8. and last exception Now for allowing of the plaintiffe to seek further remedy of the referring of the party obstinate vnto him which is the sum of the sixt Arg as also of these terms let him be to thee as an heathen and publican which is an other exception together with that consideration that the party offended is the principall in all the degrees of proceeding I have formerly spoken in the exposition of the words to which the reader is to look back for answer if such idle conjecture give any cause of doubt to any One onely blow more is to be warded by which Mr B. would disable this 18. of Math. from being any rule of discipline and that is bycause it provides not for suspension we grant it doth not and you your self half graunt that no such thing is to be found in the new testament And what reason haue you or any other man to put vs to prove your corruptions and devises which you know we neyther practise nor allow of These things thus ended and the received exposition of Math. 18. confirmed viz that Christ in it prescribes a rule of discipline in the Church I come to your reasons Mr B. in your first book by which you would prove that this Church is the chief governours The first whereof is that Christ could not be understood eyther then or now except he spake as the practise was then or took some order afterward and so you go about to prove vnto vs that the chief governours onely had authoritie to excommunicate both in the synagogues and in the Church of Corinth To this I answer sundry things First it followes not that Christ was not then or cannot now be vnderstood except he spake with some such reference as you note The words are so plaine the order so equall the state of the Church vnder the new testament which is not as before nationall but a particular assembly so capable of such an ordinance as that laying aside prejudice and politick respects there can be nothing more playnely spoken or more easily vnderstood 2. It doth no way prejudice the exposition we give though the disciples for the present vnderstood it not they vnderstood litle no not touching the death and resurrection of Christ or nature of his kingdome when they were at the first taught them till eyther by their own experience or by the extraordinary gift of the Holy Ghost or some other meanes the thinges formerly taught them were brought to their remembrance Mat. 16. 21. 22. 20. 20. 21. Mark 16. 14. Luk. 24. 20. 21. 22 25. 26. -44. And it is expressely affirmed Act. 1. 3. that the Lord Iesus did the 40. dayes before his ascension instruct them in such things as concerned the kingdome of God which is the Church The next thing to be considered is your proofs from scripture that the power of excommunication was in the chief governours But the places proove no such thing Ioh. 9. 22. and 12. 42. 16. ◠do onely prove an agreement amongst the Iewes that such as confessed Christ should be dissynagogued but that this authority was onely in the hands of the chief governours cannot be thence collected I know there was at Ierusalem a representative Church for the whole nation of which we shall speak hereafter but that there was such a Church representative in every synagogue furnished with such power can never be concluded frō these scriptures They rather in deed prove the contrarie It is sayd Ioh. 9. 22. that the Iewes had ordeyned that such as confessed Christ should be dissynagogued which words do rather interest the people in the busines then otherwise If you think that because there is mention made of the Pharisees the officers onely are meant you are deceived For Pharisaism amongst the Iewes was not an office but a sect There were no other lawfull officers ecclesiasticall amongst them but the Levites whom the Lord took from among the children of Israel in stead of the first borne for his service but many of the Pharisees were of other tribes Phil. 3. 5. Besides I see no sufficient reason to perswade me that this casting out of the synagogue was any ecclesiasticall censure but rather a violent rejection or extrusion out of the place as nothing was more cōmon then such tumultuous outrages in those dayes And the very same word that Iohn vseth ch 9. ver 35. Luke vseth ch 4. 28. 29. for the violent extrusion of Christ himself by the Iewes vpon the like occasion both out of the synagogue and citie The same also doth Iohn himself vse ch 2. 15. speaking of Christs casting the mony chaungers out of the temple And yet neyther the NAZARITES excommunicate CHRIST nor CHRIST the mony-chaungers But if there were amongst the Iewes at that tyme any such distinct ordinance of excommunication ecclesiasticall it was a Iewish devise I am perswaded and without ground of the scriptures and that for these causes First every blasphemer or worshipper of vnknowen Gods was by the law of Moses to dy the death without redemption that so evill might be put from Israell Exod. 22. 20. Lev. 24. 16. Deut. 13. 6. 7. 8. 9 12. 13. 14. 15. And so the Iewes reputing this blind man such a one were to put him to death but being deprived of this power by the Romayns through the just judgement of God for their sinnes they devised this other course of dissynagogueing or excommunicating offendours by them so deemed Secondly the severall synagogues were not distinct Churches but members of that one nationall Church which was both representatively and originally at Ierusalem neyther could any of them excommunicate out of the temple which was a higher communion then theirs and so it is very probable that Christ found this blind man afterwards in the temple Ioh. 9. 38. compared with 10. 22. into which had he been ecclesiastically excommunicated he might not haue entred neyther hangs it together that any rejected in the communion of the synagogue might be received in the communion of the temple 3. The Lord did chuse the whole nation of the Iewes to be his peculiar people and took all and every one of them into covenant with himself gave them the Land of Canaan for an inheritance as a type of the kingdome of heaven erected a policy over them civil ecclesiasticall in the judiciall ceremonial law called the old testamēt making the same persons all of them though in divers respects the Church the cōmon wealth whervpō the Church is also called the common wealth of Israel Exod. 19. 5. 6. Lev. 20. 24. 26. Deut. 4. 6. 7. 29. 2. 10. 11. 12. Ios. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Rom. 9. 4 Ephe. 2. 12. Hence it followeth that except a man might enjoy one type of the kingdom of heavē as was the Land of Canaā not an other as was the temple or tabernacle Heb. 9. 24. except he might be
vnder one part of the old testament or covenant of God namely the judicial law for the common wealth and not vnder an other part of it the ceremoniall law for the Church it cannot be that any such ordinance as excommunication could be vsed lawfully in the Iewish Church Yet do I not deny but that the lepers other persons legally vnclean were for a time debarred froÌ„ the coÌ„munioÌ„ of the Church and from all the sacrifices and services thereof but this inhibition say I was no way in the nature of an excommunication For first it was for ceremoniall vncleannes issues leprosy and the like which were not sinnes but punishments of sinnes at the most 2. It did not onely exclude men from the communion of the Church but of the common wealth also and the affaires thereof 3. It did not agree in the end with excommunication The end of excommunication is the repentance of the party excoÌ„municated 1 Cor. 5. 5. but the person legally vncleane whether he repented or no was to bear his shame till the date of his time were out yea to his dying day if his disease continued so long Lev. 12. 13. 14. Num. 5. 2. 3. 4. 12. 10. 14. 2 Chron. 26. 19. 20. 21. A type I confesse it was of excommunication as legall pollution was of morall sin whence I also conclude that the type and thing typed outwardly could not both stand together But here it vvilbe demaunded of me did not the Lord require in the Iewish Church true morall and spirituall holynes also God forbid I should run vpon that desperate rock of Anabaptistry The Lord was holy then as now and so would have his people be then holy as now Yea so jealous was the Lord over his people that he took order then as well as now that no sin should be suffered vnreformed no obstinate sinner vncut off Some sinnes were of that nature as he that committed them was by the law to dy the death without pardon or partialitie so to be cut off from the Lords people Lev. 20. And when other sinnes not of that nature were committed whether of ignorance or otherwise the party offending was to be told and admonished of his offence and so to manifest his repentance by the confefsâ—on of his sinne and professioÌ„ of his faith in the mediatour by offering his appointed sacrifice and so his sinne was forgiven him Lev. 4. 13. 14. 15. 20. 21 23 26. 27. 28. 35. 5. 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. 10. 19. 17. Num. 5. 6. 7. But now if there were with the least sinne joyned obstinacy or presumption the party so sinning was to be cut off from his people Num. 15. 30. 31. 32. 34. 36. Deut. 17. 