A30189:191
An answer to two treatises of Mr. John Can, the leader of the English…An answer to two treatises of Mr. Iohn Can, the leader of the English…
An answer to two treatises of Mr. John Can, the leader of the English Brownists in Amsterdam the former called, A necessity of separation from the Church of England, proved by the Nonconformists principles : the other, A stay against straying : wherein in opposition to M. John Robinson, he undertakes to prove the unlawfulness of hearing the ministers of the Church of England ... / by the late learned, laborious and faithful servant of Jesus Christ, John Ball.An answer to two treatises of Mr. Iohn Can, the leader of the English Brownists in Amsterdam the former called, A necessitie of separation from the Church of England, proved by the Nonconformists principles : the other, A stay against straying : wherein in opposition to M. Iohn Robinson, he undertakes to prove the unlawfulnesse of hearing the ministers of the Church of England ... / by the late learned, laborious and faithfull servant of Jesus Christ, John Ball.
London: printed by R.B., 1642
Chapter 1 › Section 4 › CAN. Stay against Stray. Sect. 3, pag. 17, 18. › ANSWER.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The Assumption you leave naked, to shift for it self, because you find it an easier matter to declaim against Idolatry, and holding communion with Idolaters, in their Idol-service (which no man ever doubted) than to make proof, that to ⟨p. 56⟩join in the ordinances of Religion in our assemblies, is willworship or superstition. But if you prove little, you have learned to accuse manfully. An Idol Church, an Idol Ministry, an Idol-government, who doth not tremble at such thunder cracks?
The Assumption you leave naked, to shift for it selfe, because you finde it an easier matter to declaime against Idolatry, and holding communion with Idolaters, in their Idoll-service (which no man ever doubted) than to make proofe, that to ⟨p. 56⟩joyne in the ordinances of Religion in our assemblies, is willworship or superstition. But if you prove little, you have learned to accuse manfully. An Idoll Church, an Idoll Ministerie, an Idoll-government, who doth not tremble at such thunder cracks?
But first you should call to mind what you answer to your opposite. 1As for your bare saying, it is far from proof. To affirm or deny (according to Aristotle) is of no consequence. We cannot take his bare saying, de jure & fide, to be a rule of faith to us. For our consciences are not (like Samsons shoulders) strong enough to bear it. If it may suffice to accuse, who shall be innocent? And if the cause may be carried with clamours and out-cries, you are sure to win the victory.
But first you should call to minde what you answere to your opposite. 1As for your bare saying, it is farre from proofe. To affirme or denie (according to Aristorie) is of no consequence. Wee cannot take his bare saying, de jure & fide, to be a rule of faith to us. For our consciences are not (like Samsons shoulders) strong enough to beare it. If it may suffice to accuse, who shall be innocent? And if the cause may be carried with clamors and out-cryes, you are sure to winne the victory.