REVELAT .18.5.

And I heard another voyce from heauen
say, Goe out of her my people, that ye be not
partakers of her sinnes, and receiue not of her
plagues.

IN the former chapter S.
Iohn sets down a description
of the whore of Babylon,
and that at large as
he saw her in a vision described
vnto him. In the
sixteenth verse of the same chapter, he foretells
her destruction: and in the three first
verses of this 18. chapter, he goeth on to propound
the said destruction yet more directly
and plainly; withall alledging arguments
to prooue the same, in all the verses following.
Now in this fourth verse is set downe a
caueat seruing to forewarne all the people
of God, that they may escape the iudgement

A1

which shall befall the whore: and the words
containe two parts: a commandement, and
a reason: the commandement, Come out of
her my people, that is, from Babylon: the reason,
taken from the euent, least ye be partakers,
&c. Touching the commaundement,
first I will search the right meaning of it,
and then set downe the vse thereof and doctrine
flowing thence. In historie therfore
are three Babylons mentioned: one is, Babylon
of Assyria standing on the riuer Euphrates,
where was the confusion of languages,
and where the Iewes were in captiuitie:
which Babylon is in Scripture reproched
for idolatry and other iniquities. The second
Babylon is in Egypt standing on the riuer
Nylus, and it is now called Cayr: of that me~tion
is made 1. Pet. 5. v. 13. (as some thinke)
though indeede it is as likely and more commonly
thought, that there is meant Babylon
of Assyria. The third Babylon is mysticall,
whereof Babylon of Assyria was a type and
figure; and that is Rome, which is without
question here to be vnderstoode. And the
whore of Babylon, as by all circumstances

may be gathered, is the state or regiment
of a people that are the inhabitants of Rome
and appertaine thereto. This may be prooued
by the interpretation of the holy Ghost:
for in the last verse of the 17. chapter the
woman that is the whore of Babylon is said
to be A citie which raigneth ouer the Kings
of the earth: now in the daies when S. Iohn
penned this booke of Revelations, there was
no citie in the worlde that ruled ouer the
kings of the earth but Rome; it then beeing
the seat where the Emperour put in execution
his Imperiall authoritie. Againe in the
seuenth verse shee is saide to sit on a beast hauing
seauen heads and ten hornes: which seuen
heads be seuen hills, v. 9. whereon the
woman sitteth: and also they be seuen kings.
Therefore, by the whore of Babylon is ment
a citie standing on seuen hills. Now it is well
knowne, not onely to learned men in the
Church of God, but euen to the heathen
themselues, that Rome alone is the citie built
on seuen distinct hills, called Cælius, Aventinus,
Exquilinus, Tarpeius or Capitolinus,Viminalis,
Palatinus, Quirinalis. Papists, to

A2

helpe themselues, doe alledge that old Rome
stood on seuen hills, but now is remooued
further to the plaine of Campus Martius. I
answer, that howsoeuer the greatest part of
the citie in regard of habitation be not now
on seuen hills, yet in regard of regiment and
practise of religion it is: for euen to this day
vpon these hills are seated certaine Churches
and Monasteries & other like places where
the Papal Authoritie is put in execution: and
thus Rome beeing put for a state and regiment;
euen at this day, it stands vpon seuen
hills. And though it become to passe that the
harlot in regard of her latter daies haue cha~ged
her seate, yet in respect of her yonger
times in which she was bred and borne, shee
sate vpon the seuen hills. Others, because
they feare the wou~ding of their own heads,
labour to frame these wordes to an other
meaning, and say, that by the whore, is ment
the company of all wicked men in the world
wheresoeuer, the deuill being the head therof.
But this exposition is flat against the text:
for in the second verse of the 18. chapter, shee
is opposed to the kings of the earth with

