A30189:496
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.
but presence at Gods worship, which God hath commanded, where Christ is present to meet, welcome and bless his servants, though some things by participation Idolatrous be retained or used therein is neither sinful nor offensive, it carrieth no evil appearance of approbation or consent.
but presence at Gods worship, which God hath commanded, where Christ is present to meete, welcome and blesse his servants, though some things by participation Idolatrous be retained or used therein is neither sinfull nor offensive, it carrieth no evill appearance of approbation or consent.
This distinction of personal and ministerial sins, as it is here applied, I never found in the writings of Nonconformist, and in it self it is a mere invention and device, which hath no ground from Scripture, and must have no place in Divinity. For if the Minister be ignorant, proud, careless, profane, corrupt in judgement, superstitious in some observations, be these sins personal or public and Ministerial. If personal, then should not they hurt the people, if this be true which here you affirm: But when you are directly cross to your self throughout your whole book. If public and ministerial, then the people are guilty of the Ministers ignorance, carelessness, pride, passion, indiscretion, &c. And if these be public and ministerial, I desire to know what is a personal and what a ministerial fault. If a Minister in preaching or prayer put up a rash petition, or deliver a rash sentence, give a weak reason, an unsound trial, use vain repetitions, a confused method; if he mis-interpret the Scripture, or do not soundly deduce his doctrines out of the Text he taketh upon him to expound; if he divide it not aright, or some way ⟨p. 27⟩misapply it; are these public and ministerial or personal and private faults, if personal, I desire to know what makes a fault ministerial and public, and see it proved. If that wch is done by a Minister in preaching and prayer, blessing and administration of the Sacraments be not ministerial, I know not what is to be called ministerial. If they be public and ministerial, then whosoever communicates with a Minister in the worship of God, he is guilty of all the sins publicly committed by him in this kind, if that distinction be of any worth. Which if it be granted, (If I may judge of your preaching by your writing) it is high time for all your hearers to hast from you, for you mis-allege Scripture, slander the godly, speak evil of the ways of God, teach many falsehoods, and whiles they join with you in the worship of God, they are partakers of your transgression.