12. and for this cause the Iewes were so oft admonished to destroy the workers of wickednes that there should be no wickednes amongst them that they should take away evil from Israel and from forth of the middest of them And vpon this ground doth David as the cheif Magistrate whom this busines cheifly concerned vow his service vnto God in this kind and that he would even betimes destroy all the wicked of the land that he might cut off the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord though he afterwards fayled in the execution of this dutie And to the very same end did Asa the King with all the people enter a covenant of oath to seek the Lord God of their fathers with all their hart and with all their soule and that whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be slaine whether be were small or great man or woman To end this point vpon which I have insisted something the longer for sundry purposes in their place to be manifested as the Lord vsually conveyed spirituall both blessings and curses vnto the Iewes vnder those which were bodily so here was the spirituall judgement of excommunication comprehended vnder this bodily judgement of death by which the party delinquent was wholy cut off visibly from the Lords covenant and people That which you adde of Cloes coÌ„plaint made to the cheif governour the Apostle is true but misapplyed You make an erroneous collection from it out of your owne lamentable experience Bycause your Church of Worxsop can reforme no abuse within it self but must complain to your Lords grace of York or his substitute therfore you imagine the Church of Corinth to have been in the same boÌ„dage wherein you are and Cloe to have complayned to Pauls court But it is playn Mr B. to them that do not shut their eyes and harden their hearts against the truth that the Church of Corinth was planted in the liberty of the gospell and had this power of Christ to reform abuses and to excommunicate offenders without sending to Paul from one part of the world to an other and that the Corinthians Ch. 5. are reproved for fayling in this duty And had Mr B. but taken this course in his writing that two of his leaves had hung together he might have spared this objection considering what he writ pag. 92. that the same persons have the power to preach administer the sacraments and excommunicate for that he meanes by government Now he cannot be ignorant that both the power and practise of preaching administring the sacraments were in the Church of Corinth in Pauls absence 1 Cor. 11. 20. 14. 1. c. And so by your own graunt the Church of Corinth had power to excommunicate though Paul were absent Wherevpon I also infer it was their sinne not to vse it Now for the practise of Cloes family wee know Paul was an Apostle and generall Officer and so intitled to the affaires in all the Churches in the world wherevpon Cloe complayned vnto him of such abuses in the Church as were both of publick nature and which the Church vvould not reform otherwise it had been both slaunder and solly to have complayned And what corne doth this winde shake Do wee make it vnlawfull for any member to informe the officers of publique enormities in the Church that they according to their places might see reformation of them Yea if the Pastor or other principall Officer of the Church were absent necessarily we doubt not but it were the duety of any brother or brethren in the like case to entreat their help for the direction reproofe and reformation of the Church for any publick enormities there done or suffered who might also judge and condemne the same themselves and for their parts exhorting and directing the whole Church in their publique meeting to do the like as Paul did Your three next Arguments to prove that tell the Church is tell the Officers are idle descants vpon the formes and phrases of speach scraped together to fill your book with First you affirm that Christ having spoken in the third person tell the Church when he comes to ratify the authoritie to be committed to his Apostles turnes his
contention as they and a thowsand worse evils could not but fall out in a Church gathered as yours is of all the prophane rable in a kingdome so when they do arise in a true Church there is power to voyd them out and the persons with them in whom they reigne But if the vnlawfulnes of a Church government might be proved by the pryde contention the like evils arising in it then surely M B. you that know so well how these and other mischeifs reign in your own should lay your hand on your mouth for shame and be affrayd to provoke any man to medle in that mattâ—â— Besides it is apparent both in the scriptures and ecclesiasticall writers that not onely pride and contention but herely and almost all other evils haue sprung from the officers governours in the Church And surely nothing hath more in former dayes advanced nor doth at this day more vphold the throne of Antichrist then the peoples discharging themselves of the care of publique affaires in the Church on the one side and the Preists and Prelates aâ—rogating all to themselves on the other side Lastly the word Church you say must be expounded figuratively to avoid the absurdâ—tâ—s which eâ—s would necessarily follow out of the text viz that the whole Church must speak ioyntly which were confusion contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 40. that women must medle in Church affaires which the Apostle forbids ver 34. that children must speak which were impossible so then it must needs â—e taken figuratively the part for the whole and if one part must be left out why not an other till the cheif of the Congregation be taken who are chosen by the rest as their mouth Touching the exception of confusion I desire the reader to remember what hath been formerly answered adding further that Mr B. herein doth not oppose vs but the Apostles and Apostolicall Churches governed by them yea the H. Ghost it self propounding their examples for our imitation The Apostle Peter Act. 1. 15. c. standing vp in the middest of the disciples which were about an hundred and twenty spake to them about the choise of one to succeed Iudas and it is sayd ver 23. that they that is these brethren to whom he spake presented two as also that the whole multitude Act. 6. 5. presented the seaven for Deacons to the twelve Apostles who are sayd v. 2. to haue called the multitude and to have spoken vnto them v. 6. to have prayed and layd hands on the elect Deacons Now might not any prophane spirit take vp M. B. words and insult over the holy Ghost himself and say what did all the disciples that were in the place an hundred and twenty present Ioseph and Mathias They must needs speak in presenting these two and spake they ioyntly or all at once this were confusion contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 14. did the women speak they must not medle in Church matters â— 34. did children speak it is impossible So for Act. 6. did all the twelve Apostles speak at once v. 2. and pray at once v. 6. did the whole multitude speak ioyntly when they presented the 7. Deaconâ— v. 6. here were the like confusion and besides here were women and children in the Church also Now let the indifferent reader judge what M. B. hath sayd more against vs then any Lucian or scoffing Atheist might obiect against the spirit of God himself and his holy pen-man the Evangelist Yea further by these and the like consequences women and children are vtterly excluded from the Church as no parts of it Luke sayth Act. 15. 22. that the whole Church sent messengers to Antiochia and Paul 1 Cor. 14. 23. speakes of the whole Churches comming together in one to exercise themselves in prayer prophesying and the like parts of Church communion but children neyther could send messengers nor pray nor prophesie nor the like and women might not speak in the Church and therefore both they must be left out of the Church and if one part why not an other so till we come to the cheif of the congregation that they alone may be the Church and all in all as it is iust with God that he which opposeth the truth should oppose himself also so doth Mr B. in this very place intaÌ„gle himself in the same absurdities wherin he would ensnare vs. First he affirms the Church Math. 1â— must be the principall of the congregation Then Mr B. is not your congregation the true Church of Christ for the principall of your Church namely your self hath no power to excommunicate And say not for shame the Archdeacon or officiall are principalls or lesse principalls of your congregation Again which is the cheif thing I desire may be observed you say these principalls must be chosen by the rest of the Church be their mouth and stand for the whole And how chosen must the whole Church speak joyntly when they chuse them that were confusion must women speak that is contrary to the scriptures Yet are they members of the congregation and so are young youthes childreÌ„ and servants I adde further the Church you say is two or three principall members Well then they two or three must speak to the party how can he els heare but for two or three to speak together is confusion and contrary to the coÌ„maundement 1 Cor. 14. 31. for all must speak by one one And by this time I hope you are ashamed of such tristing as here you vse I do therefore answer in few words it is not necessary that every one of the people should speak to the offender no nor of the officers neyther If but one officer do sufficiently evince and reprove the party what needs more speak The rest both Officers people may manifest their consent eyther by voice signe or silâ—nce yet so as liberty be preserved for any in place and order to speak eyther by way of addition limitation or dissent And for women they are debarred by their sâ—x as from ordinary prophecying so from any other dealing wherin they take authority over the man 1 Cor 14. 34. 35. 1 Tim. 2. 11. 12. yet not simply from speaking they may make profession of faith or confession of sin say Amen to the Churches prayers sing Psalmes vocally accuse a brother of sin witnes an accusation or defend themselves being accused yea in a case extraordinary namely where no man will I see not but a woman may reprove the Church rather then suffer it to go on in apparent wickednes and communicate with it therein Now for children and such as are not of yeares of discretion God and nature dispenseth with them as for not communicating in the Lords supper now so vnder the law for not offering sacrifices from which none of yeares were exempted neyther is there respect of persons with God in the common duties of Christianity And for that so oft reinforced objection of authority given to
