A description of new Jerushalem Being The substaunce of two Ser­mons deliuered at Paules Crosse.

Containing, A briefe Discouery and Conuiction of certayne Doctrines held of Roma­nists and Brownists against the Ca­tholike and Apostolike faith.

By Henoch Clapham.

Dan. 12.10.

None of the wicked shall haue vnderstan­ding, but the wise shall vnderstand.

Printed at London by Valentine Simmes. 1601.

To the Right Honorable Sir William Ryder knight, Lord Major of the Ho. Citie of London.

BEing (Right Honorable) to send this litle Description of New Ie­rushalem vn­to print, (tho­ugh far from being done in print) I pondred to whom I might with expediencie dedicate the same. At last, I set downe my rest on Him, who was in the publique place where I preached, then preeminent: Who also heard both the Sermons, and therewithall did both times with Ho. curtesie receaue the Preacher home to Table. All this to your Ho. selfe.

And in verie troth, I know not well to whom rather it appertaineth: seeing, besides the former respects, the Lord hath made you (next vnder her Ma­iestie) chiefe Ouerseer in our Ho. Ci­tie, for cherishing vertuous acts, and for pruning and cutting off all trans­gressions from the same.

Transgression is two fold: either th [...] whereby Religion is abused, or that which transcendeth Humain equitie. God and Man are made one in Christ, nor should Religion and Righteousnes be sundred, though distinguished. The first is by God his Ministers to be prea­ched: The second by Maiestrates to be proclaimed: and the breach of both, by their Sword to be punished.

What need of a sharpe sword and of a two edged word there is, let the rank growth and impudent cariage of Impietie and Iniquitie testifie that. Easie salues are for easie sores, but Fistulaes must be bitten, & Gangrenes be pared off. I need not signifie to your [Page] Lo. somuch what vnrighteousnes ouer­flowes (euery Court and Session rings that Alarum) as what false coine in Religion daylie is dispersed by Roma­nists, Brownists, Anabaptists, Arrians, Familists, and such like factions. These that counterfait the Q. coine, are pu­nished accordingly: But for adulte­rating, clipping, and flat changing of Christes coine (the precious written-word, stamped with Gods image) how litle this is looked vnto, & how seldom, and then also how slenderly corrected, it is able to make the heart of Gods subiect to bleed.

As the sword and word are for pro­curing subiection vnto Maiestrates: so much more be they ordained for cau­sing obedience vnto God, Duetie to earthly powers, it should lead vs (as by the hand) to that duetie which we owe vnto the Prince of Princes. Else, while we liue to Man, whose breath is in his nosthrils, we dye to God, whose breath doth kindle the fire of Tophet.

In lighting Ierushalems torch, I therwith disclose false lights & sleights wherby Babels marchants would vt­ter their painted wares. Looke how I drew it at first for helping mine owne memorie, so I sent it to the examina­tion, and so it was returned authorized to the presse. And that falleth out to be the same that was preached for sub­stance, howsoeuer some other Acci­dents drew in some other particular discourses, not so necessarie the presse.

Besides the two Sermons, I haue ad­ioyned a Brief of that I purposed then also to haue deliuered. All I present, and yet all that nothing to the sacred Texts desert. As I could, I haue done, and so in all holie dutie I remaine,

Your Ho. obliged, Henoch Clapham.

To al that wish Ieru­shalems prosperitie, the grace of God be mul­tiplied.

BEloued, if euer, now fast­ing and prayer is highly necessary: as for the whole catholike Church, so (of our partes) more specially for our owne particular Church, a member of the vniuersall. As I am not a little acquainted with forraine Churches their corruptions (but the lesse contagious, because they be in further part of the catholik body remoued from vs) so, not to dissemble our own (alas, alas) hovv is our Sauiors speech fulfilled vpon vs? Faith (faithfully professed) hard to bee found, when vnder color of Reformation, people feare not to complot Deformation: euerie fantasticke spirite attempting what is good in his owne eyes and priuate iudgement, as though there were no King in Israel, no God in heauen. For Charitie, the most of vs haue exiled her. Faith iustifieth alone, say we: tis true: but adde with the Apo­stle, That faith which worketh by Loue: euen by Loue termed the Bond of Perfection, and [Page] the Fulfilling of the Law: for neuer shall that Tree bee approoued which bringeth not foorth good fruit. Trees are not planted for liuing to themselues, but for benefiting others also. The diuel once sought to leade vs so to gaze on the merit of workes, as no­thing at all we should examine howe wee stood in the faith: now he labors to cause vs so to admire Faith, as wee should forget (I had almost said, forsweare) good works. Thus Satan is euer in extremities: but the people of God must know, that as GOD hath blessedly ioyned true faith and good workes togither: so, none can but by the instinct of Satan attempt to put them a­sunder. If we so beleeue, and so walke, then God shall not be weary of doing vs good, nor we haue occasion to feare the threates of Belial.

As all euilles are contagion, so falshood in doctrine is Leauen for infecting many: and a Canker for corroding like a viper. For, from whence proceede euill workes, but from euill Beliefe, false perswasion of God and his proceedings? The late Ro­manistes will that their Pope may erre in Fact, but not in Faith. A blinde assertion: for no erroneous fact, but it proceeds from erroneous Faith. As for example: Peter denieth his maister, a foule Fact. From [Page] whence proceeded this, but from a per­swasion, that it should be good for him then to do so? The like may be said of any fact. So that we may conclude rather, A man may erre in faith, yet not in fact (for hee may stay to act his error) but neuer erre in fact, but first the diuell hath sowen errour in his faith. And heereof it commeth that Romanists on the one hand; & Brownists, Anabaptists, Arrians, &c. on the other hand, they besiege our Church with spiri­tuall artillery: euery Sect thinking they therein doe God very good seruice, and their Fact passing commendable: whereas (alas) such proceeding is but the fruite (to thinke the best) of errour in Faith, corrup­tion in iudgement.

It is then a duty of Gods Ministers, spe­cially owing to the people, namely, to hold out the word of trueth for enlightning the senses. And because Illumination without Sanctification doth make a man but a Bala­am, an Iscariot, a diuell: herewith they are to pray much, that GOD would sanctifie such light and knowledge to true obedi­ence.

Amongest the residue of Gods Mini­sters, I (the least of many) do labour in this worke daily. Though I haue no particu­lar [Page] flocke to attend on by peculiar calling: yet am I called to the worke of Christ, for ministration of worde and Sacrament to God his sheepe, in this catholike sheepfold. A calling had at home, and not vnsubscri­bed vnto by forraine Churches. Before thine eyes I haue heere lighted a candle, describing new Ierushalem, the praise of the whole earth. This is not done so parti­cularly as might be wished, but as the time could affoorde. Moses (from mount Neboes toppe termed Pisgah) he seeth Canaan and Israels distinct lotts: but Ioshuah (the diui­dent of these mansions) hee sawe it more thorowly. If that I haue done may occa­sion any other to do better, my lot is good. Meane time accept of this Description of Ie­rushalem, as of a light, directing to a Descrip­tion of Babel: that (if God thinke good) I may heereafter publish. Which if, some things heere omitted, may there be fruit­fully obserued.

A DESCRIPTION of new Jerushalem

EZEK. last chap. last verse, and last clause.

And the Name of that Citie from a Day (shalbe) Iehouah-shammah.

TO the end this vpshot of Ezekiels Prophecye may be the cleerer too our senses, Let vs sum­marily consider the whole bodie of this Priest-like Prophecie, In this visionarie volume we may obserue two sorts of Visions: the first, ge­nerall, the second, speciall. That is [Page 2] generall, it is that one stately sight which the Prophet hath in the first chap. containing a treasurie of com­fort to the whole Catholike bodie of Israel: seeing therin the Church may behold, how Iehouah Aelohim the great God, is mounted vpon the stately Chariot of the world, hauing the raynes in his hand, gouerning by the mightie outgoings and retur­nings of his eternall spirit: wherby he also seeth cleerely into all things. Come heauen and earth together, run all vpon wheeles, not Fortune, but the mightie Iehouah, he turneth all the frame of Nature vnto his owne most worthie glorie, and the common vtilitie of his beleeuing Israel.

In the other visions we more specially obserue, first, the Prophets calling: secondly, a particular disco­uerie of the Iewish typicall matters. In his calling (contained in the se­cond and third chap:) we cleerely [Page 3] may see, how togither with his No­mination vnto this stately kind of ministerie the prouident God gi­ueth vnto him a Rowle of wisdome to eate: Because hee sendeth no prophet in mercy to his church, whome first he enricheth not with the hid treasure of his burning spirit, for consuming vp the spirituall op­positions, that stand as hinderances in the way of his kingdoms passage.

In these visions that concerne the bodie of the Iews more particular­ly, we may consider: first Iehouah casting them out for their sinnes, specially for filling the Temple with pictured Beasts (beastlie affe­ctions in them, who should haue bin themselues a Temple for the holy ghost) auerting and turning their backs vpon the Lord: for the which Iehouah leaues the Temple, drawing his glorie to the Moun­taine, forsaking them and their City; that so the Chaldeans with vnbridled [Page 4] crueltie might ouerturne all, destroy a multitude, and carry a remnant into captiuity. This their eiection laid downe in sundry visions, in the second place is vttered, God his free acception of this cast-away people. And this is don, first by destroying his peoples aduersaries: secondly by powring a bounteous blessing vpon this people: first by revni­ting Iudah and Israel (the two and ten tribes) into one, for the glorious ouerthrow of Gog and Magog: se­condly by measuring vnto his peo­ple Canaan and Ierusalem for new. That I say, for new, it is because all in this restauration is new. For in respect of the letter fully, when were the ten Trybes (who schismed in Rehoboams time, and in Hosheahs time were transported by Assur,) when were they revnited to Iudah and Beniamin? When did these 12. Trybes of Israel make such hauock of Gog and Magogs huge armie? [Page 5] When was Canaan so remeasured, and these new lots (diuers vnto Ieho­shuahs) when were the Trybes re­planted in them? Other things tou­ching the Citie and Temple might come into a Quaere: but that is said vnto the learned is sufficient, for manifesting that the fulnesse and spirit of this prophecie was to be expected of a new Israel, comming out of a new Babylon, vnto a new Canaan, endowed with a new Citie and Temple. Insomuch as this New-church might well say with the Apostle,2. Cor. 5.17. Old thinges are passed away, behold all thinges are become new. As Ezekiel saw them in the spi­rit, so must we consider them in the spirit. For (as a certaine Auncient well saith of Moses fed in the mount &c.Macari­us in ho­mil. 12. ( [...]) What soeuer was done, (or, fell out) it was a figure: and (as th'apostle speaketh,Heb. 10.1. a shadow of good thinges to come. Now to the Text.

And the Name of that Citie, &c.

What Citie speaketh he of? The whole hystorie before considered, we easily vnderstand of what Citie he treats according to the letter and open narration, (namely of Ierusha­lem in Palestina) which according to this Prophecie was to be turned into a new Citie: and therewith to be inuested with a new name. First to this old Citie, the shadow; then afterwards to the new Citie, the soule and substance of the former shadow.

Ierushalem in Ioshuahs 18. chap. and last verse, is termed Iebusi, (of the vncircumcised Iebusits that in­habited the same) and is there sea­ted in the lot of Beniamin: specially the superiour part, Zion (2. Sam. 5.) together with the sacred Temple seated vpon the Mountaines, ter­med by Moses, the shoulders of Ben­iamin. But else, from Ioshuahs 15. chap. and last verse, it should also [Page 7] fall within the lot of Regall Iudah. This do some reconcile thus: it was Beniamins Per sortem. by lot, but Iudahs by Beniamins Per conces­sionem. concession or graunt: or else, it was by reason that God (for after purpose) had interming­led Beniamin with Iudah.

Touching the Name (Ierushalem) diuers are diuersly minded. Some haue taken it to arise from the greek word [...] (signifyingor Sacrificer. a Priest) and the auncient hebrew terme Sha­lem, in English, Peace, Heb. 7.2. as if it were termed, Sacrifice or Sacri­ficers-peace, or Peaceable-sacrifice. But such composition should haue been to the Iewes, but as a Lynsy­woolsy garment, or the matching of an Ox and an Asse together, or the sowing of their ground with Mis­cellaine, inhibited by the law. For what had Hebers people to do with Iauans tongue? Or whē did the spirit of prophecy abhor Hebers language & the Dialects following out of it, [Page 8] that so he should to the old Synago­gue adde the Grecians language? The continuall practise of the old testament doth euer witnes the con­trarie.

