Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	author_n	church_n	scripture_n	2,947	5	6.3449	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A93884	The second part of the duply to M.S. alias Two brethren. Wherein are maintained the Kings, Parliaments, and all civil magistrates authority about the Church. Subordination of ecclesiasticall judicatories. Refuted the independency of particular congregations. Licentiousnesse of wicked conscience, and toleration of all sorts of most detestable schismes, heresies and religions; as, idolatry, paganisme, turcisme, Judaisme, Arrianisme, Brownisme, anabaptisme, &c. which M.S. maintain in their book. With a brief epitome and refutation of all the whole independent-government. Most humbly submitted to the Kings most excellent Majestie. To the most Honorable Houses of Parliament. The most Reverend and learned Divines of the Assembly. And all the Protestant churches in this island and abroad. By Adam Steuart. Octob. 3. 1644. Imprimatur Ja: Cranford.; Duply to M.S. alias Two brethren. Part 2.	Steuart, Adam.	1644 (1644)	Wing S5491; Thomason E20_7; ESTC R2880	197,557	205

viz. One individuall Body actually existent cannot at one time be in divers totall places to be true For the Scripture poseth it not formally but presupposeth it to be true Now I pray you M.S. shew me wherein any Presbyterians contradict these Assertions that I have laid down you name none and therefore I am not bound to answer Only you say I contradict my selfe But wherein Because saith M.S. I say p. 27. § 3. 1. Subordination between superiour and inferrour Ecclesiasticall Iudicatories is partim juris Divini partim Natura lis aut mixti 2. This Subordination c. needs not any patterne expresly and formally from Christ It sufficeth that it have one from Nature p. 36. § 2. 3. And yet we can shew a patent for it not only from the Law of Nature which should suffice but also from the Law of Grace in the Old and New Testaments 4. It is only from God that can give power to any man in his Church pag. 48. 5. Only Gods Word is the rule or measure in matter of Ecclesiasticall or Presbyteriall Government p. 61. 6. Combined Presbyteries judge of Points of Doctrine and Discipline already revealed in the holy Scripture and give us new Ecclesiasticall Lawes of things indifferent p. 34. Answ In my second Proposition he putteth Patterne for Patent 2. Here in all these Propositions there is no contradiction neither sheweth M.S. wherein it consisteth here It may be partim juris Divini and partim Humani 1. In respect of its divers parts whereof some may be revealed in Scripture and some proved by Naturall reason 2. In respect of the same parts which may be both known by Nature and by Divine revelation or some supervenient Divine Ordinance So Divines hold that we know God to be both by Naturall Knowledge and Supernaturall Revelation 3. In so far forth as that which is juris Naturalis is also juris Divini when jus Divinum supposeth jus Naturale for in such a case jus Naturale becommeth Divinum not Thetically but Hypothetically not by any formall Divine Position but by some Divine reall Supposition as I shew it cleerly in that passage of my Book that he citeth p. 36. These three last Propositions contradict not the rest For in the 4. Proposition p. 48. of my Book I speak not of the ground of Ecclesiasticall Discipline nor of it all only I say that it is not in Church-Ministers power to transferre the Ecclesiasticall power unto the Civill Magistrate Which contradicteth not the first three In the 5. Only Gods Word c. But 1. Gods Word there must not be taken strictly for that which is Gods Word formally in terminis Theticè but in a more large signification 1. For Gods Word formally or by consequence 2. In terminis aut in sensu 3. Theticè aut Hypotheticè by some Position or Supposition 3. If ye take Gods Word in the last sense then Discipline or Government must be taken for Discipline in its essentiall and principall integrant parts and not in all its accidentall and circumstantiall parts Neither is it needfull that we have any particular rules from Scripture for every circumstance of Doctrine or Discipline As for example That Sermons should be on such or such Week-dayes so long viz. an houre or two houres long in the morning or afternoon That Ecclesiasticall Senates should sit once a day once a week or once a moneth In the 6. Proposition 1. Discipline there must be taken for Discipline quoad Essentialia Substantialia Necessaria and not quoad Accidentalia Circumstantialia Contigentia Indifferentia as appeareth by my words in the last part thereof New Ecclesiasticall Lawes in things indifferent c. 2. Holy Scripture must be taken in a large signification as I have already declared for so only is it taken by our Doctors when we prove against the Papists that it is the only Rule of Faith In the 2. Position when I say Subordination needeth not c. the word needeth must not