A30189:467
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
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.
Carriers pretence in that particular is a mere juggling trick, that he might insinuate, a change of Religion, might be made among us without any great alteration, which is as likely as the light should be turned into darkness and not espied. If many points of Popery be not condemned expressly in the Catechism, or Service-book (which are for the instruction of the simple in the grounds of Religion, and the administration of the holy things of God, and not to show what is condemned in Religion) yet so many points are there taught directly contrary to the foundation of Popery that it is not possible Popery should stand, if they take place. And whereas Antichristianism standeth in ungodly superstructions and additions to the truth and worship of God; both matter and object, if the Catechism and Service-book have not enough in them in his sense, of necessity they contradict the whole bulk of Popery, which consisteth in abominable superfluities, or impious inventions of their own.
Carriers pretence in that particular is a meere jugling trick, that he might insinuate, a change of Religion, might be made among us without any great alteration, which is as likely as the light should be turned into darknesse and not espied. If many points of Popery be not condemned expresly in the Catechisme, or Service-booke (which are for the instruction of the simple in the grounds of Religion, and the administration of the holy things of God, and not to shew what is condemned in Religion) yet so many points are there taught directly cōtrary to the foundation of Popery that it is not possible Popery should stand, if they take place. And whereas Antichristianisme standeth in ungodly superstructions and additions to the truth and worship of God; both matter and object, if the Catechisme and Service-booke have not enough in them in his sense, of necessitie they contradict the whole bulke of Popery, which confisteth in abhominable superfluities, or impious inventions of their owne.
It is mone proper to say, the Mass was added to our common-prayer, than that our common-prayer was taken out of the Mass-book: For most things in our common-prayer, were to be found in the Liturgies of the Church, long before the Mass, whereof we speak, was heard of in the world. And the Mass was patched up by degrees, and added to the Liturgy of the Church, now one piece, then another; so that the ancient truths and holy Liturgies were at last stained with the Idol of the Mass,