A30189:202
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. Sec. 3. pag. 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.
As for the high places of which we read often in Scripture, it was lawful for the Fathers of old to offer Sacrifices upon them, when it was not precisely commanded, but only the place for sacrifice undetermined. But after that God ⟨p. 59⟩had chosen, determined, and appropriated a peculiar place for sacrifice where it was to be offered and not else where, 1then it was a great sin for them without extraordinary dispen ation or commandment to offer in those places, where their godly Ancestors had truly worshipped before, not because they had no commandment so to do (for that may be said of their Ancestors, they had no commandment to offer there) but because it was expressly forbidden. And here you may see how the first part of the sentence doth cross the later: For if godly Ancestors did truly worship God in the high places, when they were not commanded, then the Israelites did not sin grievously in carrying their oblations thither, because it was not commanded. What moved you so to write, and to allege Authors, as if they affirmed the same, I leave it to your conscience to judge. This is sure, neither Scripture nor Author cited, doth speak with you in that matter, but plainly profess, that it was unlawful, because it was expressly forbidden. That exercise (saith Zanchie) did seem praiseworthy to the Israelites, and yet it is to play the harlot: Why? because it is sacrilege to depart from the Word of the Lord. But the Word of the Lord had commanded, that they should worship the Lord only at Jerusalem, and by such rites as he had instituted.
As for the high places of which wee read often in Scripture, it was lawfull for the Fathers of old to offer Sacrifices upon them, when it was not precisely commanded, but only the place for sacrifice undetermined. But after that God ⟨p. 59⟩had chosen, dete•mined, and appropriated a peculiar place for sacrifice where it was to be offered and not else where, 1then it was a great sinne for them without extraordinary dispen ation or commandement to offer in those places, where their godly Ancestors had truly worshiped before, not because they had no commandement so to do (for that may be said of their Ancestors, they had no commandement to offer there) but because it was expresly forbidden. And here you may see how the first part of the sentence doth crosse the later: For if godly Ancestors did truly worship God in the high places, when they were not commanded, then the Israelites did not finne grievously in carrying their oblations thither, because it was not commanded. What moved you so to write, and to alledge Authors, as if they affirmed the same, I leave it to your conscience to judge. This is sure, neither Scripture nor Author cited, doth speake with you in that matter, but plainly professe, that it was unlawfull, because it was expresly forbidden. That exercise (saith Zanchie) did seeme praiseworthy to the Israelites, and yet it is to play the harlot: Why? because it is sacriledge to depart from the Word of the Lord. But the Word of the Lord had commanded, that they should worship the Lord only at Ierusalem, and by such rites as hee had instituted.