Certaine reasons, proouing the separation, commonly called Brownists, to be schismatiques. By William Gilgate, minister of the Word of God.. Gilgate, William, 1600 Approx. 17 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 8 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2012-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 2). B07699 82474855 STC 11895.5 ESTC S92695 82474855 ocm 82474855 185141

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

 Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 2, no. B07699) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 185141) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1475-1640 ; 2251:7) Certaine reasons, proouing the separation, commonly called Brownists, to be schismatiques. By William Gilgate, minister of the Word of God.. Gilgate, William, Stansby, William, fl. 1597-1638, printer. Butter, Nathaniel, d. 1664, bookseller. [13] p. Printed by W. Stansby for Nathaniel Butter, and are to be sold at his shop neare St. Augustines gate, at the signe of the Pyde Bull., London : 1621.. Caption title: "The reasons of the Separation, called Brownists, taken out of two chiefe places of Scripture, answered. Running title: "The reasons of the Separation, called Brownists." "Brownists" in italics whenever mentioned. Signatures: A⁴ (-A1, blank leaf?) B⁴. Ornamental title vignette, head pieces, tailpiece, initials, side-bars. Reproduction of original in: Massachusetts Historical Society.

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.

 eng Brownists -- Early works to 1800. Dissenters, Religious -- Early works to 1800. 2020-09-21 Content of 'availability' element changed when EEBO Phase 2 texts came into the public domain 2011-08 Assigned for keying and markup 2011-08 Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2011-09 Sampled and proofread 2011-09 Text and markup reviewed and edited 2012-05 Batch review (QC) and XML conversion

CERTAINE REASONS, Proouing the Separation, commonly called Brownists, to be Schiſmatiques.

By WILLIAM GILGATE, Miniſter of the Word of God.

GALAT. 5.19, 20, 21.

The works of the fleſh are manifeſt,—Seditions,—whereof I tell you before, as I haue told you before, that they that doe ſuch things, ſhall not inherit the Kingdome of God.

LONDON Printed by W. Stansby for Nathaniel Butter, and are to be ſold at his ſhop neare St. Auguſtines gate, at the ſigne of the Pyde Bull. 1621.

The Preface to the Reader.

HAuing ſome yeares ſince ſuffered ſhipwracke in the gulfe of Separation, and by Gods gracious hand hauing beene lifted out, and ſaued from drowning in theſe waues, I thinke it my duty to diſcry to others the danger and eſcape of thoſe paſſages to and from Amſterdam. I left theſe Arguments of mine with Master Henry Ainſworth, Preacher to the ſame Engliſh at Amſterdam, calling themſelues the Separation, commonly called Browniſts; that hee and his might ſee, how I not raſhly, but for iuſt cauſe left them. Sithence that, I haue beene inwardly moued to publiſh them in print, that they alſo who ſtill ſticke in that pit, may at length perceiue on what a ſandy foundation the Separation is built; and forſaking the ſame with mee and others, may labour to build themſelues vpon the Rocke Chriſt, ſo as the gates of Hell may not preuaile againſt them, to plucke them from the one Body, whereof hee is the one onely Head. Becauſe they perſwade themſelues, that their manner of ſeparation is the ſame that the holy Scriptures doe warrant, I haue ſet downe their Reaſons grounded on two chiefe places of the ſame, very firmely, as they imagine: but I haue ſhewed that they wreſt them, as many other alleaged to that end, for the proofe of that which they reproue. My reaſons ſhewing their Separation to be a Schiſme, I haue ſet downe briefly. This I haue done, not of hatred to any of their perſons, or any truth of Chriſt, which they hold with the true Churches of God; but of ſincere loue toward them; that they might acknowledge and forſake this worke of the fleſh, Schiſme I meane, which among other excludeth men from the Kingdome of God; which I pray God to beſtow vpon all his there and euery where. Amen.

William Gilgate.
The reaſons of the Separation, called Browniſts, taken out of two chiefe places of Scripture, anſwered.

