and affirm that this their true constitution was the reason why they
were not to be separated from: for being a national church, ceremonial
and typical, their excommunication was either putting to death in, or
captivity out of that ceremonial Canaan. Hence Shalmaneser’s carrying the
ten tribes captive out of this land, is said to be the casting of them
out of God’s sight, 2 Kings xvii. [18,] which was their excommunication.
[Sidenote: Death and captivity in the national church, typed out
spiritual death and captivity in the particular.]
Accordingly in the particular Christian churches, Christ Jesus cuts
off by spiritual death, which is excommunication: or for want of due
execution of justice by that ordinance in his kingdom, he sells the
church into spiritual captivity, to confused, Babylonish lords and
worships, and so drives them out of his sight.
[Sidenote: Ceremonial uncleanness in the national church, typed out moral
uncleanness in the particular.]
Now from the consequent of this place in Haggai mine argument stands
good; and Mr. Cotton here acknowledgeth it, that holy things may be all
unclean to God’s people, when they lie in their uncleanness, as this
people did. Those scriptures, Lev. xvi. and Num. xix., which discourse of
typical and ceremonial uncleanness, he acknowledgeth to type out in the
gospel the moral uncleanness either of dead works, Eph. v. 11, or dead
persons, 2 Cor. vi. 14, or dead world, Gal. vi. 14. And in this place
of Haggai, he acknowledgeth that God’s people, prince and people, were
defiled by worldliness, in which condition, saith he, their oblations,
their bodily labours, were all unclean, and found neither acceptance nor
blessing from the Lord.
Therefore saith he afterward: “In the church godly Christians themselves,
while they attend to the world more than to the things of God, are
unclean in the sight of God; therefore the church cannot be constituted
of such; or if it be constitute of such, the people of God must separate
from them.” And, lastly, he saith, “the church of Christ and members
thereof must separate themselves from their hypocrisy, and worldliness,
else they and their duties will [still] be unclean in the sight of God,
notwithstanding their church estate.”
_Answ._ What have I more spoken than Mr. Cotton himself hath uttered in
this his explication and application of this scripture? As,
First, that godly persons may become defiled and unclean by hypocrisy and
worldliness.
[Sidenote: Mr. Cotton’s own confession concerning unclean worships, even
of godly persons.]
Secondly, while they lie in such a condition of uncleanness all their
offerings, persons, labours, are unclean in the sight of God, and have
neither acceptance nor blessing from him; but they and their duties are
unclean in his sight, notwithstanding their church estate.
Thirdly, the church of Christ cannot be constituted of such godly
persons, when defiled with such worldliness.
Fourthly, the church consisting of such worldly persons, though otherwise
godly and Christian, the people of God must separate from them.
[Sidenote: Inferences from Master Cotton’s grant.]
These are Mr. Cotton’s own express words which justify:[257]
First, my former distinction of godly persons in their personal respect,
between God and themselves; and yet becoming ungodly in their outward
defilements.
Secondly, they justify my assertion of a necessity of cleansing from
anti-christian filthiness, and communions with dead works, dead worships,
dead persons in God’s worship, if the touches of the dead world, or
immoderate love of it, do so defile, as Mr. Cotton here affirmeth.
Thirdly, if, as he saith, the church cannot be constituted of such godly
persons as are defiled by immoderate love of the world, much less can
it be constituted of godly persons defiled with the dead inventions,
worships, communions of unregenerate and ungodly persons.
Fourthly, he justifies a separation from such churches, if so
constituted, or so constituting; because though worldliness be adultery
against God, James iv. [4,] yet not comparable to spiritual adultery of a
false bed of worship, ministry, &c.
CHAP. XXI.
_Mr. Cotton_ proceedeth: “The second stumbling block or offence which
you have taken at the way of these churches, is that you conceive us to
walk between Christ and anti-christ. First, in practising separation
here, and not repenting of our preaching and printing against it in our
own country. Secondly, in reproaching yourself at Salem, and others
for separation. Thirdly, in particular, that myself have conceived and
spoken, that separation is a way that God hath not prospered; yet, say
you, the truth of the church’s way depends not upon the countenance of
men, or upon outward peace and liberty.”
