then that which is established by the law of the land: and that, he sheweth him selfe to see well ynough in his 62. section of his Answere to my Admon. where, for the same reason (though it helped his cause neuer a whit) he quarelleth with me, for calling the church at Corinth, The church of Corinth. 2. Their conuenticles can not be said to be frequented according to the lawe, without the like insolencie of speach, as in the former note. For by this forme of wordes, is alwayes in­tended the lawe of the land: & whensoeuer the law of God is spoken of, it is euer set downe with those or the like plaine wordes of difference? els let them shewe one in­stance to the contrary. But the third difference is most cleare: for hauing bound him selfe to frequent and hold the peace of our Churches, he is taken faster, then that any struggling can giue him hope of escape. Thus hauing voyded the doubtfulnes of his subscription, let vs nowe come and try, how well his heart & his hande haue gone together, & that I may rake no further in his filthie con­fusions, (whereof I suppose the reader would be as wea­rie as my selfe) let the former cited places of his writings, be here likewise called to witnesse, what a friende he is to the church of England, and what peace he entertaineth with our assemblies. As for his practise euen since his subscription (omitting all that was before, and namely [Page 139] his runnning ouer the sea, and carying many with him) the parish where he dwelt of late, doeth testifie, as is saide before, that it is farre from a peaceable and quiet beha­uiour towardes the Church: but much more the parish of Olaues in Siluerstreete, a poore woman in the which, he hath so strongly seduced, that whereas my selfe some­times had hope, by satisfying her propounded doubts in writing, to haue wonne her into our assemblies, & church exercises, which of many in that parish was greatly desi­red, he hath againe, by so large a writing and heape of wordes, ouerwhelmed the seelie woman (who belike thinketh v. or vi. sheetes of paper must needes confute one) and confirmed her in her sottish separation, so as at this day in respect of inferiour meanes, we see vtterly no hope of her recouerie. As for excommunication gone out against her, she altogether contemned it, before halfe a score of the parish: and boasted of Bro. spreading of his writings against me, to a hundreth miles distance from London. Besides this, & somewhat later, he hath disturbed the cōgregatiō at Dertford, drawn away some, railed opē ­ly & dispersed writings, as of chalenge against the lectu­rer there,M. Edmondes. for discouering vnto his auditorie the dan­ger of that schisme. Beholde, is not this quiet behaui­our, and tending to the peace of this Church? the latter part of his last interrogatorie, being this, that he shoulde not preach, nor exercise the ministerie, vnlesse he be lawfully cal­led thereunto, is aswell obserued and kept by him, I war­rant you. I thinke hee dares not (for the euidence of proofe that he knoweth to be against him) deny, that he hath since his subscribing, preached in priuate houses: & namely amongst the rest, one Lordes day, & not farre from Ludgate: hauing a litle before in the same house earnestly contēded against, in reasoning, & disswaded frō publique hearing. He was at the same time by one M. W. soundly resisted in the same his schismatical dealing: who rightly iudged it not meete, in a time of the great assēblies of the church, to the publike exercises of the worde and prayer, [Page 140] to make priuate meetings for the same at our pleasure. And M. W. after he had spoken in this matter, what the Lord then gaue him, departed with some others that went with him to the next sermon, and left Browne with the rest that liked better to tarrie, to their cursed cōuenti­cle. Wherin Bro. tooke vpon him to exercise the ministerie of preaching: howbeit (he saith) he was earnestly reque­sted vnto it by those that were present. Now that poynt therfore wil I leaue to the lerned to decide: namely, whe­ther this was a lawful calling to that ministrie, yea or no.