4

whome shee is said to commit fornication:
and in the last verse shee is called a citie standing
on seuen hills and raigning ouer the
kings of the earth (as I haue said,) & therfore
must needes be a state of men in some particular
place. And the Papists themselues perceiuing
that this shift will not serue their
turne, make two Romes, heathenish Rome,
and that whereof the Pope is head: now (say
they) the whore spoken of, is heathenish
Rome, which was ruled by cruell tyrants, as
Nero, Domitian, & the rest: and that Rome
whereof now the Pope is head, is not here
meant. Behold a vaine and foolish distinction:
for Ecclesiasticall Rome in respect of
state, princely dominion, and crueltie in persequuting
the Saints of God, is all one with
the heathenish Empire: the See of the Bishop
beeing turned into the Emperours court, as
all histories doe manifest. But let the distinction
be as they suppose, yet by their leaues,
here by the whore must be vnderstood not
onely heathenish Rome, but euen the papall
or Ecclesiasticall Rome: for v. 3. of this chapter
the holy Ghost saith plainely, that shee

A3

hath made all nations drunke with the wine
of the wrath of her fornication: yea it is added,
that shee hath committed fornication
with the kings of the earth, whereby is signified
that shee hath endeauoured to intangle
all the nations of the earth in her spirituall idolatrie,
and to bring the kings of the earth
to her religion. Which thing cannot be vnderstoode
of the heathenish Rome, for that
left all the kings of the earth to their owne
religion and idolatrie: neither did they labour
to bring forraine kings to worshippe
their gods. Againe chapt. 18. v. 16. it is saide,
that the ten hornes, which be ten kings, shall
hate the whore, and make her desolate and
naked, which must not be vnderstoode of
heathenish Rome, but of popish Rome: for
whereas in former times all the kings of the
earth did submit themselues to the whore,
now they haue begun to withdraw themselues,
and make her desolate; as the king of
Bohemia, Denmarke, Germanie, England,
Scotland, and other parts: therefore this distinction
is also friuolous. They further alledge
that the whore of Babylon is drunke

with the bloode of the Saints and Martyrs,
cap. 17.6. shedde not in Rome, but in Ierusalem:
where the Lord was crucified: and the
two prophets beeing slaine lie there in the
streetes, Rev.11.18. But this place, Rev. 11. is
not meant of Hierusalem, as Hierome hath
fully taught, but it may well be vnderstoode
of Rome: Christ was crucified there, either
because the authoritie, whereby he was crucified
was from the Romane Empire, or els
because Christ in his members was and is
there daily crucified, though locally in his
owne person he was crucified at Ierusalem.
And thus, notwithstanding all which hath
bin said, we must here by the whore vnderstand
the state and Empire of Rome, not so
much vnder the heathen Emperours as vnder
the head thereof the Pope: which exposition,
besides the authoritie of the text, hath
the fauour and defence of auncient and learned men.
Bernard saith, They are the ministers
of Christ, but they serve Antichrist.
Againe, The beast spoken of in the Apocalyps,
to which a mouth is giuen to speake blasphemies,
and to make warre with the Saints of

A4

God, is now gotten into Peters chaire, as a lyon
prepared to his praie. It will be saide, that
Bernard speakes these latter wordes of one
that came to the Popedome by intrusion or
vsurpation. It is true indeed: but wherefore
was he an vsurper? he rendereth a reason
thereof in the same place: because the Antipope
called Innocentius was chosen by the
kings of Almaine, France, England, Scotla~d,
Spaine, Hierusalem, with consent of the
whole Cleargie and people in these nations,
and the other was not. And thus Bernard
hath giuen his verdict that not onely this
vsurper, but al the Popes for this many yeres
are the beast in the Apocalyps: because now
they are onely chosen by the colledge of
Cardinalls. To this agreeth the decree of
Pope Nicholas the second, ann. 1059. that
the pope shall afterward be created by the
suffrages of the Cardinall bishops of Rome,
with the consent of the rest of the cleargie
and people, and the Emperour himselfe: and
all Popes are excommunicate & accursed as
Antichristes, that enter otherwise, as al now
doe. Ioachimus Abbas saith, Antichrist as

8

long since borne in Rome, and shall be yet aduanced
higher in the Apostolike See. Petrach
saith, Once Rome, now Babylon. And Ireneus
booke 5. chap. last, said before al these,
that Antichrist should be Lateinus, a Romane.
Again this co~mandeme~t must not so much
be vnderstoode of a bodily departure in respect
of cohabitatio~ & presence, as of a spirituall
separatio~ in respect of faith & religion.
And the meaning of the holy Ghost is, that
men must depart from the Romish Church
in regard of Iudgement and doctrine in regard
of their faith and the worship of God.
Thus then we see that the words containe
a commaundement from God, inioyning
his Church and people to make a seperation
from Babylon. Whence I obserue,
That all those who will be saued, must depart
and seperate them selues from the faith and
religion of this present Church of Rome. And
whereas they are charged with scisme that
seperate thus from them; the truth is, they
are not scismatikes that doe so, because they
haue the commandement of God for their