be taken for necessarium absolutè or quoad esse but secundum quid ad bene esse not to its being but to its well-being for howbeit Christ had not given us any patent of Subordination in Ecclesiasticall Judicatories in the Gospel yet the Law of Nature and the Scripture of the Old Testament had been sufficient to direct us therein and had bound the Church of the New Testament to the Presbyterian Government And this M. S. acknowledgeth himselfe howbeit not without some Comedian jeeres more ordinary with him then any apparent Reason and confesseth that the words following in the 3. Proposition declare it But put the case that Presbyterians differed as he saith whether it be juris Divini Naturalis aut Humani as they differ not for any thing I know or have read Yet they agree in this That it is Juris Confesse this and ye may live in a Fraternall communion with us for the Difference viz. If one say it is juris Divini another Naturalis another Ecclesiastici will not breed a Schisme for it is not a Dispute de re sed de modo rei to know whether it proceedeth from God as Author of the Law of Nature or of Grace by a Naturall or a Positive Law Much lesse materiall is it to know whether it be in Scripture explicitè or implicitè formaliter aut per consequentiam in terminis aut in sensu et consequenter Theticè or Hypotheticè CHAP. III. Containing the Arguments whereby we prove the Opinion of the Orthodoxe Churches against the Independents borrowed from the Old Testament THe Arguments that might be brought for the Orthodox Churches against all Sectaries are many whereof I will touch a few some from Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and others from reason founded on Scripture but to proceed more cleerly I intend to prove 1. That in Scripture there is more then a Congregationall Independent Church 2. a Subordination of Churches and that in Authority Whether in Scripture or in Reason we find more then a Congregationall Church We affirme and prove it thus 1. Such a Church and Church-government as was amongst the people of God in the Old Testament and is not abrogated in the New may be admitted amongst his people in the New But a Church and Church Government more then Congregationall and Independent was amongst the people of God in the Old Testament and is not abrogated in the New Testament Ergo A Church and Church Government more then Congregationall and Independent may be admitted amongst his people in the New Testament As for the first Proposition I beleeve our Adversaries will not deny it for if it was in the Old Testament it was either by Gods Ordinance or by his Approbation If God ordained it how can they abolish it If he approved it how can they reprove it And for the Assumption I prove it 1. For they had a Nationall Church God dealt not so vvith every Nation Psal 147.19 20.

further confirmed by sundry other Texts of Scripture and 9. by Act. 20.7 8 9. There was such a throng at St. Pauls Sermon which he made in an upper Chamber in the night upon occasion of his departure from Troas that Eutychus and doubtlesse also some others were forced to sit in the windows note that this was in the night what a throng might there have been had it been on the Day time out of all doubt the Chamber would not have held them all but certainly they could not meet every Lords-day in any one Roome such as were their places of meeting in those times and consequently there must have been there more then one of the Independent Congregationall Churches 10. We have also cleer Texts of Scripture to prove that the Church is taken for a greater then for any Independent Congregation as Act. 8.1 And at that time there was a great persecution against the Church that was at Hierusalem This Persecution was not against one onely Independent Congregationall Church but against the whole Churches of Iudea 11. So in the same Chap. vers 3. Saul made havocke of the Church And chap. 9.1 breathing out threatnings and slaughter against the Disciples of the Lord now of this Church some members were in Damascus v. 2. so he sayes of himselfe I persecuted the Church 1. Cor. 15.9 Phil. 3.6 from whence I argue thus The Church that Saul persecuted was greater then a particular Congregation or an Independent Church But the Church here meant is that which Saul persecuted Ergo The Church here meant is greater then a particular Congregation The Minor is certain the Major I prove it for he persecuted not one onely particular Congregation but that wherever there were Disciples of the Lord chap. 9.1 in Hierusalem chap. 8. vers 1.3 and in Damascus chap. 9. v. 1.2 12. And Act 12.1 Herod the King stretched out his hand to vex certaine of the Church Here the word Church must signifie more then a particular Congregation for Herod did it to pleasure the Iewes which he could not have done in vexing the members of one particular Church alone 2. Because here must be meant the Church whereof Peter was a Member v. 