in ministring of their judgements And so I go on The rule prescribed Mat 18. concernes all the visible Churches in the world since the power of excommunication is an essentiall property one of the keyes of the kingdome the onely solemn ordinance in the Church for the humbling and saving of an obstinate offender and as necessary as the power to receive in members without which a Church cannot be gathered or consist And therefore the Officers cannot be the Church there spoken of since true Churches may and do want officers as I have formerly proved If two or three officers be the Church Math. 18. then may they two or three excommunicate the whole body though it consist of a thousand persons for what brother or brethren soever will not hear the Church there spoken of he or they are to be accounted as heathens and publicans Yea I ad if the power of excommunication be â—yed to the office since the office may remayn in one I see not but one may do any work of his office and so as well excommunicate as admonish preach minister the sacraments and the rest Now whether this power in one or two to punish judicially one or two thousand be not Lordly at the least let the reader judg Further if the officers be the Church I would know if one of them fall into scandalous sinne and will not be reclaymed what must then be done It wil be answered that the rest must censure him But what if there be but two in all must the one excommunicate the other the ruling Elder it may be the Pastour 2. if the rest of the Elders being many may displace the Pastour by their authority they may also place him and set him vp by their authority and so the poore laity is stript of all liberty or power of chusing their officers contrary both to the scriptures and your 〈…〉 oâ—ne graunt If the Officers be the Church then they alone may excoÌ„municate a brother without the consent yea or the privitie of any of the brethren for the busines concernes none but the Church Math. 18. neyther need they so much as acquaint any others with it But so absurd is this as you your self graunt the contrary and thaâ— it must be done with the knowledge of the Church publiquely and when the body meets together in open assembly The Apostles themselves whom no ministers now can equall eyther for skill or authoritie did not thus engrosse all things into their own hands but did interesse the people though raw newly come to the faith in all the publick affaires of the Church and in such deliberations as arose about them And who should deny them to meddle in those things which concerne them But if any do these scriptures avow their liberty Act. 1. 15. 23. 26. 6. 2. 5. 11. 2. 3. 18. 22. 1. 14. 17. 15. 3. 4. 14. 21. 22. 30. 31. 21. 22. Rom. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. 16. 3. 2 Cor. 8. 19. 23. 24. Now there is nothing that more concernes the body of the Church then the excommunication of a brother whether wee respect the commaundement of God binding them not to suffer sin vpon a brother but to rebuke him plainly and to admonish him that being rebuked by many he may be humbled drawn to repentaÌ„ce or the credit of the Church which must be defended against the slaunders of the excommunicants which will ever be iust in their own cause or their own good that â—t by the rebuking of one all may learn to fear or their conscience who must to day avoid him as an heathen and lim of Satan whom yesterday they were to imbrace as a brother and member of Christ. How clearly these things plead the brethrens both liberty and interest in all this busines let the indifferent reader judge If the Officers alone be the Church to which offenders are to be brought and by which they are to be judged then are they as the Church to admonish and judge those offenders eyther apart from the body or in the face of the publique congregation but neyther of these two wayes and therefore they alone are not the Church Not in private or apart for Then may the Pastor be excomunicated before any one of the brethren know of it Of which evill I have spoken formerly 2. It is against the nature of the ordinance being a part of the publick communion of the Church and worship of God to be performed but publiquely Yea there is no reason why admonitions and censures should be administred lesse publiquely then doctrine and prayer For the kingdome of the Lord Iesus is as glorious as his preisthood or propheticall office and his throne is to be advanced as high and made as conspicuous to the eyes of all as his altar or pulpit that I may so speak Now as the Preistly and Propheticall offices of Christ are administred in prayer preaching so is his Kingly office in government In deed if wee thought as you do that Christ had left his kingdom the Church without lawes and officers for the government of it or that this government were an indifferent thing alterable at the willes and pleasures of men then wee should be as indifferent where or how or by whom it were administred as you Mr B are 3. The officers are to feed the flock one part whereof consists in government Now if admonitions and excommunications may be administred apart from the body how is the flock fed by them or how do those Elders vpon whom the government of the Church especially lyeth discharge their publique Ministery and service vnto the Lord and his Church to which they are called or how can the Church see and know their ministration that they may have them in super abundant love for their workes sake if there be cause or contrarywise if reason require the contrary or when they that sin are rebuked openly whether Elders or people how can the rest fear Yea how can these men which are to feed the flock by government be accounted faithfull sheepheards eyther before God or men if they gather not the flock together see they feed accordingly though with you Mr B. they that feed the flocks by government never so much as see the faces of the hundred part of their sheep and when they have a sheep in hand for straying it may be from a dumb sheepheard to a preacher they deal with him for the most part many a mile from but never in the place where the particular stock walkes whereof that sheep is Lastly the administration of Christs kingdom being a part of the communion of saynts and publique worship is to be performed of the Lords day as well as other parts are and to be joyned with the administration of the word sacraments almes and the rest as making all one entyre body of communion yea
lawes of men but Pauls word even the preaching or publishing of the gospel is the proper means which the Lord hath sanctifyed for that purpose though I doubt not but there both hath been and is great vse of the Magistâ—â—â—â—â— authority for the furtherance of the gospel that way When the Lord Iesus purposed to advance the scepter of his king â—â—me he sent out his Apostles not furnished with sword and â—pâ—â—â— noâ— yet backed with humayn lawes or authority but with châ—â—ge and commission to publish and declare his holy commâ—â—ndâ—ments and the things which he had taught them and thâ—reby to 〈◊〉 Disciples or gayn subiects vnto his kingdom Math. 2â— 19. 2â— which they also practised admitting and initiaâ—ing mâ—n into â—â—â— Church vpon their voluntary submission vnto and 〈◊〉 of the â—ayth of Christ. Nâ—â—â—â— vnto â—â—â— be added a second consideration namely where and to â—â—â— a the Apostles were first to preach and to 〈◊〉 th◠〈◊〉 commission received from Christ it wil both gâ—ve lighâ— to the â—oâ—nt in hand and discover the vanity of a distinctâ—â—n in Mr B. â— book to which he trusteth much and therefore â—â—th oâ—t â—â—r the gathering and establishing of Churches after the P 〈…〉 by fyâ—â— and sword without any further respect then the magistrates authority the summe whereof as also of that he infeâ—reth upon it is that to a Church in the fâ—â—â—t 〈◊〉 that iâ— as â—â— eâ—poundâ— himselfe gathered of inâ—iâ—els and of such a people â—â—â—re no Church 〈…〉 there is required preaching and 〈◊〉 going bâ—fore with the word and profession of the name of Christ but for a people that are not infidels but Christians hâ—â— corrupt soever aâ—â— a Church â—â— suâ—h preachiâ—â— on the one side nâ—◠〈◊〉 of â—â—yth on the other is râ—qâ—ired 〈…〉 compel with the feare of the swâ—â—â— the Magistrate authority is sufficient in such a case Let the Reader behold this bold mans grosse ignorance and contradiâ—tions and if he wil not open his eyes to see them he mâ—y feel them with his hand so palpable are they I wil lay them down in these particulars â—â—â—st he affirmeth pag. 176 that the Lord taâ—â—s a peâ—ple to be 〈…〉 and that commâ—â—â—dements are for his people to â—â—â—â—â—â—â—m and nâ—t to make them 〈…〉 maâ—s commaâ—ndemeâ—t makâ—s not a servent but declâ—â—es such a one to be â—is â—â—â—vant already and so he gives God not more power to commaund the wicked and vnbeleevers then a man hath to commaund another mans servant and yet here he tells vs that before a people can become a Church Paul must goe with the word and expresly pag. 277. that the Lord to make mâ—n his people gives tâ—em his word and quoâ—es Math. 28. 19. to prove it Secondly by this his distinction and his inferences vpon it he makes all the Iewes to whom Iohn Baptist Christ and the Apostles preached and which were baptised by them or any of them to have been Infidels before and nâ— Church no Christianâ— And â—â— he affirms directly pag. 262. though I suppose he considerâ—t not where in answer to a proposition of Mr Aynsworthes that the Churches of Christ were established of saynts onely men visibly 〈◊〉 confirmed amongst other scriptures by Math. 3. 