surely ordinary Elders did never concurr with the Apostles in Acts of their Apostolick office As penning Scripture c. From all that is said it is most clear that the Apostles here acted as Elders leaving a Pattern for such like Judicatories upon the like occasions to the end of the World Which is the Second Point ¶ III. Inferior Church Judicatories are Subject to Superiour THE Third point we have to make out is this That Inferior Church Judicatories are subordinate to the Superior as Sessions or Congregational Elderships to Presbytries Presbytries to Synods c. So that the greater have power of Government over the lesser For receiving Appeals from them Complaints of them Enacting of Church Canons unto which the Inferior ought to be subject in the Lord. The point in short is That particular Elderships are not Independent so as to do what they please without being accountable to any Judicatory above them But Presbyteries are over them in the Lord. We shall follow the former Order First To clear the Question Secondly To bring Arguments for the Truth Thirdly To answer Arguments against the Truth Fourthly To apply it to Use. I. For the First We allow unto particular Congregations an Eldership and Power of Discipline within themselves to judge of these things that are of their particular concernment But as for things wherein other Congregations are concerned with them We hold that such do belong to Superiour Judicatories according to the Rule What belongs unto all should be handled by all Secondly We do not give Power to any one single Congregation above another We say That all Congregations the least as well as the greatest is equal in Power This way was the Bishops Tyranny that made all the Congregations of the Diocess subject to the Cathedral Church the Parish where the Bishop lived So that all others were to subject themselves to it and the great Lord Bishops Laws which he gave out in it We do only say That all particular Congregations should be subject to a Presbytery made up of Elders taken from among themselves wherein no Congregation can challenge Power more than another The meanest hath as great Power in them as the greatest Thirdly We do not say that the Power of Presbyteries or Synods are absolute so that whatever they conclude should stand for a Law or that they ought to be obeyed in every thing We affirme Their Power is a limited and Ministerial Power It is a Power in the Lord So that put the case If a Presbytery or Synod should conclude a thing that is wrong They are not to be followed blindly We allow to every particular Christian a Judgement of Discretion whereby they should compare the Acts of Church Judicatories with the Rule of the Word and accordingly either to choice or refuse Only herein we say First That particular Christians should have a kind of loathness to differ from the Judicatories of the Church arising from a secret kind of diffidence and distrust of their own Light and understanding so that although they are not to follow others blindly yet they are to suspect themselves rather than them we mean when the matter is dubious Secondly We say That when the case comes that it is evidently seen that Superiour Judicatories have gone wrong private Christians are to differ from them indeed yet so as to give great Reverence and Respect to the Judicatory even when they are necessitate to dissent from their Acts least by their furious zeal they cast all loose and into confusion But to come to the point The Question is Whether all the Power of Church Government be in the Hands of particular Elderships And so if particular Elderships be Independent Or if Jesus Christ hath warranted Presbyteries to be above them in the Lord. We maintain the last And we clear our part the Controversy from several Arguments II. The First Argument is taken from the many defects that are in this way of Independency where the whole Power is put in one Congregation so as to be countable to none We shall reckon four or five of these Defects and indeed very great Defects First According to this way of Theirs there is no Authoritative way in Christs Church to right a man that is wronged by a particular Congregation As put the Case that an Eldership should wrong a man by Censuring him unjustly According to Their way He must sit with the wrong there is no remedy to him till Christ come in the Clouds There is a second defect according to this Independent way of Theirs There is no Authority in the Church to heal Breaches in a Congregation Put the case that a People should divide from the Elders or the Elders among themselves or that one Congregation may have a contest with another Now in these cases suppose both these Parties to be wilful as too usually it falls out so as They will not yeild to any Advice without Authority to back it Now what remedy is left in such Cases without the assistance of a Presbytery that hath Power over both Parties to command them in the Lord to do what is right And can we think that Christ hath left no remedy in his House for such evils as may so frequently fall out Thirdly The Independent way leaveth no Authoritative mean for holding down Pluralities of Religion For if so then let a particular Congregation set up what Religion they please suppose it be Popery There is no Authoritative mean to hinder it But in the Way of Presbytery it is otherwise Presbytery is Christs Weeding-hook to weed out Heresies so we observe wherever it is set up it bears Heresy down And no wonder For Judicatories are so subordinate one to another that what is overseen in the one is taken notice of in the other Fourthly By this way of theirs there is no Authoritative mean for unity and uniformity in the publick service of God among Congregations But every one being left to themselves will take a way of Their Own This Congregation one way and that Congregation another way which doubtless would prove a great stumbling block to the weak not knowing unto what Congregation to joyn because of the great diversity among all Put the case to clear it in some things whereby ye may guess at others that in one Congregation they would both read and expound In another they would only Read In others the line were not read for singing And in another it were read In some Congregations Children were not Baptized but in time of Sermon In others That Baptism were Administrate at other times also In some Congregations Two Prayers before a Sermon In another but one In another the Conclusion Sung In another not Now though the Strong would not stumble at these things knowing that such in their own nature are for the most part at least indifferent Yet to the weak Christian they might prove a ground of stumbling For usually such presently stamp Conscience on that part of
this is absurd For Christians are in an estate of greater liberty As appears from Galat. 4. 1. Therefore c. For clearing the first proposition We lay down these things First There was a Subordination of Judicatories in the Jewish Church As might be made out from several places We take one 2 Chron 19. 8. where there is a Supream Ecclesiastical Judicatory v 10. The matters they handle come to them from other Judicatories And Deut 17. 8. Sheweth the matters to be handled by the supream Judicatory are such as had been before the Inferior Court but found too hard to be judged there So that here was a Refuge for the party wronged by the Inferiour Court Now if there be no such Refuge left to Christians we may certainly say The state of Christiansis most hard being left under the Tyrannical sentence of the unjust Eldership And no power to right them When the oppressed Jew might appeal to the Superior Judicatory We might further argue from this Whatever was in the Jewish Government that was neither Ceremonial nor Judicial but Moral That is binding to us For the Moral Law bindeth all alike and is not abrogate But this That there was subordination of Judicatories for the relief of the grieved party among the Jews was Moral not Ceremonial nor Judicial It is true that all things were determined by an high Priest among the Jews who was typical of Christ and of his supremacy in Judgment So the Papists argue ill from the high Priest to the Pope But it is as true That the Subordination of Judicatories for things of harder knowledge and relief of the oppressed party was Typical of nothing But Moral and of the Law of Nature which forbids party to be judge which will naturally follow if there be not Subordination of Courts Yea further we shall not find that this Law is given to Moses in the pattern upon the mount but was taught by the light of nature to Jethro and by him given to Moses Exod. 18. 22. It shall be that every great matter they shall bring unto thee c III. We come now to Answer Their Objections many whereof we have taken off in the first two Heads As for the rest we shall not trouble you with those that are frivolous as indeed the most part are we shall only pitch on these that â—eem to carry some shew of Reason and whereof they boast most Their first Objection is from Matth 18. 17. This Church say they is a Parochial Church and Christs mind is that the business should be here ended without any Appeal from it Answer Christ means not only a particular singular Congregation but also if not mainly A Presbyterial Church For first The particular Church cannot sometimes heal the distemper as when it is divided or when the Church it self is Scandalous as oft may fall out by giving a wrong sentence So that if Christ had meaned only a particular Church should be compleaned to and in no case a Judicatory above them then his Remedy should have come short in curing the desease for which he intends it which to say were no small imputation to Jesus Christ. Secondly Christ here alludes to the Government of the Jewish Church as appears from the Censure of the Obstinate to be reputed as an Heathen the same which was among the Jews And from the plainness of the speach Tell the Church Which could not be otherwise understood if he had not alluded to the Jewish Judicatory besides which They knew no Judicatory for such offences as Christ spoke of to them There being as yet no particular Church which had given its name to Christ. Now as we cleared before the Judicatories among the Jews which were to be complained to for Scandals were not only these who were in their single Synagogues or Congregations But also Superior Courts to which it was Lawful to Appeal from the lesser Courts Thirdly Christ meaneth here of such a Church as were the Churches of Jerusalem Antioch c. But these as we have already cleared were Presbyterial Churches or Judicatories having the oversight of many Congregations Now sure these being the first Churches instituted by the Apostles must not be excluded from the power of Government given by Christ to his Church in that place Their Second Objection is this That the Dependency of Churches upon Presbytries layeth on a yoke of Tyranny and Subjection upon particular Congregations equal to the Tyranny of Bishops And if the Church must be in bondage it is better to be subject to one Lord Bishop than under a number of Ministers and Elders in Presbytry or Synod For Answer We make no other Subjection here than what the Independents themselves make For they make Ten in a Congregation subject to Five hundred and the Lawes of the Five hundred to be binding to the Ten So make we many Churches to be subject in the Lord to all their own Pastors and Elders conveened in a Presbytry What more Subjection is there in the one than in the other Secondly It is an unjust comparison to compare Bishops Tyranny with Presbytries For 1. The Government by Bishops was Humane This is Divine 2. The Bishop being but One Man did by himself alone Govern and that ad Arbitratum Nor had he Any to Answer to But here moe Pastors and Elders are joyned together who are by mutual advice to Rule Gods People according to the Word of God 3. The Government by the Bishop was altogether extrinsecal to or without the Particular Churches For the Bishop was none of their Members nor yet chosen by them But Presbyteries and Synods are not so They are wholly made up of Members and Commissioners from those same very Churches where They govern and so it is wholly intrinsecal 4. We say Government by Presbyteries is so far from being in its own nature Tyrannical as that it is the greatest remedy against Church Tyranny because it is a City of Refuge for all these who are oppressed in their particular Congregations For if in the Independent Government one be wronged he must sit with it till Christ come and right him Neighbour Churches may advise and request but the Congâ—egation advised is not bound to follow it But hâ—â—e when the Eldership doth wrong there is a refuge to a Presbytery and above them to a Synod c. Object 3. Government by Presbytery layeth upon Ministers and Elders the Charge of other Flocks than these of whom the Lord made them Overseâ—rs to wit The Charge of all the Churches in the bounds of the Presbytery They are Elders to all these Churches because they govern them Answer It followeth not that they have the Charge of all these Congregations in particular and in every thing that concerns the Duty of an Elder so that they are bound particularly to Catechize to Visit c. Only They are Elders to them in things common to all And as they are joyned in the Court with others And this is