Others more rightly deduce the former part of the word also from the Hebrew, and hereof be two iudgments. Some take it to be com­pounded of Iireh (Gen. 22.14.) a terme which Abraham put vpon the mount1. Chro. 3.1. Moriah, whereon the Temple was built: and of Shalem the auncient name of this citie (Gen. 14.) what time (Melchi-zedek did inhabite there. Which two termes (Iireh and Shalem) contracted into one, do make Ierushalem. And so in this one word; the Iewes are put in mind of God his prouident sight in Abrahams offring vp his Isaac: and of Melchi-zedeks blessing pow­red vpon Abraham, after his returne from slaughter of the Kings.

Others compound it of Iebus and [Page 9] Shalem. And very certaine it is, that this Citie at seuerall times enioyed these seuerall names. But these two termes drawen into one, should so yeeld, not Ierushalem, but Iebusha­lem. Answere is made, that B. is tur­ned into R. for mysterie sake, (as Saul was turned into Paul, Sarai into Sarah, Abram into Abraham,) the change of letter being a sacramental signe of the Cities change from sin to Sanctitie: no longer to remaine a cage of such vnclean and hatefull byrds, as were the Iebushits: but a Citie for the Saints, an habitation for the mighty God of Iaakob. And this mysticall sense, the B. turned in­to R. will further imply, if so they be considered in Hebers language: where B. is termed Beth, (in English an House) R. is termed Resh, (in Eng­lish an Head) as if one would say, that vnclean House became the Head or Metropolitane citie. And in verie truth, euery one of vs in our [Page 10] first creation was Shalem, at peace with God: but by Apostacie and miscreation, we became in the se­cond place Iebus, a receptacle of vnclean spirits: but by recreation, and the new gift of God, we are made Ierushalem, a Citie for the great king.

The truth resting betweene these two last repeated iudgements, you may demaund, whether of them vt­ters the truth? I answer, both speak probably, for any thing yet vnto me reuealed. If of Iireh and Shalem, it signifieth vision of peace: if of Iebus and Shalem (B. turned to R.) it also commeth to be (as before) Iireh­shalem, by contraction, Ierusha­lem: the vision of peace, or the place of such vision as bringeth True peace. For all false vision doth ef­fect but a false peace; compared by Ezech. chap. 13.11. &c. to vntem­pered morter, that will not hold out a storme, when the wrath of God [Page 11] commeth out against sinners. Whereas that vision which issueth from God and his Ministrie, it of­freth (and to the Beleeuer giueth) a Peace, which the Receiuer shall ne­uer need to repent of. This tou­ching the Iudaicall and typicall Ie­rushalem premised: Let vs now exa­mine the remoouall of this shadow for establishing the substance.

And the Name of that Citie from a Day (shalbe) Iehouah-shámmah.

As if he should say, From the day of this new Cities building, a terme shall be put vpon this Citie, which shall be vnto it as a sacrament of Ie­houahs presence there for euer. So that, herein we are to obserue, First, the remooual of an old Citie, 2. for building of a new: with the remoo­uall of an old name, for baptizing this Citie into a new.

First, touching the remoouall of the old, Haggai (including Citty,Hag. 2.7. Temple, Land,) doth tearme the [Page 12] pollicie ecclestiasticall and ciuill, an heauens and an earth which God would shake after a while, euen then shake the same, what time the expe­ctation of the Nations (that is Mes­siah) should come. And because we should not doubt what he meaneth by shaking, marke how the Author to the Hebrewes descants thereon: Yet once more will I shake, Heb. 12.27.28. not the earth onely, but also the heauens. And this (word) Yet once more, signifieth a remoouing of those things which are made, that the things which are not shaken may remaine. Where­fore seeing we receiue a kingdome which cannot be shaken, &c. In all which is plainly concluded, that the old pollicie of the Iewes, togither with their whole kingdome, it was to be shaken, and by the Messiah remooued: that so we might receiue the new kingdome of Messiah, that neuer was to be shaken or remoo­ued. The Prophets are plentifull [Page 13] in this poynt, and the Author to the Hebrewes maketh this doctrine as the mayne argument and subiect of his Epistle. And what doth Iaakob in his prophecie vpon Iudahs tribe inferre principally, if not this, that Iudahs tribe should continue till Shiloh come,Gen. 49.10. but Shiloh once come he should gather the people to him­selfe: and so consequently dissolue Iudahs tribe and annihil their City and pollicy? The tribe shall not de­part Iudah (that is, Iudahs tribe shall not be dissolued and confounded) till Shiloh come, and the people shall be gathered vnto him. And how appa­rant this is, let Iudahs present disper­sion, the losse of their Canaan, the subuersion of their city, the ouer­throw of their priesthood and sacri­fice (and that for these 1500. yeeres, and vpward) let that their tragike experience be as ten thousand sub­scriptions to this doctrine.

Nor were these heauenly Mosai­call [Page 14] heauens and earth shaken and remoued for a season, but for euer. For from the day of that shaking, we receiued a kingdome that was neuer to be remooued. Now, if with our vnmooueable kingdome (the kingdome of Christ) we should after a season expect the Iewish kingdomes restauration vnto their Mosaicall pollicie, this were to con­found Christ and Moses, shadowe and substance. I do not define whe­ther euer the Iewes shall be gathered into some forme of gouernment, but I conclude that their figuring kingdome was (as a shadowe) euer to be abolished, that so the figured and substantiall kingdome of Mes­siah might be planted for euer.

The Synagogues kingdome was notably shaken, when (Messiah hanging vppon the crosse) the earth quaked, the vayle rent, the stones cloue a sunder. Yea, they might take knowledge of a new world, when [Page 15] as the graues (togither with the Lord of resurrection) did send out their dead,Matth. 27.51 &c. who walked into the City and shewed themselues to many: put­ting them in mind of Daniels Dan. 12.2. resur­rection of many. About 40. yeares after, their Temple was fired, their city by the Romanes rased to the ground, and their whole common­wealth vanished as a scrowle folded togither.Euseb. dem. Euan. l. 1. c. 6. This caused Eusebius to say (Soluta est confestim omnis Mosi constitutio &c.) ‘The whole constitu­tion of Moses forthwith was dissol­ued, and all things of the old Testa­ment whatsoeuer till then reserued, they then were taken away.’ From this day, Ezekiels new city was to be builded. The lowe Ierusalem was to giue place vnto that new one, which th'apostle termethGala 4.26 so vnderstood of Luther, Caluine, Mar­iorat, Hemin gius. Hyperi­us, & others. See Hebr. 12.22. heauenly and free, yea the mother of vs all: and by Iohn defined to be theConcilium Senosense in primo decre­to, vnderstandeth so of Reuel. 21. Tabernacle of God resiant with men. Of the old citie excellent things were spo­ken, [Page 16] but greater and more meruai­lous things are recorded of this city, the substantiall city of God. And no maruayle, seeing this is compact­ed in such durable manner of such durable matter, as one with God it must continue for euer. Th'other was but Leah, that is, Rahel, the beu­ty of the nations: and better then the Egyptian Queene may bee calledIn Dan. 11 17. she is ter­med Bath-Nasim. Cleopatra, the glory of a countrey: for the King of kings hath vnited her to himselfe for euer. Heereof a certaine Auncient he thus writeth: The citty of our Sauiour is builded. ‘And the Name of that Citty shall not be (as was the first) Ierushalem (interpreted Vision of Peace, Ierom here on: Vrbs Sal­uatoris ex­tructa est. &c.) but A­donaj-sama (Ierom vseth Adonaj for Iehouah, according to the maner of the Hebrues) which in latine speach is turned Dominus ibidem: who will neuer departe from it, as from the first people he did, saying to his dis­ciples (Iohn 14. vlt.) Arise, let vs go [Page 17] hence: and vnto the Iewes (Math. 23.38.) your house shall be left de­sart. But this shall haue an eternall possession, and he himself wilbe the possession vnto it, promising so to the same disciples, saying: Beholde, I am with you vnto the ende of the world.’ Ludouic. La­uater. hereon And a later Writer speakes thus: The Citty was foure-square, whereby is signified the firmitude of the Church, because it cannot be euerted. Howsoeuer assailed, it euer riseth vp against all assaults. Iehouah there. Out of this citie the Lord will not depart. He will not leaue it as he did the synagogue: but in all ages he will be There, accor­ding to that in Math. 28. I will be with you vnto the end of the world. Briefly then I inferre, 1 First, 1 that Christians are not to retaine the whole, or any part of Moses cere­moniall kingdom, in the nature of that ceremonie: 2 Secondly, 2 that the new testaments kingdom once [Page 18] established, it neuer after can be to­tally remoued. These two doctrines how they be receued of Romanists, Anabaptists, Brownists, &c. I shall briefly examine.

The Romanists commaunde in their Church the vse of sundry crea­tures (as garments, oyle, water, salte, belles, &c.) and, as their Prouinciall Moguntine synode affirmeth,Mogunt. councel held Anno 1549 Eccle­siam exorcizandi potestatem accepisse, &c. that the Church hath power of coniuring, salt, and other creatures, for auerting the diuelles traines, and noysome pestilences: so (as they write) their Pope Alexander of old vrgeth his holy water from Leuies ceremoniall water: and they from the Aaronicall priesthoode do vrge garments and other ceremoniall creatures. What must their argu­ments now be?

1 The Church hath receued po­wer no lesse than the Synagogue, to exorcize creatures for driuing away [Page 19] Diuelles: or,

2 Moses commanded to the Sy­nagogue, holy water, holy oyle, holy garments, &c. therefore the church of Christ may, or ought also so to consecrate and vse them.

First, I passe by their misconstru­ing of the Leuiticall ceremonies, who neither were by the Priests exorcised or coniured: nor yet af­ter their consecration set aparte for such ridiculous purposes, as to feare away the diuel, driue away pestilen­ces, preserue corne from thunder, &c. Secondly I answere, it follow­eth not, that what ceremonies God by Moses did prescribe vnto the sy­nagogue, that these must of God by Christ Iesus be continued in the new Testaments church: for then it should followe, that not onely some ceremonies, but all should be tran­slated into the Church. But as the Apostle saith, that Leuiticall or Ce­remoniall meates, drinkes,Coloss. 2.16, 17. and [Page 20] holydaies, they were but a shadow of things to come, the body (or sub­stance) whereof was Christ, (and therfore had their sacramentall end in Christ) so, the same Apostle ter­meth the obseruance of Iudaicall ceremonies, A yoke, from which Christ hath made vs free. And in deed, to retaine these Ceremonies, what is it else but the rearing againe of the particion wall which stood between Iew and Gentile, and so consequently to deny that Messiah is come in the flesh: seeing his ap­pearance in our nature, it was for the abolishment of that particion wall of ceremonies? Wherevpon a certaine Auncient could well con­clude,August. de doctr. christ. l. 3. c. 9. that after Christ by his resur­rection manifested himselfe to be the freer of vs from the burden of legall ceremonies, he himselfe and th'apostolicall discipline deliuered vnto vs (quaedam pauca pro multis) a certaine Few for Many, (sicuti est [Page 21] Baptismi sacramentum & celebratio corporis & sanguinis Domini) as namely the sacrament of Baptisme, and the celebration of our Lord his body and bloud. As for Ordinati­on by presbyterall imposition of hands, mentioned by him elsewhere for a kinde ofAug. contr. Parmen. li. 2 c. 12. & alibi So Bucer ex­presly, in l. de vi & vsu mi­nisterii. Cal­uin in Instit. l 4. c. 3. sect 16 & ch 14. sect 20. & ca. 19. sect. 28 & 31 So hath Apo­logia Augu­stanae confess. graunted by Chemnitius in exam. Tri­dent. Concil. So hath our doctor Bilson in his perpe­tuall gouern­ment, ca. 9. and 10. sacrament (and in the new church practised precisely and plentifully by the Apostles and Presbyters) he in this place passeth by it, because, neither it was a cere­monie to the whole Church, nor now instituted: but an auncient sa­cred signe continued, whose signifi­cation had no end in Christs mani­festation. For Christians to reuiue the legall shadowes, it is but to cast againe a vaile vpon Moses, and to hinder vs (as the Iewes are yet hin­dred) from seeing into the ende of things which by Messiah are aboli­shed. But in very troth, the Roma­nists, their coniuring of creatures for driuing away Diuelles, it is so farre [Page 22] from being Mosaicall (much lesse Christian) as it rather is borrowed from Ethniks, who so hoped to pa­cifie their Daemones: or else from Tobits Apocryphall Angell, who taught the fugation of a diuell (byArchangeli expos. in Con­clus. Miran­dula. Cabalistes termed Asmodeus, the prowde diuell) and that by vertue of a fume made vpon a fishes heart and liuer. The Romanistes coniu­red creatures tending thus (not to so reasonable a woorke, as to reare vp the partition wall againe, but) to a reuiuing of Gentiles idolatrous worship: or at best, a putting of spi­rite into Rabbinicall blasphemous figments, to the violation of Messi­ahs kingdome.