6. he pâ—â—emptorily avouches and so builds vpon it that that pâ—oposition scripture amongst the rest is to be vnderstood of a people which is no Church no Christians so the Church of the Iewes at that tyme must be no Church and they no Christians with this man for of them that scripture speaks whatsoever Peter and Paul say to the contrary Thirdly since the Apostles being sent by Christ to teach and make Disciples were to begin their ministration amongst the Iewes in Ierusalem Iudea and else where which is the consideration I formerly mentioned and so by the publishing of the gospel of fayth on their part and by the profession of fayth and confession of sinns on the peoples part to gather and establish particular Churches and that the Church of the Iewes was at that tyme the Church of God in respect of which the establishing of these particular Churches was no new plantation but a continuation of their former ingraâ—â—ing in the same root wherein they formerly were planted not differing from it essentially but being onely reformed perfited and otherwise ordered then before it appeareth most vntrue which Mr B. affirmâ—th that the preaching of the gospel is onely necessarily required for the planting of Churches of such people as were formerly infidels and no people of God Fourthly and lastly even that which he most freely graunts in one pag. namely that at the first the word must be preached and by that means men brought to a voluntary 〈◊〉 without compulsion that he vtterly reverses and denyes in the very next pag where pleading the proclamation of Hezechiah and compulsion of Iosiah he annexeth to the same purpose as cunningly as his wit wil serve an insinuation that Mordecai for feare of whom he sayth many of the heathen for such the people were became Iewes procured of the King proclamations and other statutes for the compelling of his subiects to the Iewish religion wherein he both perverâ—s the words as the reader may see and the meaning also of thâ— scripture which is that the heathen observing the myghty and mervelous hand of God for his people and against his and their enemyes many of them became Iewes and separated themselves vnto them from the 〈◊〉 of the heathen of the land to seek the Lord God of Israel as also in alleadging to the same purpose Luke 14. 23. as he doth in another place borrowing as it seems the corrupt exposition of that scripture from the Ministers whom â—e drawes in with him in his former book of which more in due place But that I may not be caryed too far in this my digression I do first deny that the reformation by Queen Elizabeth though great in it selfe and she for it of blessed memory did in any measure equalize the reformation made by Hezechiah Iosiah and Nâ—heâ—yah in whom you most insist Mr Bernard For whereas all reformation respects eyther persons or things that which was wrought by these godly Kings and governours receives testimony from the H. Ghost himselfe to have been most full and intyre both wayes And to let passe for brevityes sake the things themselves with referring the reader to these and the like scriptures which handle that part I wil insist a litle vpon the persons about whom the question here is between Mr B. and me in whom the other parte of reformation is to be considered which wil better appear if we compare together officers with officers and people with people And first it is evident in the scriptures that those Kings Princes of Iudah did not apoint any other Preists eyther for the purging of the temple or for any other Preistly work whither of reformation or administration
and combyne together as they did may cease to be the true Church of Christ and may eyther become no Church by forsaking all profession of Christianity or a false Church by holding and professing themselves stil Christians in fellowship with God through Christ when being considered by the revealed will of God and testament of Christ they are in truth in deed neyther the one nor the other And considering what Iohn sayth that he which loveth not his brother and so consequently cares not for his welfare which issueth from the former as the stream from the spring is not of God nor of his children but of the children of the Divel and withall that you your self right now did place the form covenant of the Church in a great measure in the manifestation and testimony of love in the members each to other and so consequently of care ech for the welfare of other I see not how that Church can be accounted the houshould of God consisting of his children by the word of God or the body of Christ vnited coupled together of his members by your owne doctrine where this love of and care for each other is visibly and outwardly wanting But to passe over all other things the point vpon which Mr B. insists and which he would most gladly fasten vpon the reader is that the power of the censures and of excommunication termed by the name of discipline howsoever it be a thing necessary for the wel being of the Church yet is it no essentiall property nor of such necessity but that a true Church may be without it And this wanting scriptures or reasons to confirm it he affirms again and again and in the end illustrates by a similtude taken from a man who is not therefore a false man though he can neyther see nor gâ—e nor speak It is recorded of one THEODOTIVS that having denied Christ in persequution to lessen his sin he went about to lessen Christ and taught that he was mere man and not God so many in the case of Christs government that their own and other mens sinne may seem lesser in not vsing or submitting vnto it do labour to extenuate and make it lesse excellent or vsefull then it is and therevpon one telles vs it is not a part of Gods worship nor of religion another that it is a thing indifferent arbytrary changeable a third that it is not simply necessary for the true Church as Mr B in this place The vnsoundnes of whose affirmation illustration I will by and by manifest the Lord assisting me in the mean while I do desire the reader to observe with me these two things in his writings about this point The former is that in labouring thus earnestly to perswade as here he doth that the power of excommunication is not of simple necessity he in effect graunts that which all men know to be true namely that the Churches in England do want this power Now if here he answer as he doth in his 2. book that though the power of excommunication â—e not in every parish yet it is in the Church of England in which is comprehended all paâ—rishes and all superiour power over these Parishes in which is the power of Christ I reply these particulars First that he might thus answer though one Bishop alone had engrossed into his hands all this power yea a Papist might answer thus for the Popes sole authority over all the Churches in the world yea though he should communicate the same with no other person or persons 2. Let this mans shifting be well noted When both in this and the other book he pleads for the Ministery in the Church he passes by the Nationall Provinciall and Diocesan Ministery and speaks onely of the Ministery in some parishes where some honest zealous preachers are but now comming to plead for the power of Christ in the Church he takes the contrary course and passing by the parishes takes his flight to the Nationall Provinciall and Diocesan Ministery there to find comfort 3. the quaestion here as he himself puts it pag. 125. of this book is about particular congregations which he sayth there are with them having true matter true form and true properties whereof excommunication is one To this also adde that in the end of his book he aâ—oucheth the Ministers affirmation that this power is given to the particular congregations in the land 4. lastly I haue formerly manifested from Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. that this power and praerogative is given to a particular congregation besides which the new testament acknowledgeth none other visible Church and if that one particular Church or congregation aâ— Corinth gathered together into the name of the Lord Iesus Christ had the promise of his presence and that he would be in the mâ—ddest of them and were by this power of the Lord Iesus Christ to deliver to Satâ—n purge out iudge and put away wicked men from among them for fayling in which duety they were reproved by the Apostle then why not every other particular Church or congregation of Gods people as well as that one espetially since that as all other scriptures was written for our learning and that there is but one Church or body as there is but one Lord one that is in matter form and essentiall properties The 2. thing I desire may be noted is that Mr B doth if not deceiptfully yet vnfitly comprehend the power of the censures vnder the care for the welfare of the Church since this power may be full and intire where the care is eyther very little or not at all as it came to passe in the Church of Corinth which had this power alwayes amongst them but neglected the vse of it and therein the care for the welfare of the Church which they should have had for which neglect they were reproved by the Apostle Now for the similitude I do except against it in a double respect first for that God doth oft times deprive a man of the naturall power of seing going and speaking by naturall infirmities within or bodily violence from without but Christ never deprives his Church of this spirituall power of excommunication neyther can it be impeached by any outward violence onely Antichrist exalting himself against all that is called God and intruding himself into the throne of Christ doth deprive the Church of God and of Christ of this liberty and power and so all those Churches or congregations over whom he thus vsurpeth receive his mark are in that respect subject to his judgement 2. Mr B as I have formerly observed doth most vnaptly coÌ„pare the power of casting out offenders to the faculty of seing speaking and the like it is more fitly resembled to the want of power to void and purge excrements which is prodigious in nature so neyther the naturall nor spirituall body so constituted can possibly consist or