GOD admoniſheth his people dwelling in Babylon, id eſt, Rome, Reuel. 18 4. That at length acknowledging the filthineſſe of that Citie, they forſake her:

Therefore hee willeth alſo all his people with ſpeed to come forth from the Pariſh Aſſemblies in England.

I deny the conſequence. It followeth not; there is not the ſame reaſon. In the Church of Rome men continuing members, are partakers of their damnable errours and ſinnes; but it is not ſo in the Pariſh Aſſemblies of the Church of England. Which is ſo farre from beeing Babylon, that it is the ſtrongeſt and moſt flouriſhing enemie of Babylon: In which regard it is moſt deadly hated by the Antichriſt of Rome. Let the Separatiſts take heed leſt themſelues, vnder the pretence of hatred to Babylon, build vp a worſe Babylon, or Babell of Confuſion in the Chriſtian Church.

2. The beleeuers in the Church of Corinth,2. Corin. 6.17. are forbidden to haue fellowſhip with Infidels in Idolatrie, id eſt, in the holy Feaſts they celebrated to the honour of Idols.

Therefore they may not communicate with the Engliſh Pariſh Aſſemblies in the Word of God, Sacraments, Prayer.

Here alſo is an inconſequence: They muſt proue the people there to be Infidels, and thoſe meanes or helpes of Gods worſhip to be Idols, and the vſing of the ſame there, to be idolatrie.

Separatists are Schiſmatiques.

NAy, the Separation ſeemeth the rather guiltie of Idolatrie in adhering to, admiring, and euen adoring their owne dreames and new-fangled fancies.

My reaſons conuincing them of Schiſme.Where the Sonne of God ſpeaketh to men by his Goſpel, there we may heare him.

In the Engliſh Pariſh Aſſemblies, Chriſt ſpeaketh to men by his Goſpel.

Therefore in thoſe Pariſh Aſſemblies, wee may heare him. And by conſequence the Separation are Schiſmatiques, refuſing to heare him in any of the ſaid Aſſemblies.

Minor proued.Where men that were dead in ſinnes and treſpaſſes, by hearing doe liue ſpiritually, id eſt, doe reioice in God, taſting Gods fatherly fauour toward them in Chriſt, there the Sonne of God doth ſpeake to men by his Goſpel.

In the ſaid Aſſemblies, ſome men that were dead in ſinnes and treſpaſſes doe liue ſpiritually, &c.

Therefore in the ſaid Aſſemblies, at leaſt ſome of them, the Sonne of God doth ſpeake to men by his Goſpel.

When I vrged this Argument to Maiſter Ainſworth, he could anſwer nothing but that Chriſt doth not at any time ſpeake to any by his Goſpell, in the Pariſh Aſſemblies of the Church of England, and that none there doe liue by Faith. Which vncharitable and hatefull opinion of his, did make me the more to hate their vnchriſtian opinions.

They that conſenting with others in the doctrine of Saluation by Chriſt,1. Cor. 1.10.11. Iud. 19. doe neuertheleſſe ſeparate themſelues from them as touching ſpirituall communion, are Schiſmatiques.

The Separation doe conſent with others in the doctrine of ſaluation by Chriſt, and yet doe ſeparate from them, as touching ſpirituall communion.

Therefore they are Schiſmatiques.

The Corinthians were guiltie of Schiſme in hearing ſome teachers, and not otherſome, Maior proued. though teaching the ſame doctrine; and in not communicating at the Table of the Lord with them that profeſſed the ſame Faith of Chriſt with themſelues.1. Cor. 11.21.

Therefore the Separation are guiltie of Schiſme in doing the like.

The former had ſome ſhew of reaſon for that they did: ſo haue the latter.

Thoſe men that Iude ſpeaketh of were Schiſmatiques,2. proofe of the Maior. for ſeparating themſelues from the godly, when they came together to the outward worſhip of God.

Therefore the Separation for doing the like, are likewiſe Schiſmatiques.