3. which was not one particular Church alone but that of all Judea since Peter and John had a particular Vocation Mission or Commission to teach there as Paul to the Gentiles Gal. 2.7 or rather of the whole Militant Church of their time since they were Apostles or Vniversall Ministers of the Gospel 3. Because if the Church here signifie a particular Church whereof Peter and Iames were Members then that Church might have deposed them of their Ministery For the Independents grant this Authority to their Churches over their Pastors And if it be said that they have it over particular but not over universall Pastors as the Apostles Ergo. If they acknowledge them to be universall Pastors they must have universall Flocks or Churches so there was an universall Militant Church upon Earth whereof they were Pastors in their time which is more then a particular Congregation 4. Put the case they had been but Ministers of particular Churches or Congregations yet must the word Church there signifie a Church whereof they were both Members for such a Church is meant here v. 7.2 3. But such a Church must be more then a particular one for it must containe both their Churches and Persons since they are called some of the Church i. e. of one Church 13. So vers 5. But Prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God for him i. e. for Peter who was in Prison And out of all doubt this was not one onely Independent Church but all the Churches that knew of Peters imprisonment and depended upon him as upon their Pastor 14. Give no offence neither to the Jewes nor to the Gentiles nor to the Church of God 1 Cor. 10.32 which cannot be a simple Independent Church but all the Churches we converse with 1. for Charity bindeth us to give no offence to all or any of them 2. Because this Church is called the Church of God which cannot be restrained to one particular Church if they be all the Church of God 3. Because it is opposed to the Iewes and the Gentiles 15. Because the Church wherein God did place Apostles and Evangelists 1. Cor. 12.28 was not an Independent Congregation but more for they were universall Ministers of the Militant Church of their time now if there be an universall Militant Church through all the world how much rather may we admit a Provinciall or Nationall Church 16. I had rather speak five words saith St. Paul with my understanding in the Church then c. 1. Cor. 14.19 This Church wherein the Apostle desires to speake is more then an Independent Congregation for he was not tyed to any particular Congregation 17. The Apostle willeth women to keepe silence in the Churches 1. Cor. 14.38 and these Churches are called the Church It is a shame for a Woman to speake in the Church vers 35. which cannot be a particular Congregation for he willeth them not to speake in any Church We may bring many other Passages of Scripture and Reasons but because they serve both for this and the next Conclusion therefore to decline repetitions we remit them unto that Conclusion CHAP. VII The Second Conclusion concerning the Subordination of Authority in the Church SEcondly I say Conclus that betwixt the Churches of God there should be some Subordination in authority i. e. such as wherein the judgements of inferior Churches and their proceedings may be subject unto the judgement of the Superiour Church whereunto they are Subordinate And this may be proved sufficiently from all the Testimonies of Scripture aleadged for the former Conclusion For if there be a Church more then a particular Congregationall viz. Provinciall or Nationall out of all doubt the particular Congregations must be subject to them 1. because a part is subject unto the whole as the hand unto the whole body nam pars magis sui totius quam sui item because the part is for the whole as a medium for its end now the Mediums must be subject unto their Ends and not the Ends unto their Mediums and Media commensurantur finibus non fines Mediis neither shape we the horse back for the saddle but the saddle for the horse his back so the government of particular Churches must not be shaped or framed according to their particular exigencies and conveniencies alone but according to that of the whole Provinciall Nationall and Universall Militant Church here upon Earth in such a manner that it hinder it not 2. Particularly it may be proved from the Custome of the Old Testament which is not abrogated in the New for therein the Iudgements of Synagogicall Assemblies were subject unto that of the middle Sanedrim and that of the middle to that of the Supreme or if there were onely two that of the