our care be not to offend the Lord and if with the offence of a private person though never so base be joyned the offence of the Lord better offend all the both lawfull and vnlawfull Magistrates in the world then such a little one Mat. 18. 6. Lastly where Mr. Ber. concludes this decade of counsayl with that which is written Rom. 14. 17. 18. he misinterprets the Apostles words if he put them down as it seems he doth for a reason of that which goes before For the Apostles in that place hath no reference at all to the authority of the Magistrate whose kingdome indeed doth stand in meate and drinke and the like bodily things wherin he may command civilly is to be obeyed in the Lord but the Apostles purpose is to admonish the strong in fayth to take heed of abusing theyr ChristiaÌ„ liberty in the vnseasoÌ„able vse of meats drinks the like to the offence of the weak brethren as though the kingdom of God stood in the pereÌ„ptory vse of those things that they were therein to shew the libertie of the gospel Furthermore howsoever the kingdome of God be not meat drink yet is the kingdom of God much advanced or hindred both in a mans self and in others in the seasonable or vnseasonable vse of them A man in vsing them or rather abusing them with offence to a weak brother may destroy both him and himself also in breaking the law of charity Rom. 14. 15. 20. It remaynes now we come to the second rank of counsayls as they are devided by the authour for what cause I know not neyther wil I curiously enquire but wil take them as I find them 1. Omit no evident and certayn commandement imposed of God If there be nothing but probabilitie of sinning in obeying the precepts of men sâ—t not opinion before iudgement Wofull counsel God knoweth and in deed such as directs a course to harden the heart of him that followes it in all impiety For he that wil at the first do that by mans precept which is like or which he thinks to be sinne wil in time do that vpon the like regard which he knowes to be sinne and so fall into all presumption against God Men are rather to be admonished especially in the case of religion about which wee deale that if the Lord shall touch their tender harts with fear and iealousy of the things they do they rather suspend in doubtful things except they can in some measure overcome their doubting by faith till in the use of all good meanes the God of wisdome and father of lights give to discern more plainly of things that differ least being head-strong hard-mouthed against the check of conscience which the Lord like a bit puts into their mouthes they provoke the Highest to withdraw his hand to lay the reyn on their necks so they even run head long vpoÌ„ those evils without fear upoÌ„ which at the first they have adventured with feareful troubled coÌ„sciences which is oft times the iust recompence of such errours froÌ„ the Lord. Rom. 1. 27. 28. 2. Let ancient probabilitie of truth be praeferred before new conjectures of errour against it As this rule shewes by what tenure Mr B. holds his religion namely by probabilities likelihoods of truth so if he mean that this way wherein we by Gods mercy walk is any new way or our rules conjectures I do hope by the good hand of God herein assisting me to make it manifest that this way is that old and good way after which all men ought to ask and to walk therein that so they may find rest vnto their souls And that we are not guided in it by conjectures neyther goe by guesses but by the infallible rule of Christs Testament 3. Mark and hold a difference betweene these things the equity of law and exequution between established truths generally and personall errors of some between soundnes of doctrine and erronious application between substance circuÌ„stance the maner the matter between the very being of a thing and the wel being thereof between worship and conveniency between a commaundement and a commaundement to thee between lawfulnes and expediency and between that which is given absolutely or in some respect The sixt and 7. rule in the former rank being the same in substance might well have been bound vp in the same bundle with this had not the authour labored to supply that in the number of his counsayls which is wanting in their weight But to the point There is a difference indeed to be held betwixt the lawes of the Church of England with the ordinances and doctrines by law established and the personall exequutions excercises applicatioÌ„s of theÌ„ the difference is betwixt evil worse the worse of the twayne by far I deem the lawes ordinances with sundry of the doctrines For though the whole cariage of the courts miscalled-spirituall be most corrupt abhominable and though the pulpits be made by very many especially in the greatest places the stages of vanity falsehood and slaunder so that as the Prophet sayd what is the wickednes of Iacob Is not Samaria And what ar the high places of Iuda Is not IerusaleÌ„ so may we say what is the sink of all brybery and extortion Is not the Consistory What is the theater of carnall vanity Is not the pulpit Yet in truth the the lawes are worse then those which exequute them and the ordinances by them established then those which minister them Let but the last Canons which are as well the lawes and doctrine of the Church of England as the Canons of the counsel of Trent are the lawes and doctrine of the Church of Rome be severely and sincerely exequuted as becomes the lawes of the kingdom of Christ the Church all in the land having any feare of God would fynd and complayne that their bondage were increased as was the bondage of the Israelites vnder the Egyptians Exo. 5. But what though there were neyther Statute nor Canon law enacted for the confusion in the assemblyes collected and consisting of all the parish inhabitants be they Atheists adulterers blasphemers and how evill not what though no law ecclesiasticall or civil did coÌ„firm the transcendent power of the Bishops Archbishops for the placing and displacing of Ministers for the thrusting out and receiving in both of Ministers and people and so fâ—r innumerable other corruptions Yet these things being vniversally practised in the land the Church were nothing at all the more pure onely it had the more liberty of reformation which now by the lawes and cannons as by iron barres is shut out What Statute or Canon was there that the Corinthians should suffer amongst them the incestuous person vnreformed And yet for so doing this litle leven levens the whole lump What Parliament or Convocation-house amongst the Galathians had decreed the mingling of
of your owne hart But let vs heare your advise Quaere Whether it be an offence iustly given by thee or taken without iust reason of others thou not offending and they displeased the fault is their own and thou not chargeable therewith But you must vnderstand Mr B. that in the vnseasonable vse of things in themselves indifferent there is an offence both given taken and so a double sinn coÌ„mitted he that gives the offence sinns through want of charity and he that takes it through want or weaknes of fayth And so where actions simply good do onely hurt him that takes offence and actions simply evill him that gives it the vse of things indifferent agaynst expediency hurts harmes and destroyes both Rom. 14. 15. Now the parts of your secoÌ„d enquiry viz. whether men be offended in respect of what themselves know or butled by affection disliking of other mens dislike are insufficient For men do oft tymes take offence at things done and yet neyther in respect of their own knowledge nor of other mens dislike but merely through want of knowledg and vpon ignorance of their christian liberty And such were the weak brethren spoken of Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. and 9. which how they were to be tendered in their weaknes let the places iudge And for persoÌ„s partially affectionate or foolishly froward which is the mayn point in the 3. Quaere they are no way to be regarded as weak but on the contrary to be reproved as wayward contentious that folly and sinne may not rest vpon them Onely let men take heed they iudge not vncharitably of their brethren because they would practise vncharitably towards them as Nabal reviled David and his men as runnagates because he would deal churlishly with them and would shew them no mercy In the forth place it is demaunded What authority may do in things externall for outward rule in the circumstances of things How colourably you cary all the abominations in your Church vnder the shadow of circumstances and of how great moment even circumstances are in the case of religion I have formerly spoken let me onely ad thus much If a subject should vsurp the crown and exercise regall authority the difference were but in the circumstance of person which notwithstanding made the action high treason Or if a Preist comming to say his evensong should fall a sleep on his desk it were but a matter of circumstance in respect of tyme and place it might lawfully be done in another place and at another tyme yet there then it were a great prophaning of the service book What sway authority hath in the Church of England appeareth in the lawes of the land which make the goverment of the Church alterable at the Magistrates pleasure and so the Clergy in their submission to K. Henry 8. do derive as they pretend their ecclesiasticall jurisdiction from him and so exercise it Indeed many of the late Bishops and their Procters seeing how monstrous the ministration is of divine things by an humane authority and calling and growing bould vpon the present disposition of the Magistrate have disclaimed that former title and do professedly hold their eclesiasticall power and jurisdiction de jure divino so consequentâ—y by Gods word vnalterable Of whom I would demaund this one quaestion What if the King should discharge and expell the present ecclesiasticall