9

warrant: and that partie is the scismatike in
whome the cause of this seperation lieth: and
that is in the church of Rome, namly the cup
of abomination in the whores hand, which
is, their hereticall and scismaticall religion.
Now touching this dutie of seperation
I meane to speake at large, not standing so
much to prooue the same, because it is euident
by the text, as to shew the manner and
measure of making this seperation: & therin
I will handle two things. First how farforth
we may ioyne with them in the matter of
religion: secondly how farforth and wherein
we must dissent and depart from them.
And for this cause I meane to make choice
of certaine points of religion, and to speake
of them in as good order as I can, shewing
in each of them our consent and difference:
and the rather because some harpe much vpon
this string, that a vnion may be made of
our two religions, and that we differ not in
substance but in points of circumstance.
The first point wherewith I meane to beginne
shall be the point of Freewill: though
it be not the principall.

10

I. Our consent.

Freewill both by them and vs, is taken
for a mixt power in the minde and will of
man; whereby discerning what is good and
what is euill, he doth accordingly choose
or refuse the same.
I. Conclusion. Man must be considered
in a foure-fold estate, as he was created, as he
was corrupted, as he is renewed, as he shalbe
glorified. In the first estate, we ascribe to
ma~s wil libertie of nature in which he could
wil or nil either good or euil: in the third liberty
of grace, in the last libertie of glorie. Al
the doubt is of the second estate: and yet
therein also we agree, as the conclusions following
will declare.
II. Conclus. The matters where about
freewill is occupied are principally the actions
of men, which be of three sorts, natural,
humane, spirituall. Naturall actions are such
as are co~mon to men with beasts, as to eate,
drinke, sleepe, heare, see, smell, taste, and to
moove from place to place: in all which we
ioyne with the Papists, and hold that man

hath freewil, and euen since the fall of Adam
by a naturall power of the mind doth freely
performe any of these actions or the like.
III. Conclus. Humane actions are such
as are common to all men good and bad, as
to speake and vse reason, the practise of all
mechanicall and liberall artes, and the outward
performance of civill and ecclesiasticall
duties, as to come to the Church, to
speake, and preach the word, to reach out
the hand to receiue the sacrament, and to
lende the eare to listen outwardly to that
which is taught. And hither we may refer
the outward actions of civil vertues: as namly,
Iustice, temperance, gentlenes, liberalitie.
And in these also we ioyne with the church
of Rome & say (as experience teacheth) that
men haue a naturall freedome of will, to put
them or not to put them in execution. Paul
saith, Rom. 2.14. The Gentiles that haue not
the lawe doe the things of the law by nature,
that is by naturall strength: and he saieth of
himselfe, that before his conversion touching
the righteousnes of the lawe, he was unblamable.
Phil. 3. 6. And for this externall obedience,

naturall men receiue reward in
temporal things. Mat. 6. 5. Ezech. 29. 19. And
yet here caveats must be remembred, I. that
in humane actions mans will is weake and
feeble, and his vnderstanding dim & darke,
and therevpon they often faile. And in these
things I vnderstand the wil of man to be only
wounded or halfe dead. II. That the will
of man is vnder the will of God, and therefore
to be ordered by it; as Ieremy saith, cap.
10. v. 23. O Lord I knowe that the way of man
is not in himselfe: neither is it in man to
walke or direct his stepps.
IIII. Conclus. The third kind of actions
are spirituall more neerely concerning
the heart and conscience, and these be twofold:
they either concerne the kingdome of
darkenes, or els the kingdome of God.
Those that concerne the kingdom of darknes
are sinnes properly: and in these we likewise
ioyne with the Papists and teach, that in
sinnes or evill actions man hath freedome of
will. Some peradventure will say that we
sinne necessarily, because he that sinneth cannot
but sinne: and that free will and necessitie