Nor doth this doctrine any iote help them which contende against certaine garments in our church. And why? because such garments are not with vs vrged for Ceremo­niall or Sacramentall garments: but onely (as is open in our lawe) for de­cencie [Page 23] and comlinesse. Christs ap­pearance did put an end, not to the vsing of the creature, but to the vsing of it So: that is, from vsing it sacramentally, figuratiuely, typical­ly. Touching which free vse of all his creatures, I shall haue occasion to speake more hereafter.

Touching the Brownists and A­nabaptists, they would not be thought to bring vs backe againe to Iudaisme, but iudge of them by this their argument: The Israelites in Deut. 12.2. are commaunded to destroy all the places wherein the nations serued their Gods: therfore all the Temples or churches where­in the Romanists haue serued their Images, they are to be destroyed. Or thus: It was simplie vnlawfull for the Israelites to sacrifice in the high places: therefore simply vn­lawfull for christians to preach or pray in the Temples of Romish or Idolatrous christians. By this argu­ment [Page 24] they conclude, a nullitie of all diuine woorship in our churches: and by the former, a ruinating of them to the earth. And the one and the other is drawen from a ceremo­niall commaundement in the lawe.

1 That the commaundement was morall (and so in that kind perpe­tuall) it cannot be: First because the destruction of such Idoll Syna­gogues, it was opposed to the stan­ding of one peculiar place, which God would choose in Israel for put­ting (Shemó Sham) his name there. And for this cause, Moses precisely (hauing spoken of such vastation) he commaunds his people to re­paire vnto this one place wherein he put his name. So that betweene this one place and the other, there was a flat opposition, th'one falling, th'other standing. And therefore the people no longer commaunded to destroy the one, then the other stood. But this was not to stand for [Page 25] euer, therfore the commaundement of destroying the other, not morall, nor continuing for euer.

2 Secondly, who knoweth not that the Tabernacle and Temple were figures of the new Testaments church? And for that cause we are commaunded,2. Pet. 2. Rom. 12.1. 1. Cor. 3.16. & 6.19. as liuing stones to become a spirituall house, to offer vp our selues for a quicke and liuing sacrifice: and plainly told, that we be the Temple of the holy ghost. Now, will they and euery one grant the Tabernacle and Temple to be figures of the new church? Then by proportion it must follow, that the former materiall Idoll houses, they (as was Babylon, Sodome, Ae­gipt) were figures of the many false assemblies schismaticall and hereti­call, that would be opposit vnto the catholike body. All which spiritu­all synagogues (or assemblies of false woorshippers) were by the spirituall Israel of god (and specially by their [Page 26] spirituall weapons) to be ouer­throwen and dissipated: that hap­pily so they may returne to the vni­tie of the Catholike Church. And to this purpose, where the twelue Trybes were armed with carnall weapons, the twelue Apostles were armed with spirituall weapons, whereby they did not cast downe materiall synagogues, but hawtie imaginations of men, and euery thing that was spiritually exalted a­gainst God.

Thirdly, admit (which they would haue) that all our Churches had bin reared vp by Antichrists limbs, and dedicated vnto Idol-worship, should it follow, that these houses should be as deep in pollution as these that serued the Gentiles? The vncircumcised Nations in Canaan had nothing in their woorship, but their owne inuentions, altogether ignorant and vnbeleeuing the Co­uenant of Grace. As for our pre­decessors [Page 27] subiected to Romes go­uernment, the written word of God (for the substance thereof, specially at time of Churches building) it was preached amongst them: and no doubt a seed of God euer amongst them. Nor was there other place where God had put his Name, for our predecessors to repaire vnto, then within the limits of the Romish iurisdiction, in the midst of which part of the Temple of God, that blasphemous horne of Rome was after mounted. If the commande­ment in Deut. 12.2. were moral and perpetuall touching destruction of Pagans houses, it yet followeth not, that the Idolatrized houses of Chri­stians, they were aswell to be torne vp. There is a great difference: first betweene the woorshippers, se­condly betweene their woorships: thirdly, betweene the end they re­ferred their houses vnto. Except with the Stoiks we held (Omnia pec­cata [Page 28] paria) that all sinnes were alike and of equal weight in the ballance; we otherwise cannot argumentate thus: The Pagans Idolatrie (which is an Idolatrie in the highest degree) it was to suffer this iudgement: ther­fore Christians in any kind of Ido­latrie are to suffer the same. The Hebrew that stole another Hebrue,Deut. 24.7. compared with Exod. 22.1. & ch. 22.22.28. &c. and afterwards sold him, or made marchandize of him, he was to die the death: but he that stole an oxe or sheepe, and sold it, was only to restore it with some aduantage. So Adultrie was death; fornication not: and yet both sin and abuse of the bodie. Where the aduersarie re­plyeth, these Churches may be spa­red from the rasing downe, and ap­plied to ciuill vsage, as for Barnes, Stables, &c. Herein they ouer­throw themselues: for the law of Deut. 12.2. admitted no such ciuill vse, but without all exception they were to be battred downe. And [Page 29] thus these fellowes will take away our libertie, and giue vs libertie, not according to setled Scripture, but their owne vnsetled fancie.

4 Fourthly, it seemeth not simply vnlawfull for Israelites to haue sacri­ficed, prayed, preached in their hie-places and Idol-houses. This I col­lect from the 1. Kings 3. chap. and also the 13. chap. (Wherewith may also be considered Israels sacrificing, & Samuels benediction thereof also in the hie-places. 1. Samuel 9.12, 13, 14.) In the third chap. it is said that Salomon sacrificed and praied in Gibeon the chiefe hie-place. The fact seemeth excusable, because to that day, no house was built vnto the name of the Lord. The Taberna­cle through age was far spent, and therefore the Arke of God his pre­sence sometimes placed in Roumes that might haue been bettred: and yet at this time seated in Ierusalem. And as in such respect, the holie [Page 30] ghost seemeth to excuse the matter; so in the second place he plainly protests, that God in Gibeon ap­peared to Salomon, and highlie ac­cepted of his praier for wisedome. Touching preaching in those pla­ces, the 13. chap. manifesteth how A man of God, (that is, a Prophet or Preacher of God) he commeth to Bethel: and there entring into the Idoll temple dedicated by Ieroboam vnto a Caluish worship, he there by the Alter-side standeth and pro­nounceth the will of God, against that Idol-worship and Priesthood: and this in the face of Ieroboams presence. By all which it seemeth vnto me, that God, and the people of god, did put a great difference be­tweene the houses which Canaanits reared vp for their Religion sub­stancially and wholie euill, and these places which Idolatrous Israelites did reare vp for their linsy-woolsie medley religion. Who (notwith­standing [Page 31] their Idolatrie) were euer interessed with Circumcision, the seale of the Couenant, wherby they stood a seperate people from the Heathen: and still amongst pro­pheticall menaces, they had this Euangelical speach from the mouth of God, Israel my people. Which (if the former law in Deut. 12.2. were moral) should teach vs a great diffe­rent vse betweene Pagans temples, and Idolatrized Churches: yea, though the Christians were so deep in Schisme & Idolatrie, as it should be vnlawfull for Iudah in such their estate, to ioyne fully in spirituall communion with Israel.

Fifthly, where they teach that we can haue no spiritual vse of the hou­ses which Antichrist or Romanists haue Idolatrized, they forget how the Temple was vsed for God his worship, sundrie times after it had been horribly prophaned. If they replie, we except not against such [Page 32] houses simplie for hauing been pro­phaned, but for hauing been dedi­cated from the very foundation to Idolatrie: I demaund of them, first how it doth appeare in Deut. 12 that the Israëlites were tyed to exa­mine, whether all such places had been so dedicated from the verie foundation? Secondly, I would know of them, how they know that all our Churches were founded by Romes Apostacie to that Idola­trous woorship? Here they must make a religion of it, to search after the ages of Churches: and whether they were builded since Anti-christ was mounted. Here I will help the Nouices. Dioclesian destroyed the Temples,Euseb. l. 8. cap. 2. as Eusebius recordeth (ve­rie aged were these Churches) and then the Gentiles vpbraided the Christians (saithOrig. ad Cel­sum l. 4. & Arnob. l. 2. Origen) with their lacke of Temples: as now they might well laugh vs to scorne, if we would pull down our Churches for [Page 33] satisfaction of Brownists, who ne­uer are like to build a Church: de­stroyers (somuch as in them is) both of Churches materiall and spiritual. The former losse by Dioclesian was recouered by the edict of Galerius Maximinus, after the hand of God had been sharp vpon him: asEuseb. l. 8. c. 16. & 9. ch. 10. Niceph. l. 7. c. 3. Eu­sebius and Nicephorus witnesse. Af­ter this, how bountifull Constantinus Magnus was this way, th'ecclesiasti­call hystories sufficiently vtter. Nor was this of Constantine effected so late as 340. yeeres from our Sa­uiours incarnation. Now let our Church-ruinors teach vs, First, when Antichrist had subdued our Westerne parts vnto him, so that thence-forth all stood subiects to that Beast? Secondly, let them proue vnto vs that our Churches in such and such times of Antichrist, they were builded at his comman­dement, and by his members, vnto his apostaticall woorship.

Sixtly, admit that Antichrist, and whosoeuer had reared vp and dedi­cated our Temples to idoles, yet the creature recouered out of their handes, it ceaseth not to be the good creature of God.1. Tim. 4.4, 5 For the Apostle teacheth me, that euery creature of God is good, and nothing ought to bee refused, if it be receiued with thankesgiuing: and reason heereof he thus rendreth, Because it is sancti­fied by the word and praier. If no meat entring into me (though once vn­cleane by the Lawe) can now pol­lute the beleeuer; much lesse can garments and houses that are crea­tures externall and outward. The Apostle indeede saith, that in not touching, tasting, handling such things as the Law once counted vn­cleane,Coloss. 2 it hath a shew of wisedome, but in trueth no substance of wise­dome. And for that cause he calleth it no better then Ethelo-threskeia, A will-worship: whereas (if we be risen [Page 35] with Christ) then wee will vse our Christian liberty in the free vse of God his creatures; & not bring our selues backe into a Iudaicall bon­dage.Iohn 4.20 21. &c. Hereof the woman of Sama­ria coulde not be ignorant, who by our Sauiour himselfe was taught, that not in Iaakobs mountaine, nor yet in Beniamins hilles, was Gods worship or sacrifice to bee longer seated: but the houre was comming, and euen then was (begunne) for a­bolishing that forme of sacrifice, as also the Place. And hitherto Saint Paul had relation, when hee writeth thus vnto Timothy, 1. Tim. 2.8 I will therefore that the men pray euery where, lifting vp pure hands without wrath or doub­ting. Because foolish man hath de­dicated Creatures to the patronage of this or that true or false Saint, I must therfore abhorre the creature, specially in ecclesiasticall or spiritu­all vsage. By this crooked rule, I may not preach nor pray in England, [Page 36] because it was dedicated to Saint George: nor in Wales, because Da­uid is there made patrone: nor in Ireland, by reason of Saint Patricke: nor in Scotland, bicause of Saint An­drew: nor in Fraunce, because of S. Denys: nor in any countrey where Rome hath domineerd, because all is dedicated to somewhat. Nay, I must in no one day of the yeare preach or pray: because they haue to euery day giuen a Saint. Thus, if a man desire to runne himselfe in­to a labyrinth and endlesse Maze, let him but leape into the Brownists and Anabaptists faction. This shal suffice for manifestation of the for­mer Doctrine: namely, That Chri­stians are not to retayne the whole, or any part of Moses Ceremoniall kingdome, in the nature of Ceremony.

THE Second Sermon.

THe second generall do­ctrine [That the newe Te­staments kingdome once e­stablished, it can neuer bee totally remooued] that remaineth in the next place to be further cleered. And that by the grace of God shall be done; first, by obseruing the dif­ference betwixt vs and the Roma­nists (we both holde the Church e­uer visible: but they in one forme, [Page 38] we in another:) secondly, by exa­mining the Arrians, Anabaptists, and Brownists allegations: where­by they would haue the Church for very many yeares, to haue no Face, or visibilitie at all.

Touching the discrepance twixt Romanists and vs, it lieth heerein: they hold, that the new Testaments church once generally planted, the face thereof continueth euermore gloriously visible. And to this end they alledge diuers places (specially out of the prophets) which doe in­ferre a large and glorious face of Christ and his kingdome here. We of the other side, doe teach, that this new church (howsoeuer in her first plantation by the Apostles, it was both passing large and glorious) yet in succeeding times, it wained with the Moone, shee lost much of her glory, and of her outstretched visi­bilitie. And to this purpose wee al­lege, first, the state of Israels church [Page 39] as a tipe and figure thereof: second­ly, very many scriptures (old & new) which can admit no other collecti­on: lastly, we vrge experience it self.