Let them not falſly affirme, that they from whom they ſeparate in the Pariſh-Aſſemblies, are not godly; and that the outward worſhip there vſed is not Gods worſhip, becauſe of I know not what pretended defects, and becauſe many wicked are mixed with them.

They that teach that in thoſe Churches, where open ſinners are tolerated, Reuel. 2.24. & 3.4. no lawfull communion can be had in things of God, and thereupon refuſe to haue communion with the ſame, are Schiſmatikes.

Reaſons diſcuſſed, pag, 247. 249. The maior proued.The Separation doe teach this, &c.

Therefore they are ſchiſmatiques.

Chriſt putteth no ſuch burden vpon the faithfull in Thyatira and Sardis to ſeparate themſelues, becauſe wicked men were tolerated in their Churches.

Therefore they are Schiſmatiques that lay ſuch a burden on the faithfull in England.

They that refuſe to haue communion in priuate prayer with thoſe, Epheſ. 4.3.4.5.6. whom they may diſcern to haue communion with Chriſt, are ſchiſmatiques.

The Separation for the moſt part doe this.

Therefore they are ſchiſmatiques.

The maior proued.In refuſing to haue communion with ſuch, they ſhew themſelues not to bee of the ſame body of Chriſt with them, nor to be led by the ſame Spirit, nor to haue the ſame Lord, and the ſame God and Father; and therefore are Schiſmatiques.

They that without iuſt cauſe, renounce all ſpirituall communion in publique, with a true Church, are Schiſmatiques.

The Separation doe this.

Therefore they are Schiſmatiques.

Minor proued.The Church of England is a true Church of God.

The Separation renounce ſpirituall communion with the Church of England in publique, and that without iuſt cauſe.

Therefore they without iuſt cauſe, renounce ſpiritual communion in publique, with a true Church.

If the Church of England be the pillar of truth, Maior proued. vpholding the heauenly truth,1. Tim. 3.16. 1. proofe for the Church of England. againſt all heretiques and the Antichriſt of Rome, as pillars vphold a houſe, then it is a true Church of God.

The firſt is true. Therefore the ſecond.

The Goſpel of our ſaluation is the word of truth.The antecedent prooued. Epheſ. 1.13.

The Church of England vpholdeth as a pillar, the Goſpel of our ſaluation.

Therefore it vpholdeth the word of truth, and by conſequence it is a true Church.

Let them not here ſtand to ſhew a difference betweene the Church of England and Epheſus. There may bee a difference betweene true Churches: notwithſtanding they are all true, that maintayne the word of truth, the Goſpell.

If the Church of England in Queene Maries time,2. proofe for the Church of England. from the errours then maintayned being the principall was rightly named a falſe corrupted Church: then ſince Queene Elizabeths time, the ſame Church from the truth maintayned being the principall, is to be named a true Church.

When I mention the truth as principall onely, I argue out of the principles ſuppoſed by the Separatiſts, namely, that there may be ſome inferior errors in the Church of England: As what Church in the world is free from erring in all things? Will the Separation boaſt that themſelues haue no errors in their Church. This taske I leaue to them, both of clearing themſelues from all error, and alſo of accuſing the Church of England of any.

Antecedent prooued.The denomination or naming of a thing is from the more principall: as it is named a heape of wheate, though much chaffe bee mixed with it; and hee is called not a ſinner, but righteous, whoſe ſinnes are forgiuen, and in whom ſinne reigneth not, though he hath ſinne dwelling in him, & ſometimes ſinneth of infirmitie: and hee is called a ſpirituall man, in whom the regenerate part beareth the ſway.

The errours in Queene Maryes time were the chiefe and principall; the truths were ouerwhelmed with the multitude of their errours.

Therefore from the ſame multitude of vntruths and errors then maintayned, it was to bee named a falſe or corrupt Church: and therefore alſo ſince Queene Elizabeths time it is to bee named a true Church, the truths haue preuailed, and are the chiefe part.