right of Membership in the Church Visible We find this from the Apostles Practice Act 2. 41. Where the Way is how they received men to be Church Members it is said They were Baptized c. And those who were Baptized are said to be added to them and added to the Church v last So in Act. 8 38. The Eunuch was received by Baptism to be a Member of the Visible Church So Saul Act 9. 18. And Lydia Act. 16 15. Secondly Circumcision was a seal of the Jews right of Membership in the Visible Church under the Old Testament And therefore Baptism is a seal of our right to be Members of the Visible Church under the New For Baptism in the New Testament is come in the same place with Circumcision in the Old Testament This is for our first Argument The second Argument is taken from the practice of the Apostles And it is this The Apostles went not by that method of our Opposits in admitting Members of the Visible Church This was not the Rule They followed Therefore it is not the right one We clear this was not the Rule which they followed from Act. 2. 41. Where in one day there are three thousand added to the Church Now surely none can imagine that it was possible that every one of these Three thousand could be perswaded in conscience of the regeneration of one another It is true Peter binds on them to Repent But it is as true that on their desire to be admitted to be Members of the Visible Church and some evidence of their conviction he receives them Although there were many of them did not even this much in sincerity For Anamas and Saphira were but Hypocrits So no more is required of Simon Magus Act. 8. 13. And so of Demas who afterwards forsook Paul Yea if we look to the Rule which Christ walked by He sought no more but a profession to follow him and He sought no more of Judas to make him not only a Member of His Society but an Apostle and Minister Christ knew him well enough to be a Hypocrite And yet upon his professed desire to follow him admits him to his Company yea makes him a Minister So that this Rule which Separatists so much cry up was neither followed by Jesus Christ nor his Apostles The Third Argument we bring is this There was never a Church before or since Christs dayes whose Members All of them could give evident signes of Grace to each other And therefore it cannot be a Rule of Gods appointing That the Church Visible must be made up of only such We prove the Antecedent Sure the Church of Israel in Moses time was not such every Member was not such a Visible Saint so as he was known to be Gracious For sayeth Moses Deut. 29. 4. Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive c. and oftimes they are upbraided as stiff-necked Secondly We must suppose the purest Churches comming nearest the Rule to have been in the Apostles dayes and yet the Members of those Churches were not of this kind So the Church of Corinth was a Church that the Apostles themselves planted and Preached to and yet we shall find many in this Church who were so far from giving evident signes of Grace one to another That there were many there Scismaticks 1 Cor 6. Many there Fornicators that Paul writes against There were many there Drunkards yea and drunk about the time of the Lords Supper And those he reproves 1 Cor 11. Yea there were some there who denyed some of the fundamental Points of the Christian Religion as the Resurrection As appears from Chap 15. So this Church of Corinth was not such Secondly The seven Churches of Asia spoken of Revel 2. 3. were Churches that had the Candlestick among them Churches that were in Christs hand that he took a care of and yet they were not such as every Member of those Churches had real signes of Grace otherwise the Spirit of God would not have said so often If any man have ears to hear c. If he had not supposed that there had been in them blind obdurate carnal hearers Thirdly The same may be said of the Churches of Rome Galatia Thessalonica and of all the Churches that ever we hear or read of since Christs days never one of them was such And therefore we may safely conclude that this Rule of Theirs cannot be Right seing neither Christ nor his Apostles nor the Church in any Age did follow it We bring a Fourth Argument and it is this That cannot be a right Rule of gathering Churches that would hold out a number of Gracious Souls from being Members But this Rule of Theirs would do so Therefore it cannot be the right Rule For the first part of our Argument none will doubt of it And Secondly That this Rule of Theirs would hold out many truly Gracious we prove it For first there are many that have Grace that for want of parts they cannot express the thing they have they are so far from giving evidences of Grace to others that they cannot satisfy themselves Some so Proud some so Passionate so Worldly so Talkative so Imprudent that it will be hard for any to satisfy themselves that there is Grace in them Thirdly The way of some is so hid or rather Gods way in them so hid that for any thing People can see in them they are nothing different from Natural Civilians and yet many of such will make clear and satisfying discoverys of Gods Grace in them at their death The work of Grace then appearing that was long under ground And now according to this Rule of Theirs these are all to be holden out of the Visible Church and put in the place of Pagans And so That cannot be Christs Rule Our fifth Argument to prove the point is this That cannot be a Rule of admitting Members to the Church Visible which puts the Church in perpetual danger of Renting But this Rule of Theirs puts the Church in a perpetual danger of being Rent Therefore it cannot be the right Rule We shall clear that this Rule of Theirs puts the Church in a perpetual hazard of being Rent For there are some more easy to be satisfied of the signes of Grace than others so That which will be a lawful Church to one will not be so to others Secondly There are some that in progress of time will grow more strick in searching Hence that which was a true Church to him the last year will be no Church to him this And so this Rule of Theirs keeps the Church in a continual hazard of being Rent of Separating after Separating while they cast off all This hath made the most part of all Their Churches rent and one part to Excommunicate another Yea hence many of that Way cast off all Churches at last and turn Seekers Cast off all Serving God with others all use of publick means only serving God apart and by themselves
Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a Pubican That is Excommunicate him Now for what faults he is to be Excommunicate they are set down v. 15. Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee c. So it is a scandalous Trespass wherein the offender does persist and remain obstinate on which according to Christ's Rule Excommunication should strick Now sure it is there are many Errors not contrary to fundamental Truths such as many points of Arminianism Antinomianism c. which yet persisted in are Scandalous both to particular Christians and the Church and therefore according to Christs Rule Excommunication should strick upon other Errors than those contrary to the fundamental Points of Religion which is contrary to their assertion Thirdly Neither can we assent that Excommunication should strick on no other Errors but those contrary to the light of Nature and that not only because of what is presently said that Excommunication should strick against every scandalous Sin done against a Brother or the Church wherein the offender does persist and remain obstinate but also according to that Rule whereby they maintain that Excommunication should strick on no other Error but these that are contrary to the very Light of Nature it would follow that the publisher of these Errors following or the like against fundamental Truths should not be censured to wit That the Scriptures are not the word of God That Jesus Christ was an Impostor a Deceiver That we are not justified by free Grace say according to that rule such Hereticks should not be censured no not Ecclesiastically because these Errors are not against Natures Light but Scripture Light only for Natures Light teacheth not the Truths which are contrary to these Errors This much for Church Tolleration but as said is concerning this is not the present Contraversy The main question then is concerning State Tolleration Concerning which some do affirm That whatever the Church may do in Inflicting Church Censures on Hereticks Maintainers of Heterodox Opinions Yet say they no civil Punishment such as Death Imprisonment Mulcts or Fines should be inflicted on any Error or Blasphem whatsoever providing the Maintainers of them carry themselves peaceably do not trouble the State or do evil against the Commonwealth in civil Things We again on the contrary do hold That it is the Duty of the Civil Magistrate to suppress Error Heresie and every sin against the First Table as well as it is his Duty to suppress Adultery Fornication Sedition and other sins against the second Table And that he is not only bound to suppress Errors and Blasphemies that are contrary to fundamental Truths or the Light of Nature but all Error contrary to other points of Truth Now for clearing the State of this Question and freeing it from some odious Imputations that may be cast upon it Before we come to Arguments we shall lay down these Assertions First We do not say that the Magistrate is bound to punish Hereticks at the first step Pains should first be taken to inform them the Judgement of the Church is Antecedent and their Labour is to convince Gainsayers So this must go before the Magistrates Duty they must be found Obstinate before the Magistrate medle with them or punish them Civilly Especially if their Errors be not horrid Blasphemies against God and Natures Light in such the Magistrate is not bound to give so much Forbearance Secondly We do not say that all Errors and Heresies are to get alike punishment but according to the degrees of the guilt that is in them even as it is in sins committed against the Second Table Murder is a more hainous Fault than Fornication and therefore the Magistrate is bound to punish it more highly Even so is it in Sins done against the First Table Blasphemies done against God or a denying of the true God is a higher Sin than Worshiping of the true God after a false manner and therefore the Magistrate is bound to punish it more severely Thirdly As we do not say that every Error and Heresie is to receive the like punishment so neither do we say that every one that maintains the same Error is to be alike punished for there are some that are Seducers or Drawers on of others to Error Disturbers of the Peace of the Church Ring-leaders there are others again that are only seduced and drawn away to Error and these last although they should not be Tollerate yet the power of the Magistrate is to be exercised more sparingly towards them So Secondly There are some rooted in Error confirmed in it who will not hear Instruction There are others that are but weak and are seeking Light whose way evidenceth them to be Conscientious only for the time they are Ignorant and in Humility seeking after Light and these last the Magistrate as all other Christians is to bear much with according to Rom. 15. 1. We then that are strong ought to bear the Infirmities of the weak c. Now this being said to clear the question we come to Arguments to make out this Truth to wit That the Magistrate is bound to suppress and punish Error Heresie and other sins against the First Table as well as he is bound to punish Adultery Theft and other sins against the Second Table The First Argument we bring is from the approven practice of Kings and Magistrates under the Old Testament from which we form an Argument thus If it was the approven practice of Kings and and Magistrates under the Old Testament to suppress Error Heresie and Blasphemy then Magistrates under the New Testament are bound to do the like But so it is that it was the approven practice of Kings and Magistrates under the Old Testament to suppress Error Heresie and Blasphemy and other sins against the first Table Therefore Magistrates under the New Testament are bound to do the like For confirming of this Argument there are two things to be made out First That it was the practice of the Magistrate under the Old Testament to suppress Error and Heresie Secondly As it was their practice so their practice herein is approven of God otherwise it were not binding unto others for Kings and Magistrates did several things wherein they were not approven and so not binding unto us now The first thing then we are to clear is that this was the practice of Magistrates under the Old Testament And we shall begin First with Abraham's practice Genes 18. 19. For I know him that he will command his Children and his Houshold after him and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do Iustice and Iudgement c. Secondly with Jacob who was a Magistrate in his own Family And we shall see him employing his Power to suppress false Religion In the 35 of Gen. vers 2. Then Jacob said unto his Houshold and to all that were with him put away the strange Gods that are among you
themselves had the Power that was of it And Lastly the Jews at this time had not the Power of Civil Punishment in their Hands but the Romans and so it was not in their Power to punish There is a Second Objection which they bring from the Apostle Paul's words in the Epistle to the Philipp 3. 15. where speaking of Differences among Christians he sayes Let us therefore as many as be perfect â—e thus minded and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded God shall reveal even this unto you Say they we see what was Paul's Judgement That notwithstanding of Differences there should be Heart Waling or Uniting and therefore the Magistrate should not be stired up to Censure those who Err. To this we Answer Paul speaks nothing there of State Tollâ—ration for then the Civil Powers were not for Christ but of Church Tollâ—ration in respect of that meekness and tenderness which Christs Servants should have in inflicting of Church Censures for fear of breaking Love Secondly He commandeth not all Errors to be thus Tollerated for so he should contradict himself in another place where he sayes An Heretick after the first and second admonition reject And Thirdly Paul limits that Tolleration that he would have here and that in two things First As to the time how long God shall reveal even this unto you And Secondly He supposes the persons differing from them should walk with them in things wherein they differ not according to the same rule and so make no separation Now it does not follow that those who remained Obstinate in their Error should be still Tollerated and that the Censure of the Church should not strick on them at all chiefly if it be such an Error as causes Rents and Schisms for he sayes Take heed to those that cause Divisions and Offences and avoid them Rom. 16. 17. Their Third Objection is That this is contrary to the way the Apostles took with those that Erred their way was to watch against them that Erred Acts 20. 29. For I know this that after my departing shall grievous Wolves enter in among you not sparing the Flock Verse 31. Therefore watch That which the Apostle commands is to watch against them And in Rom. 16. 17. Now I beseech you Brethren mark them which cause Divisions and Offences and avoid them And in the 2 Timoth 2. 