Unto this he answers, “that they halt not; but walk in the midst of two
extremes, the one of being defiled with the pollution of other churches,
the other of renouncing the churches for the remnant of pollutions.”
This moderation he, with ingenuous moderation, professeth he sees no
cause to repent of, &c.
_Answ._ With the Lord’s gracious assistance, we shall prove this middle
walking to be no less than halting; for which we shall show cause of
repentance, beseeching Him that is a Prince and a Saviour to give
repentance unto his Israel, Acts v. 31.
First, Mr. Cotton himself confesseth, that no national, provincial,
diocesan, or parish church, wherein some truly godly are not, are true
churches. Secondly, he practiseth no church estate, but such as is
constituted only of godly persons, nor admitteth any unregenerate or
ungodly person.[258] Thirdly, he confesseth a church of Christ cannot be
constituted of such godly persons who are in bondage to the inordinate
love of the world. Fourthly, if a church consist of such, God’s people
ought to separate from them.[259]
[Sidenote: Mr. Cotton extenuates and minceth the root, mass, and
substance of the matter of national churches, which he acknowledgeth
to be unregenerate, not yet born again, by naming only a remnant of
pollutions. The estate of the godly mingled with the ungodly in worships.
The state of men must be faithfully discovered unto them.]
Upon these his own confessions, I earnestly beseech Mr. Cotton, and
all that fear God, to ponder how he can say he walks with an even foot
between two extremes, when, according to his own confession, national
churches, parish churches, yea, a church constituted of godly persons
given to inordinate love of the world, are false and to be separated
from: and yet he will not have the parish church to be separated from
for the remnant of pollution, I conceive he meaneth ceremonies and
bishops, notwithstanding that he also acknowledged that the generality
of every parish in England consisteth of unregenerate persons, and of
thousands inbondaged, not only to worldliness, but also ignorance,
superstition, scoffing, swearing, cursing, whoredom, drunkenness, theft,
lying. What are two or three or more of regenerate and godly persons in
such communions, but as two or three roses or lilies in a wilderness? a
few grains of good corn in a heap of chaff? a few sheep among herds of
wolves or swine, or (if more civil) flocks of goats? a little good dough
swallowed up with a whole bushel of leaven? or a little precious gold
confounded and mingled with a whole heap of dross? The Searcher of all
hearts knows I write not this to reproach any, knowing that myself am
by nature a child of wrath, and that the Father of mercies shows mercy
to whom and when he will; but for the name of Christ Jesus, in loving
faithfulness to my countrymen’s souls, and [in] defence of truth, I
remember my worthy adversary of that state and condition from which his
confessions say he must separate, his practice in gathering of churches
seems to say he doth separate; and yet he professeth there are but some
remnants of pollution amongst them, for which he dares not separate.[260]
CHAP. XXII.
_Mr. Cotton._ “Secondly,” saith he, “I know no man that reproacheth Salem
for their separation, nor do I believe that they do separate; howsoever,
if any do reproach them for it, I think it a sin meet to be censured,
but not with so deep a censure as to excommunicate all the churches, or
to separate from them before it do appear that they do tolerate their
members in such their causeless reproachings. We confess the errors of
men are to be contended against, not with reproaches, but the sword of
the Spirit; but on the other side, the failings of the churches are not
forthwith to be healed by separation. It is not chirurgery but butchery
to heal every sore in a member with no other but abscission from the
body.”
_Answ._ The church of Salem was known to profess separation, and was
generally and publicly reproached, and I could mention a case wherein she
was punished for it implicitly.[261]
[Sidenote: Mr. Cotton seems to be both for and yet against separation.]
Mr. Cotton here confesseth these two things, which I leave to himself
to reconcile with his former profession here and elsewhere against
separation. First, saith he, if any reproach them for separation
it is a sin meet to be censured. Secondly, the churches themselves
may be separated from, who tolerate their members in such causeless
reproachings. In these latter passages he seems, as in other his
confessions and practices mentioned to be for it, sensible of shame,
disgrace, or reproach to be cast on it.
[Sidenote: Mr. Cotton’s own confessions are sufficient answers to
himself.]
I grant with him the failings of churches are not forthwith to be healed
by separation; yet himself, within a few lines, confesseth there is a
lawful separation from churches that do but tolerate their members in
causeless reproaches.
