The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• A Just and Necessary Apology.
• Chapter I.: Of the Largeness of Churches.
• Chapter II.: Of the Administration of Baptism.
• Chapter III.: Of Written Liturgies.
• Chapter IV.: Of the Ecclesiastical Presbytery.
• Chapter V.: Of Holy Days.
• Chapter VI.: Of the Celebration of Marriage By the Pastors of the Church.
• Chapter VII.: Of the Sanctification of the Lord's Day.
• Chapter VIII.: Of the Exercise of Prophecy.
• Chapter IX.: Of Temples.
• Chapter X.: Of Things Indifferent.
• Chapter XI.: Of Civil Magistrates.
• Chapter XII.: Of the Church of England,
• Notice Respecting the Two Letters.
• On Religious Communion
• The Preface.
• Chapter I.: Of Private Communion.
• Chapter II.: Of Public Communion.
• Chapter III.: Of Flight In Persecution.
• Chapter IV.: The Outward Baptism Received In England Is Lawfully Retained.
• Chapter V.: Of the Baptism of Infants.
• Chapter VI.: A Survey of the Confession of Faith Published In Certain Conclusions By the Remainders of Mr. Smyth's Company After His Death. *
• The People’s Plea For the Exercise of Prophecy
• Preface.
• An Answer to the Arguments Laid Down By Mr. John Yates, Preacher In Norwich , to Prove Ordinary Prophecy In Public, Out of Office, Unlawful; Answered By John Robinson.
• A Treatise On the Lawfulness of Hearing Ministers In the Church of England
• On the Lawfulness of Hearing the Ministers of the Church of England. By John Robinson.
• A Letter to the Congregational Church In London
• An Appeal On Truth's Behalf.
• To Our Beloved, the Elders and Church At Amsterdam , Grace and Peace From God the Giver Thereof, and In Him Our Salutations .
• An Answer to a Censorius People
• Letter By Rev. Joseph Hall, B.d., Rector of Halstead, Called By Mr. Robinson “a Censorious Epistle.”
• An Answer to “a Censorious Epistle.”
• A Catechism
• An Appendix to Mr. Perkins’ Six Principles of Christian Religion.
• Appendix
• No I.: The Church In Southwark.
• No. II.: The Exiles and Their Churches In Holland.
• Chronological Index of Mr. Robinson's Works.
• Index of Subjects.
• Index of Authors Referred to Or Quoted, With Occasional Brief Notices of Their Works and Lives.
• Index of Important Texts of Scripture Illustrated Or Quoted.

CHAPTER XII.

OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND,

There remains one, and that a great matter of exception against us, and the same the fountain well-nigh of all our calamity: to wit, that we seem evil affected towards the Church of England, and so averse from the same, as that we do no less than make a plain secession and separation from it.

I answer, first, That our faith is not negative, as papists used to object to the evangelical churches; nor which consists in the condemning of others, and wiping their names out of the bead-roll of churches, but in the edifying of ourselves; neither require we of any of ours, in the confession of their faith, that they either renounce, or, in one word, contest with the Church of England, whatsoever the world clamours of us this way. Our faith is founded upon the writings of the prophets and apostles, in which no mention of the Church of England is made. We deem it oar duty what is found in them to “believe, with the heart to righteousness, and to confess with the tongue to salvation.” Rom. x. 10.

Secondly, We accord, as far as the Belgic and other reformed churches, with the Church of England in the Articles of Faith and heads of Christian religion, published in the name of that church, and to be found in the “Harmony of the Confessions of Faith.”

Thirdly, If by the church be understood the catholic church, dispersed upon the face of the whole earth, we do willingly acknowledge that a singular part thereof, and the same visible and conspicuous, is to be found in the land, and with it do profess and practise, what in us lays, communion in all things, in themselves lawful and done in right order.

But and if by the word church be understood a spiritual politic body, such as was in her time the Church of Israel; and in hers the Church of Rome, Corinth, the seven Churches of Asia, and others, with them, partaking of the same apostolical constitution, and as unto which do appertain the oracles of God, sacraments, censures, government, and ministry ecclesiastical, with other sacred institutions of Christ; I cannot but confess and profess, though with great grief, that it is to us a matter of scruple, which we cannot overcome, to give that honour unto it which is due from the servants of Christ to the Church of Christ, rightly collected and constituted.

And, that there may be place left in the eyes of the prudent reader for our defence in this case, so far forth as equity and reason will permit, he must once and again be entreated by me, seriously to weigh with himself, and in his heart, this one advertisement following.