24. it is said And the Servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle unto all men apt to teach patient Now say they this is a far other way than to stir up the Civil Magistrate against those who differ from us This Savors not of the meek Spirit of Christ. I answer It is the Duty of Ministers to watch against Error and that is one mean for suppressing of Error and Heresy but one mean destroyes not another it does not follow that this which is in controversy is not another mean also neither is it contrary to that meekness commanded to wait on them more than to deliver to Satan or to Curse and Excommunicate Apostates with that great Curse called Anathema Maranatha 1 Cor. 16. 22. They may as well say It is contrary to Christs meek Spirit to establish the Sword in the Hands of the Christian Magistrate according to Rom 13. 4. For punishing Sins against the Second Table and so under this pretence Adulteters Murderers Seducers Thieves and all should go free unpunished But they do far mistake the Meekness of Jesus Christ Christs Meekness is not to let people live in their Sin to let vile Hereticks trample on Truth destroying Souls And in the mean time binding up the Hand of the Magistrate that he dare not hinder it this were a disrespect to Truth and cruelty to poor Souls in danger to be carried away which our Lord was very tender of There is a Fourth Objection from Matth. 13. 24. Taken from the Parable of the Tares where the Kingdom of Heaven is compared to a man that sowed Wheat and the wicked one comes and sowes his Tares among it and both is bidden let grow till the Harvest Now say they by these Tares is meaned Hereticks therefore they should not be plucked up by the Sword of the Civil Magistrate We Answer If they astrict the Word Tares to Hereticks in this sense That the Sword of the Civil Magistrate should not be used against them by the same reason they may say that they should not be disputed against for that is a plucking up of them also Secondly We answer That by the Tares that are commanded here to be suffered let grow up to the Harvest is no more meaned Hereticks than other Scandalous Livers And this we shall make out from Christs exponding the Parable Verse 41 And they shall gather out of his Kingdom all things that offend Now Hereticks are not all things that offend other scandalous Livers offend also Thirdly By the Tares is meaned Them that do Iniquity vers 41. Now others besides Hereticks are such And Fourthly If by the Tares were here meaned Hereticks then by the Wheat are meaned only the Orthodox and so every man that is Orthodox should Shine forth as the Sun in the Kingdom of Heaven vers 43 But there are many who are Orthodox who yet are evil Livers and so will never go to Heaven And therefore by the Wheat must only be meaned the truly Regenerate and so by the Tares must not only be meaned Hereticks but all other Evil-doers And further By this it would follow that Hereticks should not be Excommunicate for that is a rooting out But what can be meaned by the Tares then for whatever be meaned by them it will follow that by this Parable Verse 30 they should be tollerated and to say that all vile scandalous Persons should be tollerated is more absurd than that only Hereticks should be tollerated Answer If we narrowly observe Christs exposition of the Parable we will find that part where he bids Let both grow together until the Harvest is not exponed although he expone the rest which doubtless he would not have omitted if it had been his mind that we should have built any Doctrine of this kind on it therefore we say this is not Christs meaning that he would have all men how Godless and Scandalous soever let alone for that were contrary to other places of Scripture But that Christ is to show that when all pains are taken by Christs Officers for purging the Church yet there will be alwayes some Hypocrites in it and it is Christs mind though he hath given order to Censure scandalous Offenders yet that his Servants should not press after such a separation of the precious from the vile as to have all the Weeds and wicked in heart to be cast out lest when they gather out the Graceless Tares they should root out also the Gracious Wheat with them Object 5. There is a Fifth Objection from Luk 9. 54 Where Christ reproves James and John for seeking fire to come down from
are the surest Pillars of our Commonwealth but woe to and will be to that Common-wealth that is builded on such Pillars And if Scotland or any party in it joyn with them on these terms our woe is but coming He is a jealous God chiefly in the matter of his Service as is clear from the Second Command The Third use is If this be an Ordinance of God to put Power in the Magistrates hand to punish Error it should make you scar at Error and labour to be grounded in the Truth For we see Error is a sin that God hates and it is a sin that God will have the Magistrate to punish and so a sin that he himself will punish if the Magistrate do neglect it It is natural to men to think If they can live a good Life it is the less matter what be their Opinion but the Lord Judges not so for as he will have other sins punished by the Magistrate so he will have these punished also And such as he usually punisheth himself by fearful Plagues when the Magistrate neglecteth his Duty in punishing other sins so doth he in those We might speak much from History of fearful Judgements sent immediatly by God upon Hereticks but we shall here close SECT III. A BRIEF REFUTATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF Erastianism Head I. That there is a Church Government held forth in Scripture HAving thus show'n that the Doctrine of Tolleration is not of God I proceed to Demonstrate this also in some other of the most Dangerous Errors of the Times We shall begin first with these Errors which are about the Government of the Church and that because the Government of the Church is the hedge of the Doctrine for if once the Government be brangled or shaken the wild Boar of the Wilderness cometh in easily and corrupteth the Doctrine therefore it is that the Devils main design hath been against the Government of the Church to blast and storm this Wall on all Hands The summe of what we have to say in this is to make out these four points First That there is a Government appointed by Christ in his Church distinct from the Civil Government Secondly We shall show that this Government is not in the hands of the Civil Magistrate but in the hands of Christs own officers which he hath appointed for Governing his house By inflicting of Church Censures enacting of Church canons so as they are not to act by derived power from the Magistrate and Appeals are not to be made from them to the Magistrate Thirdly we shall endeavour to prove That this power of Church Government is not in the hands of private Christians or the community of the Faithful but in the hand of Christs own Officers Ministers and Elders And Lastly We shall endeavour to prove that this Authority and Government is not in the hand of particular Congregations or particular Elderships Independently from other Judicatories above them but that this power is given to them so as they must be subject to Superior Judicatories In which propositions we will meet with these Errors that are most dangerously opposite to Church Government at this time The First two propositions are contrary to the Doctrine of Erastians and the last two are contrary to the Doctrine of Independents as they are commonly designed First we shall engage with Erastianism and our Scope in this shall be as in the former to show that however it pretend to the Spirit yet when it is brought to the tryal it will be found not to be of God This Doctrine or Error hath its name from the prime Author of it called Erastus a Doctor of Medicine who upon some discontent did first vent it to wit That Ministers should only meddle with Preaching but should have no power to meet in Church Judicatories Sessions Presbyteries or such like nor should they punish Scandalous sins with Church Censures Such as Suspension or Excommunication But that all power whatsoever in a Nation both in Church and State should be in the hand of the Civil Magistrate This Doctrine so soon as it was vented did get and does yet get many followers chiefly among state Divines and Christians that know more of wordly policy than Christian simplicity so that in a short time if God prevent it not it is like to swallow up all other Controversies about Church Government so plausible and pleasing it is to the powers of the World who cannot well endure to have Christ Reigning besides them Psalm 2. 3. Let us break their bands assunder and cast away their cords from us Both Sectaries and Malignants do aggree in this Error to take the power of Discipline out of the Churches hand 's The spiritual power of Church Censures in the hands of Christs officers is an eye sore to both of them But to come nearer to the point There are two heads of this Erastian Doctrine which we shall labour to refute The First is most gross whereby they affirm That there is no particular Church Government set down in Scripture In a word that there is no Government in the Church by divine right but that this Government is left in the hands of the Civil Magistrate whether to erect any Government at all in the Church or not or if he please to erect one That he may establish That Government which suits best the well-being of the Civil state So that according to this Doctrine the Civil Magistrate may establish Episcopacy this year the next year he may establish Presbytry and the third year he may cast both and establish Independency And if he like He may find out a Government different from any of these and establish it The Second Erastian Error is this whereby they affirm whatever Government be in the Church whether grounded in Scripture or not that according to Scripture it is in the hands of the Civil Magistrate and that he is the chief fountain of Church Government In opposition to the first Error we lay down this Conclusion which God willing we shall make good That Jesus Christ the King and head of his Church hath established a particular form of Church Government in his word which to alter is not in the power of any State whatsoever He hath set down a way for punishing Scandals for inflicting Church Censures Enacting Church canons And hath not left this in the Arbitriment of Kings or Parliaments to set down any Government they please In prosecuting which point we shall follow that Method we keeped in refuting the Doctrine of Tolleration We shall First clear the State of the Question Secondly We shall bring Arguments to confirm the Truth Thirdly We shall Answer these Arguments the Adversary brings against the Truth And so we shall apply all to Use. I. And First for clearing the State of the Question take thir two assertions First we do not affirm that all the Circumstantials of Church Government is set down expresly in the word But only first That all the
transferred it to the Civil Magistrate which they cannot do Our fifth Argument is to obviate that which they say That Ministers are but the Magistrates deputes From which we argue thus If Church Officers in inflicting Censures be the Magistrates deputs then whatever the Church Judicatory does the Magistrate may do it also for none can delegate more right to ther than what he hath himself And so by this it should follow that the Magistrate might ordain Misters himself by imposition of hands he might Excommunicate And if he may do this by consequence he might also Preach Administrate the Sacraments c. For what right can be pretended to the one which may not be extended to the other and so there should be no need of Pastors and Teachers but the Magistrate might do all Our last Argument is taken from the distinction which the Scripture holdeth out betwixt Ecclesiastick and Civil power Scripture condemneth Church-mens usurping the Civil power and States-mens usurping the Church power Church men are forbidden to judge or meddle with Civil things by Christ himself Luk 12. 13 14. 22 25. And so the Civil Magistrate may not meddle with Church power either There are two Kings we read of to be heavily punished for their Transgression in this kind Saul for offering a Burnt-offering 1 Sam 13. 13. And Vzziah for burning Incense 2 Chorn. 26. 19. He would go in and burn Incense And therefore the Lord smites him with leprosie And surely Reason would say if it be a sin for Church Officers to Exercise the Civil Government then it is a sin for the Civil Magistrate to take to himself the only supream power of Church Government and ingross it wholy to himself III. We come to the Third thing we promised to speak to And that was the answering of the Opposites Arguments The first Argument they bring against this Truth is That Godly Magistrates under the Old Testament had the power of Church Government And therefore so should Christian Magistrates have it under the New Wee Answer That their Argument proves nothing except they also prove that what power of Church Government Magistrates had then they had it as Magistrates For we grant indeed what did belong to Magistrates as Magistrates under the Old Testament does belong to Magistrates under the New But it may not be granted that that which belonged to Magistrates then under other respects doth belong to Magistrates yet For clearing of this It is to be observed that there were many Magistrates extraordinary men under the Old Testament So Moses gives out Laws and Ordinances for ordering the Church But we find in Deut 18. 15. Moses was a great Prophet and a Type of Christ. The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee of thy Brethren like unto me unto him ye shall hearken So David appointed the office of the Levites that divided their courses But David was a Prophet 2. Chron 8 14. And he appointed according to the order of David his father the courses of the Priests to their service Thus in another place it is shown how David did this at the direction of other Prophets 2 Chron. 29. 