[Sidenote: Not for a sore of infirmity, but a leprosy or gangrene of
obstinacy, ought a person to be cut off. Mr. Cotton deeply guilty of
cruelty both against consciences and bodies in persecuting of them, yet
cries out against the appearance of due severity in the church of Christ.]
I confess also that it is not chirurgery but butchery, to heal every sore
with no other medicine but with abscission from the body: yet himself
confesseth before, that even churches of godly persons must be separated
from, for immoderate worldliness: and again here he confesseth they
may be separated from, when they tolerate their members in such their
causeless reproachings. Beside, it is not every sore of infirmity or
ignorance, but an ulcer or gangrene of obstinacy, for which I maintained
that a person ought to be cut off, or a church separated from. But if
he call that butchery, conscientiously and peaceably to separate from a
spiritual communion of a church or society, what shall it be called by
the second Adam, the Lord Jesus, who gives names to all creatures and all
actions, to cut off persons, them and theirs, branch and root, from any
civil being in their territories; and consequently from the whole world,
were their territories so large, because their consciences dare not bow
down to any worship but what they believe the Lord Jesus appointed, and
being also otherwise subject to the civil state and laws thereof.[262]
CHAP. XXIII.
Thirdly, whereas I urged a speech of his own, _viz._ that God had not
prospered the way of separation, and conceives that I understood him
of outward prosperity: he affirms the puritans to have been worse used
in England than the separatist, and thus writes: “The meeting of the
separatists may be known to the officers in court and winked at, when the
conventicles of the puritans, as they call them, shall be hunted out with
all diligence, and pursued with more violence than any law can justify.”
[Sidenote: God’s controversy for persecution.]
_Answer._ Doubtless the controversy of God hath been great with this
land, that either of both have been so violently pursued and persecuted.
I believe they are both the witnesses of several truths of Jesus Christ,
against an impenitent and unchristian profession of the name of the Lord
Jesus.
[Sidenote: The sufferings of the separatists and puritans in England
compared. Mr. Udall, Mr. Penry, Mr. Barrow, Mr. Greenwood.]
Now for their sufferings: as the puritans have not comparably suffered,
as but seldom congregating in separate assemblies from the common,[263]
so have not any of them suffered unto death for the way of nonconformity
to ceremonies, &c. Indeed the worthy witness Mr. Udall,[264] was near
unto death for his witness against bishops and ceremonies;[265] but Mr.
Penry,[266] Mr. Barrow, Mr. Greenwood followed the Lord Jesus with their
gibbets on their shoulders, and were hanged with him and for him, in the
way of separation:[267] many more have been condemned to die, banished
and choaked in prisons, I could produce upon occasion.
[Sidenote: Few conscientious separatists, but first were puritans. The
nonconformist’s grounds enforce separation.]
Again, I believe that there hardly hath ever been a conscientious
separatist, who was not first a puritan: for, as Mr. Canne hath
unanswerably proved,[268] the grounds and principles of the puritans
against bishops and ceremonies, and profaneness of people professing
Christ, and the necessity of Christ’s flock and discipline, must
necessarily, if truly followed, lead on to and enforce a separation from
such ways, worships, and worshippers, to seek out the true way of God’s
worship according to Christ Jesus.
But what should be the reason, since the separatist witnesseth against
the root of the church constitution itself, that yet he should find, as
Mr. Cotton saith, more favour than the puritan or nonconformist?
[Sidenote: Most of the separation of the lower sort of people.]
Doubtless the reasons are evident: first, most of God’s servants who,
out of sight of the ignorance, unbelief, and profaneness of the body of
the national church, have separated and durst not have longer fellowship
with it:—I say, most of them have been poor and low, and not such gainful
customers to the bishops, their courts and officers.
[Sidenote: The poverty of Mr. Ainsworth. The nonconformists have been a
fair booty for bishops.]
That worthy instrument of Christ’s praise, Mr. Ainsworth, during some
time, and some time of his great labours in Holland, lived upon ninepence
per week, with roots boiled, &c.[269] Whereas on the other side, such of
God’s servants as have been nonconformists have had fair estates, been
great persons, have had rich livings and benefices, of which the bishops
and theirs, like greedy wolves, have made the more desirable prey.