That a man may do a thing truly pleasing, and acceptable to God, it sufficeth not, that both the doer in his person be accepted of God, the thing done commanded by God, and that he do it with good and holy affection before God, except withal, and first, he be possessed of that state and condition of life, which may afford him a lawful calling to that work. That a man, though never so good, with never so good a mind, should exercise the office, or do (though the best) works of a magistrate, father of family, husband, steward, citizen, or messenger, except he were first lawfully called, and preferred to the state of a magistrate, master of family, husband, or the like; so far were he from deserving any praise for so doing, as on the contrary he most justly incurred the censure of great rashness, and violation of all order in family and commonwealth; as “taking unto himself that honour, unto which he was not called of God.” Heb. v. 4. The same holdeth, and that specially in course of religion, which is the special state of man's life: so as if any either as a pastor dispense the holy things of the ministerial church, without a lawful pastoral calling going before; or participate in the same, out of a just and lawful church-state; neither that dispensation, nor this participation can be warranted, but both the one and other are usurpations, and in which is seen not the use, but abuse of holy things, and confusion of order. And as it behoveth every person first to believe, and know, that he is truly a Christian, and partaker of the grace of Christ, before he can hope to please God in the performance of this or that particular Christian work; so doth it also concern every Christian to provide, that he be first possessed of a just and lawful church order, before he so much as touch with his least finger the holy things of the church thereunto proper and peculiar. Proper, I say, and peculiar, amongst which I do not simply reckon the hearing of the Word, which both lawfully may, and necessarily ought to be done, not only of Christians, though members of no particular church, but even of infidels, profane persons, excommunicates, and any others: as being that in which no communion spiritually passeth, either ecclesiastical or personal, between the teacher and hearer, but according to some union, ecclesiastical or personal, going before: seeing that Christian faith comes by hearing the gospel, by faith, union, and from union, communion.

This thus premised, I will speak a few things of the Church of England; not by way of accusation of it, but for our own purgation in the eyes of the godly and equal reader, of the imputed crime of schism, so far as truth and equity will bear.

And first, seeing that the people of God are materially, as they speak, the church of God, it is required to the constitution of a holy church of God, that the people be holy, or saints, and sanctified in Christ Jesus, Rom. i. 7; 1 Cor. i. 2; 2 Cor. i. 1: truly and internally in regard of God, and their own consciences; externally and in appearance in respect of others, whom it concerns to discern and judge of them, according to the Word of God and rule of charity. And considering that our question is about the church external, and visible, as it is called, we are not so fond, or rather frantic, as to require, in respect of others, other holiness in the members thereof, than that which is visible and external.

Now how marvellous a thing is it, and lamentable withal, that amongst Christians, any should be found so far at odds with Christian holiness, as to think that others than apparently holy at the least, deserved admittance into the fellowship of Christ's church, and therewith of Christ! Do, or can the gracious promises of God made to the church, the heavenly blessings due to the church, the seals of Divine grace given to the church, appertain to others than such? Are others to be admitted into the family of God, the kingdom of Christ, and as it were the suburbs of heaven? The church of God is by him called, and destinated to advance his glory in the holiness of their lives, and conversations; what then have those to do with it, or it with those, who, as Calvin saith, in 1 Cor. v., live not bat with God's dishonour? For they, as the same author, on Rom. ii. 24, both truly and holily affirmeth, who are called, and accounted the people of God, to bear as it were in their foreheads, Rev. vii. 3, the name of God, whereupon it cannot but come to pass, that before men, even God himself, after a sort should be stained with their filth. And this I deem the rather to be observed, seeing that there are to be found, and these not a few, who would thrust upon the churches of our thrice holy Lord, a very stage-like holiness: stoutly striving to make it good, that to constitute a true and lawful member of the visible church, no more is required, than that a man with his mouth confess Christ, although in his works he plainly declare himself to be of the synagogue of Satan. But what saith the Holy Spirit of these impure spirits? “They profess they know God,” saith the apostle, “but in their works they deny him, being abominable, and rebellious, and to every good work reprobate.” Tit. i. 16. Are abominable persons to be brought into the temple of God? rebellious persons into the kingdom of God? such as are reprobate unto every good work into the family of God, which is as it were the storehouse of all good works? “If any one that is called a brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, or idolater, or railer, or drunkard, or extortioner,” 1 Cor. v. 11, or any way a wicked one, such a one by the apostle's direction, is to be expelled, and driven out of the church's confines. And seeing that, as one truly saith, “It is a matter of greater contumely to thrust out, than to keep out a guest,” with what conscience can such plagues be received into the church, to the purging out whereof the same church, furnished for that end with the power of Christ, stands in conscience bound? or by what authority, I pray, can such persons be compelled into the bosom of the spouse of Christ, as for the expelling of whom far from her fellowship, and in embracing all authority ought to conspire? “He that saith he hath fellowship with God, and walks in darkness, is a liar, and doth not truly.” 1 John i. 6. Profession of Christ therefore with the mouth, in those that work the works of darkness, and so by consequence, that by which a man is rather branded for a natural child of the devil, John viii. 44, than marked for a true member of the church. Lastly, David, that holy man of God, and type of Christ, doth holily profess, that “he who works deceit, shall not continue in his house,” Psa. ci. 7. And shall the workers of deceit, and of all wickedness, not only be admitted, but even constrained into the house of the living God, which the church is? “O Jehovah, holiness becometh thine house to length of days.” Psa. xciii. 5. Which notwithstanding (a sickness desperate of all remedy) that so it stands with the Church of England, no man to whom England is known, can be ignorant: seeing that all the natives there, and subjects of die kingdom, although never such strangers from all show of true piety, and goodness, and fraught never so full with many most heinous impieties and vices (of which rank, whether there be not an infinite, and far the greater number, I would to God it could with any reason be doubted,) are without difference compelled and enforced by most severe laws, civil and ecclesiastical, into the body of that church. And of this confused heap, a few, compared with the rest, godly persons mingled among, is that national church, commonly called the Church of England, collected and framed. And such is the material constitution of that church. But if now you demand of me, how it is formally constituted; and whether upon profession of faith and repentance, in word at least, made by them of years, any combination and consociation of the members into particular congregations, (which consociation doth formally constitute the ministerial church, and members thereof, as both the Scriptures and reason manifest) either is, or hath been made, since the universal and antichristian apostacy and defection in popery? Nothing less; but only by their parish perambulation, as they call it, and standing of the houses in which they dwell. Every subject of the kingdom dwelling in this or that parish, whether in city, or country, whether in his own or other man's house, is thereby, ipso facto, made legally a member of the same parish in which that house is situated: and bound, will he, nill he, fit, or unfit, as with iron bonds, and all his with him, to participate in all holy things, and some unholy also, in that same parish church.

