A30189:538
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 3 › ANSWER.Chapter 3 › Section 3 › 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.
ANSWER.
ANSVVER.
IF your meaning be as the ordinary signification of the words import, it is not to the purpose, for it is one thing in our own persons to practice according to the ordinance of Christ, another, to separate from that society, which doth not practice in all things according to the institution of our Saviour. But you give cause to think, that by these words (erecting this power, and exercising the same among them) you mean, that they are to separate and draw themselves into such a society, where they may exercise that power. For thus you write; I do not mean, 1that any private person should meddle with the affairs of the Realm, but that every one in his own person, do place himself about the throne of God, leaving the abuses of the public State•, to be reformed by such as have a calling thereto. And if this be your mind in that clause, you greatly wrong the Nonconformists, and reformed Churches, in charging them with this position. For it is their direct assertion to the contrary, that for want of orderly administration of discipline, Christians are not to separate from the true and sound Churches of Jesus Christ. Your phrase likewise of placing themselves about the throne of God, is in no sort approved of them, or of the truth it self: As if none were placed about the throne of God, or God did not graciously vouchsafe his presence unto, or reign over any assembly, wherein discipline is not rightly and orderly in all points administered.
IF your meaning be as the ordinary signification of the words import, it is not to the purpose, for it is one thing in our owne persons to practice according to the ordinance of Christ, another, to separate from that societie, which doth not practice in all things according to the institution of our Saviour. But you give cause to thinke, that by these words (erecting this power, and exercising the same among them) you meane, that they are to separate and draw themselves into such a societie, where they may exercise that power. For thus you write; I doe not meane,