goverment plant in stead of it the Presbytery or Eldership would they submit vnto the government of the Elders yea or no if yea then were they traytors to the Lord Iesus submitting to a goverment overthrowing his goverment as doth the Praesbyterian goverment that which is Episcopall if no then how could they free themselves from such imputations of disloyalty to Princes and disturbance of States as wherewith they load vs others opposing them But to the quaestion it self As the kingdom of Christ is not of this world but spirituall he a spiritual King so must the goverment of this spirituall kingdom vnder this spirituall King needs be spiritual all the lawes of it And as Christ Iesus hath by the merits of his Preisthood redemed as well the body as the soule so is he also by the scepter of his Kingdom to rule reign over both vnto which Christian Magistrates as well as meaner persons ought to submit themselves the more Christian they are the more meekly to take the yoke of Christ vpon them and the greater authority they have the more effectually to advance his scepter over themselves their people by all good meanes Neyther can there be any reason given why the merits of saynts may not as wel be mingled with the merits of Christ for the saving of his Church as the lawes of men with his lawes for the ruling and guiding of it He is as absolute and as intire a King as he is a Preist and his people must be as carefull to praeserve the dignity of the one as to enjoy the benefit of the other The next Quaere is Whether authority commaunding doth not take away the offence which might otherwise be given in a voluntary act This question is answered affirmatively by the Bishops their adhaerents and so with one voice they affirme in their books pulpits and other publik determinations but herein as palpably flattering the Magistrate as ever Canonist did the Pope What more was ever given to the Pope then that he might dispence with the morall law And what lesse is given to the King when by his authority I vse things indifferent with offence to my weak brother Is not love the fulfilling of the law And is it not against the law of love to vse things indifferent with offence which must the more carefully be avoyded coÌ„sidering the effects it drawes with it which are not onely the grief vvhich were too much but even the destruction of him for whom Christ dyed ver 5. 20. 1 Cor. 8. 11. Onely he which can strengthen the weak faith which is the cause of the offence can take away the offence and stablish him that is weak Rom. 14. 4. Men may and must vse meanes for that purpose and not nourish the weak in their weaknes but beare them they must in love and much love will have much patience Lastly for I passe over the 5. Quaere as comprehended in those which go before where you advise meÌ„ to studie agayn to study to be quiet and to follow those things which concerne peace it is needfull counsel and againe needfull considering what vnquiet spirits are to be found in all places Onely let men in their counsayls which you leave out ioyne with peace aedification and holynes as the scriptures teach and so separating the pretious from the vile they shal be to vs as Gods mouth and let their peace be in the word of righteousnes the ioy of the counselers of peace shal be vpon
reader may see in both his books from their gifts and aptnes to teach from their holy graces their painfull and zealous preaching their suppressing of Popery and conversion of soules with other the like effects of the truthes of the gospel published and taught by them which things since he dares not affirm of the scandalous vnpreaching Preists he cunningly passeth them by as some small moat faln into the Church by the covetousnes of Much-wormly patrons but contrary to the true meaning of the lawes and without the least default of the Bishops or Archbishops as though the covetous Patrons could present them except the vngodly Bishops had first ordeyned them If he had undertaken the justification but as true though not as good both of the vnpreaching and preaching Ministers he must have sought and produced such Arguments as would haue agreed to both but finding himself able to make no shew at all for the ignorant idle and scandalous sort having no colours to paynt no morter to dawb over those filthy stones no not to any shew he smothers all them though far the greater both in number and authority and in deed the almost onely true formall ministers according to the Church canon and constitution and presents to the reader a few dispersed disgraced tolerated and tolerating persons and vndertakes their defence manifesting himself a right naturall merchant of that great whore in shewing some handfull of tolerable wares thereby to deceive the simple buyer with the whole peice or heap of rotten stuffe which goes with them Now on the contrary if Mr B. should not haue defended men of lewd conversation as true visible matter of the Church and members of Christs body he could not haue justifyed with any colour the Nationall Provinciall Diocesan and Parish Churches or any one of them as true since they were all at the first collected and do still consist for the greatest part of such people and so disposed He therefore takes liberty vnto himself to make such defence and for so much of his Church and Ministery as will serve his turn amongst the deceived multitude and of no more But the mayn point in this place about this matter in hand to be considered of is whether ability to preach be a qualification and so preaching a work necessarily required in the ministery of Engl according to the true meaning of the lawes ecclesiasticall civil and the book of ordination This Mr B. takes for graunted affirmatively and vpon it as a mayn ground builds his whole treatise about this matter but I on the contrary do affirm that this is so is known to be to all that mind it with wisdom good conscience cleane otherwise and that neyther this ability nor practise of preaching is of necessity required to the true and naturall constitution of the English ministery in the meaning of the lawes established in that case And for the confirmation of that I affirm against this mans presumptuous asseveration these proofs suffice First the books of Homilies published and confirmed by law to be read of such ministers as cannot preach do evidently declare that ability to preach is not necessarily required of all in the true meaning of the law 2. By the statute law of the land and in particular by one statute enacted for the prevention of vnworthy ministers though wanting the book I cannot set down the title tyme or order of it he that is eyther a Bachilour of arts in one of the Universities or can give an account of his faith in latin or hath been brought vp in a Bishops house though he haue been his porter or horsekeeper or hath a gift in preaching is capable of orders and may be by the Bishop ordeyned a minister so that by the expresse letter and playn meaning of the law aptnes and ability to teach is not necessarily required in the English ministery If he haue any one of the three former qualifications the law approves of him and being ordeyned the Patron may present him to any congregation in the land whom the Bishop also must institute the Archdeacon induct and the people receive and may be therevnto compelled whither they will or no. Adde vnto these that your canons and constitutions framed by the convocation house and confirmed by the Kings royall assent so being the lawes ecclesiasticall of your Church by your doctrine Mr B. the Act of all the Church though the inferiours come not to consent do not onely approve an vnpreaching Ministery but also lay deep curses and Anathemaes vpon all that deny eyther the truth or lawfulnes of it To this also I might annex that it is a very common doctrine with your Prelates and their Chaplins and faction that preaching is no necessary annexum or appurtenance vnto Orders which they also offer to defend against all gainsayers But it seems you haue speciall reference to the book of ordination let vs therefore see what it makes for you or your purpose That you build vpon I know iâ— these words of the Bishop when he orders his Preist and delivers him the Bible in his hand Take thou authority to preach the word of God and to minister the holy sacraments in this congregation where thou shalt be so appointed The words I hear and acknowledge but the true meaning of the book I deny it to be that every Minister should be able to preach It may as wel be sayd it is the meaning of the book that that every Preist should be ordeyned in the particular congregation where he is to minister bycause of the latter words in this congregation where thou shalt be so appoynted and that he is to minister the discipline of Christ as well as the doctrine and sacraments bycause such words passe betwixt him and the Bishop in another place of the same book It is not the least delusion of Sathan or mistery that such formes of good wordes are reteyned both in the Romish English Church without any truth eyther of purpose or practise in those which vse them for by them the eyes of the simple are easily bleared by such deceivable merchants as right now I spake of though it be not without a speciall providence of God that these the like forms of words should be vsed for the more full conviction and condemnation of them that chuse to be deceived as I have formerly noted in this book To conclude this poynt The reading of the service book in form and maner the celebrating of mariage churching of women burying of the dead conformity and subscription are more essentiall to your ministery and more necessarily requyred by the lawes of your Church both civil and ecclesiasticall then preaching of the gospel is The wearing of the surplice and signing with the crosse in baptism are of absolute necessity without partial dispensation yea I may ad violation of oath by the Bishops whereas preaching of the word is no