cannot stand togither. Indeede the necessitie
of compulsion or coaction, and free will cannot
agree: but there is an other kinde of necessitie
which may stand with freedome of
wil: for some things may be done necessarily
and also freely. A man that is in close prison
must needes there abide and cannot possibly
get foorth and walke where he will; yet can
he move himselfe freely and walke within
the prison: so likewise, though mans will be
chained naturally by the bondes of sinne, and
therefore cannot but sinne: and therevpon
sinneth necessarily, yet doeth it also sinne
freely.
V. Conclus. The second kinde of spiritual
actions or thinges, concerne the kingdome
of God: as repentance, faith, the conversion
of a sinner, newe obedience and such
like: in which we likewise in part ioyne
with the Church of Rome and say that in
the first conversion of a sinner, mans free will
concurrs with Gods grace, as a fellowe or
coworker in some sort. For in the conversion
of a sinner three thinges are required: the
word, Gods spirit, and mans will: for mans

will is not passiue in all and euery respect,
but hath an action in the first conversion
and change of the soule. When any
man is converted, this worke of God is not
done by co~pulsion, but he is converted willingly:
& at the very time when he is co~verted,
by Gods grace he wils his co~version. To
this end said Augustine, He which made thee
without thee, wil not saue thee without thee.
Again, that is certen that our wil is required
in this that we may do any good thing wel: but
we haue it not from our owne power but God
workes to will in vs. For looke at what time
god giues grace, at the same time he giueth
a wil to desire & wil the same grace: as for exa~ple
whe~ God works faith, at the same time
he works also vpon the wil causing it to desire
faith and willingly to receiue the gift of
beleeuing. God makes of the vnwilling will
a willing will: because no man can receiue
grace vtterly against his will, considering
will constrained is no will. But here we
must remember, that howsoeuer in respect
of time the working of grace by Gods spirit
and the willing of it in man goe togither:

yet in regard of order, grace is first wrought,
and mans will must first of all be acted and
moved by grace, and then it also acteth, willeth,
and moveth it selfe. And this is the last
point of consent betweene vs and the Roman
Church touching free will: neither
may we proceed further with them.

II. The dissent or difference.

The point of difference standeth in the
cause of the fredome of mans will in spirituall
matters which concerne the kingdome
of God. The Papists say, mans will concurreth
& worketh with gods grace in the first
conversion of a sinner by it selfe, and by it
owne naturall power; and is onely helped by
the holy ghost. We say, that mans will worketh
with grace in the first conversion, yet
not of it self, but by grace. Or thus They say,
will hath a naturall cooperation: we deny
it, and say it hath cooperation onely by
grace, being in it selfe not actiue but passiue;
willing well onely as it is mooued by grace,
whereby it must first be acted and mooued

before it can act or will. And that we may
the better conceiue the difference, I will vse
this comparison: The Church of Rome
sets forth the estate of a sinner by the condition
of a prisoner, and so doe we: marke the~
the difference. It supposeth the said prisoner
to lie bound hand and foote with chaines &
fetters, and withall to be sicke and weake,
yet not wholly dead but liuing in part: it supposeth
also that being in this case, he stirreth
not himselfe for any helpe, and yet hath abilitie
and power to stirre. Hereupon if the keeper
come & take away his bolts and fetters,
and hold him by the hand, and help him vp,
he can and will of himselfe stand and walke
and goe out of prison: euen so (say they) is a
sinner bound hand and foot with the chaine
of his sinnes; and yet he is not dead but sicke,
like to the wounded man in the way betweene
Ierico and Ierusalem. And therefore
doeth he not will and affect that which is
good; but if the holy Ghost come and doe
but vntie his bands, and reach him his hand
of grace, then can he stand of himselfe and
will his owne saluation, or any thing els that

B1

is good. We in like manner graunt, that a
prisoner fitly resembleth a naturall man, but
yet such a prisoner must he be, as is not onely
sicke and weake but euen starke dead;
which cannot stirre though the keeper vntie
his bolts and chaines, nor heare though
he sound a trumpet in his eare; and if the said
keeper would haue him to mooue & stirre,
he must giue him not onely his hand to help
him, but euen soule and life also: and such a
one is euery man by nature; not onely chained
and fettered in his sinnes but starke dead
therein; as one that lieth rotting in the graue,
not hauing any abilitie or power to mooue
or stirre: and therefore he can not so much
as desire or doe any thing that is truly good
of himselfe, but God must first come and
put a new soule into him, euen the spirit of
grace to quicken and reuiue him: and then
beeing thus reuiued, the will beginneth to
wil good things at the very same time, whe~
god by his spirit first infuseth grace. And this
is the true difference betweene vs and the
Church of Rome in this point of freewill.