First,I. Type. touching the Type or Fi­gure, we see the church of Israel go­ing out with banners in the wilder­nes, and finally seated in glorious Canaan by Ioshuah. After his death al ranne out of order, the vncircum­cised had them long in subiection, there was no king in Israel, and eue­ry man didde what was good in his owne eyes. Then in Saul, Dauid, & Solomons times, we see the church by sundry steps mounted & enlarged: but in Rehoboams dayes wee see ten tribes schisme from the twoo (that is, from Iudah and Beniamin) and that which was worse, didde reare vp and woorshippe; first, calues in Dan and Bethel: secondly, Ba­alim with his abhominations. Nor was the bodie of these tenne tribes at anie tyme recouered, but fi­nally, [Page 40] in Hosheahs raigne, carried away by the Assyrian armie: Co­lonies of straungers beeing in their rowme transported vnto theyr Me­tropolitane Citie Samaria and them parts.

In the meane time, the little king­dome of Iudah (contayning also Beniamin) it did not euer retayne the face of her orderly gouerne­ment: for sundrie of the Kinges brought Idolatrie in: but by others agayne in some good sorte purged. Yet finally (such was the height of their sinne) GOD left them to the boyling potte of the North (e­uen to Nebuchadnetzar) who spoy­led their Cittie and Temple, and departed the chiefe of the Royall seede vnto Babel. Then for seuen­tie yeares did orderly sacrifice cease, their Iudiciall pollicie (giuen by God at mount Sinai, so well as the ecclesiasticall) it was subiected to the pleasure of straungers, then [Page 41] where was their beauteous Consti­tution? And at the end of seauen­ty yeares, Babels Monarch was subiected to the Medes and Persi­ans, who licenced Iudah to returne for building their Cittie and Tem­ple: which after some nine and for­tie yeares were reedified, but where was the sacramentall Arke of God his presence? Where was Moses originall copie? Where was Vrim and Thummim for decision of ex­traordinarie scruples? What was become of Aarons rod and the sa­cramentall Manna? And that which was not least, what became of their Iudiciall pollicie, from that time vn­to Christ Iesus? Somewhat I know there was, but farre from the first patterne. Curtailed they were of their Mosaicall constitutions: First by Babels monarch: secondly, by that of Medes and Persians: thirdly, by the Greekes Alexander: fourth­ly, by the two legged gouernement [Page 44] of Aegypt and Syria, springing out of the third Monarch: and lastly, by that last Monarch Rome (swal­lowing vp the former togither with Messiahs appearance) who had so manacled Iudah, that they coulde not condemne Iesus, but by the po­licie of wicked Rome. This being the condition of the typical church, it followeth (say we) that the New-testaments-church be in some mea­sure thereto analogized. And then onely it is so, when we find after her fulnesse of grace, a declining there­of: running into schismes and des­perate apostacies: whereby God is prouoked to lessen her light, to di­minish her glory, to ouer-turne her constitution, to abbreuiate her pol­licie.

Scripture. II.Secondly, the scriptures which in­ferre such lamentable ruine of the church, they be many: wherof a few, & to this purpose pregnant. That 89. psalme is a typicall prophecie of [Page 43] Christ & his kingdome, who grants not? wherein wee first see a glori­ous large kingdom giuen to Christ for his possession, but anon, behold (as grieued at his Messiah or vncted, who hath sinne considered as vpon him, but in his members) he casteth his crown on the ground, he breaks downe his walles, ruinates his for­tresses, and leaues him to be spoyled & rebuked of the multitude. Wher­of the learned monke Folengius thus writeth: These things may be applyed to the Christians times, and perchance to our present times. Presently wher­vpon he plainely saith, that Religion is conculcate and trode vnderfoote. And Aben-ezra citeth a certayne Spanish Iew so amazd at this psalm (for the Iews dreame,Io. Baptista Fol. in psa. 89 40. Ad chri­stianorum tempora (for­sanque prae­sentia) aptari possunt. that Messiahs kingdome shoulde be according to the worlds glory, & so perpetuall) as he refused to reade it: euen as the Romanists at this day can not abide to hear, or reade any thing that crosses [Page 44] their Iudaicall opinion touching the outward face of Messiahs king­dome.

2 Nor maruell I thereat, seeing heere in the person of Aetham (brought in by the holy Ghost, ex­postulating the cause of such down­fall) wee are taught howe hardely our nature brooketh the cast-down estate of Messiahs outward glorie. Another Scripture wee haue in the foure and twentieth of Mathew, whereas our Sauior euidently fore­telleth the notable intricate estate of the faithfull in after times: name­ly, that many false christs, false apo­stles, false prophets, shoulde arise in the church, to the seduction of many; charitie growing colde, and iniquitie hauing the vpper hande. Yea, heerewithall, that seduction and delusion (as in the second E­pistle of Paul to the Thessalonians and the second chapter) should be so strong, that if it were possible, the [Page 45] very elect of God shoulde be sedu­ced.

This generalitie of false prophe­cie, of horrible iniquitie, and migh­tie delusion, it can not stand with a notable and glorious visibilitie of the Church: nor yet can be consi­dered where the constitution and pollicie is (as at first) sounde and vnshaken. Nay it argueth (accor­ding to that of Saint Paul in 1. Tim. 4.1, 2, 3. and 2. Timoth. 3.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, &c. and that of Saint Peter 1. e­pistle 2.1, &c.) that all shall lie in horrible confusion and disorder, do the holy men of GOD what they can. Which also is denoted by theThis I haue mani­fested largely in my Anti­doton. Hieron. in Zeph. 1.12 Recte aeutem Ierushalem. &c. parable of tares, Math 13.24, &c Touching which first and latter e­state of the Church, hearken what Ierome writeth on Zephaniah, 1. Chronic. verse 12. I will search Ieru­shalem with candles] Rightly Ieru­shalem, that is, the church which first was called Iebus, that is, trode [Page 45] vnder foote. Because it was con­culcate of the Gentiles, and was a laughing stocke to the Deuils, it was called Iebus. And after the peace of the Lord began to dwell in it, and his place made in peace, it was called Ierushalem. But be­cause in the last-times (as I haue oft said) Charitie shall freeze, and Iniquitie shall be multiplied, (yea the light of the Sun shall with­draw from Ierushalem, and the va­station shall be so great, that the verie elect of God shall hardlie be saued) the Lord therefore then with the Lanthorne of his word and Reason will search all the vi­ces in Ierushalem, and bring them into sight.’ 3 Another plaine scrip­ture we haue in Reuel. 6. where af­ter our Salomon hath rid foorth vpon the cleere word of Truth,Ps. 45.4. and Meeknes, and Iustice, and by the bowe of his right hand hath subdued a people vnto him: We [Page 47] presently after see bloodie persecu­tion, scarsitie, death, slaughter, together with a fearfull darkning of the Sunne, blood stayning the Moone, accompanied with a ge­nerall Apostacie of the Church-starres from the kingdome of hea­uen vnto earthly conuersation, ef­fecting therewith a generall dis­solution of all good order. All which thinges can be but mystically vnderstood according to the nature of prophecie, and so a plaine decla­ration of the Church turned vpside downe, with a losse of her large vi­sibilitie and glorie. Other Scrip­tures may of Romanistes be held more litigious, these shall here suf­fice.

Besides the type and plaine eui­dence of Scripture,III Experience. I will adde the argument of experience signed by Antiquitie. For the first 300. yeeres and better after Christes in­carnation, we are not ignorant [Page 48] of a reasonable glorious estate of the Church, for the which some haue (not altogether vnfitly) vrged that of the Apocryphall Esdras, 2. Esd. 7.28.29. (a thing that he might gesse at by com­parison of Scripture) where in the person of the Lord he saith: ‘My sonne Iesus shall appeare (with these that be with him) and they that re­maine shall reioyce with him 400. yeeres. After these yeeres shall my son Christ dye, and all men that haue life:’ as if he should say, Christ shall liue in his Church 400. yeeres, then shal he dye, and the Church be darkned. And indeed, for so long we find the writers giuing in a more excel­lent testimonie, then for the 200. yeeres after. But after 600. yeeres (or there abouts) I trow that by one litle horne starting vp at Rome, and an other in the East (vniuersall Pope and Machomet, both affirming they haue the kaies of Paradise, and speaking well of Iesus in generall [Page 49] tearmes) a foule beast was moun­ted, that opened a bottomles pit of humane inuentions that darkened all.Sozomen. eccl. hist. l. 6. c. 5. Anthonie the Heremite (about the beginning of Constantines raign, he is said to see in a dream certaine Mules [Altare insultantes calcibus &c.] leaping vpon the Altare with their feete, and ouerturning the sa­cred table: whereupon he should say, that by mixt and adulterate do­ctrine, and by rebellion of Schisma­tikes the Church should be harmed. And indeed (not long after) Arriani potiti sunt Ecclesiarum gubernaculis, the abhominable Arrians got the Churches reines in their hands. ‘Yea (saith venerable Beda Bedae eccl. hist. de gent [...] Angl. l. 1. c. 9.) Peace was in the Church vntill the times of Ar­rius his frenzie, which (corrupto orbe toto) the whole world being there­with corrupted, did also with the ve­nome of his errour, infect this Iland of Britaine so far remoued out of the world. And this (as againe he after [Page 50] vrgeth) notwithstanding it was condemned in the Synode of Nice.’ If Arrianisme so quickely got such an vniuersall head, what did also Pe­lagius, Macedonius, Nestorius, Marti­an, and all other heretikes their doc­trine? All of them marching in bat­tell aray against the Church; all of them termed by Chrysostoms Riuall on Mat. 24.Incertus an­ther on Mat. 84. the army abhominable in the midst of the Temple, prepa­ring a seate for Antichrist. Ech of these wonne disciples, did drawe a­part, and teare the vnseamed coat of Iesus in a thousand peeces. Not long after wee finde a man of sinne mounted in the midst of Gods tem­ple, aduancing himselfe as a god, ex­alting himselfe aboue the thinges of God, treading christian kings vnder foote, and subduing all to his lustes, as the apostle S. Paul, and S. Iohn e­uidently fore-prophecied.Clem. Alex­andr. in stro. lib. 1. fol. 2. If Cle­mens could say of the churches next succeeding the Apostles, [...] [Page 51] [...], Few children like the Fathers (for few conuaied the do­ctrine vncorrupted) what may we say of the doctrine and churches e­state in times long after? euen that which Ierome long since said:

— Inter Nitentia culta,
Lappae (que) et tribuli et steriles dominātur Auenae
Ierome a­gainst the Luciserians.
Burres, thistles, and wilde-oates,
Domineere in midst of the wheate field

To spare the repetition of odi­ous particulars, Experience hath taught vs, how the wheate field (af­ter some sleepinesse of Ministers) it became so pestred with visible and incurable tares, that hardely anie wheate could be seene. The Lord his vineyard became so clogged with thornes and briars, that hard­ly any Vine coulde bee discerned. The Barne floore was so full of chaffe, that the Grayne was al­most inuisible. The holie man Iob was scabs from the crowne of [Page 52] the head vnto the soule of the foote, he sate vpon ashes scraping himself with a potshard, his breath was cor­rupt, his friends could hardly know him: but yet not destitute of mo­tion of spirit, of a good conscience. The Church indeed was in Baby­lon, subiected vnto Babels externall gouernment: but with Daniel, and the three yong gentlemen of Iudah, it preserued a good conscience. The yeeres of captiuitie expyred, it coms forth of Babel in a great measure, but without expectation of the former Apostolicall glory. Yong-men wil think the last Temple superexcel­lent, but Aged spirited-ones will weep, at the inferioritie thereof, in comparison of the first. Diuers yet with Daniel bide behind in Babel, which somtimes come to their graue in peace: somtimes do buckle with Lyons, and depart to heauen in a firie chariot with Elijah. So far are we (whatsoeuer the Romanistes [Page 53] barke) from condemning all our predecessors, or yet adiudging to Hell, all such as liue and dye a­mongst them. For as there be in our Church, who are not verily of it; so we beleeue there be many in their idolatrous Israell, who not­withstanding are not verily of it. Thus briefly I haue cleered, that notwithstanding the Church hath been euer visible, yet she hath som­times (as also her Figure) been spoi­led of her glory, darkned in her members, captiued of her aduersa­rie, destitute of her constitution. Now remaineth it I examine the reasons of such aduersaries as deny the Church alwayes to haue been visible.

The Arrians, Anabaptists, and Brownists, gone out of the Catho­like communion, they oppose to the Church her euer visibilitie thus: First 1 the typicall Church was not euer visible. 2 Secondly, direct scrip­tures [Page 54] testifie that the new-Church should not be euer visible.