under the notion of Apostles and Church-Ministers endowed with extraordinary gifts and namely of Infallibility governed the whole Church extraordinarily so doe Generall Councels endowed with ordinary gifts govern it ordinarily 14. I would willingly enquire of the Independents to what Church were added so many thousands that were baptized by the Apostles and added unto the Church in one day Whether to a Particular Congregation or to a greater Ecclesiasticall Consociation It could not be to a Particular Congregation 1. For the Reasons I have already produced 2. Because the Apostles were not Particular but Universall Ministers set over the Universall Militant Church and therefore in vertue of their charge admitted them to be Members of all the Churches whereof they were Ministers 3. Because they were of divers and sundry Countries neither is it credible that to be a Member of the Church they were bound to quit their Countries and to stay at Hierusalem howsoever so long as they did stay there they might participate as well of all the rest of Gods Ordinances as of Baptisme Ergo they were added to some greater Consociation viz. to that and to all those whereof the Apostles were Ministers for out of all doubt the Apostles who baptized them could not refuse to admit them unto the Lords Table wherever they celebrated the Sacrament If it be answered That this Argument only proveth a greater Reall but not a greater Representative Church I reply That directly only it proveth a greater Reall viz. an Vniversall Militant Church but yet by consequence it proveth also a Representative Church of the same extent for every Reall Church may be represented in its Commissioners or Messengers as ye call them that meet in a Synod If it be yet answered that this may prove a greater Representative Church but not endowed with any Authoritative power I reply It is a power of Iudging which must be Authoritative and cannot be meerly Consultative such as is that of every Tinker who may give counsell to a Church and that of one Church which hath power to give counsell to a thousand yea to ten thousand represented in a Synod for particular Churches being parts of the whole Provinciall Nationall or Universall Militant Church must be subject to the whole for it is a Maxime in Philosophie that Totum non subjicitur parti sed pars toti Item Totum non regitur motu partis sed Pars Totius And they distinguish between the Universall and Particular Inclination of things and tell us That a part doth sometimes quit its Particular Inclination to be ruled according to the Inclination of the whole as when water which according to its Particular Inclination descends yet to avoid the vacuum whereof might ensue the overthrow of the world against its Particular Inclination but according to its Universall Inclination as it is for the Totall it ascends And so it is or should be in Politicall and all Spirituall Consociations for the parts cannot be conserved but in the whole The Politicians also tell us that Lex paerticularis cedit generali so Laws that concern Particular Cases or Consociations must give place to the generall Law of more generall Cases and Consociations for the generall good of Consociations is to be preferred before the Particular good of Particular Persons or Particular Consociations 15. All the Churches here upon Earth make up one Republike tyed together by Faith Charity and other Particular Christian vertues as that in Heaven another Now it is a Maxime in Politicks Salus Reipub. suprema Lex esto Ergo There must be one Law common to this whole Christian Republike If so Ergo There must be some visible Iudges to judge according to this Law otherwayes in vain should we have it Now this visible Iudge can be no other but a Synod For if ye say it is Christ then we cannot be legally Iudged according to this Law till the day of Iudgement when Christ shall Iudge the quick and the dead which is most ridiculous 16. C. C. acknowledgeth That by Baptism we are made Members of the Universall Militant Church and consequently Subjects of some Christian Republike Ergo There are some Iudges to judge such Subjects But those Iudges are not in one Particular Church for by Baptism as he sayeth They are not admitted to the societie of any Particular Church Ergo They must be judged by some greater Representative Church which must be either Classicall Provinciall Nationall or Oecumenicall 17. It is a generall Rule of S. Paul in matter of Church Government That the Spirits of Prophets be subject to Prophets 1 Cor. 14 32. Which cannot at all or at least cannot easily and commodiously be obtained in the Independent Opposition or Coordination as in some Subordination of Ecclesiasticall Assemblies or Iudicatories for when all are equall there is no subjection of one to another 18. This Doctrine of Subordination of Inferiour Ecclesiasticall Iudicatories to their Superiours with a Coordination of Inferiour Iudicatories or Ecclesiasticall Assemblies amongst themselves is most convenient to the nature of the Sacraments in receiving unto them all such as are our Brethren in Christ whereas a meer Opposition Independency or at most a Coordination of Churches founded on a meer will and charitie without any Law is repugnant to it in so far forth as it debarreth from