If any object, that yet the minister of the parish may suspend from the Supper of the Lord flagitious persons, and so by complaint made to Mr. Chancellor, or Mr. Official, procure their excommunication; to let pass, that this is merely a matter of form for the most part, and a remedy as ill as the disease, I do answer, that even by this is proved undeniably that which I intend: viz. that all these parishioners before mentioned, are not without, but within, and members of the church (and the same as before constituted) whom she judgeth, 1 Cor. v. 12, 13.

There is besides these a third evil in the way, and the same as predominant, and overtopping all other things in that church, as was Saul higher than all the rest of the people: and with whose Rehoboam-like finger we miserable men are pressed and oppressed: and that is, the hierarchical church-government in the hands of the lord bishops and their substitutes: the very same with that of Rome, the pope the head only cut off, upon whose shoulders also many, though not without notable injury, would place the supreme magistrate, and administered by the self-same canon law.

Now this vast and insatiable hierarchical gulf, swallowing up and devouring the whole order, and use of the presbytery, and therewith the people's liberty, and withal, by Mr. Parker's testimony, with whom “a bishop in England is the pastor of the whole diocese, and the priests or ministers, only his delegates and helpers,”* the very office of the pastors themselves, as did the seven lean and evil-favoured kine the seven fat, and the seven wizened ears the seven full that went before them, Gen. xli. 20, 24; and so by consequence, not being of Christ the Lord, but of him rather, who opposeth and advanceth himself against whatsoever is called God, or is worshipped; 2 Thes. ii. 4; so as lie sits in the temple of God, as God, (for unto God alone dwelling in his temple it appertains to appoint the offices of the ministers, 1 Chron. xxix. 11–13, 19; and to prescribe the people's bonds) our hands are bound by that supreme, and sole authority of Jesus Christ in his churches, upon which both the order of presbytery, and liberty of people, and office of pastor are founded, and from whom as the one only Lord, 1 Cor. v. 4, all ecclesiastical power floweth, and by whom all ministries, 1 Cor. xii. 5, 28, are instituted, from giving any the least honour or obedience to the same hierarchical exaltation in itself, or its subordinates, which, as philosophy teacheth, are one with it.

Wherein yet I would not so be understood, as if we were at any defiance with the persons of the bishops, much less with the king's civil authority whereof they are possessed, whether in matters civil or ecclesiastical. Of their persons, their own lords shall judge, to whom they stand or fall. Rom. xiv. 4. There have been of that rank, who in our Marian days have preferred the profession of the truth of the gospel before their lives: I hope there are also of their successors, who, if pressed with the same necessity (which God forbid) would give the same testimony, though at the same rate, unto the same truth of God revealed unto them.

Now as concerning their civil authority; albeit we do not believe, that the same is at all competent to the true ministers of the gospel, especially in that emineny, external glory, and pomp of this world, in which they far exceed many worldly princes, and rather seem to represent the triumphant, than the militant church; yet forsomuch as they both obtain the same, by the gift of the king, and exercise it in his name, we do not unwillingly yield honour and obedience unto it, and to his majesty in it.

But, whereas, it seems unto many, plain and evident, that we may adjoin ourselves to the Church of England without any subjection, or relation unto the spiritual government, and governors thereof; that is altogether beyond our capacities: neither can we comprehend it, how it may be that he who subjects and joins himself to any public and politic body, or community, whether spiritual or civil, becomes not in so doing, ipso facto, subject to the public government, and governors thereof, and undergoes not a relation and respect actually unto them. They rather are, with all seriousness, to consider, how faithfully and sincerely they quit themselves and their consciences before God and men, who contending, and proving in and by so many words and arguments, that the hierarchical government is papal and antichristian, do nevertheless submit themselves thereunto both in the respect, and relation political formerly mentioned, and also in acts properly ecclesiastical, into which the ecclesiastical government, and spiritual policy of the church doth necessarily diffuse itself. Now I do earnestly entreat thee, whosoever thou art, acquainted with Belgic, or rather Christian liberty, and either free from the mists of prejudice, or if any way prejudiced, “yet not choosing rather to serve a preconceived opinion, than to follow an apparent truth,”* that thou wouldest truly and ingenuously tell, whether if the magistrates here (from which they are far) should by public edict, under severe penalty constrain all and every the native subjects of the country into the bosom of the church, without any difference made, either in respect of faith or manners, according to the place of their habitation; and should set over this church so collected and constituted, an hierarchical bishop provincial or diocesan, in whose hands alone, with his officials, chancellors, commissaries, archdeacons, and other court-keepers, canonical authority should be placed, to constitute and depose ministers, excommunicate and absolve both ministers and people, yea, whole churches (yea, with the living, the dead that they may obtain Christian burial): whether now in this confused heap, and under this spiritual lordship, thou wouldst endure to remain either pastor or member. I suppose not. You, brethren, have not so learned Christ; whom you acknowledge both for the author of your faith, and instituter of your order ecclesiastical. Col. ii. 5. Neither yet we, having learned otherwise by the grace of God. Christ the king doth gather and form unto himself another kind of kingdom amongst men, and the same to be administered by other officers, and according to other laws. And if no place upon the face of the earth should be free for us, poor creatures, refusing upon mere conscience of God, as thou God the judge and searcher of hearts knowest! to commingle, and prostitute ourselves in and unto this confusion and domination hierarchical, we have most assured hope, that heaven itself is open for us by Christ, who is the way, and whom in this duty also we do serve, in which we shall, at the length, be fully free from this, and all other incumbrances.