the constitution for the ministery in it Now where you adde that Luther and other worthy Ministers of Christ were raysed vp out of the Romish Church you wrong him them and the truth in them whilst you would gratifie Rome and England Luthers Ministery from Rome was his Fryardome and is a Fryar a true minister of Christ by his office or of Artichrist whither Besides look what ministery the Church of Rome gave him it took from him and lastly if he had been a true officer or minister of the Church of Rome it had been sinne in him to have left his charge Touching the baptism received in the Romish Church I have formerly spoken and of our reteyning it but not our Ministery I shall speak hereafter That which is worthy consideration in the fourth Argument is the enterance into the ministery in the substance of which he tells vs there is nothing wanting by their lawes For touching the ability and desyre to teach and other graces he speaks of they no more make a minister then courage the feare of God true dealing and the hatred of of covetousnes make every man a Magistrate that is so indowed Now this entrance he layes down in 4. particulars 1. presentation 2. election 3. probation 4. ordination with imposition of hands But these in such confusion and with so many contradictions as do evidently shew what monsters an ill cause a vayn spirit meeting together will gender and bring forth First in his former book pag. 136. he places the whole calling or as he speakes the making of a Minister in ordination and comprehends vnder it as the 3. parts of it 1. examination 2. election 3. admission with imposition of hands In his second book he makes ordination but the fourth and last part of his calling pag. 295. as in deed it is and the same with admission The reason why he would thus advance ordination is bycause that in Engl is all in all being done by a Bishop yea though it be by the Bishop of Rome And so they call their book they make ministers by the book of ordination not the book of election or choise or calling of Ministers The Bishops Lordship swallowes vp the peoples liberty and if he but lay his hands vpon a man bid him Receive the H. Ghost he is a minister of the Church sufficiently ordered 2. Where in his former book he puts examination or probation before election in his â— he would haue election first and the probation or tryal of the partyes gifts and graces to come afterwards mis-interpreting that which is written 1 Tim. 3. 10. of probation to be made before election And the Reason of this I conceive to be bycause the Ministers in England are not onely elected but fully made before any such tryall be taken of them But I come to the particulars and first to that which he calls presentation for which he quotes Act. 1. 23 and 6. 6. In which scriptures especially in the latter of them he is much mistaken the presentation there spoken of not being before but after election The cause I suppose of this his confused wryting is the confused practise in his Church wher the Patrone presenteth his clerk both after his chusing and ordeyning But for the thing it self vnderstanding by presentation the nomination of the person to be chosen or considered of for choyce as the officers are in all other things to goe before the people so in this ordinarily provided alwayes the brethrens liberty be not infringed but that they may present or nominate others if any amongst themselves seeme more fit Now for the examination and tryall of the partyes gifts and graces as we all know what it is in the Church of England where if a man have the gift of subscription conformity canonical obedience though other gift or grace he have none he is a tryed minister and so reputed which if he want be his other gifts and graces never so eminent he is neyther to enter into nor being entred to continue in his Ministery so do the things which you write in your former book touching this tryall examination of men before they be choseÌ„ into the Ministery notably condemn both the ministery of your Church which you labour to iustify and on the contrary iustify sundry practises amongst vs which els where you condemn for notable errours The particulars are these 1. First that the gifts of him that is to be chosen must be examined according to those things which the place wherein he must be requireth and God hath commaunded 2. that the place or office of the Ministery consisteth principally in the preaching of the word administration of the sacraments and prayer 3. that the first namely the preaching of the word is to be preferred in the first place as being first imposed Math. 10. 28. 29. and most necessary both to beget and preserve a people Iam. 1. 18. Prov. â—9 15. 4. that the knowledge zeale and vtterance of of â—â—â— party to be elected must be examined Whereupon these things follow First that by your own graunt men out of office may preach administer the sacraments and prayer and so exercise their gifts and graces of knowledge zeal vtterance But as there is some difference in the respect in hand between the sacraments on the one side and the word and prayer on the other bycause there is no speciall gift required for the administration of them as there is for the latter so is the exercise of prophesying and prayer out of office so much impugned by you vndenyably iustified by this your own position And as it is a very presumptuous evill to call any man into the office of a teaching Elder whose gift in teaching hath not been sufficiently tryed out of office so is it no lesse presumption in a Church to set a man over herself for government of whose both ability faithfulnes in the reproving censuring of sinns and in other publick affaires of the Church she hath not taken good tryall 2. If this be true that the office of the Ministery consist principally in the preaching of the word and administration of the sacraments prayer how is that true for which you have so much contended in the former part of your book that the authority to censure offenders is in the cheif officers and governers of the Church as their speciall prerogative Can a lesse principall work be the peculiar priveledge of a more principall office It is against the light of nature and common reason More particularly this observation by you truely made with that also which followeth namely that the preaching of the word is to be praeferred in the first place overthrowes the order both of the Prelacy and Preisthood of your Church For if the preaching of the gospel be the principall work of the Ministery and to be preferred in the first place then are not your Provinciall and Diocesan
vnto them ever by how much the more superstitiously bent by so much the moâ—e devoutly addicted vnto them And so farre is that from truth which you say Mr Bernard that the godly and Church of God have in Popery kept possession of those buildings for the godly which should follow them that as they were erected by such as were most superstâ—tiously seduced so haue they been ever since the proper possesâ—ions of the most dangerous seducers in the Romish Synagogue the Praelates and their Clergy So that the morall equity of those commaundements in the old testiment touching the demolition and subversion of idolatrous temples and other the like superstitious monuments doth as well bynd now as then Which commaundements are also in effect renued in the new testament where the faythfull are charged to touch none vncleane thing to keep themselves from idols which they cannot do except they keep themselves from their appurtenaunces to hate even the garment spotted by the fâ—â—sh not to receive the least mark of the beast but to go out of Babylon which is also called Sodom and Aegypt spiritually as for other sinns reigning in her so for her idolatry amongst the rest which I the rather note that men may se it is not we but the holy Ghost that compares together Paganish AntichristiaÌ„ Idolatry Lastly where Mr Bernard bids vs prove that their Churches were built by Antichrist their records as Mr Ainsworth observeth vvill prove it so will their situation directly East and West with the Quyer or Chauncell alwayes at the East end and the rood-loft in the midle to separate it from the body of the Church the prophane layity their vacant places for Images abolished and their popish pictures still remayning and lastly their names even the names of the Apostles Saynts and Martyrs in whose honour they were built and to whose peculiar service thy were consecrated Thus much of the temples which is the last difference betwixt Mr B. and me and I confesse the least and this much also of his book Something remayns to be spoken of the Ministers Positions but very breifly both bycause the things in them for substance have come formerly into consideration and also bycause Mr Bernard affoards them no confirmation in his 2. book being shaken by Mr Ainsworth as they are ANd to omit the bloody doom which these Ministers passe vpon vs all contrary I am perswaded to their own consciences that wee are cut of from Christ for our separation from the Church of England I will consider breifly of their reasons to prove it a true Church THe first is bycause They enioy and ioyn together in the vse of those outward means which God in his word hath ordeyned for the gathering of an invisible Church which are preaching of the gospell and administration of the sacraments which they will prove by the vnfâ—yned conversion of many by the scriptures Math 28. 18. 20. Eph. 4. 11. 14. First the Church of Engl namely the nationall Church under a nationall government and Ministery is a popish devise the Lord having appointed none other Church vnder the new testament but a particular congregation as these Ministers truely vnderstand Mat 18. 