1 For probation of the first, they say that the Church was not visible in Elias his time: and to that purpose they alleage the Prophets com­plaint against Israell, Rom. 9.2, 1. Kings 19. Whereto I answere: 1 First, it is an ill shaped forme of rea­soning to say, Elias saw no Church, therfore no church was any where visible: Elias saw no church in Is­rael, therefore there was no church visible there, nor yet in Iudah. It is a sophistication of this nature, Tho­mas seeth not, therefore Peter seeth not: There is no light here, there­fore no where. Secondly, I answer: 2 Elias did not so reason: for his com­plaint was not against Iudah (wher­in he knew that the Church then florished vnder good Iehosophat) but against Israel the ten schismati­call Trybes, where then he feared that bloody Ahab and Iesabell had [Page 55] slaughtred all, from whose furie he then fled. But the Prophets asser­tiō is corrected of the Lord saying, that he had reserued 7000 soules which bowed no knee (that is, did not outward substantial homage) to Baal. And indeed, if we consider (besides these Prophets which Oba­diah hid in caues) the sundry schools of Prophets at Elias his time of be­ing rapt vp, we may easily beleeue that God had a notable people in that schismaticall Israell: seeing he sendeth not forth many prophets, but when he is minded to gather in some large Haruest. Thirdly, 3 we can by plaine demonstration, poynt foorth the Churches visibility, from the verie first Adam, vnto Christ the second Adam. In the houses of

  • 1 Adam
  • 2 Sheth
  • 3 Enosh
  • 4 Kainan
  • 5 Mahalaleel
  • 6 Iered
  • 7 Henoch,
    These 10. see in Gen. 1.3. &c.
  • 8 Methushelah
  • 9 Lamech
  • 10 Noach,

[Page 56] The Church was visible in them till the floud. After the floud, the Church stretched it selfe thorough the houses of Noach,

  • 1 Shem
  • 2 Arphaxad
  • These ten see in Gen. 11.10. &c.
    3 Selah
  • 4 Heber
  • 5 Peleg
  • 6 Reu
  • 7 Serug
  • 8 Nachor
  • 9 Thara
  • 10 Abram

From Abram to the captiuitie of Babel, and from thence vnto Iesus, Saint Mathew draweth a direct line in three times foureteene Generati­ons, that is, two and fortie, accord­ing to the number of Israels stati­ons or pitching places mentioned in the booke of Numbers chapt. 33. As for Saint Luke, hee in his third chapt doth point out the first fruits of God, from the first Adam vnto the second. Saint Mathew from Da­uid dooth, vnto the captiuitie, passe through the house of Solomon his el­dest sonne, finishing this mans seed in Iehoiachin: from the front of [Page 57] whose name Iehouah remouethCompare 2. King. 24.6. with Ier. 22.24.28. &c. according to Greek for me Ieconias in Math. 1.11. Iah, (as a signet from his finger, terming him Coniah) pulling heerewith Na­than (the other sonne of Dauid) his family into the line by adoption: beginning with Salathiel, and so to Zerubbabel: and then downe by his eldest sonne Abiud, vnto Christ. S. Luke beginning with Ioseph (the supposed father of Iesus) hee steppeth vpwarde to Zerubbabel, by the line of his second sonne Rhesa: and so from him directly vpward to Da­uid: not by Solomons house, which ended with the captiuitie, but by Nathans line, the line of adoption. This paines haue the two Euangelists ta­ken, for manifesting the church her visibilitie, from the beginning of the worlde, vnto Messiahs comming. The Typicall church so ouerturn­eth our aduersaries doctrine: for that was alwayes visible.

Secondly, they alleadge certaine scriptures against the new churches [Page 58] visibilitie: the seeming strongest whereof be these: first, Reuelat. 12. where, by the woman, they truely vnderstand the church (whereof the virgin Mary was an arch-member) and from her lodging in the wilder­nesse for a time, two times, and halfe a time, they vnderstand some long time, wherein the church should be hid from the sight of al, be inuisible. I answer, scripture must be expoun­ded from scripture, not by vnreaso­nable fancies: for, where haue they any one scripture, which By being in the wildernesse doth vnderstand In­uisibilitie? Rather lette them vnder­stand, that the holy-ghost puttes vs hereby in mind of the anciēt church of Israel, fed in the wildernesse, and (as Moses sayth Exod. 19.4. Deut. 32.11.) carried as vpon the wings of an Eagle: a figure of the worlds state, through which the Church heere is to passe, in her pilgrimage spirituall.

Now, who will say, that Israel was inuisible in the wildernesse? Or that they could be considered, but onely according to secret Election? The flat contrary followeth. Such ill happe haue these men in their al­legation of scripture. Another scrip­ture is that before alleadged in Reu. 6. whence they would conclude an apostacie of the whole church. I an­swer again, scripture must expound scripture. Compare this wyth Isai­ahs prophecie chapt. 24. last verse: as also with 34. chap and 4. verse, & with other like places, and it onely implyeth, a darke desolation of all church beauty, and orderly consti­tution: whereby God testifieth his anger against rich and poore, one & an other. The Moone therefore is seene coloured like blood, whereby each meaneth a general persecution and blodshed in the church: which cannot be, if the church were inuisi­ble. And to this purpose, marke [Page 60] howe in the twelfth chapter, when the red dragon assayled the Church wyth all his might, hee yet drewe downe but a third parte of the stars, some were reserued to shine in the Church: God euer in that reuelati­on shewing mercy to a remnant, whē otherwise the viols of his wrath were powred out vpon the malig­nant multitude. This theyr winde shaketh therfore no hauer. Another scripture is, Reu. 13. where (say they) all do take the beasts mark. Tis vn­true, for the holy-ghost thus sayth: All that dwell vppon the earth shall worshippe him (marke the exception) whose names are not written in the Booke of the life of the Lambe, &c. And because such there shall be, he afterwardes concludeth, Here is the patience of the Saynts. So that Saints there shall be, who wyth patience shall conquere. And that is more plainely declared in the 11. chap­ter, where all the tyrannous raigne [Page 61] of the beast (choose whether that beast be the body of cruell Empe­rours, or the sonne of perdition) GOD also hath his Prophetes, by whose ministerie, the oyle of God, his sauing grace is conueyed vnto his people.

Thus these men talke (no men so much) of the booke of Reuelation, before any one of the Seales be vn­clasped vnto them. They should now at last learne to meddle lesse with this booke, seeing the holy ghost leaueth so fearfull a curse vp­on these that adde their owne idle fancies therto, Reu. 22.19. An o­ther scripture they alleage, namely, 2. Thess. 2. whence they affirme the Churches whole departure from the Faith. I answere: First the aun­cient writers did ordinarily vnder­standIerom ad Algasiam. Tertull. de resurrect. ca. 24. August. de ciuitat. l. 20. it of a generall Reuolt from Romes Empire, which then had ruledome ouer the Nations of the earth. And that indeed is verie [Page 62] plainly fore-told by S. Iohn in Reuel. 17.16. Later writers (in respect of some after circumstances) do take it to be an Apostacie generall from Faith: but none that stinke not of heresie, do from thence conclude a flat Nullitie of the Church. A ge­nerall desolation there should be (as before in the Reuel.) but not a fal­ling away in euery particular mem­ber. For this is an absurd forme of argumentation: Many (or, the most) shall fall away: therefore euery one shall fall away. The man of sin with his army abhominable should enter into this new Citie and Temple of God (yea, rather rise vp in the midst thereof) sowing his perfidious do­ctrine, and planting his Idolatrous bottomles pit-inuentions, but yet neuer essentially subdue those soules vnto him, whose names were writ­ten in the Lambs booke. Spot them he might with many superstitions, but neuer subuert them in the Sub­stance [Page 63] of their Faith and Obedi­ence: asIn my Antid. as also in my Visible Chri­stian. els where I haue in wri­ting plainlie euinced. If during Antichrists raigne there should be no visible people of God, then An­tichrist should be no more Anti­christ, seeing Christ had none in opposition against him. Anti-christ must euer haue some to warre a­gainst: and there must euer be some to wage battaile against Antichrist. Otherwise fire would drop from Heauen, and the world thereupon be presently consumed: seeing there were none in the earth who had the word of Couenant in their mouths. Such Nouices are ignorant of the promise sealed by the Father vnto Messiah the Churches Redeemer. Isa. 59.21. My spirit (saith he) that is vpon thee, and my words which I haue put in thy mouth, shal not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of thy seedes-seed, saith Iehouah, from henceforth euen for EƲER. [Page 64] And to this purpose (when the sa­credReu. 7.1. &c. winds of God breathed by the foure Euangelists were to be held back in an vnknowen tongue) the Lord taketh order for many Iewes, and moe Gentiles: that they should notwithstanding carie (not onely in their heart, but also in their fore­heads) the visible marke of true Christianitie.Bulling part. 2. in annot. tabulae 5. Bullinger in his Epi­tome of times (hauing spoken of the most accursed times wherein Pha­rises, Saduces, Esseni, crept into the Iewish Church) he addeth: Interim non dubium est &c. Meane time it is not to be doubted, that true do­ctrine continued vncorrupted a­mongst the litle remnant of Gods people. For Simon Iustus (called also Hillels son or disciple) and Ze­charie Iohn Baptists father, as also the Elders of our Sauiour (so well as others whose names are vnknowen) they conserued (doubtles) the Sub­stance of religion: not bowing their [Page 65] knees to the traditionary and secta­rie Baal. The last times of Iu­dahs church is a type of our times. For in all times the Lorde reserued to himselfe a Church: yea, in the midst of heresies, schismes & corruptions. And them times were a type of these our last times, where­in at this day we liue.’ In which pad of Bullinger, Caluine, Peter Martir, & al of any note in these latter times do vniformely walke. This poynt I will (to the shame of hereticall Christians) shutte vp with Sybillaes prophecie.

Sed postquam Roma
Sybil. l. 2.
Aegyptum reget, imperio (que)
Froenabit, summi
tum summa potentia Regni
Regis inextincti
mortalibus exorietur.
Rex etenim sanctus
veniet, quitotius Orbis
Omnia seclorum
per tempora sceptra tenebit.

Wherein she plainely affirmeth, that after Rome shall rule ouer Ae­gypt [Page 66] (and that it did presently after Herods creation of King for Iudaea) a most high King (namely Messiah) should set vp a kingdome ouer the whole world, whose kingdome shal haue no end. In the second place, so this secōd doctrine is clered, name­ly, That the New-testaments King­dome once established, it neuer after can be totally remooued.

Nowe it remayneth we consider more particularly this same Cittie: and that is doone by searching out; 1 first, what is the Citties foundation: 2 then in the next place, who bee the Citizens.

1 The foundation of this City (that is, of this Church) it is, first, Perso­nall; secondly, Reall. Personall, as the Church is sayd to be built vpon some person or persons: Reall, as it is said to be built vpon some Thing or matter. The foundation perso­nall is two-folde: first, as it is built vpon Christ: secondly, vppon the [Page 67] Apostles and Prophets. That Ie­sus Christ is the foundation, harken to Paul (1. Cor. 3.11.) Other founda­tion can no man lay (than that which is laid (which is Iesus Christ. That the Apostles and Prophets are also ter­med Foundation, harken to the same Apostle (Ephesians chapter 2. verse 20.) And ye are built vpon the foun­dation of the Apostles and Prophets, Iesus Christ himselfe being the chiefe corner stone. Nor is the word foun­dation expressed in both these pla­ces, otherwise then by one and the same word ( [...], Themélton) in the original. Aquinas Tho. Aquin. super 1. Cori. 3. remembreth both these, thus: Ʋnum habet per se soliditatem &c. ‘The first of them hath the soliditie of it selfe (like as some Rock wheron some edifice is builded, and vnto this foundation Christ Iesus is resembled) for he is the Rock spoken of in Math. 7.24.25. Th'other foundation, it hath the soliditie (not of it selfe, but) of [Page 68] the other solide subiect (like as stones which first are placed vpon a solide Rock, and in this sense the Apostles are called the foundation of the Church, Ephes. 2.20. So far the Schoolman.’

Touching the foundation Real, it is onely the Faith or Gospell of Christ Iesus, whereon the Church or faithfull are said (often of diuers) to build. And this Gospell is som­times called Simply, the gospell of God and Christ Iesus (as in Rom. 1.1, 9, 16, and 15, 16, 19, 29, &c.) Sometimes Respectiuely the Apo­stles gospell, as in Rom. 2.16, and 16.25. The Gospell of God and Christ Iesus it is, as they are the Au­thors therof: but the Apostles gos­pell, as they are the Preachers ther­of. Both these senses of foundation remembred, let vs come to examine the Romanistes on the one hand: and then the Brownists on the other hand.