[Sidenote: The separatists have been professed enemies; but the puritans
in many things professed friends and subjects to the bishops.]
Secondly, it is a principle in nature to prefer a professed enemy, before
a pretended friend. Such as have separated have been looked at by the
bishops and theirs, as known and professed enemies: whereas the puritans
professed subjection, and have submitted to the bishops, their courts,
their officers, their common prayer and worships: and yet, as the bishops
have well known, with no greater affection than the Israelites bore their
Egyptian cruel taskmasters.
[Sidenote: Mr. Cotton.]
He saith, “God hath not prospered the way of separation with peace
amongst themselves, and growth of grace.”
[Sidenote: A false church may enforce a present peace greater (though
false) grace than the true spouse of Christ Jesus. God’s people have
found infinite sweetness and peace in some times of their holy communion.
Breaches have been and must be among all God’s people, to make them
celebrate the Lord’s holy ordinances according to due order.]
_Answer._ The want of peace may befal the truest churches of the Lord
Jesus [as] at Antioch, Corinth, Galatia, who were exercised with great
distractions. Secondly, it is a common character of a false church,
maintained by the smith’s and cutler’s shop, to enjoy a quiet calm and
peaceable tranquillity, none daring, for fear of civil punishment, to
question, object, or differ from the common road and custom. Thus sings
that great whore, the anti-christian church, Rev. xviii. [7,] _I sit as
a queen, am no widow, see no sorrow_: while Christ’s dearest complains
she is forsaken, sits weeping as a widow, Lam. i. [1.] Thirdly, God’s
people in that way, have sometimes long enjoyed sweet peace and soul
contentment in England, Holland, New England, and other places, and
would not have exchanged a day of such an holy and peaceable harmony for
thousands in the courts of princes, seeing no other, and in sincerity
seeking after the Lord Jesus. And yet, I humbly conceive, that as David
with the princes, and thirty thousand Israelites, carrying the ark on the
shoulders of the oxen, leaped and danced with great rejoicing, until God
smote Uzzah for his error and disorder, and made a breach, and a teaching
monument of Perez Uzzah, the breach of Uzzah: so in like manner all those
celebrations of the spiritual ark or ordinances, which yet I have known,
although for the present accompanied with great rejoicing and triumphing,
yet as they have not been after the due order, so have they all met with,
and still must, a Perez Uzzah, breaches and divisions, until the Lord
Jesus discover, direct, and encourage his servants in his own due holy
order and appointment.
[Sidenote: Many graceless Judases amongst God’s people. Multitudes of
gracious and holy persons that have professed separation.]
And for growth in grace, notwithstanding that amongst all sorts of
God’s witnesses some false brethren creep in as cheaters, and spies,
and Judases, dishonouring the name of Christ Jesus, and betraying his
witnesses: yet Satan himself, the accuser of the saints, cannot but
confess that multitudes of God’s witnesses, reproached with the names of
Brownists, and anabaptists, have kept themselves from the error of the
wicked, and grow in grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus, endeavouring
to cleanse themselves from all filthiness both of flesh and spirit, and
to finish holiness in the fear of God. I will not make odious and envious
comparisons, but desire that all that name the name of the Lord Jesus
may depart wholly and for ever from iniquity.
CHAP. XXIV.
[Sidenote: Mr. Cotton.]
Lastly he addeth, “That such as erring through simplicity and tenderness,
have grown in grace, have grown also to discern their lawful liberty in
the hearing of the word from English preachers.”[270]
[Sidenote: Four sorts of backsliders from separation far from growth in
grace.]
_Answer._ I will not question the uprightness of some who have gone
back from many truths of God which they have professed: yet mine own
experience of four sorts who have backslidden I shall report, for a
warning to all into whose hands these may come, to be like Antipas, Rev.
ii. [13,] a faithful witness to the death, to any of the truths of the
Lord Jesus, which he shall please to betrust them with:
[Sidenote: Some backsliding turn to familism.]
First, I have known no small number of such turn to absolute Familism,
and under their pretences of great raptures of love deny all obedience
to, or seeking after the pure ordinances and appointments of the Lord
Jesus.
[Sidenote: Some to profaneness.]
Secondly, others have laid the reins upon the necks of their consciences,
and like the dog licked up their vomit of former looseness and
profaneness of lip and life; and have been so far from growing in grace,
that they have turned the grace of God into wantonness.