25. And he set the Levites in the House of the Lord with Cymbals with Psalters and with Harps according to the Commandment of David and of Gad the Kings seer and Nathan the Prophet For so was the Commandment of the Lord by his Prophets And so from these and such like practices they can no more infer the Power of the Magistrate now in Church matters than we may infer the Power of Church-men in Civil-matters from the example of Church-men under the Old-Testament For Church-men did meddle with Civil-Matters in extraordinary Cases As Eli the Priest He governed the State And Samuel in cutting Agag in pieces Elisha in Anointing Jehu to be King And Jehoâ—ada the Priest in causing kill Attaliah the Usurper and making Joash King All which we grant were extraordinary Acts and so cannot be an ordinary rule for Church-men to have such Power in Civil things now And so must they grant concerning these extraordinary practices of Civil Judges in medling sometimes with Church matters The Second Argument they use is this If so be that Magistrates were set over Church Officers to receive Appeals from them it would make them afraid to go beyond their Duty But if they have none above them there is danger of their Ambition and abusing of Discipline To which we answer First Ministers are Men indeed and as other men are ready to abuse their Power But if the danger of abusing Power be a good Argument to take Power from them then there should be no Power in the Hands of any For what kind of Men are there to be found who are not in danger to abuse their Power and so all must be left in Confusion We give a second answer That the same Argument may be used against the abuse of Preaching the Word and administrating the Sacraments For the danger is as great and yet the Erasitans the most part of them at least will not say that the Magistrate for preventing of this abuse may step into the Pulpit himself and Preach better and Administer the Sacraments better There is another way to curb that abuse and so is it in the matter of Governing the Church there is danger indeed of abusing that Power but we say in like manner that for that the Magistrate may not sit down and take the Power of Church Government himself There are other means left to prevent this danger Which shall be our Third Answer Wherein we shall show some of these means appointed by God for preventing the abuse of Power in the hands of the Church-Officers First There are some Remedies in the Church Power it self to wit The Subordination of Judicatories So that although a Congregational Eldership should wrest Justice yet there are above them Presbyteries and above them Synods and above them General Assemblies Now it may be conceived that an Act of Injustice will hardly get through all those before it be branded with some deserved mark But Secondly Though all Church Officers should connive one at another and so the Faults of Ministers go through unpunished yet there is some remedy left even in the Civil Power For although for the reasons foresaid he may not take upon him the Power of the Church Judicatory under pretence of Righting their Abuses no more than he may take upon him to Preach for preventing their abuse of Preaching Yet he may do several things 1. If Church Officers commit a civil Crime he may curb them by his own Authority 2. If Church Judicatories meddle to judge in Civil things which concern a mans Life or Estate the Magistrate may make null what they conclude and punish them for abuse of Power for therein they medled with what belonged not unto them 3. Grant the matter be meerly Ecclesiastick wherein they abuse their Power yet the
infer any Church power which we clear in both First The Peoples power in Electing their Minister doth not infer any power of Church Government in them and that because it is not the Peoples Election or their choise that makes the Minister to be a Minister or gives him Authority to Exercise the Ministerial calling but it is the Act of Ordination by imposition of the hands of those who are Church Officers that makes the man the Minister and gives him Authority We shall find this Acts 6 3. where the Peoples Election and Ordination by Church Officers is clearly distinguished Wherefore Brethren say the Apostles look ye out among you seven men of honest report full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom there is the Peoples Election whom we may appoint over this busines There is the Church Officers part Though the People look them out and choise them that gives them not the power of their calling untill the Church Officers appoint and ordain them Secondly The power of trying the Spirits doth not infer any such power or Authority of Government in the People otherwise it should follow that the People of Berea who did try Pauls Doctrine Act. 17. 11. And compared it with the word whetber those things were so had Authority over Paul which none will affirm A Second distinction to clear the state of the Question is this There is a great difference betwixt those to whom the Authority of Governing the Church is given and those for whom or for whose good it is given although we deny that the power of Governing the Church is given to private Believers yet we grant it is given for them So all Ordinances are given for the good of Believers As it is Ephes 4. 11. And he gave some Apostles and some Prophets aud some Evangilists and some Pastors and Teachers For the perfecting of the Saints c. and in this respect 1 Cor 3. 21 22. all is said to be theirs For all things are yours whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the World or Life or Death or things present or things to come all are yours i. e. given for their good But hence it will not follow that because Church Discipline is given for them that therefore they have the power of it for in this respect Paul is given to every particular believing Woman and yet it does not follow that Women have Pauls Authority And so the Body of the particular Church hath not this power in their hands although the power be given for their good A Third thing for understanding the State of the Question We do willingly grant to private Christians power to admonish exhort in the Lord out of Charity and this they may extend even to Ministers say to Archippus take heed to thy Ministry But this Liberty to admonish by way of Charity doth not import any Church power in them over those whom they rebuke no more than Pauls rebuking of Peter Gal 2. 14. doth infer a power in Paul above Peter So ye see what we do grant to private Christians and what we deny The sum whereof is this That Jesus Christ hath not given them any power of Church Government or the Exercise of it either in whole or in part but has intrusted it wholly to his own Officers Ministers and Elders This for clearing the state of the Question II. We come now to Arguments for clearing the Truth And the First is this That Jesus Christ hath given no warrand to private Christians for Governing his House or for the Exercise of this Government and therefore they have no right to it The consequence must be clear For none has right to play the part of a Governour in Christs Church except those who have a warrand in his word for it Now that private Christians have no warrand in his word for Governing the Church either expresly or by good consequence either by precept or promise or any thing else it is clear from this that in several places of the Word this power is denyed unto them So Rom 10. they must not exercise the Power of Preaching for how shall they Preach except they â—e sent v. 15. Now the whole communiâ—y of Believers cannot be sent besides they have no ability to discharge this Office there is but one of a Thousand that can convince gainsayers Is apt to teach that is able to cut and divide the word aright and so they have no power to Preach And Secondly From this it will follow that they have no power to Administrate the Sacraments for Christ Jesus hath joyned both these powers in one Commission He gives no power to any to Aministrate the Sacraments but those to whom he gives power also to Preach Matth 28 19. Go ye therefore and teach all nations Baptizing them- c Power of Preaching and Administrating the Sacraments go together And so seeing the one power is denyed to them the other must be denyed also Thirdly They have no power to ordain Ministers or to execute any other act of Church Jurisdiction for they have no ability to try Ministers gifts there is no precept commanding them to do it there is no practice in the New Testament proving that ever they did it as shall be more fully cleared in answering the Arguments they bring for it And so they have no right to Govern the Church The Second Argument for the Truth is this That this Doctrine of theirs whereby they give the power of Governing the Church to private Christians doth overturn the order established by Jesus Christ in his House And therefore they have no right to it The consequence none may doubt of For nothing appointed by God doth evert the order established by himself Now that this Doctrine of theirs whereby they put the power of Governing the Church in the hands of the People doth evert the order appointed by Christ is clear Because his order is That some be watchmen some watched over some Rulers some to submit some Governours some to be Governed some Sheepherds some the flock But if so be that all the Members of the Church had the power of Governing in their hand then all should be overseers watchmen Rulers Governours and none more than another If so be that power to Govern should flow from this That they are Church Members For all are so alike The Third Argument we bring for the Truth is this That to whomsoever Christ Jesus hath given warrand for Governing the Church to those he gives promises of sutable abilities for discharging of that great Trust But so it is that Jesus Christ hath not gifted neither promise to gift every Christian nor yet requireth He answerable gifts for Government from them And therefore he hath given them no warrand for Governing the Church For the first part of the Argument that those to whom he gives the power of Church Government he doth also promise them sufficient abilities for their Trust is clear For how could it stand with the wisdom
not have saluted every one man by man and therefore certainly it must be the prime men of the Church But Secondly The name of the Church is very usualy given to Rulers and Judges whether Ecclesiastick or Civil without the People in the Old Testament So Psalm 82 1. God standeth in the congation of the mighty The same word rendred there Congregation is rendred the Church elsewhere And by the Congregation there is meaned the Judges and not the People so we find it taken for the Rulers by comparing Exod 20. 18. 19. with Deut 5. 23. 2 Chron 1. 3. Where Solomon takes up the whole Congregation with him And yet that Congregation is exponed v. 2. to have been Chief-men and Rulers so that usualy in the Old Testament the word Church is taken from Rulers And Thirdly it must be so taken in this place also for in the verse following he telleth what a Church he meaned by v 18 Verily I say unto you whatsoever yee shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven c. Speaking to the Apostles So it must be the Church of Rulers who are so called because they represent the Church doing her business wherein she is concerned Objection Fifth This were say they to establish a yoke of Tyranny over Church Members if power be put in the hands of Officers to make Acts binding to them and they to have no hand in making these Acts themselves We Answer it is no yoke of Tyranny to instruct Officers with power to be over the People in the Lord To Rule them according to his will to make use of their power not for destruction but for edification And this is all we do teach It s true Church Officers may abuse their power but there is no power were it never so good but coming in mans hand may be wrongly used But secondly There is as great danger of Tyranny in the Independent way and more also than in this For if the major part of the Congregation should enact what is wrong and press it on the fewer and better part would not that be Tyranny And surely there is as great liklyhood of this as of what they say that the Eldership may press unjust Acts upon the Congregation And as it is as likly so it is more remeedless for though a Congregation or any in it be wronged by the Elerdership they have a Superior Judicatory to complean to according to our Doctrine But if the lesser part of the Congregation be wronged and Tyrannized over by the greater according to their Doctrine there is no power under Heaven to right the wrong to call the oppressing party to an account So of all Governments under Heaven Independency is the most Tyrannical Obj. VI. The Sixth Objection they bring against the Truth is from Matth 16. 19. Where Christ sayes I will give unto thee the keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever shall be bound on earth c. It is agreed on by both sides that by the Keys there is meaned the power of Governing the Church Now from this place they would infer that the Keys are given to the Body of the People we shall propone and Answer Three of their Objections whereby they labour to prove this consequence The first is this The Keys are given to the Church built on the Rock whereof Christ spake in the preceeding 18 v. But sure it is all that are believers are built on this Rock Therefore the power of the Keys are given unto them We Answer What they say that the power of the Keyes are given to the Church built on the Rock Is said without a ground For he doth not say Vnto this Church built on a rock do I give the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven But I give it to thee Peter Sure none needs to learn our Lord to speak and this change of Person is not without a Reason in the preceeding verse he says upon this rock I will build my Church Now if Christ had meaned to have established the Government in the hands of the body of the Church he might have as easily said unto this Church will I give the keys c. But he says not so but changes the person unto thee to wit Peter will I give the keyes Besides this also every believing woman is a part of this Church built on the rock And yet according to their own grant the power of the Keys is not given unto them The Second Argument they bring from this place is this The power of the Keys is given to those whom Peter did represent But Peter did represent all believers the body of the Church therefore the power of the Keys is given unto them For answer to this we deny what is affirmed that Peter in this place doth represent all believers he doth but represent the rest of the Apostles and those who were to succeed to the Apostes in Preaching the word and Administrating the Sacraments And this we shall make good from other places of Scripture wherein the grant of this power is renewed and confirmed The first place is John 20. 21. Then said Iesus to them again Peace be unto you as my father hath sent me even so send I you and v 23 Whosoevers sins ye remit they are remitted unto them c. Where it is clear the above mentioned grant is renewed and renewed to the Apostles Secondly He did not only represent the Apostles but all Ministers who succeed to the Apostles in Preaching the word and Administrating the Sacraments As in plain also from Matth 28. 19 20. Where ye will find these things clear 1. That there is a grant of power by Jesus Christ unto the Apostles 2 That this grant is made there not only to the Apostles but to these who should succeed to them in Preaching and Baptizing to the end of the World For it is said lo I am with you alway even unto the end of the World And so from this we retort the Argument on themselves That the power of the Keys is given to these whom Peter did represent But so it is Peter did represent the Apostles and Ministers who were to succeed to them in Preaching the word c. And therefore the power of the Keys is given unto them They argue Thirdly from this place that the grant of the Keys is of as large extent as Peters confession v. 16 Thou art Christ the son of the living God Now this Confession belongs to all believers and so also must the power of the Keys We Answer 1. That the grant of the power of the Keys doth belong to all who hold out Peters Confession hath no ground but their own Assertion And 2. We say it is false For this Confession belongs to all faithful Women and Children as well as men who yet by our Opposits own concession have not the Power of the Keys Their last Objection is taken from 1 Cor 5. 5. Where the Apostle commands the Church of Corinth to
