A30189:491
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.
You tell us very confidently, that as zealous and judicious Nonconformists as ever held that cause, affirm, that a man cannot without sin communicate in that worship, where the Ceremonies are used. But whether should a man admire more your impudency, or vain confidence herein? Must not he mistrust you in every thing, that shall consider how notoriously you lavish in this particular? Is it not contrary to their profession, protestation, and practice? Do they not usually frequent the Congregations? have they not written in maintenance and defence thereof? who have cried down by conference, preaching, writing, the neglect of Gods ordinances, or the practice of separation more than they? And yet you blush not to write, that our Assumption is assented unto by as ⟨p. 23⟩judicious and zealous Nonconformists as ever held that cause, and they have brought good reasons for it.
You tell us very confidently, that as zealous and judicious Nonconformists as ever held that cause, affirme, that a man cannot without sinne communicate in that worship, where the Ceremonies are used. But whether should a man admire more your impudency, or vaine confidence herein? Must not he mistrust you in every thing, that shall consider how notoriously you lavish in this particular? Is it not contrary to their profession, protestation, and practice? Doe they not usually frequent the Congregations? have they not written in maintenance and defence thereof? who have cryed downe by conference, preaching, writing, the neglect of Gods ordinances, or the practice of separation more than they? And yet you blush not to write, that our Assumption is assented unto by as ⟨p. 23⟩judicious and zealous Nonconformists as ever held that cause, and they have brought good reasons for it.
First, You quote Mr uParker, That men must fly from Idols and Idolothites: but men when they come to worship God in societies where the Ceremonies are used, they do not fly from Idols, but draw near unto them. But if a man should have sought out a place of purpose to manifest your fraudulent and unconscionable alleging of mens words and sayings, he could scarce have found a second more pregnant. The whole passage in Mr Parker, to which you send us, I will set down at large, because it serves to clear the matter in many particulars, and all men may take the better notice of your fidelity. There is an Idol more strictly taken (saith he) and an Idol of larger sense, which will include the Cross. For the better understanding whereof, we must borrow a distinction from the