The Romanists from these words in Matth. 16.18. Thou arte Peter, and vpon this Rocke I will builde my church, they with tooth and nayle labour to enforce, that Saint Peter is the Churches foundation, that vpon him (as on a Rocke) it is buil­ded: as if these wordes, on this rocke were spoken of Peters person, and (which more is) of al Romish Pops succeeding in that Sea. Let vs exa­mine the Text. Our Sauior deman­ding of the Apostles, whome they did say him to be? Peter (in the name of all the rest) answereth: Thou arte the Christ, the sonne of the liuing God. Then Iesus saide vnto him, Blessed arte thou Simon the sonne of Ionas, for flesh and bloud hath not reuealed it to thee, but my Father which is in heauen. And I say vnto thee, Thou arte Peter, and vppon this Rocke I will builde my Church. Vpon which Rocke? vp­on Peter? Then hee woulde haue said, Thou arte Peter, and vpon thee: [Page 70] not vpon this rocke) I will builde. The change of speech, from The to This, from [...] thou Peter, to [...] vppon This very Rocke, it argueth, that Iesus would haue Peter to looke from himselfe to some other person or thing. If to some other person, then only to him selfe, whom Peter had confessed to be the very Messiah. Which Christ is onely sayd to be the Rocke, 1. Co­rin 10.4. The worde Foundation is communicated also with the Apo­stles and Prophets, but the tearme Rocke is neuer giuen vnto anye meere creature: For hee that is God, can onely be the rocke of our saluation. And to keepe people from applying the tearme Rocke vnto Peter, the Holy-ghost pre­sently after recordateth, how (be­cause of his euill counsaile soone af­ter) our Sauiour saith vnto himMatth. 16.23 Get thee behind me Satan, thou arte an of­fence vnto me, &c. And not long af­ter [Page 71] hee three times forsweareth his Maister. Yea, after he hadde recei­ued (in the day of Pentecost) a ful­nesse of the Holy-ghost, he halteth in his ministerie, and draweth Bar­nabas into the same dissimulation (Galathians chap 2. verse 11. &c.) for which the holy apostle Paul re­sisteth him to the face, and blameth him. And that this was Saint Peter the Apostle (and not some other Cephas, as some malitious Roma­nists haue lately vrged, but indeede an auntient errour) first obserue how they oppose to Paul, who saith it was Peter (whome in the Syriacke terme hee before callethElias in Thisbi affir­meth, that Simon (Iesus of Nazareth his disciple) he was called Cepha, whi­che signifieth Strength. Cephas) but also vnto the antient Fathers, as Tertullian, (in praescriptionibus aduer­sus haeret.) Ambrose (in ep. Gala cap. 2.) Chrysostome on the Galat. chap. 2.) Augustine contra mendac. ad Con­sentium cap. 12.) Ierome on Galat. 2. Cyrill (contra Iulian. li. 9. in fine.) Collecting it out of Au­stines epistle to Ierome, as also out of o­ther his wri­tings. So doth Aqui­nas on the same place. Bae­da on Galath. 2. &c. Yea heerein [Page 72] they oppose vnto Gregorius Magnus their Pope, cōfuting the same fond fancie in his eighteenth homily vp­on Ezekiel, post B. Thus the Roma­nists propound vnto vs weake foundation, Peter for Christ, the crea­ture for the Creator.

To shutte vp this poynt briefly, hearken to Augustines testimonie: August. in Ioh. ttact. 124.The Church is founded vppon the Rocke whereon Peter tooke his name.Non enim a Petro Pe­tra, sed Pe­trus a Petra, &c. For the Rocke was not de­riued of Peter, but Peter of the Rocke: euen as Christ is not so termed, of Christian, but Christi­an of Christ. Ʋppon this Rocke therefore (saieth hee) whome thou hast confessed, I will build my Church: for the Rocke was CHRIST, vpon which foun­dation also Peter himselfe is buil­ded. Whereunto ioyne that of I­sidore:Isid. hisp. lib. 7. etymo­logiarum c. 9 Peter tooke his name of the Rocke, that is, of Christ: vppon whome the church is founded: For [Page 73] Christ was the Rocke, vpon which foundation, Peter himselfe was also builded. If they will that Peter shoulde be, in some sense, a founda­tion, then they must admitte all the residue of the Apostles in the same respect to be foundations. And that is it which Saint Iohn in his Apocal. 22.14. speaketh of, when hee seeth this Ierushalem to haue twelue foundations, and in them, the names of the twelue Apostles.


But Peter only had the keyes gi­uen to him.


First, that is nothing to this: Se­condly, it is false: for the keys (namely, the power of binding and loo­sing) is afterwardes giuen to many others, euen to the whole Church, so well as vnto him, Iohn 20.22, 23. And this Origen precisely (from the same place of Iohn) doth prooue in his Homily on Mathew 16. not to [Page 74] speake of other Ancients, (as Cypri­an de simplicit. praelat. Aug. super Ioh. 124. Tertull. scorp. aduers. Gnostio. c. 10. Rabanus c. 8. de poenit. Ansbert. li. 3. c. 5 in Apoc. &c.) who grant, that in Peter was considered the church, to whom the power is giuen of bin­ding and loosing spiritually.

If we consider Faith, that is, the Gospel to bee the foundation of the Church, then that is it which diuers haue well vnderstood: seeing Faith is the hand which coupleth Christ and his church together. Hence it is that Chrys. Chrys. serm. de Pente­coste, Super hanc petram, non dixit su­per Petrum &c. thus writeth: Vpon this Rocke, not vpon Peter: for not vpon man, but vpon the Faith Christ buildes his church. And what was that Faith? (namely) Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God. Nyssenu (in testim. de­lect. ex vet. testa.) vtters the same. So do Theophil (in Mat. 16.) Smarag. on the same place: and Vict. Antiochenus saith, that frō this faith & sound do­ctrine, Peter receiued his name, on [Page 75] Mar. 3. not to mention any others. Thus, respect we scripture, or heare we the Antients their testimony, the Romanists still are found loosers.

For the Brownists, what foun­dation doe they by their necessarie consecution propound to vs? This forsooth, The outward Constitution of the Church, that is, The forme of plan­tation and church-gouernement, and this is their Puppis and Prora, the load-star of their Course. Insomuch as they deny to haue communion in prayer, in preaching, in sacrament with any such Church whatsoeuer, which hath not bin so planted, & is not so gouerned, as they conceiue of the Primitiue churches their planta­tion and gouernement. And as they deny spirituall cōmunion with Eng­land & Scotland as failing in both: so let it be such of the Dutch & French churches as haue planted their chur. rightly in their own iudgement: yet bicause of som few things in gouernment [Page 76] ecclesiasticall, which they dislike, they, not onely deny communion with them (yea for very hearing the worde) but also excommuni­cate such of their peopleSo Maister Pe. Al. Mai­ster M. Sl. &c came to be excommuni­cate. as shall but ioyne with them in prayer or in preaching. Whereby it commeth to passe, that this people (main­taining that that their father Browne dare not) they conceiue of them­selues, for the onely true visible church of God which can be throwly communicated with.

Briefly to returne answere: first, I they take it for granted, that the faith of Christ was amongst vs first planted, by force of the sword (not by preaching of the worde) whereby came to passe, that all wicked were receiued, &c. Let it be so. Augu­stine August. in ep. 48. indeede was once of opinion, that no compulsion herin was to be vsed, but (by his felow ministers) be­ing put in mind, how his owne citie was wholy Donatists, til feare of im­periall [Page 77] lawes brought them from that schisme, to catholike vnity, the good man changeth his minde, al­leadging such Scripture, Prouerb. 9 9. and 29.19. &c. And I woulde gladly know of these men, to what end a Christian hath the sword put into his hand, if not (with Nehe­miah, Iosiah, Hezekiah, Iosaphat, A­sa, &c.) to driue the subiectes vnto outward conformity of holinesse & righteousnesse? Take away this vse of the sworde, and then so wel with Anabaptistes remooue Magistrate and his sword out of the church.


But it was prophecied, that the Church should be a voluntary people, Psal. 110.3. and Christ gathe­red and planted his Church by the word onely.


The Anabaptists do apply these thinges aswell to their purpose, ad­ding further, The Primitiue churches [Page 78] had no Kings in them &c. therefore Kings (as Kings) not of a true esta­blished Church. And thus Brow­nisme leadeth to Anabaptisme. But least the crie of these Lapwings draw me from my purpose, I leaue the Brownist to answere the Ana­baptist; and this shall be my an­swere to the scripture and our Sa­uiours practise. It is true, peo­ple were and did voluntarilie giue vp their names to Christ vpon the Gospels preaching. Christ herein would not vse the sword: not be­cause it had been vnlawfull (for he in himselfe vsed a whip in the Temple, and forcibly ouerthrew their chaunging tables) but be­cause (for the first plantation of the Gospell) he saw it not to be expedient. The weakest and foo­lishest meanes (in mans iudgement, 1. Cor. 1, 27, 28, 29,) he now did vse, that so no flesh should reioice in his presence. As he vsed onely [Page 79] his woord, so he chose vnlearned men for the publication thereof. And because none should say, that it was no maruell, though simple subiects became Christians, see­ing some of their Kings were first Christians, the Apostle therefore before said, Not many Mighty▪ not many Noble are called. To conclude now, That the Sword hath not his vse in churches plantation &c. they may aswell conclude, That Noble men, wise and learned men, they haue nothing to doe in Church plan­tation. Indeed, when there com­meth a New-Christ, and new Apo­stles, we will either graunt they con­clude well: or else we wil hold them and the new Christ accursed.

II Secondly, they assume [That the sword planted first the Faith here] which we deny. First, it cannot be but the first plantation of the Faith wheresoeuer, it must bee by the Gospell preached. The sword may [Page 80] make a noyse together with the Words voice, but none can by the sword alone take any knowledge of the Gospell. Besides, it appeareth by auncient record, that the Gos­pell came into this land in the Apo­stles times, according to that in Rom. 10.18. Tertullian Tertull. ad­uers. Iud. ca. 7. saith, Britanno­rum inaccessa Romanis loca, Christo vero subdita &c. That the Britans (euen in such places as Romaines had not accesse vnto) they were sub­dued to Christ. That S. Paul (after his first captiuitie at Rome) should come into these partes, Theodoret writeth,Theod. l. 9. de cur. Graec. affect. Niceph. l. 2. ca. 4. Nicephorus affirmeth that Simon Zelotes came into Britaine. And Iohn Bale (from auncient Gil­das our writer, and from others) af­firmeth, that Ioseph of Arimathia was sent into Britain by Philip the Apo­stle, after the dispersion from the Galles, & this to be about the yeere of our Lord 63. Yea, that Iames with some others did repaire to, and [Page 81] preach in Ireland, Vincentius Vinc. 8. c. 7. wri­teth. But more of this I haue writ­ten in my Antidoton. Who came first hither with the Gospell, it skil­leth not: sure we are it came here, for we find it here, and the Brow­nists against his owne soule must confesse it: except they will tell vs that them selues haue receaued the Gospell vpon Sea, or in some fo­raigne country. Obiection: But this proueth no way an orderly planta­tion of the Church to haue bin here. Ans. Yes forsooth, except you wil haue a companie of beleeuers dwel­ling together in the Faith (as the Church first did lodge in a myles compasse by Welles, now tearmed Glascon-bury) to liue without rule, without forme of true gouernment. If they liued at first like Libertines (which no sober spirit can think) then we must greatly lament that none of the Brownists were then with them for instructing them in [Page 82] discipline. Obiection: Let it be what soeuer it was, yet we find not true discipline now. Ans. Some of you haue also said, that neither we haue the Gospell: but if some of you vp­on better aduise do graunt we haue the Gospell for the substance, I think ye had best graunt also disci­pline for the substance: that is, such externall gouernment as (for the substance at least) doth stand for the Gospell, for Christ. And that the Gospell shall so soundly be prea­ched, and gouernment so faithfully executed of any Churches in these last times, as was at first, none of wit can beleeue, because our Sauior and the Apostles do fore-tell the contrarie (Math. 24, 37, 38, 39, Luk. 17, 22, 23. Math. My Antido­ton openeth that point at large. 13, 24, &c. 1. Tim. 4, 1, &c. 2. Tim. 3, 1, &c. Re­uel. 13, 11, &c. 2. Thess 2, 3, &c.) and yet no reason nor warrant of run­ning out of the Catholike wheat­field or Church, vnder a pretext of [Page 83] Replantation: but rather to keepe within, and as we can, and may, to labour for Reformation.