them such as are worthy to be received 19. The Apostle commands That all things be done decently and in order 1 Cor. 14.40 And telleth us That God is not the Author of Confusion but of Peace Vers 33. Now where there is no Subordination of Ecclesiasticall Judicatories When none of them is subject one to another but they are all equall when one Church be she never so corrupted in life and Doctrine hath as great Authority over all the Churches of the World represented together in a Synod be they never so sound in their life and Doctrine as they all have over her What can be done decently and in order I adjure you all tell me in Conscience Whether ye think that God can be the Author of any such order or rather of so abominable a confusion 20. I could shew how that this Subordination is most convenient and the contrary Independency Opposition or Coordination of Churches founded on mans meer will is most repugnant 1. unto the perfection that appeareth in all Gods Works both in those of Nature and of Grace 2. To Gods Truth and Wisdom in giving no better means for redressing of Offences 3. To his Iustice in making of Laws that cannot suppresse Heresies and all sort of wickednesse in disordered Churches 4. To his Mercy that in furnishing us so graciously so many means and helps to Salvation he should have given us this Independent Anarchy to crosse them all yea to lead us irresistibly to Hell 5. To his Providence in providing of means so disproportionate and incommensurated for so excellent an end viz. for the peace of the Church means more fit to trouble then to

of the Christian Church 2. Because a Pagan qua talis knoweth not the Principles of Christian Religion and consequently wants the Directive power without the which he can never well or justly use the Imperative or Executive power 3. Because without the knowledge of our Religion he can neither direct nor act any thing about the Church or for the Church but by conjecture or guessing at it 4. Because God never ordained any such Externall power for Pagans about the Church 5. To end my answer to this Argument Where learned M. S. to desire him that denieth any thing to prove his negation Nonne Affirmantis est probare The Scripture conteineth not formall rules or testimonies of meere Negations or of things that are not but of Affirmations and things that are Now M.S. that affirmeth a thing to be might more easily have found authorities for it in Scripture if any such had been then we for things that are not It is enough for me to say that the Scripture that conteineth all things needfull to salvation conteineth no Extrinsecall power in actu exercito for Civill Magistrates that are not Christians M.S. But hath not then an Heathen or Heterodox Magistrate power to doe good to the Church A.S. Ans 1. The Heathen Magistrate hath a Naturall but not a Morall publique power or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to doe good to the Church 2. Or if he hath it he hath it not in actu exercito as I have already proved 3. Or if he hath it so he hath it not to doe good to the Church in quality of a Church for neither can he know or love the Church in quality of a Church but of men or members of the State for the Church in quality of a Church is no wayes the object of his Knowledge or Will He may doe it as an Asse that carrieth the corne to the Mill or as Caiaphas who judged that one man must dye for the People but knew not what he said He cannot doe it by any power Intrinsecall to the Church as M.S. pretends And howbeit I should grant unto a Iew or a Pagan a Civill power to doe good to the Church both in actu signato and exercito yet from thence cannot be concluded an Intrinsecall or Ecclesiasticall power belonging to a Iew a Pagan or to an Antichristian to rule the Church Internally M. S. p. 48. § 13. of this Chapter durst not answer A.S. what he meaneth by the Civill Magistrate upon whom he would seem to bestow such a power but in stead of Answer racketeth it back to him with jeering and babling But I answer him 1. that Quaestio Quaestionem non solvit one Question satisfieth not another 2. I answer that the Magistrate who I beleeve should have such a power in actu exercito must be such as is not a professed Enemy to the true Religion at least in quality of a Magistrate or in his Lawes And so it is false that M.S. saith of the King for in quality of King he hath professed Presbyterian Discipline in Scotland in as much as he confirmed it by his Authority so hath he done in England in favour of the French Dutch Italian and Spanish Churches so did King James by his Divines approve the Presbyterian Discipline at the Synod of Dort So M. S. sees how much he hath deceived himselfe in looking for 20 Distinctions of me to answer him to this Question We answer him candidè in all simplicity and feare not to declare to the World what we hold as the Sectaries doe M.S. p. 49. § 15. Was it not lawfull for them