in the minds of many if it were but for this one Reason that they who are intrusted with it do not Labour to beautify it It is looked on by many as a place of respect and not of Office If a man be Richer than his neighbour he thinks he is not respected if he be not an Elder and having goten the name he cares for no more Now is that the way either to make People respect thy Person or thy Office Let me obtest and charge all of you who have taken on this Heavenly Calling as ye will Answer on your hazard to Jesus Christ the chief sheepherd that ye would study by all means so to walk in it as to beautify it and that so much the more as the Devil is Labouring to disgrace it And this now for the First Head of Independency Head II. The highest Power of Church Government is not in Church-Sessions or Congregational Elderships WE come now to the Second Head And it is That for which mainly they are called Independents The point they affirm is this That every particular Church Session or Congregational Eldership is instructed with the highest power of Church Government on Earth so that there is no power in the Church above them to call them to an account when they go wrong to rescind any Act once concluded though it were never so unjust They grant that a Synod of Ministers and Elders may meet to consult about matters but withall affirm that they have no Ecclesiasticall power to command in the Lord any Congregation whatsoever So that if a man be wronged by a Session As for instance if he be unjustly censured as it may very readily fall out he must sit with his wrong there is no power to right it till Christ come in the Clouds Or if a particular Congregation divide turn Hereticks run wrong as many of the Independent Congregations doe there is no Church power to heal the breach unless it be by giving an advice which they may either follow or not follow as likes them best We again grant That particular Elderships have a power from Jesus Christ to Exercise Discipline in these things which concern the Congregation in particular But as for other things of more publick concernment that is to say Things that concern other Congregations as well as them these ought to be handled by a Superior Judicatory And that even in those things of particular concernment They are lyable to Appeals and the inspection of the Superior Judicatory So that wherein they shall be found wrong partial or Erronious They may be called to an account For shewing the fashood of this Error as also for the vindicating of the Government of the Church of Scotland that is now so much spoken against we shall labour to make out with the Lords assistance these Three Truths from the word of God The first it this That besides the power of Church Government that Christ hath given to particular Elderships There is also holden forth in his word A plat-form or a Copy of the Government of many Congregations by one Presbytry over them all in common The Second Truth that we shall make out is this That besides the Church Government that Christ hath established by Presbytries there is also holden out in the word greater Church Judicatories to wit Synods made up of Commissioners from several Presbytries instructed with power of Church Government from Christ also And Thirdly We shall labour to make out this Truth That the inferior Judicatories are to be Subject to the Superior as Sessions to Presbytries Presbytries to Synods Synods to General Assemblies So that the Superior judicatories have power over the Inferior in the Lord to receive Appeals from them and complaints 〈◊〉 them to Censure them for Miscarying in the matter of Discipline and to enact Church Canons or conclusions binding to them which Inferior Judicatories are bound to obey in the Lord. ¶ I. There is a Platform of the Government of many Congregations by one common Presbytery holden out in Scripture COncerning the State of this Question I only premit this That however we have the very name of this Presbytry whereabout we dispute holden out in 1 Tim 4. 14. Whereby I might easily show is meaned the Presbytry we plead for yet we shall not dispute about names Though the Name were not yet it is sufficient that the Thing be in it And this we shall make good to wit That in Scripture is holden out a pattern of the Government of many Congregations by one common Presbytry The proof of this point we might instance almost in all the Churches that were planted in the Apostles time As in the Church of Jerusalem The Church of Antioch Ephesus Thessalonica Corinth and of Rome We might easily make it appear that those Churches were not single Congregations but Presbyterial Churches under one common Government But in stead of spending of time in pointing out this in all these Churches we shall instance it only in the Church of Ierusalem That by this One ye may know what to judge of the rest And first concerning the Church of Jerusalem planted by the Apostles we shall labour to make out thir two things 1. That in that one Church there were many particular Congregations And 2. That all these particular Congregations made up but one Church and was guided by one common Presbytry and Judicatory set over them all in common Which two being made out the point we intend will appear evidently to wit That there was here a Government set over many Congregations in one common Judicatory such as our Presbytry is over all the particular Church-Sessions in the bounds The first thing we shall make out is this That there were moe Congregations in the Church of Jerusalem than one and this from four grounds First From the multitude of Church Members that were in Jerusalem Secondly From the multitude of Pastors Teachers and Elders that were there moe than could get work in one single Congregation Thirdly From the diversities of Languages that were among the People of that Church And Fourthly From the way of their meeting and the place they resorted to for Gods service And first For the multitude of Church Members that was at Jerusalem If we compare place with place we will find that they amounted to many thousands and so behooved to be moe than one single Congregation Take a view of some of these places Acts 1. 15. they are numbred to be about ane hundred and twenty And Act. 2. 41. there are added unto them about three thousand Souls and then in v. 47. There is daily Addition of moe and moe the Lord added unto the Church daily such as should be saved Act. 4. 4. We see yet a greater increase There are about five thousand and the nuâ—ber of the men was about five thousand concerning which five thousand it is necessarly to be understood that they were added presently excluding the rest of the numbers before
were no more left than might meet in a single Congregation for the Text faith They were all scattered abroad throughout the region of Judea and Samaria except the Apostles To this we answer That if it be granted that there were moe Congregations before this Persecution then it makes out the point we are to prove But Secondly Neither do we yeild that which they affirm That by the persecution mentioned Act. 8. 1. The multitude was brought to such a few number as they could make up but one Congregation It is said indeed They were all scattered except the Apostles But by this all is not meaned all the Professors but all the Preachers and there are several reasons to prove it For it is said Saul made havock of the Church verse 3. Now if he had meaned that all the Professors were scattered where should Saul have gotten Men and Women to hail to Prison and that this was done in Jerusalem Paul himself acknowledges Act. 26. 10. A second thing to prove that this all that was scattered was the all of the Preachers and not of the Professors is that in verse 4. where it is said They were scatered abroad every where Preaching the Word So that it astricts the scattering mainly to those who were Preachers For certainly the whole multitude could not have gone to Preach the Word And Thirdly The Apostles remain still at Jerusalem as appears from the first verse Now to what end and purpose should the Apostles have stayed there behind the rest except there had been several Flocks there with whom they stayed with the hazard of their Lives to confort them against the Persecution which had driven their Preachers from them But a second answer is That however they had been so scattered in the beginning of the Persecution that there was no more of them than made up a single Congregation yet in process of time they so multiplyed that they behooved to make up many Congregations And for this ye may find out several places as Act. 9. 31. They were multiplied and Act. 12. 24. speaking of Jerusalem The word of God grew and multiplied But we shall take one place for all In Act. 21. 20. where the Elders relate to Paul the exception that the People had taken at him for his going to the Gentiles Thou seest Brother how many thousands of Jews there are which believe c. Now the word rendered thousands in the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies Ten Thousands so there were not only Thousands but Ten Thousands yea and many ten thousands there And so moe than could be Edified in one single Congregation And that these were of Jerusalem is clear from verse 21. They are informed of thee c. And from verse 22. the multitude must needs come together c. Now this is from the first ground of our Proof 2. The second ground from whence we are to prove That there were moe Congregations in the Church of Jerusalem than one is taken from the multitude of Christs Officers That there were so many that it had been a shame for them all to wait upon one flock We find the Apostles were there as in Act. 6. 15. about the choosing of the Deacons We find they were also there in Acts 15. v. 6. Now besides the Apostles we find there were other Church-Officers in Jerusalem as in Acts 11. verse last There were Elders there where he is speaking of Jerusalem as it appears in verse 27. Besides there were Prophets in it as in verse 27. of the same Chapter And in these aayes came Prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch And it is the Judgement of several Interpreters that the seventy Disciples whom Christ sent out to Preach were still at Jerusalem And that they were of the number of these hundred and twenty mentioned Act. 1. 15. Now let any man consider if it was likely especially when the Harvest was so great That so many of the Apostles should be ordinary Hearers of the Word and only one but to speak especially when we consider That when Christ sent out the twelve Disciples only he sent them not out all together but two by two and so certainly a wise man may well conclude That there behooved to be moe Congregations there than one yea many Congregations This is for the second ground of our proof The third ground is taken from the multitude of Languages that were in Jerusalem Act. 2. 5 8 9. 10. 11. and Act. 6. Which diversity did necessitate them to enjoy the Ordinances in divers distinct Congregations in their own Language And that it might be so the Spirit furnished the Apostles with diversity of Languages The fourth ground to prove this point is taken from the way of their Meeting which was not in void capacious Rooms built for the purpose as we now have for they had not then the Civil Magistrate for them to allow places of meeting for the purpose but only in private Houses upper Chambers Houses allowed to them by private Christians as Act 2. 46. And surely it cannot be conceived that their Houses could contain so many thousands and therefore of necessity they could not meet all in one Congregation Thus we have made out the first point That there were moe Congregations than one in Jerusalem We might prove the like in the other Churches of Ephesus Antioch Corinth Rome Thessalonica that there were moe Congregations than one there also And that from the multitude of Believers the Scripture speaks of the multitude of Preachers diversities of Languages But for brevities cause we pass to the other point which is the second thing we have to make out and it is this II. That all these Congregations in Jerusalem were under one Government there was one common Judicatory that Ruled them all in common As our Presbytry is over all the Congregations within its bounds And for clearing of this we lay down three things The First is that although there were many particular Congregations at Jerusalem yet they are called but one Church so in several places they are called the Church Act 8. 1. 15. 4. c. And by the way this refutes one of the Independent tenets whereby they affirm That the name of Church is never given under the New Testament but to those who meet ordinarly in one place for the discharging of all parts of Gods Worship But to the Argument For what reason could they be called one Church Not because they met together in one place for the Ministration of the word Sacraments and Prayer For those were dispensed to them in their singular Congregations severally and so certainly they are called one Church because they were under one Government one Eldership above them to Govern them As the Church of Scotland is called one Church because all her Congregations are Governed by one General Assembly Secondly We add to the former In this one Church made up of many Churches we find there are Ruling Elders so we