Besides the subscribing to these interrogatories, hee furthermore wrote his submission: a point or 2. whereof I will likewise set in the vewe of the Reader. Fiftly (saith he) I refuse not to communicate in the Sacraments. For I haue one childe that is alreadie baptized, according to the order and lawe, and by this time in mine absence, if God haue giuen my wife a safe deliuerance, and the childe doe liue, I suppose it is also bap­tized in like maner. Further, my seruants being three, doe order­ly come to their owne Parish Church, according to the lawe, and communicate also according to the Lawe. Hereupon hee ad­deth, To all these poyntes that they are true, I do subscribe with mine hande and name, this 7. of October, Anno Dom. 1585. Here I obserue, that he testifieth it to be orderly done, to come to our owne parish Churches: which is more then his writings can well beare, howsoeuer he thinke to shift it. Also in that he sayth, he refuseth not to communicate in the Sacraments: perhaps he stoppeth the crye of his con­science, (which telleth him, he communicateth not in the Sacraments with our congregation) by this foolish and deceitfull perswasion: namely, that he satisfieth his promise by communicating in the Sacraments, though but in his owne conuenticles. But his argument of fact, that he giueth to bring credite withall vnto the same as­sertion, as in these wordes: For I haue one childe thas is al­ready baptized according to order and Lawe, &c. this (I say) stoppeth vp that starting hole against him. And then it woulde bee shewed in what congregation of ours, [Page 141] hee hath communicated in the Sacraments, since the day of his running ouer sea. Nay if his behauiour bee truely obserued, when hee commeth into our congregations, I doe not thinke, it can bee proued, that hee hath since that day, so much as ioyned with them in their prayers.Brown the pat­tern [...] of a noto­rious ill con­science. To this last place of the matter of Brownes subscription, I haue reserued one thing, which is good for al to know, and some to prouide for, and that is this. Answering to my Admonition for that point of his subscription, which I had obiected against him, as a proofe of a vile consci­ence, he graunteth that he had subscribed, but he deni­eth that he had so subscribed, as that he should be proo­ued against himselfe thereby, in anie thing. Thereupon he setteth me downe (though vntruly as you haue heard) certaine fourmes of the pointes whereunto hee did sub­scribe, and there withall telleth mee, what handsome in­terpretations of his owne wordes he can make: whereby giuing one hand, to the satisfying of the authoritie, that then dealt with him, with the other hee stroketh the eyes of his foolish followers, that they might sleepe still in the opinion of his good meaning. As though the dea­lings of Rob. Browne, had not otherwise bene vile ynough, except he had by this means shewed, that he hath not one haire of an honest man about him. Read (beloued) and then testifie. The first article of his subscription he repor­teth thus. The bishops ciuill authoritie Browne did acknowledge lawfull in his subscription, and their magistracie to bee obeyed. Well, how doe you thinke he maketh this agree with his bookes? euen thus hee telles you, that hee doeth by those wordes, neither iustifie those for brethren which doe persecute, nor allow an idle and Lordly ministerie in the Church as a part of the brotherhoode. How the reader can conceyue this, that he denieth vpon his subscription, I knowe not: but thus much I am sure, this his explication certifieth, that the BB. being by the Queene and her lawes, allowed the ti­tles of Lordes, are accounted of Browne not to bee mem­bers of the Church. And by this answere it appeareth, he [Page 102] coggeth this imagination into his disciples, that hee al­lowed the BB. ciuill authoritie, but therewithall denied them their ecclesiasticall ministerie. Howbeit, in plaine wordes he subscribed to their authoritie. To couer him­selfe in the 2. article, hee is faine to hide the trueth, as I haue before discouered. For the third, though he vse the same craft, yet in that hee cannot but confesse that hee subscribed, that his childe was baptized according to order of lawe, to salue his credite with his companions in this, hee saith, But yet it was done without his consent, and contrary to an order he had taken and appointed: for it was baptised in England he being beyonde the sea. If it were contrarie to his purpose, howe coulde it argue his not refusing to communicate in the Sacrament? On the other side, if hee tell his dis­ciples true of his meaning herein, that hee had taken o­ther order for his childs baptizing, but that his being be­yond sea, crossed his purpose: how agreeth that with his neglecting of the same order taking, for his later childes baptizing, which euen at the time of his subscription, he alledged (by way of coniecture, as if God had giuen his wife safe deliuerance) to be baptized also according to lawe. He was nowe in Englande when hee might haue taken bet­ter order, if the first were such an errour. But because he had no such colourable excuse for this, he tooke a shor­ter way, though no lesse shamefull, in stepping ouer that part of the article, as though there had beene no such thing. Also for his alleaging his seruants comming to Church according to lawe, whereby he perswaded vnto the BB. his owne conformitie that way, he excuseth this to his com­panions to be, for that he was not to force his seruants agaynst their conscience and custome, being newly come to him. Adding this beside, that he neuer came to the same Church with them, the parson beeing a common drunkard, and infamous by sundrie faults. Againe, confessing he promised the BB. on the one side, that he would come to Church according to order of lawe, On the other side, hee perswadeth his disciples, that hee might well ynough doe so, for that there was no lawe to [Page 143] force him to take such a parson for his lawfull minister, neither to ioyne with him in the prayers and Sacraments. Thus hath hee first manifestly mocked authoritie,Iude vers. 8. so as that place of Iude which hee had wrongfully writhen towardes mee, returneth nowe againe with full force vppon his owne heade. And secondly, hee apparantly sheweth that hee continueth his olde course of seducing the seelie sheepe, euen as heretofore. In summe, if all that is here sayde, touching his subscription, bee melted together as in one lumpe, where shall wee find a more perfect image of a pestilent schismaticke, and one more voide of all conscience, than is this Browne, though Rome it selfe be raked through to find him? Howe well doe these notes (which were long agoe obserued to be the verie proper­ties of all heretikes) agree with this mans maners:Clemens Stro. lib. 7. name­ly, to shrinke from their doctrines as ashamed, when they are pressed with them, and neuerthelesse still vnder­hande to glorie in teaching such things. Againe,Barnar. ser. 66. in Cant. cantic. as an o­ther testifieth, It is not ynough to bee heretikes, vnlesse they bee also hypocrites. These are they that come in sheepes clothing. Sheepe they are in shew, foxes for craft, but wolues in act and crueltie. Neither is it in price with them to followe vertue, but to colour vices as with a cer­taine painting of vertue.