2. proofe of the Antecedent.As the Spirits, or teachers are to be tryed by that ſhort ſumme of the Goſpel (Chriſt is come in the fleſh) and thereby are to bee iudged true or falſe: ſo by the ſame is a Church to bee iudged true or falſe. From hence I frame this argument.

If they bee to bee accounted falſe Teachers, who holding ſome truths of Chriſt, yet alſo holde ſome great errour contrary thereunto, as Cerinthus denying Chriſts godhead; then a Church, as that of England in Queene Maries time, was to bee accounted a falſe Church, which profeſſing in word that ſentence concerning Chriſts perſon and office, yet in the meane time defended opinions ouerthrowing the truth both of his natures and offices.

The firſt is true. And therefore alſo the ſecond.

If they are to be accounted true Teachers,3. Proofe for the now Church of England to be a true Church. who keepe this foundation (Chriſt is come in the fleſh) and build not vpon it any Doctrine, ouerthrowing the ſame; then a Church, as that now of England, is to be held for a true Church, which retayneth this foundation of the Chriſtian Faith, and buildeth not vpon it any Doctrines, ouerthrowing the ſame.

The firſt is true. Therefore the ſecond.

The Separation haue no iuſt cauſe to ſeparate as they doe, from the Church of England.

IF a member of that Church may there not defile his garments, then in hearing of the Word read and preached, in Prayer and receiuing the Sacraments, they haue no cauſe to renounce communion with that Church.

The firſt is true; and therefore the ſecond.

The ſincere and pure profeſſion of Chriſt,Antecedent proued. from all filth and defilements of monſtrous opinions and vices, are thoſe garments.

A member of that Church may make there a pure profeſſion of Chriſt, from all filth and defilements of monſtrous opinions and vices.

Therefore a member of that Church may there not defile his garments.

2. Proofe. A member of that Church needeth not to bee infected with the company of the wicked there; hee may ſeparate himſelfe from euery of them, but not from the Church where ſuch are.

Therefore, a member of that Church may keepe his garments vndefiled.

And ſo the Separation haue no iuſt cauſe to renounce communion with the Church of England in thoſe meanes of Gods worſhip.

The French and Dutch reformed Churches are true Churches of God.

The Separation renounce ſpirituall communion in publique with thoſe Churches.

Therefore, they renounce ſpirituall communion in publique with true Churches.

They haue no iuſt cauſe to doe it, becauſe they meet in Temples.If the difference of places bee taken away by Chriſt, euen as the difference of meates, that as Chriſtians may eate any meates; ſo they may ſerue God in any places: then the Temples they aſſemble in to worſhip God, are no iuſt cauſe of renouncing communion with them.

Coloſſ. 2.16.The firſt is true: Therefore the ſecond.

1. Tim. 2.8.If they anſwer, the place of Paul to Timothy: Though he bids vs pray for all men, yet Iohn excepteth one ſort, 1. Iohn 5. ſo though he bids men pray euery where, yet one kind of place is excepted as euill to ſerue God in: let them then name one of the Apoſtles, who hath made ſuch an exception. I deny not that in the old Teſtament, there was in force ſuch a difference of places, but it is taken away in the new Teſtament.

Nor becauſe they reade a ſet forme of Prayer.If in a ſet forme of prayer read, or ſaid by heart, all things may be put in practice, required in acceptable prayer to God; then the vſing thereof by theſe Churches, is no iuſt cauſe of their renouncing communion with them in publique.

The firſt is true: Therefore the ſecond.

The things asked of God may be ſuch as are contayned in the Lords prayer. Wee may haue a ſenſe of our wants, and a deſire of the grace of God to ſupply the ſame. Thirdly, Faith, whereby wee beleeue and profeſſe, that God for his Sonne Chriſts ſake, will in his due time grant vs our requeſts.

Therefore, all things required in acceptable prayer to God (except they can ſhew vs any moe) may be put in practice, in a ſet forme of prayer, read, or ſaid by heart.