[Sidenote: Some to persecuting of others.]
Thirdly, others backsliding have lost the beauty and shining of a tender
conscience toward God, and of a merciful compassion toward men, becoming
most fierce persecutors of their own formerly fellow-witnesses, and of
any other who have differed in conscience from them.
[Sidenote: Some to languishing in sorrow and sadness, &c.]
Lastly, others although preserved from familism, profaneness, and
persecuting of others, yet the leaf of their Christian course hath
withered, the latter beauty and savour of their holiness hath not been
like their former; and they have confessed and do, their sin, their
weakness, their bondage, and wish they were at liberty in their former
freedom; and some have gone with little peace, but sorrow to their
graves, confessing to myself and others, that God never prospered them,
in soul or body, since they sold away his truth, which once they had
bought and made profession of it never to sell it.
CHAP. XXV.
[Sidenote: Mr. Cotton.]
Yea; but, saith he, “they have grown to discern their lawful liberty, to
return to the hearing of the word from English preachers.”
[Sidenote: Mr. Canne’s answer to Mr. Robinson’s liberty of hearing.]
_Answer._ Here I might engage myself in a controversy, which neither
this treatise will permit, nor is there need, since it hath pleased the
Father of lights to stir up the spirit of a faithful witness of his truth
in this particular, Mr. Canne, to make a large and faithful reply to a
book, printed in Mr. Robinson’s name, tending to prove such a lawful
liberty.[271]
[Sidenote: Mr. Cotton’s confession concerning the ministry.]
For such excellent and worthy persons whom Mr. Cotton here intends by
the name of English preachers, I acknowledge myself unworthy to hold
the candle to them: yet I shall humbly present what Mr. Cotton himself
professeth in three particulars:
First, concerning this title, English preachers.
Secondly, hearing the word from such English preachers.
Thirdly, the lawful calling of such to the ministry or service, according
to Christ Jesus.
[Sidenote: ποίμενες διδασκαλοὶ ἐπισκοποὶ πρεσβυτεροὶ Matt. xxviii.
μαθητέυειν. Preachers and pastors far different.]
For the first, he acknowledgeth, that the ordinary ministers of the
gospel are pastors, teachers, bishops, overseers, elders, and that
their proper work is to feed and govern a truly converted, holy, and
godly people, gathered into a flock or church estate; and not properly
preachers to convert, beget, make disciples, which the apostles and
evangelists professedly were. Now then, that man that professeth himself
a minister, and professeth to feed a flock or church with the ordinances
of word and prayer, he must needs acknowledge that his proper work is not
to preach for conversion, which is most preposterous amongst a converted
Christian people, fed up with ordinances in church estate. So that,
according to Mr. Cotton’s confession, English preachers are not pastors,
teachers, bishops, elders, but preachers of glad news, evangelists, men
sent to convert, and gather churches, apostles, ambassadors, trumpeters,
with proclamation from the King of kings, to convert, subdue, bring in
rebellious, unconverted, unbelieving, unchristian souls to the obedience
and subjection of the Lord Jesus.
[Sidenote: Conversion in a church accidental.]
I readily confess that at the pastor’s, or shepherd’s feeding of his
flock, and the prophet’s prophecying in the church, an unbeliever coming
in is convinced, falls on his face and acknowledgeth God to be there:
yet this is accidental that any unbeliever should come in; and the
pastor’s work is to feed his flock, Acts xx. [28,] and prophecy is not
for unbelievers, but for them that believe, to edify, exhort, and comfort
the church, 1 Cor. xiv. 3, 22.
[Sidenote: Personal repentance wrought in thousands by godly persons in
popish ministries.]
I also readily acknowledge, that it hath pleased God to work a personal
repentance in the hearts of thousands in Germany, England, Low Countries,
France, Scotland, Ireland, &c., yea, and who knows but in Italy, Spain,
Rome, not only by such men who decline the name of bishops, priests,
deacons, the constituted ministry of England hitherto; but also by
such as have owned them, as Luther remaining a monk, and famous holy
men remaining and burning Lord Bishops. For all this hath been under
the notion of ministers feeding their flocks, not of preachers sent to
convert the unconverted and unbelieving.