Our adversaries bear in hand not only others, but even us ourselves also, that we do for certain trifling matters, and as they speak, circumstantial corruptions, sequester ourselves from the Church of England. And as nurses use to lisp with children, so they, that they might descend to our capacities, do oft and much instruct us, that unworthy members must be born in the church, especially of private persons; that some corruptions at least in the discipline and external rites, are to be tolerated; that there may be the temple of God, though profaned; the holy city though without a wall; the field of the Lord, though the enemy sow tares amongst the wheat; also a heap of wheat, though much chaff commingled therewithal. And that we, dul-bayards* as we are, may at the length conceive those things, they very seriously inculcate and whet upon us in these and the like considerations: as that the Israelitish church in its time was stained with almost all enormities, both for manners and faith: that into the same all Israelites and Jews whatsoever without difference, were violently compelled by King Josiah and others; as also, that in the parable, all were compelled to come to the marriage, good and bad, that the house might be filled. Lastly, that in the apostolic churches themselves, there were not wanting some who practised, and others who taught vile, and evil things: that in one place the discipline was neglected, in another the very doctrine of faith corrupted, and many the like matters, which it were too long to repeat.

Surely, foolish were we if we knew not these things, impudent, if we denied them to be true for the most part; and lastly, unequal, if we acknowledged not, that many the same, or like blemishes after a sort, will, and do creep into the churches of our days: which yet to disclaim as unlawful for the same, stood neither with wisdom, nor charity. But the prudent reader may plainly observe by the premises, that they are other matters, and of greater weight, for the most part, wherewith we, and our consciences are pressed.

We do not judge it an evil intolerable, though greatly to be bewailed, that evil men should be suffered in the church; but that all of most vile, and desperate condition, that such, and so great a kingdom affords, should thereinto, will they, nill they, be compelled: nor that the discipline, as they call it, or ecclesiastical government instituted by Christ, is neglected or violated, but that another plain contrary unto it is set up by law, and fully and publicly everywhere exercised. Neither lies our exception against any personal, or accidentary profanation of the temple, but against the faulty frame of it, in respect of the causes constitutive, matter and form. Neither strive we about the walls of the city, but about the true and lawful citizens, the policy and government of the city of God, and essential administration of the same.

But to give more full satisfaction to the indifferent reader, it seems worth the labour to descend particularly to a few, and the same the chiefest objections made on the contrary behalf. And of them, that which may and ought to be said touching the church of Israel, and its condition compared with the Christian churches seems to deserve the first place. And touching it; first, the constitution of the church of Israel is not to be considered in that whole, much less apostatical nation, but in holy Abraham, from whom it came, and in whom it was holy, as the lump in the first fruits, and the branches in the holy root, Rom. xi. 16: and that by virtue of the gracious covenant, “I will be thy God, and the God of thy seed,” Gen. xvii. 7, first contracted with Abraham himself, and after renewed with his seed, whole Israel. But now to affirm any such thing of the whole English nation were foolish; to prove it impossible.

2. God doth not now-a-days select and sever from others as his peculiar, any whole nation or people, as sometimes he did the people of Israel, both ecclesiastically and civilly, Exod. xix. 6; Lev. xx. 85: “but in every nation, they who fear God, and work righteousness are accepted of him.” Acts x. 35. These, in what nation soever combining together in holy covenant, and worshipping God after the prescript of his Holy Word are that holy nation, the commonwealth of Israel, the Israel of God, the temple and tabernacle of the living God, in which he hath promised to dwell: these he would have scattered in all places of the world, and to hold intercourse with the men of the world in the common affairs of this life, 1 Cor. v. 10, for their gaining if it may be unto Christ: “God adding daily unto the church such as should be saved.” Acts ii. 42. Whereas on the contrary, unto the Church of England, whereof all natural English are together, and at once made members, it can hardly be, if at all, that any at any time should be added.

3. The very land of Canaan was legally holy, and the land of the Lord's inheritance, and whose fruit was to be circumcised, and her sabbaths kept, by the Lord's appointment, Amos vii. 17; Josh. xxii. 22; Lev. xix. 23, 25: and in which alone by Divine right tithes were to be paid. Gen. xiv.20; xxviii. 23; Lev. xxvii. 30. And as holy things are not to be mingled with, or prostituted unto profane, so neither was any place in this land to be permitted unto profane persons to dwell in. The seven profane nations, which formerly had inhabited it, were altogether to be destroyed by the Israelites being to possess it for their inheritance, neither was mercy to be showed them. After, if any, whether born in the land, or strangers, did aught with an high hand, he was to be cut off from among his people. Deut.vii.1,2; Numb. xv. 13. Herewith accords that of David the king, “I will betime destroy all the wicked of the land.” Psa. ci. 8. Lastly, He that did not seek the Lord God of Israel with all his heart, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. 2 Chron. xv. 12,13. Far be it from godly princes, and other potentates in the world, to think, that it behoveth them in this rigorous manner to deal with their subjects: although there want not, who partly from a preposterous, and Judaizing zeal, and partly to serve their own ambition, cease not to inculcate unto the kings of the earth, above that is meet, the examples of the kings of Judah.