i. e. unchristian Kings to interpose with their Authority that the Churches of Christ in their Dominations might lead a quiet and peaceable life in all Godlinesse and honestie If not then was that exhortation 1 Tim. 2.2 to be laid up in Lavender for some hundreds of yeers after it was given or else the benefit and blessing the obtaining whereof by prayer is made the ground of the exhortation must have been made over in the intentions of those that had so prayed unto their posterities after many generations A.S. 1. This Argument proveth not that any Magistrate either Christian or other hath any Intrinsecall power in the Church either Directive or Executive 2. It proveth not that an unchristian Magistrate hath any power in actu exercito in the Church 3. As for that Text 1 Tim. 2.2 the sense of the Text is that we should pray for the conversion of Kings to the Gospel which appeareth evidently by the Apostles reason v. 3. 4. For saith he this is good and acceptable in the sight of God v. 4. who will have all men saved and come unto the knowledge of the truth And another reason v. 6. For Christ gave himselfe for all men And another v. 7. Because the Apostle is a Preacher of the Gospel to all men Now these words That we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all Godlinesse and Piety expresse finem intentum sed non eventum not the Event but the End intended by the Christians who prayed for they obteined not in those times a quiet or a peaceable life under the Heathen Kings 2. Neither prayed they here that any Nero should have had the Government of the Church in his hand for they obeyed him not neither in Doctrine nor in Discipline M.S. p. 50. § 17. doth nothing but repeat what he hath said viz. That the Civill Magistrate in taking away Superstition and Heresie had need of some other security then the Synod can give him A.S. The Civill Magistrate as a Christian man must learne Gods will by all the meanes that God hath appointed him viz. 1. By reading of Scriptures 2. Comparing one Scripture with another 3. Conferring in private about Scriptures of any difficulties he hath with other Christians of whom he may learn any thing 4. Hearing of Sermons 5. As a Magistrate he must have a Politicall prudence and knowledge of Scriptures to direct him in judging about Superstition Heresie and matters of Religion 6. He must serve himselfe of prayer and all the rest of the meanes that God hath ordained him 7. Neither say we that he must be directed by a Synod alone This is one of the meanes that God hath ordained him in his Providence but not all as this M. S. falsely would perswade the Reader if he be not altogether impertinent Whether in the Militant visible Church there should be any Subordination in Ecclesiasticall Judicatories CHAP. I. Containing the State of the Question TO the end we may the better and more easily resolve this Question it will not be amisse to note concerning the word Church 1. That we mean not here the Triumphant Church in Heaven but the Militant upon Earth 2. That it is not meant touching the invisible Church viz. The Church of Beleevers compounded of men and women endowed with Justifying Faith which is invisible to us but of the visible Church

qua Rex or qua Carolus Rex Lex viva and under this notion he is not his own carver but the Law carveth for him and us both neither can he serve himselfe of other mens Estates c. but in so far as the Law permitteth him But how much the Law permitteth him it is not for every particular person nor for every particular and inferior Iudicatory to define it for Inferiors qua tales cannot judge their Superiors at least ordinarily and in such a case they remaine no more Inferiors but become Superiors To the 3. Inconveniencie which I note § 9. M.S. retorteth it in this manner Tell me plainly and distinctly what Power more your Government giveth to a thousand Churches over one then to a Tinker or the Hangman over a thousand A.S. Answ When they are represented in a Representative Church they have a spirituall Authoritative power over all the Churches that they represen both Collectivè and every one of them Distributivè which no Tinker or Hangman hath either over many or any one of them for they have no Authoritative power at all But amongst the Independents a thousand Churches whether they be taken Distributivè or Collectivè representing all their particular Congregations have no Authoritative power at all and consequently no more then a Tinker or a Hangman M.S. What makes you think that the Government of the Apologists gives no more power to a thousand Churches over one then to a Tinker or Hangman over a thousand Vbi quando quibus testibus did this Government or any Son it hath ever make any such comparison A.S. 1. I say not that you make any such comparison but only I deduce it out of your Tenets by necessary consequence 2. Neither doe you deny my consequence you grant it freely and tell me that it is no