A30189:290
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 5 › CAN. Stay. Sec. 5. pag. 41, 42. & Sect. 6. pag. 86 › 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.
ANSWER.
You roll the same stone up and down. Is there any thing here for substance, but what hath been repeated oft, ⟨p. 90⟩but not proved once? You talk of superstition, false worship, idolatry, giving honour to the ways of Antichrist, and such like great abominations. But if we call for proof of these accusations, you are glad to fly off, and to play least in sight. Superstition, false worship, idolatry is unlawful, that you can say, and no man will deny it. But that it is false worship, idolatry, or superstition to hold communion in our assemblies in the ordinances of grace, in this if your bare word, will not be received, here is nothing to bear you out.
You rowle the same stone up and downe. Is there any thing here for substance, but what hath beene repeated oft, ⟨p. 90⟩but not prooved once? You talke of superstition, false worship, idolatry, giving honour to the wayes of Antichrist, and such like great abominations. But if we call for proof of these accusations, you are glad to fly off, and to play least in sight. Superstition, false worship, idolatry is unlawfull, that you can say, and no man will deny it. But that it is false worship, idolatry, or superstition to hold communion in our assemblies in the ordinances of grace, in this if your bare word, will not be received, here is nothing to beare you out.
This reason therefore, that is, for the substance thereof nothing but a new furbishing over of the same broken staff, might well be passed over in silence. But lest the credulous reader should conceit it is slighted, because it containeth some matter of importance, I will in few words lay open the weakness and vanity thereof. First you translate the Schoolmans words (vel cui non debet, vel non eo modo quo debet) very improperly, when divine worship is not exhibited, either to the person it should be, &c. and indeed make his speech absurd or senseless. For it was never imagined to be superstition, not to exhibit divine worship to God, but Atheism or profaneness rather. You say, superstition is that which is done supra statutum, when more estimation is had of a thing, more dignity placed in it than is meet; which is contrary to the not exhibiting of divine honour to God: but this is your common practice. 2. Your reasons to prove it superstition to hear Antichristian Ministers in their false assemblies (as you stile them) are none of the best,