But where they say, You want Christs gouernment, and in the roume thereof you haue Antichristes, and therfore we seperate, I more particu­larly answer. 1 First, (after Peters con­fession in Math. 16) our Sauior doth not promise that outward Church-gouernment shall preuaile for euer against Hell-gates (and themselues graunt it hath not) but only A true being of the Church, by reason of the Rock wheron it should be builded. 2 Secondly, let them marke that Pe­ter maketh no confession of Church discipline (for as yet he had not lear­ned that) but of Christ Iesus to be as verilie the Son of God (vnseen of flesh and blood) as he was man, well seen of flesh & blood. Who beeing the Christ or Messiah, did verily car­ry with it that there was no other by whom Saluation was wholie or in [Page 84] part to be effected. And the know­ledge, beliefe, and apprehension of this (not exteriour discipline) is the essential foundation of the Church: Which who so holdeth in the vnitie of the Catholike Church, they are to be held of this Catholike Citie, and not because of imperfections to be seuered from: because Iehouah is Shammah, There. 3 Thirdly, let them consider, that as outward Church gouernment is not the mark or badge euer of true Christi­ans (for in the Brownists iudge­ment, many of the Anabaptists haue that: and we know that Iesabel with her spiritual children, Balaams sectaries, the faction of beastly Ni­colaitans &c. (Reuel. 2. & 3.) they were in the Asian Churches, right­ly established and possessed of right gouernment, (but yet bearing the badge of Antichrist) so neither is humane regiment a marke euer of false Christians. For if Christ his [Page 85] gouernment externall, it can not cause all vnder it to be (vnto vs) true visible Christians: much lesse can humane regiment, or Antichrists outward gouernment, cause all vn­der it to be (of vs) reputed An­tichristes. Seeing Anti-christes gouernment can not haue more vice in it, then there is vertue in Christes. Fourthly, they know not what Antichrists marke is: for if euery good thing be not the marke of a true Christian (for Arrius, Nestorius, yea, euery Heretike hol­deth some good thinges) so nei­ther can euery bad thing be the badge of Antichrist: for then eue­ry man should be Antichristian, seing euery man (at least somtimes) hath some bad thing visible in him. As Antichrist is opposed to Christ, so in nothing so much, as in the verie foundation of Religion; [...]r which the Apostle S. Paul tear­meth him Anti-keimenos, 2. Thess. 2.4. the Layer [Page 86] of an opposite foundation. And in very troth, as it is the verie essentiall truth of the Gospell, which is the mark of a true Christian: so, it is the very fun­damentall falshood of Antichrist, for the which he is entitled Anti­christ, & his members Antichrists. The foundation false (not hay, stub­ble, &c. vpon a true foundation, 1. Cor. 3.10. &c.) is the beastes marke differencing his people essentially from Christes. Obiect. But the A­postle saying, Let euery man take heed [...] how he builds, not [...], what he builds; it argueth he there speaketh of the manner of teaching, not of the matter taught. I answer: He inten­deth both maner and matter. And that may be seen; First, by compa­ring the 2. chap. & the 1. verse with that which foloweth there, & in this chapter: for he compareth not only his plaine manner of teaching with humane Eloquence, but also, the plaine matter of the Gospell with [Page 87] the worlds wisdom, which elswhere he tearmethColoss. 2.8. Philosophie. Second­ly, gold, siluer, &c. hay, stubble, &c. they cannot in any proprietie so much resemble manner, as matter: specially compared with Fire which is not appointed so much to trie the manner, as the matter or thing it self. Thirdly, seeing Eloquence may stand with Christ the foundation: first, for that it is the gift of God: 2. is sanctified to his people, Exod. 4.10.11, Eccles. 12.9.10, Act. 18.24, 1. Cor. 1.5. Lastly, an hundred schol­lers may be called together for de­fining fully what is the Primitiue forme of Church-regiment, and 3. of them (though otherwise good­men) not be found in one iudgment for all things. How vnwise therfore are these people, that about the forme of discipline, do rend them­selues from the Catholike Citie of god! Our Sauiour foretold that ther should be such schismatical spirites, [Page 88] who in these confused times would crie, Come into the desert, come into the secret places, Christ is here: but therewith he saith to his sheepe, Go not thither, nor follow them, Luk. 17.23. Thus much briefly touching the foundation of this new Citie Ieho­uah-Shammah.

This that followeth was not vttered, as being preuen­ted by the time.

THe founda­tion consi­dered, it now remayneth I speak of the Citizens, & that so brief­lie as I can.

The Citizens are as the Citie is considered. This Citie being the Church extended from the East to the West, it must be considered, either as existing of all Christians good and bad (and so Heretikes, Scismatikes, Pharisaicall professors &c. are all Citizens, though bad Ci­tizens:) [Page 90] Or else, as it existeth only of such as are sanctified (accor­ding to the end of their Election, Ephes. 1.4.) who are verie deed the liuely members of Christ Iesus. 1 In the first consideration all are Ci­tizens, by reason they haue recea­ued the outward badge or cogni­zaunce of Christ, and so by Bap­tisme haue giuen vp their names to Christ. Who before they appeare euill, are of vs to be deemed true Christians: but appearing euill, and not obaying the Churches voice for repentance, they are to be denied all familiar communion (spe­cially in ecclesiasticall ordinances) but not without some hope that God wil in time, recouer them: see­ing the first excommunication is but for humbling the proud flesh, that so the spirit may, in the Lord his good day be saued, 1. Cor. 5.4.5. As for the second excommunica­tion (tearmed Maran-atha, 1. Cor. [Page 91] 16.22,) it is seldom inflicted on any by the Church, because such is their Apostacie from Christ, as for the which the Church denieth after­wards to sacrifice or pray for them, Heb. 6.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, compared with Heb. 10.26, & 1. Ioh. 5.6, and easily the Church dare not so iudge and leaue any soule vnto the Lord his comming to iudgement, as the Syri­ake phrase (Maran-atha) importeth. [...] Máréa Dominus, Dan. 2.47. [...] Atha, Venit, vt in Ezra. 5.3. And that the Church is considered in such sence (namely to consist of good and bad) it is to be heeded first in her types (as in Noahs Arke, and Israels congregation, as also in such of the New testaments scrip­tures, Math. 3.12, and 13.24. &c. and there in vers. 47. &c. and 24.40, 41. 2. Tim. 2.20, with many of like nature. And so are ordinarilie vnderstood of our Auncients.

2 That the church is also vnderstood of such as be really sanctified and borne anew through the immortall [Page 92] seede of God his word, and the in­ward operation of his spirit, it may appeare: first from the end of Ele­ction and vocation, which is, vnto sanctification of the Spirit, where­vppon they are called Saints, or Holy-ones, Rom. 1.7, and 16.2.15, 1. Cor. 1.2, & 6.1, & 16.1.15. & alibi saepe, compared with, Ephes. 1.4. Iohn 15.3, & 17.17: Secondly, by such expresse testimonie, Ephes. 5.25, 26, 27, Heb. 12.14, 1. Cor. 6.19, 1. Pet. 1.9. And of this sort of Citizens is that Ierushalem from heauen, and that Tabernacle of God with men, which S. Iohn seeth in Reuel. 21.2.3. vnderstood soRabanus ca. 8. de modo poenitentiae. Bale hereon. Beza in ser. 20. of Chr. passion. Tho. Aquin. on Galat. 4.26. of Auncient and moderne writers: though somtime of the triumphant Church also.


Here is a citty wherein no vnclean thing enters, but the best of God his people here haue vncleane things in them: therefore here they cannot be [Page 93] the Citizens of this new Ierushalem.


The Antecedent is true, but the illation (or consequent) is false. For they are sayd to be Cleane, not sim­ply, but respectiuely: that is, in re­spect that they are alredy in the La­uer of regeneration cleansed so in part, as in Christ their head it is con­sidered Absolute and perfect. And that in S. Iohn cittizeas there be im­perfections, it may appeare in 22. chap. verse 2. where hee sayth, that the leaues of this citties wood (the Tree of life, Christ Iesus in his word and spirit) they were to heale the Na­tions with. Whereas the healing of vs (in regarde of our spirituall sores) it appertaineth in proprietie to this life, besides that the Lord tearmeth things that are not, as if they were: because his Velle is Esse, his present Wil, is present Worke: but vnto vs reuealed in time. This holy people (for if the first fruites be holy, so is [Page 94] the whole lump; and if the roote be holy, so are the branches, Ro. 11.16) for theyr sakes the wicked tares are spared, Math. 13.29. yea the Sodo­miticall worlde (were it not for this righteous Lot) should soon be con­sumed with fire & brimston. Wic­ked within, wicked without, they al fare the better for this little Citties sake: and yet they can intreate it no better, than Laban intreated Iaakob, Sodom intreated Lot & his good an­gels, no better than Saul vnto Dauid.

While Iudahs Ierushalem stoode with her Temple and ceremonies, then these Citizens (for one gentle swallow makes not a summer) were the seede of Iaakob or Israel, pent vp within the typicall Canaan: but now this new citties people are stretched from Sea to Sea, from one ende of the world to an other; consisting of all nations and kinreds, and people, and tongues, Reuel. 7.9. Sayd I of all tongues? Yea: not onely all sorts [Page 95] of people, but all sortes of tongues are to stand before the Throne of Christ, and prayse him. Not onely the Hebrew, the Greeke, and Latin tongues (wherein our Sauiours In­scription was written) but all the tongues that were giuen vnto the a­postles in Actes 2. ch. whereby they were enabled to preach the doctrine of faith vnto all sortes of people. Which were a sufficient confutati­on of the Romanists seruice in sole Latine (compared with 1. Corin. 14.16.) But because no instrument shal be lacking, for cutting off that euill, themselues now at last haue turned the new testament into English, for euery Lay man to looke into: as al­so haue made English Manuels of prayer, besides their turning of Ie­sus his Psalter (blasphemously so cal­led) into our language: So great is the Truth, and preuaileth.

Secondly, these are that Ierusha­lem which is here tearmed Iehouah [Page 96] Shammah. The Lord is there: Where? in this Citty, in this people, for they are the Habitation and Temple of the mighty God of Iaakob. God riseth vp in them, and they grow vp in God: and so (oh depth of wisdom & mer­cie) God and Man becommeth One. The diuell at first saide to Euah, that in eating the forbidden fruit, they should become AS GODS. He meant As Diuels, Blacke gods: and yet hee spake truer than hee was a­ware. For as the creature cannot be­come the Creator, so we are not be­come really Gods, but we (through his free fauour that called Light out of Darknesse) are become really As Gods: not [...] Elohim, butGen. 3 5. [...] Kelohim. Vnto this City and people appertaine the pri­uileges of grace in this life, & the exhibition of glory in the other life. In a word, al the things of God, are for these people, called to be As gods: for in his presence is the fulnesse of ioy, [Page 97] and at his right hand are pleasures for euermore, Psal. 16.11.

Much contention (about our Lordes yeere 666) was betweene Rome and Constantinople for supre­macie vniuersall. Rome woulde bee chiefe, because it had beene the an­tient seate of the Emperours. Con­stantinoples, Bishop woulde haue it, because Constantine (the first christi­an Emperour) hadde of Bizantium made it Constantino-polis, and so in­uested it with his owne name, mak­ing it also an emperors seate. Marke, that neither of them could alleadge then any Donation from Constantine. If there had beene then such a Do­nation as now they tell vs of, howe greatly would it haue helped Romes plea? But as neuer of these Aunti­ents it is once mentioned, viz. Euse­bius, Entropius, Ruffinus, Socrates, Theodoret, Euagrius, Paulus Diaco­nus, Beda, Orosius, Zonaras, Nicepho­rus: Nor of Ierome, Damasus, A­thanasius, [Page 98] Basil, Ambrose, Optatus Mileuitanus, Gregorius Nissenus, Gregorius Nazianzenus, Augustine, Chrysostome: nor of the Romaine Bishoppes in the Councells, which then had beene of much moment) so,See Auen­tinus lib 2 de rebus Boio­rum. Pius secundus Pope (a man ve­ry expert in Antiquities) he laugh­ed this toy to scorne, accounting it fabulam inanem, a vayne fable.Naucl. in generat. 11 suae crono­graph. Nau­clerus fathers it on Isidore, but in his antient Books no such thing found. And no sooner start vp this Fict-do­nation but the lerned opposed. This did Marsilius Patauinus in his Defender of Peace. So dooth Laurentius Valla in his Declamation. So didde Antoninus Archiepiscopus Florenti­nus, 1. Part. tit. 8. c. 2. §. 8. in his historie. So doth cardinall Cusanus in his Catholike Concor­dance l. 3. c. 2. sent vnto Basils Councell. So doth Aeneas Siluius (after­wards Pope) in his dialog. So doth Raphael Volateran in the life of Con­stantine: Hierony. Paulus Cattalanus [Page 99] doctor of both laws, and chamber­laine to Pope Alexander the sixt, in his booke entituled, Practica cancel­lariae Apostolicae.

