A30189:530
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 3 › Section 2 › ANSWER.Chapter 3 › Section 2 › ANSVVER.
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.
The matter in hand betwixt you and Mr D. is the absolute necessity of Church-discipline to the being of a Church; To what end then do you bring, That the Book of common-prayer used in the Assemblies of England, is an infectious Liturgy, Romish-stuff, a devised service, raked out of three Romish Channels? That the Ministry of the Church of England is unlawful and Antichristian! That the Ministry, worship, and government of of England are corruptions! Doth this make ought to confirm your position, or weaken the answer which was truly given? But some thing must be said, whether to or besides the purpose, it matters not.
The matter in hand betwixt you and Mr D. is the absolute necessitie of Church-discipline to the being of a Church; To what end then doe you bring, That the Book of common-prayer used in the Assemblies of England, is an infectious Liturgie, Romish-stuffe, a devised service, raked out of three Romish Channells? That the Ministery of the Church of England is unlawfull and Antichristian! That the Ministery, worship, and government of of England are corruptions! Doth this make ought to confirme your position, or weaken the answer which was truely given? But some thing must be said, whether to or besides the purpose, it matters not.
Another stratagem byou put in practice in the same place, not very commendable. You would seem to confute the D. out of himself. What say you, if it appear that Mr D. arguments, do lead rather to separation, and that he speaketh one thing, and practiseth another; would not this be a strange sight, especially, to himself? Now whether this be so, we will here try by some reasons in his own mood and figure. But though the mood and figure be his, the reasons be your own, and not his, and the conclusions unjustly drawn from the Premises, as the D. answered, and we have showed before. Perhaps in war stratagems may be of use, but in the cause of God such cunning devices are dangerous symptoms. This I note, to entreat your serious reexamination of what you have done: and now I come to the argument here propounded, whereunto I make answer as you relate it, for I have not the D. Book to search out what he hath written.