4. It is not true that the kings of Judah or Israel did constrain any into the church by force, or compel them to undergo the condition of members, but only being members, to do their duty. All the Israelites and posterity of Jacob, had their part in the Lord's covenant: unto which also they were bound to stand under peril of cutting off from the Lord's people, both spiritually and bodily, according to the dispensation of the old testament in the land of Canaan. But of this our question is not for the present: That neither is to be considered, whether king David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat and others did force circumcision, and other Mosaical institutions upon the Edomites, Ammonites, and others by them subdued, and held in civil subjection; or whether they compelled them by co-active laws, would they, nould they, fit or unfit into the church of God. That this was so, cannot be affirmed with modesty: which yet except it so were, hath nothing in it, which either can hurt our cause, or help our adversaries.

Lastly, He who well weigheth with himself what legal and typical holiness was in use of old in Israel, shadowing out the true and spiritual holiness; and withal by how much, both the more clear revelation of heavenly things, and more plenteous grace of the Spirit is afforded to the churches since Christ, than was formerly to Israel, he shall see many things making for the tolerating of much in Israel; which, in us is plainly intolerable: and that God will not use that patience and long-suffering towards any church now, Rev. ii. 5; iii. 16, nor permit, or wink at those things in it, which for the hardness of their hearts, he bore in that ancient people.†

The parable of the tares, Matt. xiii., followeth; with which as with some thunderbolt, men both learned and unlearned think us beaten all to fritters.

But first, these words, “Let both grow together till the harvest,” ver. 30, (from which alone they do dispute) Christ the Lord doth not expound nor meddle with, in the opening of the parable: from them therefore nothing firm can be concluded. 2. Christ himself interprets the field, not the church, but the world, ver. 38, as also the harvest not the end of the church, but of the world, ver. 39. And if by the world, you understand the church, you must needs say, that Christ hi the expounding of one parable, used another. 3. Both the text itself, ver. 28–31, and reason of the thing do plainly teach that he doth not speak at all of excommunication, which serves for the bettering of the tares, but of their final rooting up to perdition. Lastly, Admit Christ spake of men apparently wicked in the church, either not to be excommunicated in certain cases, which with Gellius Snecanus* I confidently deny, or not excommunicated as they ought to be, and therefore to be born of private members; the former of which is too ordinary, especially in churches enjoying peace and prosperity: the latter of which, the church not being desperately bent on evil, I easily assent to, yet doth this place afford no medicine for our grief; which ariseth not from any corrupt or negligent administration of the church's discipline, through the carelessness or want of wisdom, it may be too much wisdom such as it is, of the administrators thereof, which are personal things; but from the very constitution of the church itself, and subject of ecclesiastical both government and power. Yea, I add unto all these things, that we for our parts are willing in the business, and controversy in hand to appeal unto the tribunal of this very parable, and that expounded by our adversaries themselves, and do willingly condescend, that by it alone judgment be given on this matter.

Our Saviour Christ doth plainly teach, that this field was sown with good seed alone; and that after, “whilst men slept, the enemy, the devil, came and sowed tares amongst the wheat.” But on the contrary, in the sowing the English field, whether we respect the national or parochial churches, together with the wheat, the tares, and that exceeding the other infinitely, were at first, and yet are sown, and that of purpose and under most severe penalties. And hence is the first and principal prejudice to our English harvest, and from which I conceive all the rest to come. For unto this church, thus clapped and clouted together of all persons, of all sorts, and spirits without difference, no man equally and prudently weighing things, can deny, but that the pompous and imperious hierarchical government, together with all its accessories, doth right well accord.

To the things objected, from the parable of the marriage, Luke xiv. and Matt. xxii., I only answer, that those servants were the prophets and apostles; the son, Christ himself; the compulsion to be made, no otherwise than by the preaching of the Word: “by which,” as Calvin hath it, on Matt. xxii. 9, “God doth importunately solicit our slothfulness, not only pricking us with exhortations, but compelling us with threatenings to come unto him:” which Word of God, as it is by some wholly contemned, so doth it extort from others only an external and hypocritical obedience; but by many is received, through the blessing of God, with all holy and devout affection.

Now unto these parables of Christ many are wont, and that very busily, to annex one of their own. A heap, say they, of wheat, although it have much chaff mixed with it, and the same more in quantity than the wheat is, remains notwithstanding truly, and is rightly termed, a heap of wheat; according to the philosophers’ rule,—The denomination is not of the greater but better part.

I answer, first, that this axiom is not simply true: for if in the church, or any other convention popular, or in which things pass by voices, the greater part happen to exceed the better, the denomination of that passage or decree, and so the whole process of the matter, is according to the greater, though the worser part.