Ʋltrich Hutten writing to Pope Leo the tenth, vppon Ʋalla his booke, hee saieth plainly, that the Donation was forged per pseudo­pontifices Orientis, by the Easterne false-popes: not to speake of Luther and others. But to finish that point; what time Bizantiums Bishop be­gunne to labour for such vniuersall headship, Gregorius Magnus bishop of Rome, he that in humiliation first tooke the title Seruus seruorum, he is bolde hereupon toLi. 4 c. 34. write thus: Ego fidenter dico, &c. ‘I constantly affirm, whosoeuer calles himselfe vniuersall priest (or desires so to be called) in that his puft vp estate, hee fore-run­neth Antichrist: and in his 39. E­pistle hee tearmeth it Nomen blas­phemiae) a title of blasphemie, which title soone after Gregories time was by [Page 100] bloudy Phocas giuen to the Pope of the seauen hilled citty.’ And thus, where on Rome before was written Roma aeterna, censured byHieron. in epist. ad Al­gasiam. Ierome for a name of blasphemy: nowe by their owne Popes censure, that Cit­ties Arch-priest hath to himselfe as­sumed no better. Thus their clay & yron will not be ioyned together: no baulme will cure this Babel.

But wil the faythfull know what Citty is Eterne? That is this new Ie­rusalem, the City of the Saints. Hel­lish power may oppresse it, but ne­uer suppresse it. Wilt thou knowe what City is supreame? That is this Ierushalem from Heauen heauenly. Wilt thou know to what Bishop al supremacie vniuersall is due? That is, to Christ Iesus, who himselfe is Iehouah, and hath obtayned a name aboue all Names, and he is the head of the Churches bodie, [Coloss. 1.18.] he is the beginning and first borne of the dead, that in ALL [Page 101] THINGS he might haue the pre­eminence. And this vniuersall su­premacie was figured darkly vnder the Hie-priest of Ierushalems Tem­ple, who had such dignitie ouer that shadowing Church, as none but he might enter the most holy place: only to him in the last place were difficult matters brought for decisi­on: and by his death were such set free, as before for vnawares blood­shed had taken sanctuarie. All which beeing shadowes of good things to come, the bodie whereof was Christ [Heb. 10.1, and 9.11.12, Coloss. 2.17.] now we are to consider al anew, as beseemeth that which is substantiall, not ceremo­niall.

Thus the Citie and the Citizens are the same: and Iehouah is There one with the same, though not the same. In this Citie he dwels gouer­ning the Citizens, subduing all their senses, all their affections, the whole [Page 102] man to himselfe. And round about this Citie he causeth his Angels to pitch their tentes of defence. Nay, which more is,Ps. 125.2. Zech. 2.5. as the moun­taines were round about the ty­picall Ierushalem, so is Iehouah himselfe (as a consuming fire) round about his people henceforth and for euer. To the Citizens a comfort, but to their aduersaries a terrour.

1 For the Aduersaries they must know, that they band not them­selues only against Man, but against armies of Angels, yea, against the God of hostes himselfe: for Iehouah is There. He that toucheth these Ci­tizens, he toucheth the apple of his eye, he dasheth himselfe against a wall of consuming fire.Reuel. [...]0. [...] 7, 8.9. Against this Citie doth Gog (the cloked ad­uersarie) and Magog (the Open ene­mie) together with their innumera­ble army convene in One: but af­ter they haue compassed the tents [Page 103] of the Saints and the beloued Citie round about, behold fire shall come downe from heauen and deuoure them. It is no bourding with Saints. Against God his Citie in her Ma­iesties dominions, how haue coue­red and vn-couered enemies risen vp (at home & abroad, by land and by Sea) but what was their end? The Egyptian Pharaoh of Spaine, his Chariot-armadoes slunke into the Seas channels, the windes of God fought against them, and da­shed their huge rigged fleete asun­der.I allude to Iudg. 5.28. &c. Rome (the mother of Spaines Sisera.) she looked out at a win­dow and cried thorough the lat­tise, why is the Chariot so long a comming? why tarrie the wheeles of his chariots? Romes wise Ladies answered her: yea, she answered her selfe with her owne wordes, thus: haue they not gotten and they deuide the spoil, the Crowne, Earle­domes, and Church reuenewes [Page 104] of England? Euery man hath a mayde or two. Sisera hath a pray of diuers colours, a pray of sundry co­lors made of needle worke: of di­uers colors of needle work on both sides, for the chiefe of the spoile.’ But sorrie fooles, through God his goodnes, a woman (a Virgin Queene) she triumphed ouer Si­sera. For domestick aduersaries, who haue banded togetherI allude to 1. King. 1. for an­nointing Adonijah, but poore soules they haue consumed themselues as wax before the Sunne.Deborahs prayer in Iudg. 5.31. So let all thine enemies perish ô Lord: but they that loue him shall be as the Sun when he riseth in his fortitude.

But here some will obiect: Either Iehouah dwelleth not in and about his Church, or els he hath promised no such protection, for we see many of his people to fall by the sword &c. I answer, there is no contra­diction in all this: for as he dwelleth in, and round about them for pro­tection, [Page 105] so he denieth them not the thing he promiseth, but performes it with aduantage. He lets Abels blood to be spilt, he suffers Stephen to be stoned &c. but what then? Hath he not protected them to the death? It is appointed that all men shall die (for death is gone ouer all) and then commeth iudgement. Abell did but die, Stephen did but die, and all must die. But marke, those that die in the Lord are bles­sed, for they thenceforth rest from their labours, Reuel. 14.13. This life is but a vallie of teares, a prison, a purgatorie: when his people re­moue hence, teares are taken away, no more prisoners, free from neces­sitie of purgation, no more labours, for they rest in the Lord: yea, they enter into Abrahams bosome of blisse, as did Lazarus: they are with Christ Iesus in the kingdome of glory, euen the very howre ofConsider that in Iohn 19.31.32. and it can­not be easily iudged but at the very vp­shot of the day he dyed, and that day he was to be with Christ. Luk. 23.43. their death, as was promised to the peni­tent [Page 106] thiefe on the Crosse:At the elea­nenth houre he entred in­to the vine­yarde, the Church: and in thend of the twelfth houre (for the day hath but twelue houres) he receiued the penny. Matth. 20.9 and as saint Paule beleeued when hee con­cluded, that it was best for him to die, that so hee might goe to the Lorde: and no maruell, for pre­tious (saieth the Psalmist) in the eies of the Lorde, is the death of his Saints. If it bee good for them to stay heere, they shall with Iudahs three yong gentlemen be vnsinged in the fornace, vnharmed with Da­niel of the greedy Lions, for the Lorde knoweth howe to deliuer His in the day of trouble. If it bee not good in some respect for them here to stay, then he remoues them from an inconstant estate to a con­stant, from sadnes to gladnes, from a temporary life, to an eternall: in a word, from hell, to heauen. 2 They loose a rusty counter, and therewith obtaine eternall treasure. Further­more, protection is for good, not for euill, therefore no longer hee protecteth them heere, because [Page 107] longer it shoulde not bee good for them to be here.

3 Agayne, their body onely loo­seth such protection, not theyr soule; for the blessed Angelles at­tend the poorest Lazarus for con­veying the soule into eternall blisse.

Besides, neyther is the body (in trueth, howsoeuer in shewe) vn­protected in death and graue: for as not an haire shall fall, but by the heauenly Fathers appoynt­ment, so neyther is the body vn­guarded of his good Spirite, see­ing that the flesh doth rest in hope.

5 Lastly, although theyr bodies fall by sundry deaths (and all but death) yet euer are they victors: First, in that their soules (the chiefer part) they triumph, nor can of man be slain: Secondly, in that the whole body of this Citty, neuer can of man be put to death, but as the pruining of a vine, causeth it rather to encrease in good, so is all cutting afflictions [Page 108] sanctified to the Churches encrease: Sanguis Martyrum, semen Ecclesiae. And warriours neuer say they are conquered, (notwithstanding the losse of many men) when so the day is theirs in the end of the day. And euer in the end, the Church is found the conquerour: her enemies dying for euer, but her members raized vp to glorie, as not euer slaine, but hauing been in a sleep or slumber.

Iehouah-Shammah, the Lorde is with his Church; and if the Lord be [...] with vs, then [...], who can be against vs? Nor diuell, nor man, much lesse inferiour crea­ture. ThoughRom. 8.36.37. &c. we be killed all the day long, accounted as sheepe for the slaughter: neuerthelesse in all these things we are more than Con­querours, through him that loued vs. For I am perswaded (sayeth S. Paul to the Romanes) that neyther death, nor life, nor angells, nor prin­cipalities, nor powers, nor thinges [Page 109] present, nor thinges to come: nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature shalbe able to seperat vs from the loue of God, which is in Christ Iesus our Lord.

What shall we returne vnto the Lord, who of [So is the Hebrew. lo gnammi] Not-my-people, hath made and pronounced vs [gnammi] my people: that where before we were many Nations now he hath made vs One people, one nation.Beda in 1. Cor. 12. ex Aug. ps. 85. Ʋna gens, vna patria, &c. ‘Wee now are (sayeth a holy Father of this Citty) One Nation, One Coun­trey. Our countrey is heauenly, our countrey is Ierushalem. Whosoeuer is not thereof a Cittizen, he pertain­eth not to this people. But whosoe­uer is thereof a Cittizen, he is of this people of God. And this people is stretched forth from the East to the West, from the North, and the sea, it is stretcht through the foure parts of the whole world. For all his ex­ceeding fauours irradiating this Cit­ty, [Page 110] this Church, this People, it rest­eth, that we all walke more worthie our holy calling: more worthy such a Gouernour as is Iehouah. Shall I with the Psalmist say vnto all our soules, * Lift vp your heades ye gates, and lift ye vppe yee euerlasting doores, & the King of Glory shall come in? Yea I say so: and I moreouer say, Take heede you fetch not in the Lorde of life, with spreading braunches, gar­ments, and crying to day Hosanna, & then to morrow betray him, & cry, Cruci-fige. It beseemeth Princes to cut traitors from their Citty, and it shall neuer vnbeseeme God to exe­cute speedy vengeance on the wic­ked. This Citties gates Saint Iohn seeth euer open to the Elect (such as cleanse themselues by vnfained re­pentaunce) come they from what coast soeuer. Vpon euery coast o­pen three gates, and euery gate an entire pearle: by sacred Trinitie in vnitie, euen by their sweete loue, of [Page 111] more worth than any pearle, al must enter. For Porters there stand An­gells (euen the twelue great Angels of the particular Churches) who by God his word inuite the repentant. If Dauid accounted it such an hap­pinesse to stand on this Cities thre­sholde, what glory must it bee, to walke in the streetes of pure golde, to haue the face of Iehouah for theyr Sunne-shine, to haue the Lord God almighty, and the Lambe for their Temple, and to haue for fellow Ci­tizens, Adam, Habel, Sheth, Henoch, Noah, Shem, Heber, Abraham, Isaac, Iaakob, Ioseph, Moses, Aaron, Io­shuah, Samson, Samuel, Dauid, Salo­mon, Hezekiah, Iosiah, Daniel, Ze­rubbabel, Ezra, Nehemiah, in a word, all the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apo­stles, true Martyres and Confessors of all ages? As all waters returne in­to the Sea, so all happinesses returne into this Citties vnitie, gathered by the Holy-ghost, founded on Iesus [Page 112] Christ, gouerned by God almigh­tie.

But without this Cities vnitie,Reuel. 21.8. are dogs and inchaunters and whore­mongers, and murtherers and Ido­laters, and whosoeuer loueth or maketh lyes. The holy enlightned as Israel in Goshen, but the vn-holie darkned as the Aegyptians in the land of Mizraim. God within, the Deuill without: for as there is no third gouernour, so there is no third Place. These that are not of Micha­els side, all these are of the Dragons side: who shall fight, but not pre­uaile, neither shall they haue any place in heauen.

As the Prophet Ezekiel with reuerent admiration shutteth vp his Prophecie with this, The name of that Citie (that is, of the New-testaments Church) from a Day, (euen from the time of typicall Ie­rushalems ende) shalbe Iehouah-Shamma, The Eternall is there: so I [Page 113] with S. Iohns speach will finish my Sermon:Reuel. 22.14 Blessed be they that doe his commaundements, that their right may be in the Tree of lyfe, and may enter in through the Gates [ [...]] into That Citie.


Errata in this Booke correct thus.

Page 16. line 8. for that reade this

Page 40 line 19. reade departed.

Pag. 45. li. 22. for Chron. reade chap.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.