18

III. Our reasons.

Now for the confirmation of the doctrine
we hold, namely, that a man willeth
not his owne conuersion of himselfe by nature,
but by grace wholly & alone; these reaso~s
may be vsed. The first is taken fro~ the nature
and measure of mans corruptio~, which
may be distinguished into two parts: the first
is the want of that originall righteousnes,
which was in man by creation: the second
is, a prones and inclination to that which is
euil, and to nothing that is truly good. This
appeareth Gen. 8.21. The frame of mans
heart (saith the Lord) is euill, euen from his
childhood: that is, the disposition of the vnderstanding,
will, affections, with all that the
heart of man deuiseth, frameth, or imagineth,
is wholly euill. And Paul saith, Rom. 8.
5. The wisdom of the flesh is enmitie against
God. Which words are very significant: for
the word NoValue translated wisdome, signifieth
that the best thoughts, the best desires,
affections, and endeauours that be in any
naturall man, euen those that come most

B2

neare to true holines, are not onely contrary
to God, but euen enmitie it selfe. And hence
I gather, that the very heart it selfe, that is, the
will and minde, from whence these desires
and thoughts doe come, are also enmitie vnto
God. For such as the action is, such is the
facultie whence it proceedeth; such as the
fruit is such is the tree; such as the branches
are such are the rootes. By both these places
it is euident, that in man there is not onely a
want, absence, or depriuation of originall
righteousnes, but a prones also by nature vnto
that which is euill: which prones includes
in it an inclination not to some fewe, but to
all and euery sinne; the very sinne against the
holy Ghost not excepted. Hence therefore
I reason thus:
If euery man by nature doe both want original
iustice, and he also prone vnto
all euill, then wanteth he natural free
will to will that which is truly good.
But euery man by nature wants originall
iustice, and is also prone vnto all euill.
ergo: Every man naturally wants free
will, to will that which is good.

20

Reason II. 1. Cor. 2.14. The naturall
man perceiveth not the things of the
Spirit of God: for they are foolishnes vnto
him, neither can he know them, because
they are spiritually discerned. In these
words Saint Paul sets downe these points: I.
that a naturall man doeth not so much as
thinke of the things reuealed in the Gospell.
II. that a man hearing, and in minde conceiuing
them; can not giue consent vnto
them, and by naturall iudgement approoue
of them; but contrariwise thinketh them to
be foolishnes. III. that no man can giue
assent to the things of God, vnlesse he be enlightened
by the spirit of God. And hence I
reason thus;
If a man by nature doth not know and perceiue
the things of God: and when he
shall know them, can not by nature giue
assent vnto them: then hath he no power
to will them.
But the first is euidently true. ergo.
For first the minde must approoue & giue
assent, before the will can choose or will:
and when the mind hath not power to conceiue

B3

nor giue assent, there the will hath no
power to will.
Reason III. Thirdly the holy Ghost auoucheth,
Eph. 2. 2. Coloss. 2. 13. that all men
by nature are dead in sinnes and trespasses:
not as the Papists say, weak, sick, or half dead.
Hence I gather, that man wanteth naturall
power not to will but freely and franckly
to will that which is good. A dead man in
his graue cannot stir the least finger, because
he wants the very power of life, sense, & motio~;
no more can he that is dead in sin, wil the
least good: nay if he could either will or doe
any good, he could not be dead in sinne. And
as a dead man in the graue, cannot rise but by
the power of God; no more can he that is
dead in sinne rise, but by the power of Gods
grace alone, without any power of his
owne.
Reason IV. Fourthly, in the conuersion
and saluation of a sinner, the Scripture ascribeth
all to God, and nothing to mans freewill.
Ioh. 3.3. Except a man be borne againe
he cannot see the kingdome of God. Eph. 2.10.
We are his workemanship created in Christ