Second. The chaff in that wheat is either of the same wheat or of other, and brought from elsewhere; if of that same, then it makes nothing to the present purpose, since wicked men appertain not to the persons of the godly, nor are their chaff; if of other, and from elsewhere, it may easily be added in that quantity and proportion, as that neither it may deserve the name of a heap of wheat, but of chaff; nor he that sells it for wheat, of an honest merchant, but of a deceitful impostor.

Third. The things objected for the apostolical churches, are altogether personal and accidental; from which that the churches gathered of men, and by men governed, should be exempted, is rather to be desired than hoped for. But for us, the things which most afflict us in the Church of England, and press us in the respect fore-mentioned to a secession, from the same, do concern the very material and formal constitution of the ministerial church, together with the essential administration of the church policy. And how different these things are, who seeth not?

Lastly, It is objected, that in the Church of England lively faith, and true piety, are both begotten and nourished, in the hearts of many, by the preaching of the gospel ‘there. God forbid! that we should not acknowledge that, and withal that infinite thanks for the same are due to God's great power and goodness, both in respect of ourselves and others; who, notwithstanding the great confusion both of persons and things, there to be found, vouhsafeth to his elect so plentiful grace; covering under the veil of his superabundant goodness and mercy, by their sincere faith in Christ Jesus, their sins and aberrations, whether of ignorance or infirmity. What, then, must be done? Should we continue in sin, that grace might abound? or, shall we against knowledge go on to walk inordinately, because in our ignorance God hath vouchsafed us of his grace in that disordered state of things? without the ministerial church, of which we speak, the preaching of the gospel both may, and useth to be had, and by it faith to be ingenerated, except Christian churches be to be gathered of infidels and unbelievers. Besides, what Minos, or Rhadamant will deny, that even in the bosom of the Romish church some faithful persons may be found? how much more in that of England, in which the main truths of the gospel, the most and greatest errors of popery being banished, are taught by so many godly and learned men, with such zeal and earnestness? Now what of these things? Is it therefore lawful for a Christian, either to content himself with himself, without joining to any Christian congregation; or to continue still in the bosom of the Church of Rome, as a member under the Pope, the head? I therefore conclude out of Mr. Brightman, on Rev. ii. 20, whose words I had rather use than mine own, speaking of the government and ministry of the Church of England, “The fruit,” to wit, of the word preached, “doth no more exempt from blame our corruptions, than a true child doth adultery.”

And here thou hast, Christian reader, the whole order of our conversation in the work of Christian religion, set down both as briefly and plainly as I could. If in any thing we err, advertise us brotherly, with desire of our information, and not, as our countrymen's manner for the most part is, with a mind of reproaching us, or gratifying of others: and whom thou findest in error, thou shalt not leave in obstinacy, nor as having a mind prone, to schism. Err we may, alas! too easily: but heretics, by the grace of God, we will not be. But and if the things which we do, seem right in thine eyes, as to us certainly they do, I do earnestly, and by the Lord Jesus admonish and exhort thy godly mind, that thou wilt neither withhold thy due obedience from his truth, nor just succour from thy distressed brethren. Neither do thou endure, that either the smallness of the number, or meanness of the condition of those that profess it, should prejudice with thee the profession of the truth: but have in mind that of Tertullian,* “Do we measure men's faith by their persons, or their persons by their faith?” as also that of Austin,† “Let matter weigh with matter, and cause with cause, and reason with reason:” but especially that of the apostle, “My brethren, have not the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ in respect of persons.” James ii. 1. But now, if it so come to pass, which God forbid, that the most being either forestalled by prejudice, or by prosperity made secure, there be few found, especially men of learning, who will so far vouchsafe to stoop, as to look upon so despised creatures, and their cause; this alone remaineth, that we turn our faces and mouths unto thee O most powerful Lord, and gracious Father, humbly imploring help from God towards those who are by men left desolate. There is with thee no respect of persons, neither are men less regarders of thee if regarders of thee for the world's disregarding them. They who truly fear thee, and work righteousness, although constrained to live by leave in a foreign land, exiled from country, spoiled of goods, destitute of friends, few in number, and mean hi condition, are for all that unto thee (O gracious God) nothing the less acceptable. Thou numberest all their wanderings, and puttest their tears into thy bottles. Are they not written in thy book? Towards thee, O Lord, are our eyes; confirm our hearts, and bend thine ear, and suffer not our feet to slip, or our face to be ashamed, O thou both just and merciful God. To him through Christ be praise, for ever, in the church of saints; and to thee, loving and Christian reader, grace, peace, and eternal happiness. Amen.

FINIS.

notice respecting
THE TWO LETTERS.

The Preface to the Treatise on “Religious Communion,” following these Letters, refers to a scurrilous book published in 1612, by persons who had formerly been in connexion with the Separatists at Amsterdam, but who had either been excommunicated, or had abandoned their former connexions, and had returned to the English Church. The title of their joint production is, “The Prophane Schism of the Brownists, or Separatists, with the impiety, dissensions, lewd and abominable vices of that impure sect; discovered by Christopher Lawne, Clement Saunders, and Robert Bulward, lately returned into the bosom of the Church of England from the company of Mr. Johnson. 1612.”

The title indicates the character of the book, and awakens suspicions as to the credibility of the authors. Mr. Robinson's allusions to the parties, as well as Mr. Clyfton's reply in his work entitled, “An Advertisement concerning a book, lately published by Christopher Lawne and others, against the exiled Church at Amsterdam, by Richard Clyfton, Teacher of the same Church, 1612,” shows that they were by no means trustworthy. Their extreme eagerness to destroy the reputation of their former friends defeats its object, and betrays only the malignity of their spirit.