To the 108.

14 No part of Church Discipline can bee wanting, but the Church doeth straight way goe to ruine thereby. Againe, there may be a true Church of GOD without the Presbiterie. These two axiomes will not well agree, as the Admo­nition supposeth. Browne sent me glewe, which he sayde, was strong ynough to holde them together. I haue tryed it, and it will not prooue, vnlesse some vnlawfull Arte be vsed with all. He mistooke me much in iudging, I vnderstood no differncee betwixt Discipline and Presbiterie. [Page 144] I knowe the office and the officer is not all one: but where the officer wanteth, there the office also wanteth, as touching the execution thereof. And therefore where the Presbiterie wanteth (which himselfe maketh the onely executors of the censuring discipline) there that discipline also by his rule,Def. 51.53. is wanting. For whie else doth he say, the Church of England is without this discipline, if the same may bee graunted to be, where the Eldershippe is not? Nowe his answere explicating his seconde enunciation, which I vrge agaynst the first, sayeth, His meaning was, that a Church remayneth still, though all the officers of disci­pline should die at once, because (forsooth) yet still the office and right of gouernement shoulde remaine. I replie: that the gouernement which hee speaketh of, in this case, can­not bee sayde to bee actually, but potentially. And if he holde it sufficient, to auouche the apparancie of a Churche (whereof is and was the question in the confe­rence alleaged) by a potentiall hauing of discipline, wee shall soone ende the controuersie for the assemblies of Englande. But I may not heere omitte to note the dealing of this double faced Ianus. In the conference which the Admonition citeth against him: through the occasion of his writings agaynst the Church of England, it was obiected to him, that it seemed hee had condem­ned our Churches, in that they were not guided by Pres­biteries. Hee denied his writings to import any such thing. Hereupon they demaunde, whether (then) hee woulde graunt that there may be a true Church of God without the Presbiterie. He answered, yea. Nowe in his writing agaynst mee, hee denieth not that hee answered so, but declareth his meaning to bee otherwise than they tooke it. So that if they had further vrged his writings a­gaynst his answere, it nowe appeareth, that he could cunningly haue turned the table vpside downe, as the painter did: who beeing hired to paint a tumbling horse, made him running: which when hee that set him a woorke found fault withall, the painter turned the table [Page 145] vpside downe: and then the horse which before appea­red running, seemed plainely to lie tumbling. But what dealing was this for a diuine, to a question propounded, of the constitution of a church, necessarie to the acknow­ledging of it, (as appeareth by this occasion of the que­stion before rehearsed) to make answere concerning an accidentall case of a constituted Church? And this answere beeing but as the lining of his wordes, the out­side seeming altogether correspondent to their purpose. So dealeth hee generally in all his writings and actions for this his schismaticall course: and namely in most of the points of his subscription: as that no childe can bet­ter represent the visage of his father that begot him, than this man doeth the spirit of him that gaue those doubt­full answeres at Delphos,

15 The rest I answere not, till you come to his conclu­sion, number 120.

Whereunto thus much I say, let it be (O Lorde) as this man hath desired, namely, be thou iudge, whether of our wayes be approoued in thine eyes: and whether of vs hath the strength of trueth in his mouth, and bee mercifull vnto our iniquities, for thy sonne Iesus Chri­stes sake.

Psalme 8.2. Out of the mouthes of babes and suckelings hast thou or­dained strength, because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemie and auenger.

AT LONDON Printed by Iohn VVindet, and are to be solde at the Rose in Povvles churchyard. 1588.

NON SOLO PANE VIVET HOMO Luke 4. Verbum Dei manet in aeternum:

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.