17. with a government Ministery correspoÌ„dent 2. Before men joyne together as a Church in the fellowship of the gospell and communion of Saynts in the ordinances of God they should be prepared by the preaching of the word and fitted as spirituall stones for the Lords building so joyn in covenant by voluntary personal profession of faith confessioÌ„ of sinns from which how far the body of the nationall Church of Engl both is and ever hath been all know 3. As the sacraments are no meanes to gather eyther the visible or invisible Church but do praesuppose a CHVRCH gathered already into covenant with God of which covenaunt they are seales so doth not the Church of England ioyn together in the preaching of the doctrine of sayth which is the outward meanes for the gathering of the Church The greatest part of the parishes as they have onely the service book for prayer so have they onely the homilies for preaching And even in the Parishes where the word is best taught and the sacraments most orderly administred yet do not men joyn in the vse but in the abuse of these ordinances considering the confused coÌ„munion wherein the vsurped authority by which and the book-service according to which they are dispensed If the Ministers had onely affirmed that they had taught amoÌ„gst theÌ„ such truths of the gospel as by which the Lord might and did sanctifie save his elect or gather an invisible Church as they speak I should not contend with them but should further ad that I doubt not but such truthes are even in many assemblies of Papists and Anabaptists and to hold otherwise is a fowl cruell errour but where they speak of enioying the outward meanes and by them vnderstand the offices of Ministery which Christ hath given vnto his Church for the gathering and feeding of the same for which purpose they alledge Math. 28. 18. 20. Ephe. 4. 11. 14 I deny they enioy the outward means ordeyned for the gathering of the Ch neyther shall they ever be able to prove it except they can prove themselves lawfully and according to Christs testament possessed of some of the offices there spoken of In the 4. place I would the cause why these ministers speak of the outward meanes of gathering an invisible Church not of a visible since both the quaestion betwixt them and vs is about the visible and not about the invisible Church and also that the scriptures they bring for the justification of these meanes amongst them do speak of the meanes ministeries given not to the invisible but to the visible Church and if it be not bycause they know that if they had spoken of the means of gathering the visible Church we would and that justly have excepted that they do not enjoy nor have not so much as taught amongst them those doctrines of the gospell and that part of Christs Testament which teacheth the right orderly gathering of the visible Church by separation of the saynts from the vnsanctified world into the covenant and fellowship of the gospell by free and personall profession of fayth and confession of sinns Lastly as the preaching of the gospell is the onely outward means to gather a Church so though this meanes be vsed never so fully and men enioy it and ioyne in it never so ordinarily yet except withall they ioyne in the vnderstanding fayth obedience of and submission vnto it and that in the order which Christ hath set they are not made a Church by it according to the right vse of it but do make themselves by abusing it a conventicle of prophane vsurpers howsoever M. B. and these ministers and many others do indeed make the
speach to the 2. person not saying what it but what you shall bind and loose c. In so saying you give the cause though you presently eat vp your own graunt For you affirm that by the Church ver 17. is meant the whole body of which Christ speaks in the third person and what say wee more But where you adde that the authoritie is not given till the 18. vers and that then Christ turns his speach to his Apostles it is your own devised glosse For first it is evident that Christ establisheth the power of binding and loosing in the hands of the Church speaking in the 3. person v. 17. that so firmely as what brother soever refuseth to heare her voice is to be expelled from all religious cōmunion Vnto this the 18. v. is added partly for explanation and partly for confirmation For where as the party admonished might say with himself well if the Church disclaim mee I shall disclaym it if it condemn me I shall condemn it again the Lord doth here back the Churches censures for her incouragement and for the terrour of the refractary despising her voice and that vnder a contestation that what she bindes and looseth vpon earth namely after his will he also will bind and loose in heaven And for the change of persons in the 17. and 18 verses it is merely grammaticall and not naturall It is common with the Holy Ghost sometimes for elegancy sometimes for explication sometimes for further inforcement of the same thing to and vpon the same persons thus to vary the phrase of speach in the first second or third person grammatically as the reader may take a tast in these particulars Psal. 75. 1. Is. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. c. Math. 5. 10. 11. 12. c. and in this very Chapt. v. 7. 8. Rom. 6. 14. 15. 16. 8. 4. 5. 12. 13. c. Your 3. Reason that bycause Christ speakes of a few two or three gathered together therefore he meanes the officers of the Church and not all the body is of no force if the body consist but of two or three as it comes to passe where Churches are raysed in persecution as the most true Churches are Yet if Christ do speak of two or three officers of a Church gathered together in his name he speaks against you where all the power of the keyes over many 1000. Churches are in the hands of two Arch-Prelates and from them delegated and derived to their severall vnderlings But the truth is that gratious promise which Christ here layes downe for the comfort of all his saints you do engrosse into the hands of a few Elders You might aswel affirme that onely two or three officers gathered together have a promise to be heard in their prayers and not a communion of two or three brethren for Christ v. 19. 20. speakes principally and expressely of prayer though with reference to the binding and loosing of sin which as all other ordinances are sanctified by prayer The very scope of the place and reason of the speach is this The Lord Iesus had v 18. enfranchised the Church with a most excellent and honourable priveledge now the disciples did already see with their own eyes and were more fully taught by their Maister that the Church should arise from small and base beginnings and that it was also by reason of persequution subject to great dissipation Math. 7. 14. 10. 17. 18. 22. 23. 13. 31. 32. least therefore their harts should be discouraged and they or others driven into suspition that the Lord would any way neglect them or his promise towards them for their paucity and meannes he most gratiously prevents and frees them from that jealousy telles them and all others for their comfort that though the Church or assembly consist but of two or three as such beginnings the true Church of God had and have though your English Church begū with a kingdome in a day Act. 16. 14. 15. 17. 34. 19. 7. yet that should no way diminish their power or prejudice the accomplishment of his promise And the reason hath been formerly rendred bycause this power for binding loosing being given to the fayth of Peter depends not vpon the order of office multitude of people or dignity of person but merely vpon the word of God And hence is it that Christ thus gratiously descends even to two or three wheresoever assembled in his name yea though it be in a Cave or Den of the earth of which most gratious and necessary priveledge you would bereave them Now in your 4. Reason out of v. 19 you do most ignorantly erre in the grāmaticall construction for you make a change of the person agayne where there is no change at all Christ speakes onely in the third person as the originall makes it plaine though the English tongue do not so distinctly manifest it to an ignorant man Christ sayth not whatsoever you two shall agree of shal be given to them that is to the Church but whatsover two of you shall agree of or consent in they two that so agree shall obteyne it of God Which words Mr B. you do most vnsufferably pervert to the seducing of the ignorant as if Christ had sayd if two or three of you officers or you two or three officers shall agree together of a thing whatsoever they that is the Church shall desire namely of the Officers for so you expound the words it shal be givē them where it is most evident that they which are to agree vpon the thing they are to ask it and that of God who will give it them And where the scripture sayth that the brother offended speaking indefinitely of any brother and so of the Officers themselves must complayn to the Church M B. on the contrary as if he would even beard the Lord Iesus tells vs the Church must complayn to the Officers Your 5. Reason followes with many litle ones in the womb of it which you bring forth in order to prove that Christ speakes here figuratively and that by the Church he means the governours The first is It agrees with the practise of the Iewish Church frō whence it is held that the manner of governing in the Church is fetched And is this the necessary proof you speak of whatsoever is so held is so in truth And yet in your second book as hath been shewed you bring in sundry men holding contrary things as if contraries could be true Well I confesse it is so held and that by many with whom I would gladly consent if the scriptures taught me not to hold otherwise It had been good here the authour had shewed vs what the government of the Iewish Church was and not thus sleightily to have passed over things of this moment For the purpose in hand thus much The Church of the Iewes was a nationall Church the Lord separating vnto himself the whole natiō