While, however, the testimony of Lawne is, in general, more than suspicious, there can be little doubt respecting the authenticity of the following letters, which, it would appear, had been surreptitiously printed, or clandestinely obtained, and afterwards copied and circulated. Mr. Robinson states in the Preface, p. 96, that these Letters, with a third, which Dr. Ames published as a rejoinder, were printed “without his consent, privity, or suspicion of such dealing.” He regarded them as private, and intended only for his correspondent and himself.

The “learned Amesius” was a distinguished Puritan in England; but in consequence of the persecuting proceedings of Archbishop Bancroft, he fled to Holland, in 1610, and became minister of the English Church at the Hague. On Abbott's succeeding to the Archiepiscopal See, he wrote to the English Ambassador, in 1612, to get Ames removed from his charge. This being effected, the same influence was exerted to prevent his appointment as Divinity Professor at the University of Leyden. The States of Friesland, however, appointed him to the Theological Chair at the University of Franeker, where he continued, discharging his professional duties with distinguished and growing success, for nearly twelve years. His health failing, he retired to Rotterdam, and became co-pastor with the Rev. Hugh Peters, over the Independent Church in that town. He did not long survive the change, and was buried November 14th, 1633.*

It is not stated in what year the “Letters” were written; but, as they were extant when Lawne published his “Profane Schism,” in 1612, they were doubtless written in 1611, while Dr. Ames was Minister of the English Church at the Hague, which office he was compelled to resign in 1612. The correspondence, therefore, took place three years before Robinson published his Treatise on “Communion.”

The insertion of the Letters in this part of the volume has been deemed desirable, as they form, an important introduction to the “Religious Communion;” and without the study of which, certain parts both of the preface and the first part of that work cannot be well understood.

What influence the correspondence with Dr. Ames had on Mr. Robinson's mind does not appear; but it is evident, on comparing the letters and the work on “Communion,” that a considerable modification had taken place in his views on the subject. Dr. Ames in his letters strenuously contends against Mr. Robinson's supposed uncharitable-ness in not holding “private communion” with “members of the true visible church,” who belonged to the “Assemblies,” or the English Church—while the parties to whom Mr. Robinson refers in the treatise, objected to his supposed latitudinarianism in holding private and occasional fellow ship with pious persons belonging a national ecclesiastical establishment.

In the earlier period of his separation Mr. Robinson was more “rigid” in his notions respecting church-fellowship and discipline; but his charity expanded as his years increased, and he delighted to recognise as brethren, all who followed Christ sincerely and devoutly, though they might not feel it to be their duty to leave their church connexions and unite themselves with the Separatists.

LETTERS.

“Letters that passed betwixt M. Ames and M. Robinson touching the bitterness of the Separation.” Copied from Lawne's “Profane Schism,” chap. viii. pp. 47–51.

“One point of schism which Mr. Gilgate objected unto Mr. Ainsworth was, for their separation in private from those particular persons, which might be discerned to be true visible Christians even by their own confession. This point, because it is further discussed in divers arguments and writings betwixt Master Ames and Master Robinson, we have thought it meet to publish them as they came unto our hands, because they serve much for the declaration and manifestation of their schism herein.”

letter of rev. wm. ames to mr. robinson.

G. M. and P. (Grace, Mercy, and Peace.)

Sir,—I do not desire to multiply many letters, nor many words in this one letter. I will pass by, therefore, your censure. Your manner of Separation also I omit, whether it be like or dislike to that of the first reformed churches, for you have irons enough in the fire about that question. Neither will I trouble you about my associates here, whom you deem evil of, though they be unknown unto you: only that one point which containeth indeed the very bitterness of Separation, I would desire you again to consider of, as you do me: viz. “Whether there be not a visible communion even out of a visible church.” These reasons seem to evince it.

• 1.Whomsoever I can rightly discern to have communion with Jesus Christ, with him may I have visible communion: the reason is, because that from visible descrying of that inward communion, doth necessarily follow external communion. Neither can other sufficient reason be given, why we should communicate with visible churches, but only because we visibly discern that they have communion with Christ: Now “quatenus ipsum et de omni convertuntur.” But we may discern (even by your confession) of some, out of a visible church that they have communion with Christ: Ergo,
• 2.That which is lawful for them to do which are no members of a visible church, that is lawful for others to join with them in: for that which is no sin in the principal is none in the accessory, “ceteris paribus.” And it cannot be simply unfawful to join in any action that is lawful, “quatenus tails;” but it is lawful for Christians converted, even be fore they join in any church (perhaps wanting knowledge of the true constitution, perhaps opportunity) to worship God. Therefore,
• 3.It is necessary, that before the covenant-making (which you hold to be the form of a church) they that are to make it, should join together in prayer for direction, assistance, and blessing, yet they are not a church until after: therefore, it is not only lawful, but necessary also that there be a communion out of a visible church. You may easily conceive the form and force of this argument. If you answer that they are a church in desire, that is to forsake your position: for desire to be, doth imply that as yet they are not: “A velle ad esse non sequitur ratio.” I will not be further tedious unto you. Fare you well.

Your loving frend,
William Ames.

Feb. 25.

letter of mr. robinson to mr. ames.

Mercy and peace be with you. Amen.