find in Act 15. 4. and Act 21. 15 18. And when they were come to Jerusalem they were received of the Church and of the Apostles and Elders c. Now they are not called the Elders of a particular flock at Jerusalem but the Elders of the Church and therefore did meet in one Common Judicatory The force of this Argument cannot be spoken against by our Opposits who prove their particular Elderships from the same ground as in Act 20. 28. mentioning of the Elders of the Church of Ephesus From whence they Reason thus Ephesus was a particular Congregation we read there were Elders in this Church therefore there was an Eldership who met together for Governing that Church in common They must give us liberty to Reason that same way thus We find at Jerusalem was a Church made up of many particular Churches we find Elders in this Church Therefore there was an Eldership who met together for Governing of this Church or these Churches in common But Thirdly to make this Argument yet stronger not only there are Elders in this Church but we find they meet together for Acts of Jurisdiction belonging to the whole Church in Common For proof of this see Act 11 30. The contribution that is gathered for supply of the Saints is sent to the Elders Now what the Elders should do with it may be gathered from a place like it Act 4. 35. 37. where it is said They sold their possessions and laid down the price at the Apostles feet And distribution was made unto every man according as he had need So doubtless the contribution was given to the Elders for this end that they might have distributed the same to the poor in the whole Church And so it was an Act of Government tending to the good of the Church Further we find this more clear Act 21. 18. They meet together and Judicially set down a way to Paul for removing of a Church Scandal by satisfying the offended and purifying himself after the manner of the Jews In v 23. Do therefore this c. So we see their Elderships meeting together for removing a Scandal We find a Third place to confirm this Act. 15. 2. 4 We shall afterward make use of the whole Chapter to prove the power of Synods only this much at present to the purpose in hand We find the Elders met and make binding Acts to the Churches under them So we have made out the first point That there is a Government of many Congregations under one Presbytry holden out in the Word The main thing our Opposits flee to at the last is this That granting it to be true That there were many Congregations in Jerusalem before the Persecution in Act 8. And that they had one Government above them yet that doth not infer a Government by Presbytry For they were Governed by the Apostles We read not of any Elders in that Church before the Dispersion at which time they were brought to so few a number that they might all meet in one place So that though there was one common Government then by Elders It inferrs not a Presbytry but a Congregational Eldership only This is the sum of all that is said to this For Answer They grant to us That after the Persecution there was a common Eldership over the Church of Jerusalem And Secondly We have proved that there were moe Congregations than One there even after the Dispersion And we have also proved that they had Elders over them in common so that whatever was before the Dispersion yet even from their own concession it followeth That there was a Presbyterial Government in Jerusalem after the Dispersion Secondly we answer They can hardly prove that there were no Elders in Jerusalem before the Dispersion It s true we read not of Elders until Act. 11. But when they were first instituted we read not Thirdly We answer That though there were not Elders to govern them in common yet it is enough for us that the Apostles did govern them in common for they were also Elders So they call themselves 2 John ver 1. 1 Peter 5. 1. But Secondly As they were Elders so what they did in these Acts of Government they did it as Elders For what they did as Apostles is not imitable now but what they did in Governing the Church is imitable such as Ordaining of Officers Distributing of Alms. Again What they did as Apostles one of them might do it alone But here they do it in Collegio Act. 6. And reserve the Peoples part of Election to them Now they never met together to write Scripture nor sought the Peoples concurrence for any Act meerly Apostolick so it is clear the Church was governed by them as Elders And so the Churches even then were under one common Eldership And this now for the first thing we promised to make out to wit That the Scripture holdeth out a pattern of the Government of many Congregations by one common Presbytery ¶ II. There is a Plat-form of Government by Synods over many particular Presbyteries holden forth in Scripture THe Second thing we promised to make out is this That as the Scripture holdeth forth the Power of Presbyteries so also the Power of a Synod by which we mean Church Judicatories above Presbyteries as they are above Sessions or Congregational Elderships I. For understanding the Question These Synods or greater Meetings of Church Officers are of three sorts Some made up of several Presbyteries and these are Provincial Synods such as commonly we have twice a year Or they are made up of several Synods within a Nation and these are General Assemblies Or Thirdly They are made up of several Churches of several Nations or Commissioners from them and these are called Universal Councils or General Synods of the Christian World Now all these differ from Presbyteries not only in this That they are more ample but also in this That the Government by Presbyteries is the common ordinary way of Government held out in Scripture But Synods for the most part are more rare and upon particular emergent as Act. 15. That Synod was called upon an occasion of Division in the Church of Antioch which troubled other Churches about Secondly All these kinds of greater Synods The Provincial Synod and the Synod of a Nation and the Universal Councils do not differ in Nature and kind but only in less and more Wherefore it is not needful that we hold out every one of them from Scripture It is sufficient that we hold out the Power of Synods in the general which is to be applyed to every kind in particular For so we find it in Scripture in other things Particulars are infinite and therefore in things of one and the same kind General Rules are sufficient Or a Rule for one particular which keeping the just proportion is to be applyed to other particulars of the same kind As Matth 18. Christ sets down the way of walking in private Scandals speaking
nothing of publick Scandals Not as if Jesus Christ did mean that publick Scandals should be passed over but that the same Rule may serve for these keeping the just proportion Even so is it here If the nature of Synods be held out in the Word that is enough though it speak nothing of the bounds to which they should extend whether of One Province or of All the Provinces of a Nation no more than it is particularly set down in Scripture what should be the number and bounds of a particular Congregation There is a Third thing for clearing of this Question The Independents and we agree in this That the word gives ground for meeting of Synods only we differ about their Power They grant that in case of Division or Scandal Synods may meet and give their Advice in Matters doubtful only they say that Synods have no Power of Jurisdiction to command others in the Lord to embrace their determinations We on the other hand maintain that they have this Power and that the Scripture holdeth out such a Power belonging to them II. We might instance this in Act 1 In the choice of Matthias which was done by no particular Church For here were the Apostles whose Paroch-Church was the whole world Here were the Brethren of Christ from Galilie v 14. Some from Jerusalem v. 15. This meeting did a Church business of common concernment to the whole Christian World and so behooved to be done by those who did represent them And therefore this behooved to be a General Council But to clear the point more fully we shall take Act 15. Where this Synod we plead for is held forth clearly The History is plain A difference ariseth in Antioch about Circumcision This cannot be composed in Antioch it self so they send up Commissioners to Jerusalem to determine this matter where there is a Synod of Apostles and Elders and they determine the Question Now that it may appear the Synod we plead for is here consider first That there was a Church meeting or Judicatory here None may doubt of this as is clear v 6. Secondly Consider That this Judicatory is made up of Commissioners from the several Presbyteries we see that Commissioners from the Presbytry of Jerusalem was there v 6. And Commissioners from the Presbytry of Antioch Act 15. 2 Paul and Barnabas and others Now that these were Commissioners and had voice appears from Act 16. 4. where the decree that was then made was ascrived to all the Elders who were present It is very likely that there were other Commissioners there also from Syria and Cilicia For they are joyned with Antioch in the Letter v. 23. For what other Reason cannot be imagined except that as they were alike troubled with the Heresy as Antioch was so they had their Commissioners there as Antioch had And therefore these Acts are binding to them in a special manner However it is clear that there were Commissioners from the Presbytry of Jerusalem and of Antioch so the meeting was made up of two Presbytries And by the same rule it may be made up of moe Thirdly We would consider that this meeting made up of Commissioners from several Presbytries makes binding Acts unto other absent Churches who were present only in their Commissioners And there are several things to clear this First They determine the Question in v 19. 20 Secondly They impose Their determination on the Churches to be keeped by them So in the Letters They wrote to the Church of Syria and Cilicia v 28. The word that is turned there a Burthen signifies a Law or a Decree and so we find it in Act 16. 4. There their Conclusions are called Decrees which were ordained of the Apostles and Elâ—ers at Jerusalem And which were to be keeped From all which it is clear They did make Acts binding other Congregations Thirdly We find they put forth an Act of Censure on the false Prophets v 24. They called them Lyars A brand of Infamy It 's true They Censured them not with Excommunication For it was time enough to doe That when they knew they were become incorrigibly obstinate according to the common Rule An Heretick after the first and second Admonition reject By this I hope ye perceive clearly a pattern for greater Synods a Judicatory made up of Commissioners from several Presbytries and these making binding Laws to other Churches who were absent in their Persons and only present in their Commissioners III. Their main Objection against this is That the Apostles were here who were guided with an infallible Spirit to determine and so this can be no Rule for our Synods made up of men wanting that assistance To this we Answer that this if it prove any thing will make against our Opposits themselves as well as against us For they hold that here is a pattern of a Synod for advice so if their Argument hold against Us in the One It must hold also against Them in the Other Secondly We shew before that the Apostles were also Elders and sometimes Acted as Elders Now if it can be proven that they Acted as Elders here it breaks the strength of their Objection But this is clear First Paul and Barnabas are sent by the Church of Antioch They willingly submit Act 15. 4 Now in their Apostolick Office they were not directed by meâ— And so surely here they acted not as Apostles Secondly The Apostles all along go not on that way as when guided by an infallible Apostolick Spirit For they state the Question and debate it in v 7. Now when they write Scripture they do not use advice nor do they debate what they shall conclude but speake all as immediatly inspired But here they debate And â—aving found Truth By force of Reason they conclude as any other Assembly upon like assurance of Scripture warrand may do It seemeth good unto Vs being Assembled with one accord c. In v 25. Thirdly When the Apostles did determine any thing as Apostles and were guided by the immediatly inspiring Spirit of God then they did determine the Question fully that nothing needed to be added But so it was not here For Peter v 6th gives his Judgment That Believers were freed from the Ceremonial Law What he saith is true indeed Yet it speaketh not fully to the point untill James addeth somewhat to wit That however the Gentils were freed from the Ceremonial Law yet to eschew the Scandal of the weak Jews They were to abstain from things strangled c v 20. And therefore They Acted not as Apostles except we would say that Peter as an Apostle intending to determine a Controversie yet did not speak fully to the point which were an injury to that immediately inspiring Spirit by which they were acted in penning Scripture Fourthly Because the decrees of the Synod are put forth in the name and by the Authority not only of the Apostles but Elders also Act 15. 22. 23. Act. 16. 4. Act. 21. 25. Now