disparagement for a thousand Churches that a Tinker or a Hangman have as much Authoritative power over them all as they have all over any particular Church And to confirme it you bring me no Reason nor Scripture but two Testimonies the first of Charron who saith That every Humane Proposition hath equall authority if Reason make not the difference To which I answer 1. That this is but an Humane Authority 2. Of a Papist 3. And as many in France think of an Atheist 4. And yet it may be granted in this sense viz. That it hath as much Naturall but not so much Morall authority for these be Maximes in Nature and in Reason Magis credendum pluribus quàm paucioribus testimonio publico quàm privato sapientibus quam insipientibus peritis quam imperitis videntibus quàm audientibus Plus valet oculatus testis unus quàm auriti decem 5. I answer that every Humane Proposition hath equall authority according to the species of its authority but not according to the degrees thereof as all white colours are equally white according to their species since the definition of white belongeth equally to them all unlesse you say that Album est genus analogum respectu hujus istius magis minus albi which no true Philosopher to my knowledge ever granted But not according to the graduall latitude of perfection conteined within the species of Whitenesse 6. And here I ask of M.S. whether he thinketh that a Proposition of Indas and of S. Peter or Adam before his fall be all of equall authority Item Whether a Proposition of Adam before his fall and after his fall be of equall authority Item Whether a Proposition of Christ qua homo or as proceeding from his Humane Nature be of no more authority then that which proceeds from Simon the Magician If I had leasure here to dispute about the foundation of Authority I might shew many absurdities and impertinencies in this Proposition in M. S. his sense but I must be briefe The second Authority is of Gerson and is this The saying of a simple man and no wayes authorized if he be well seen in the Scriptures is rather to be believed then the Popes own determination But this Proposition is not against me for a man well seen in Scriptures qua talis speaketh according to Gods Word and is some wayes authorized by it but the Popes Determination without Gods Word is meerly Humane yea ordinarily passionate M. S. confesseth ingenuously that I propound many more Inconveniencies against Independencie but out of modesty he will not answer them Only here I note that M.S. in all this his Discourse answereth very little to my Arguments and objecteth rather against our Doctrine then justifieth his own And to elude my Arguments pretends evermore ignorance of things that are most easie and obvious to all men which neverthelesse I expound most cleerly sometimes he contemneth them as unworthy of any Solution which is a very odde and new Independent way a la mode CHAP. V. M. S. his first two Reasons for Independency with the Solutions thereof M. S. with other Independents prove their Independent Government of every particular Congregation by some frivilous Reasons The first is this If a single Congregation being solitary and without Neighbours hath entirenesse of Jurisdiction Ergo every single Congregation hath it But the first is true according to the Presbyterians Confession Ergo so must the second be also A. S. I deny the first Proposition or rather distinguish it in this manner If a single Congregation have entirenesse of Iurisdiction absolutely it is true but then the Assumption or second Proposition is false If a single Congregation have it secundum quid viz. In case of Solitarinesse as it is expressed in the first Proposition or in case of any other necessity that hindereth its consociation with Neighbour Churches as distance of place persecution c. then all other particular Churches must have it in the same case it is true But I deny that such is the case of all single Congregations for they are not all remote from all Neighbourhood of other Churches nor are they all hindered by persecution c. M. S. But when a solitary Congregation hath an entire Jurisdiction then certainly it hath a lawfull right title or claime to it Ergo She hath it evermore A.S. 1. She hath a lawfull right by a generall Law of necessity whereby it is ordained that when we have not all the best helps that are necessity to do the best we are then to serve our selves with the best we can and such as we have at hand to serve God by So if we have not Wine to celebrate the Lords Supper with we may celebrate it with some other liquour most usuall for drinke and there is an Article in the French Discipline whereby it is permitted to any man that cannot drinke wine to communicate in participating only of the Bread So if men be cast upon any Island very remote from the Continent and have none amongst them endowed with sufficient abilities to preach or teach them they may chuse the ablest howbeit he be not