Sir,—Because I do understand by many, that you mar-Tel I answer not your reasons, having had your writing so long in my hands, I thought good to return you a brief answer. Your reasons to prove visible communion out of a visible church follow; though that be not the question between you and me, but whether “we which are or deem ourselves to be of a visible church, may lawfully communicate with such as be of no church”?

I deny that external communion doth necessarily flow from the discerning of inward communion with Christ, which is your first reason: for then I have external communion with the angels and faithful departed this life. External communion is a matter of external relation and order, under which men out of the church are not. The order set by Christ and his apostles is, that such as receive the Word and are to be saved, Acts ii. 41–47, join themselves forthwith unto the church, and a large remnant it is of the confusions which Antichrist hath brought into the world, that men fearing God should remain out of the true church.

For the further clearing of these things,

If an innocent person (in mine absence) be excommunicated from the church, upon the testimony of two or three, yet will I for order's sake (and so am bound) forbear communion with him till I have manifested his innocency to the church. On the other side, though I know some great wickedness by a brother, which he denies, and I cannot prove, I must still for order's sake keep communion with him in the church, till God discover him. It is evident, therefore, that, in cases, I am both to forbear communion with a godly man, till we be orderly joined together; and to keep communion with a wicked man till we be orderly disjoined.

Add unto these things, that upon this ground, I may also lawfully admit one out of the church, to the Lord's Supper, to the choice of officers, censuring of offenders, and all other exercise of external communion; if by the judgment of charity, I deem him holy in his person. And how can I deny him one part of external communion, to whom I afford another, but I make a schism in the communion of saints? and this also may serve for answer to the latter part of your proof touching visible churches; for they have not only internal communion with Christ, but external also in the order which he hath set. For which we stand and for the want of which alone, we withdraw ourselves, as we do in this case, not daring to break Christ's order for men's disorder.

The sum of the second argument, is, that because it is lawful for some such as are not yet members of a true church to pray, therefore, others of a church may join with them in prayer.

I do first answer, that men in a church are bound to and from many things, wherein men not in the church may use more liberty, and upon the same ground you might soundly argue thus: Because two or three persons excommunicated upon false testimony, may pray together, and, therefore, the brethren of the church may forthwith pray with them; though prayer be in itself a lawful thing, and they holy in their persons that perform it, yet it is unlawfully performed out of the church, in which men ought to be and therein to use it. So that although there be neither “Vitium personæ nec vitium rei,” yet there is “Vitium ordinis, et relationis:” and this external religious order and relation is the church order; and religious communion, a work, doth presuppose religious union of persons.

Touching men joining in prayer, before they enter covenant, and so before they be in a church, whence you do take your third argument: I do answer, first, for that there is not the like reason of them and us, which are, or take ourselves to be in the order of an established church: they then break no order, though we should. Secondly, Such persons are joined in will and purpose, at the least, the which is accepted as the deed; 2 Cor. viii. 12; though the outward ceremony be not as yet performed. So is Abraham said to have offered up Isaac, Heb. xi. 17; and Priscilla and Aquila to have laid down their own necks for Paul's life; Rom. xv. 3, 4; which notwithstanding, they did only in will and purpose. Your axiom, “A velle ad esse non sequitur ratio” hath his use especially “in rebus natwalibus.” But the urging of it thus absolutely in matters of religion, tends to deprive the church of her greatest spiritual comfort.

Lastly, Consider the covenant “in concreto” and prayer is a part thereof. And when men are so met, with a purpose to unite, and do begin prayer for the sanctification of it; they are in the door coming into the house, and not without. The Jews were not to have religious communion with persons uncircumcised: and yet, I doubt not, hut when a godly proselyte was to he circumcised, they might lawfully join with him for the sanctification of the ordinance.

I cease further to trouble you, and do heartily salute you in the Lord God, wishing you from him all prosperity, and in him resting.

Leyden, this second of the week,
Your loving friend,

Joh. Robinson.

Dr. Ames published a rejoinder to this letter, hut Mr. Robinson did not reply again, judging his friend's arguments inconclusive and not requiring refutation.

EDITORIAL NOTICE.

The title and preface of the following Work sufficiently explain its object.

It was doubtless written at Leyden, and probably printed in that city. The first part, “On Communion,” shows the progress of Mr. Robinson's mind towards more enlarged and liberal views on Christian fellowship, than those he entertained when the correspondence took place between Mr. Ames and himself, three years previously; and furnishes an illustration of his remark respecting himself, at the close of the Preface, that he was one of those who desired “to learn further or better what the good will of God is.”

The second and third parts are more controversial in their character, and may be regarded as amplifications and confirmations of the arguments on similar topics, in the “Defence of the Doctrine propounded at the Synod of Dort,” contained in vol. L, pp. 260–471.

[67]Parkerus, de Eccles. Pol. 3, 35, et Hierarchia, passim.

[68]Theodoret. Dial. 1.

[69]Literally, dull or stupid horses; but used in reference to person dull of comprehension.

[70]Pareus in 1 Cor. vii. 11.

[71]Ch. Discip. 2 part, Meth. 2, pp. 24, 27, 28.

[72]Tertull. de Præscr. adv. Heret. cap. 3.

[73]Austin contra Maxim. 3, 14,

[74]Vide Brooks' Lives of the Puritans, vol. ii. pp. 405–408; Hanbury's Historical Memorials, vol. i. p. 257.