the difference which they like best and hence arise contests Janglings and matter of renting the Church Now there is no way in Independency left for preventing of this Fifthly The way of Independency leaves no remedy to a Congregation wanting a Minister for Tryal of the next that comes Whose tryal is left wholly to the People by this way of Theirs How slight that tryal would be any may judge How few Parishes can try a Minister in his Abilities If he be apt to Preach convince gainsayers watch against ravening wolves c. Now this is remeeded in the way of Presbytery according to Pauls Rule 1 Tim 4. 14. That Ministers be ordained with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery This for the first Argument from Five great defects in the Independent way Other defects also might be instanced but these may suffice Our Second Argument is taken from Matth. 18. 16. 17. 18. where Jesus Christ layes down a way for the removing of private Scandals or dealing with an offending brother From whence we argue thus If Christ hath laid down a way for gaining an offending brother how much more for gaining an offending Church It s above all doubt that a Church may offend walk inoderly wrest Justice Now surely Gods care must be no less of the whole Church than of One Member So that our consequence holds but we assume There is no way to heal the Scandal of an offending Congregation or particular Church but by compleaning to a Presbyterial Church above them This is evident For 1. our Opposites themselves will not censure them-themselves They cannot be both judge and party 2. It appears from the rule of proportion For by that same rule that private Christians are to be compleaned of to that Eldership whereof they are parts so the Eldership is to be compleaned of to that Presbytry whereof it is a part and if the Christian liberty of the private Christian be not taken away by the one so neither is the just power of the Eldership taken away by the other Our Third Argument is from that which we handled before That in Scripture is holden forth Government by Presbytries over single Congregations and by Synods over Presbytries From whence we argue thus That the way of Governing the Church in the Apostles times was by Presbyteries and Synods And therefore the Church should still be so Governed For the first part of our Argument That the way Then of Governing the Church was by Presbytries and Synods it was proved before So we have only to speak to the Second part of our Argument that therefore the Church should be Governed so now And to clear this consequence consider these things 1. That whatever is recorded of the practice of the Churches in the matter of Government in the Apostles times can be for no other end but to be a Pattern for imitation to the Churches in after times For whatsoever things were written afore times was for our learning and instruction Rom 15. 4. 2. Those primitive Churches were planted by the Apostles Now who can imagine but what the Apostles did of that kind was according to the directions given them by Christ A promise of whose presence they had with them in their Ministry and if so then their practice must be a Rule to Generations following 1 Cor 11. 1. Be ye followers of me c. 3. We make the practice of the Apostles then to be a Rule for us in other things As from their practice in giving the People liberty in choising their own Deacons Act. 7. We argue That the People may choise their own officers yet And from their practice in having Ruling Elders in the Church 1 Tim 5. 15. We argue That we should have Ruling Elders yet So from their practice in having the office of Deacons we argue That we should have them yet And from their practice in Celebrating the Lords Supper on the Lord's day Act 27. We argue Therefore we should celebrate it on that day yet Now if so be that Their practice should be a Rule to us in other things why not also in Church Government by Presbytries and Synods especially seeing that we have made out that Their practice is as clear in this as in other matters A Fourth consideration to strengthen this Argument is this That the Churches now have these same Reasons to move them to submit to that Government which the Church in the Apostles times had and a Law or Practice is still binding so long as the Reason of the Law remains Now the Reasons that moved the Church in the Apostles time to submit to Presbyterial Government was first Because there were many things of common concernment to all the Congregations in Jerusalem and therefore they were Governed by one Presbytry as said is so there are many businesses of common concernment to many particular Congregations now and therefore it should be so yet Secondly In Act 15. There ariseth a controversie in Antioch and because the controversie cannot be composed in the Presbyterial Church of Antioch therefore it is referred unto a Synod made up of many Presbytries all concerned in it So there are businesses of common concernment to many Presbytries yet and some that cannot be ended in one Presbytry and therefore there should be Synods for composing of these things yet And seeing the Apostles extraordinarly assisted one whereof might have composed the Controversie would nevertheless have a Synodical Convention for ending Controversies Much more ought we to do it whose Gifts are far Inferior to Theirs By all which it remains clear that the practice of the Church then in that point is binding to us now Argument Fourth There is no Pattern of such an Independent Congregation by precept or Practice in the whole Scripture where one particular Congregation with one Pastor and Their Eldership did Exercise or may Exercise all Church Government in all its Acts and that Independently therefore c. The Antecedent is true First An instance cannot be given of Ordination of Ministers by One Congregation Secondly By precept and Practice Ordination is to be by moe Pastors than one as Act 1. 13. Act. 6. 2. Act 13. 13. 1 Tim 4. 14. So it is clear That it is by Pastors and many Pastors and so cannot be by a single Congregation where there is required and should be say they but one Pastor As to what they say of the Church of Corinths Excommunicating the Incestous man We Answer Corinth was a Presbyterial Church And Secondly It proves not that they might Excommunicate Independently For if a Controversie had arisen about it which they could not have ended among themselves they were to have their recourse to a Synod By the same Reason for which the Church of Antioch had Acts 15. Argument Fifth If so be that Congregations be Independent And no benefit of Appeals allowed to the party grieved Then the state of the Christian Churches were in greater Slavery than the Jewish But
the Communion and not only so but to quite That Church and set up a new Church of Their own We shall begin first with that Doctrine that concerns the Constitution of Visible Churches And therein we shall follow our usual Order First Clear the Question Secondly Bring Arguments for the Truth Thirdly Answer those they bring against the Truth And Fourthly Apply the whole to some Use. I. First For clearing of the Question ye would know what Church it is concerning which the Controversy is First It is not that place where Gods people meet to go about Gods publick Worship such as this House we now are in which is called the Church by a Figure improperly But it is the People gathered together in it which People are really and properly the Church although the House be so called because it contains them by an usual Figure The Church that we are to dispute of is made up of Men and Women And not that which is built of Timber and Stone Secondly The Controversy betwixt Us and Them is not concerning the Invisible Church that is called the Church of the First-born Those who by vertue of their Effectual Calling are united to Jesus Christ the Head are living Members of His Mystical Body and draw Spiritual Influence from him Concerning the Church taken in this Sense There is no Controversy betwixt Us and the Separatists but that the Members of this Church are only made up of Believers are all gracious because this Church is Christs Mystical Body a Royal Priest-hood the Lambs Wife all fair undefiled c. Thirdly The Question Then is concerning the Church Visible which is a Company of Men and Women who have according to the Tenor of Gods Covenant with the Visible Church an Outward Ecclesiastical which is in its kind a real Right to enjoy the Outward Priviledges of the Children of God This being the Church about which the Controversy betwixt Us and the Separatists is We shall speak a litle to clear what is meaned by it And First The Church is called Visible not because the Members of it may be seen For in that respect the Church Invisible the Church of Believers may be called Visible For the Members of it being believing Men and Women may be seen also But the difference betwixt the Churches in those two Senses is taken from that which makes one to be a Member of the one Church as it differs from that which makes one a Member of the other That which makes One man a Member of the Invisible Church is True Grace sincere Faith inward Marks thereof Now Grace is a thing that cannot be seen by another certainly It s true there are outward effects of it but they are such that a Hypocrite may have the counterfeit of them so as the one cannot be discerned from the other by a Beholder The nature of Grace is only known Infallibly and certainly to God And therefore This Church is called Invisible Again that which makes a Man or Woman a Member of the Visible Church is something that may be seen something that may be judged of by those who have Power to receive Members into the Church and cast them out from it Secondly We said that this Visible Church is a Company or Society of Men and Women that have an Ecclesiastical Right to enjoy the Outward Priviledges of the Sons of God For understanding what is meaned by enjoying of Outward Priviledges we shall show you That there are Outward Priviledges and Inward Priviledges of those who are the Sons of God Inward Priviledges are Jesus Christ himself a Right to him a saving Right to the Covenant of Grace and Life Eternal These are the Inward Priviledges of the Sons of God And only Believers have right to those Painted Hypocrites have no right to them But Secondly There are Outward Priviledges of the Sons of God such as these To be ordinary Hearers of the Word Preached To be taken a care of by Jesus Christ his Servants To have liberty to come to the Sacraments These are Outward Priviledges And these are Priviledges that a Member of the Visible Church hath a right to We said they had an Ecclesiastical Right or a Church Right to them That is such a Right as gives Warrand to the Church for receiving them to enjoy these Priviledges and yet possibly they have not a Right to them before God As for Example when there is a painted Hypocrite in a Congregation who makes Conscience seemingly to use the Means That man hath an Ecclesiastical Right to come to a Communion such a Right as may Warrand the Minister for admitting of him although he have not a Right to come before God God will challenge the Hypocrite for coming and not the Minister for suffering him to come Yet we are still to consider that tho' this Ecclesiestical Right be not Saving yet it is Real in its kind being founded upon Gods Covenant with the Visible Church and his Ordinance of admitting such therein Now ye may know somewhat by this what we mean by an Ecclesiastical Right it 's That which gives warrand to Church Officers to admit a man to enjoy these Outward Priviledges And so ye may know what we mean by the Visible Church whereof we Dispute There are several differences betwixt Us and the Separatists Concerning the Visible Church First They affirm That there is no Visible Church on Earth But a single Congregation As many as may meet in one place This we refuted in the former Controversie by shewing That in the Church of Jerusalem there were far moe than could meet in one single Congregation yea many particular Congregations And yet are called but One Church Secondly They differ much from us as also from the Truth concerning the power They give to this Visible Church They give them the full power of Church Government and that Independently from any Chuch power on earth This difference also we spoke of in the preceeding Debate And so we shall stand now no longer upon it Thirdly We differ concerning That which gives a Being to the Church Visible They say To make a Society of People a Visible Church so as to have right to partake of the Priviledges there of It is requisite that all the Members of that Society Swear a Covenant one to another wherein they bind themselves to submit one to another in the Lord to walk in all the Ordinances of God and not to leave that Society till liberty be given them by the rest So that tho a man should be never so truely Godly and Gracious yet if he take not such a Covenant and if he Swear not such an Oath He is without the Visible Church He is in the state of a â—agan to live and to die without any Church Ordinance The Judgement of our Church and that of Truth herein is this That wherever a man comes out of one Particular Congregation which we call a Paroch to another By his so doing he comes