22

Iesus to good workes. And c. 4. v. 24. the new
man is created to the image of God. Now
to be borne againe, is a work of no lesse importance
then our first creation; and therefore
wholly to be ascribed to God as our
creation is. Indeede Paul Philip 2.12, 13. biddeth
the Philippians worke out their saluation
with feare and trembling not meaning
to ascribe vnto the~ power of doing good
by themselues. And therefore in the next
verse he addeth, It is God that worketh both
the will and the deede: directly excluding all
naturall freewill in things spirituall; and yet
withall he acknowledgeth, that mans will
hath a worke in doing that which is good,
not by nature but by grace. Because when
God giues man power to will good things,
then he can will them: and when he giueth
him a power to doe good, then he can doe
good, and he doth it. For though there be
not in mans conuersion a naturall cooperation
of his will with Gods spirit, yet is there
a supernaturall cooperation by grace, enabling
man when he is to be conuerted, to
will his conuersion: according to which S.

B4

Paul saith, 1. Cor. 15. 10. I haue laboured in the
faith: but least any man should imagine, that
this was done by any naturall power: therefore
he addeth, yet not I, that is, not I by any
thing in me, but Gods grace in me, inabling
my will to doe the good I doe.
Reason V. The iudgement of the auncient
Church. August. The will of the regenerate
is kindled onely by the holy Ghost; that
they may therefore be able because they will
thus: and they will thus, because God workes
in them to will. And, We haue lost ovr
freewil to loue God by the greatnes of our
sinne. Serm .2. on the words of the Apostle.
Man when he was created receiued great
strength in his freewil: but by sinning he lost
it. Fulge~tius, God giueth grace freely to the
vnworthie, whereby the wicked man being
iustified is inlightened with the gift of
good wil, and with a faculty of doing
good: that by mercie preuenting him, he
may begin to wil wel, and by mercie co~ming
after, he may doe the good he will Bernard
saith, It is wholly the grace of god
that we are created, healed, saued. Council.

Arausic. 2.c.6. To beleeue and to will is
given from aboue by infusion, and inspiration
of the holy Ghost. More testimonies and
reasons might be alleadged to prooue this
conclusion, but these shall suffice: now let vs
see what reasons are alledged to the co~trary.

III. Obiections of Papists.

Obiect. I. First they alledge that man by
nature may doe that which is good, & therfore
will that which is good: for none can
doe that which he neither willeth nor thinketh
to doe, but first he must will and then
doe. Now (say they) men can doe good by
nature, as giue almes, speake the truth, doe
iustice, and practise other duties of ciuil vertues
and therefore will that which is good.
I answer, that a naturall man may do good
workes for the substance of the outward
worke: but not in regard of the goodnes of
the manner: these are two diuers things. A
man without supernaturall grace may giue
almes, do iustice, speake the truth, &c. which
be good things considered in themselues as
God hath commanded them; but he cannot

doe them well. To thinke good things and
to doe good things are naturall workes: but
to thinke good things in a good maner, and
to doe them well, so as God may accept the
action done, are works of grace. And therefore
the good thing done by a naturall man
is a sinne, in respect of the doer: because it
failes both for his right beginning, which is
a pure heart, good conscience, & faith vnfained;
as also for his ende which is the glorie
of God.
Obiect. II. God hath commanded all
men to beleeue and repent: therefore they
haue naturall freewil, by vertue whereof being
helped by the spirit of God, they can beleeue
and repent. Answ. This reason is not
good: for by such commaundements God
sheweth not what men are able to doe; but
what they should do, and what they can not
doe. Againe, the reason is not well framed,
it ought rather to be thus: Because God
giues men commaundement to repent and
beleeue, therefore they haue power to repe~t
& beleeue, either by nature or by grace;
& then we hold with them. For when God

26

in the Gospell commandeth men to repent
and to beleeue, at the same time by his grace
he inableth them both to will or desire to
beleeue and repent, as also actually to repent
and beleeue.
Obiect. III. If man haue not freewill
to sinne or not to sinne, then no man is to be
punished for his sinnes: because he sinneth by
a necessitie not to be auoided. Answ. The
reason is not good: for though man can not
but sinne, yet is the fault in himselfe, & therefore
he is to be punished: as a bankrupt is not
therefore freed from his debts, because he is
not able to pay them: but the bils against him
stand in force, because the debt comes thorough
his default.