under a duty and Obligation which he is bound to before God and the Congregation also to discharge himself in Namely all the Duties pertaining to a Member of that Particular Congregation or Paroch to which he comes Although he Swear not such an Oath We say Secondly he may also Swear to do these Duties But Thirdly To bind this on all the Consciences of the Members of the Church to take such an Oath so as if they take it not They are not Church Members We say It is Will Worship not commanded by God either by Practice or Precept in Old or New Testament We might easily prove that Jesus Christ never took This way to gather a Visible Church But the main difference is the Fourth and that is Concerning those who are to be kept or received Members of the Church Visible Or who they are that have right to these Outward Priviledges we spoke of That which they hold in this Point is That they would have all Visible Churches disolved and then Churches gathered out of these wherein none are to be received or admitted to partake of Church Priviledges so as to be under the care of Ministers Admitted to the Sacraments c. but those who have evident positive signes of Grace and these not only evident to the Minister and a few moe but to all the Members of the Congregation so that every one in the Congregation must be convinced so far as men can attain unto that he hath Grace or else he is no Member of the Visible Church by which Rule they model Congregations But there was never a Congregation since Christ was on the earth so constitute except Their Own For according to this Rule they will cast out the Two Part and of some Congregations leave Ten Parts and take but the Eleventh leaving all the rest as Pagans without Baptising their Children or admitting themselves to any Church Priviledge This is what They hold As for the Judgment of our Church and that which is according to the Word take those Assertions First We hold that every man indeed that is a Member of the Visible Church ought to have Grace so that he sins against God and his own Soul if he have it not And all the priviledges he enjoyes will do him no good without it We say in this respect all the Members of the Church ought to have Grace But to say That they so ought to have Grace that none of them must be admitted to be a Member of the Church Visible without it This we deny It is ill reasoning from unanswerableness to an obligation to a forfaulture of Priviledges For every man that is a Magistrate ought to have Grace so as he sins against God if he have it not yet a man may be a lawful Magistrate and have the Priviledges of a Magistrate although he have not Grace Secondly We do willingly grant that in the Constitution of our Church and admitting of People to the Lords Table Our Practice comes far short of the Rule There is not that care taken to purge out scandalous persons as should be Our practice is indeed short of the Rule But Our Rule which we shall hold out as we shall prove is Good To know then what is the Rule according to which we should admit men to be Members of the Church First There are some who are admitted to some Priviledges only and not to all as to Baptism And these are Members of the Church Incompleatly They are Members but not so fully And those are Infants that are born within the Church Visible They are Members although not to be admitted to the Lords Supper Now betwixt Us and the Separatists herein to wit whether Infants should be Baptized there is no difference Secondly There are some who are admitted to all Priviledges of the Visible Church And those are Members Compleatly and fully And concerning those the dispute is Who are those that ought to be admitted to all the common Priviledges of the Visible Church They mantain as we heard that none should be admitted but those that can give evident Signs of Grace to the satisfaction of the Consciences of all within the Church We hold First that if it be known that Men be Baptized And Secondly If they be free of Scandal And Thirdly If they submit themselves to the Doctrine of the Gospel and have some competent knowledge of the Grounds of the Christian Religion If these things I say be in a man We hold that he is to be received although he cannot give evident signes of the reality of the Grace of God in him to All. And this is the Controversie II. Now we come to prove that which we hold by Arguments The first is John the Baptist did not follow this Rule of Theirs in receiving Members to the Church and therefore it is not the right Rule That John the Baptist did not follow this Rule will appear if we consider Luke 3. Wherein consider Who it was whom John Baptized v 21. Now when all the People were Baptized c. It was all the People Consider Secondly What he requires of this People before he Baptize them We shall find in the preceeding words that he seeks no more than that they would be convinced that they were wrong before And Secondly Profess an earnest desire to amend So we find in v 10. And the People asked him saying what shall we do And the publicans in the 12. v do the same who yet were but Course Men. And in the 14 v The souldiers likewise demanded of him saying what shall we do Now these Questions import this much That they were convinced they were wrong and professed at least a desire to become better And accordingly John instructs them thus and thus ye shall do And without more ado in v 21. He Baptizes them Now it is not possible that John could have got positive signes from every one of them to convince him that they had real Grace Far less That every one of the multitude could have been perswaded in Conscience of the reality of Grace in each other And therefore the Rule of admiting men to be Members of the Visible Church cannot be this That every one to be admitted should have evident signes of Grace satisfactory to the Consciences of all John sought not this of those whom he received It 's true he fals very sharply on the Scribes Matth. 3 v 7 O generations of vipers who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come But it is as true when he hath rebuked them as ill as they were before seing now they professed a desire to amend he Baptizes them in v 11. I indeed Baptise you with water c The same You whom he spoke to in v. 7. As is clear from the Connexion of every Verse If it be Objected that they were not received to be Members of the Church although they were Baptized We shall once for all clear that Baptism sealeth up a mans
alone Because they cannot be sure enough that any others have Grace but only themselves There is a Sixth Argument taken from the similitudes and comparisons under which the Church Visible is holden forth in Scripture which similitudes do shew there is not That strictness required in admitting Members to the Visible Church as the Separatists judge It 's compared to a Draught net cast into the Sea that gathereth fishes good and bad Matth 13. Secondly To a Field wherein is Wheat and Tares ibid. Thirdly It is compared Matth 22. to a Table of Guests where there are some with and some without a Wedding Garment Fourthly It is compared to a House wherein are Vessels of Honour and Dishonour and to a Fold of Sheep and Goats And in every Church there are many Called but few Chosen Now how shall Tares chaff Goats c. give convincing signes of that which they have not Certainly these Similitudes seem to speak That there needs not so much Waling or Picking out in admitting Members to the Visible Church providing they be free of Scandals Once take them in and and then let the Word work on them This great Waleing and Separation will be when the Net comes to the shoar when the great Harvest comes when the Sheep and Goats are severed This much for Arguments for the Truth III. We shall in the next answer Their Objections whereby they labor to prove that the Church Visible should only be made up of such Church members as can give satisfactory Signs of Grace to each other Obj. 1. Their first Objection which is the most specious is taken from these Glorious sâ—â—ies given to the Church in Scripture They are called Saints a chaste â—â—rgine spoused to Christ Sons and Daughters of the Lord Almighty and Christs mystical Body whose Members are all Gracious Now say they seing the Church hath these Stiles in Scripture Should any be joyned to the Church but such who to the uttermost of our discerning have Grace For answer If this Argument conclude any thing it will conclude that none should be Members of the Visible Church but those who have Real Grace for none is a partaker of Christsâ— Mystical Body the Lambs Wife c. But such only Now this our Opposites themselves will not affirm They grant there may be painted Hypocrites in the Church and the Scripture saith the same for Ananias and Saphira Judas and Simon Magus were such and so these places of Scripture if they prove any thing will prove more than They will grant But to answer directly ye would know that in the Church Visible there is a Company of Good and Bad sincere Christians and painted Hypocrites Now the Scripture speaks of them sometimes according to the Better Part and sometimes according to the Worse Part where it speaks of them according to the Better Part it speaks so of them as if there were not One Evil Man among them all hence are these Stiles The Lambs Wise Sons and Daughters of the Almighty Called to be Saints c. They are so according to the Better Part. Again when it speaks of the Visible Church according to the Worse Part it gives such names as if there were not One Good Man among them all it calls them Stif-necked a Rebelious house Children that are Corrupters Now As it were ill Argued to conclude from these places where such stiles are given to the Church that every one within the Church were Corrupters Stif-necked c. and not one seeking God For there he gives them those Stiles from the Evil Part among them So it is also ill argued from these places where the Scripture calls them the Lambs Wife Sons and Daughters of the Almighty c. That they were All of them so And we shall clear it more fully from the Church of Corinth 2 Cor 6 18. They get many Glorious stiles They are called The Sons and Daughters of the Almighty they are called A chast Virgin c. 2 Cor 11 2. Now there were many Schismaticks among them some denying the Resurrection some Vilifying Pauls Doctrine Many who were Contentious Drunkards Fornicators so that these Stiles cannot be Verified of the Members of the whole Church but only of the Better Part that was among them even as men speaking of an Heap of Chaff and Corn will call it An Heap of Corn Not that there is nothing but Corn in it but because the Corn is the Best Part And so the Church Visible wherein is a mixed Company is denominated from the Better Part sometimes in Scripture and called Sons and Daughters of the Lord Almighty and sometimes from the Worse Part and called Stiff-necked c. Obj. II Their second Objection is taken from Act 2. 47. Where it is said And the Lord added unto the Church daily such as should be saved Say they God added no other to the Church but such as would be saved therefore we should adde no others For Answer If any thing follow from this it would follow that none should be added to the Church but these who are Believers really for no other will be saved But this is against themselves And therefore our second Answer is this That the meaning of the words must be That He had a chief care of adding those to the Church who were to be Saved But it is not said that He added no other for the same Chapter sayes He added moe v 41 whole three Thousand were added and yet all those were not to be saved For there were Ananias and Saphira and doubtless many other Hypocrites among them Obj. III. The third Objection is taken from Matth 22. 12. In the Parable concerning the Kings Banquet where he bids his Servants go and invite to the Marriage and finding One wanting the Wedding Garment says he Friend how camest thou in hither not having a Wedding Garment Now say They this is a reproof to those who admitted him to this Priviledge We Answer This is quite contrair to the scope of the Parable if we look to the command v 9 Goe ye therefore into the high-ways c. They are commanded to invite all and to hold out none for want of the Wedding-Garment For that being Inward is only discernable by God Indeed this Parable will shew this much That Ministers may admit People to Communions and yet Christ will come with an after search and find many there whom he will cast that Ministers have admitted Ye ought not to think that every man that comes through a Ministers Tryal is in a good state The place says That Christ found One wanting the Wedding Garment But it sayes not That Ministers should let none come but those that had the Wedding Garment And to shew that this is the scope of the Parable see v 14. There it is said For many are called but few are chosen Ob. IV Their fourth Objection is taken from Rev. 2. 4 5. The Lord speaking there to the Church of Ephesus sayeth Nevertheless I have
that the Apostle John is there speaking of whoorish Rome and is commanding all Gods People to Separate from the Antichristian Church Now let any judge if that be not loose Reasoning We are commanded to Separate from Rome who hath overturned the foundation of Religion Worships the Creature instead of the Creator therefore we are to Separate from Christs true and Purest Churches and Gods Worship in them If so be prophane men be keeped in them It is a senseless Consequence Obj. III. Their Third Objection against the Truth is taken from 1 Cor â— 11. But now I have written unto you not to keep company c. Say they We are forbidden to eat our ordinary meat with wicked men and far more we are forbidden to eat at the Lords Table with them To this we Answer That indeed it is the shame of Christian Churches and our sin that Scandalous and Ignorant Persons are admitted to the Lords Table But when they are admitted partly through the neglect of Ministers and partly through abounding corruptions It doth not follow that every private Christian is to cast himself out of the Church because wicked men are admitted As to this place here spoken of It s true every tender Christian is forbidden to use Familiar Society with Fornicators But it is not simply forbidden as if it were unlawful at all times to eat with them For even Paul himself eats with Heathens Act 27. 35. So the thing here forbidden is That the Lords People should not use intimat Society with wicked men yet so as when they cannot get it eschewed It is lawful both to eat and drink with them As put the case we could not get it otherwise it were lawfuâ— for us to eat with them following Pauls practice And so it follows in the matter of the Lords Table If it be in Ministers power to hold them back if they do it it is well If not it doth not follow that private Christians who have no power to debarr them and so cannot get eating with them eschewed without neglecting of a duty are bound to Separate Obj. IV. Their Fourth Objection is from 1 Cor 5. 6 Know ye not that a litle leaven leaveneth the whole lump Scandalous men infect the Church And the Church being infected infects the Worship and so if I come to the Worship it is infected to me and I do sin Now this is a Consequence far from Pauls words a litle leaven sayes he leaveneth c. Therefore cast out the Incestous man But he doth not say If he be not put out cast out your selves As for that they say that prophane men infect the Worship It is without ground It s true prophane men oftimes infect these among whom they live But they do not infect the worship For the way that prophane men infect these among whom they live is not Physical As the Pest infects every thing it toucheth but they infect by their evil example And so a prophane man may infect another man but by his evil example cannot infect the Worship because the Worship is not carried away with evil example as a man is And so if I can keep my self from following their example the worship is pure and clean to me Obj. V. Their last Objection is say they My coming to the Table with them is a countenancing of them in their profanation of the holy things So I partake with them in their sins say Amen to what they do And therefore better for me to withdraw We Answer this is a plausible Argument to deter People that are tender but when tryed it will be found weak For if so be this Argument do hold for Separating from the Lords Table it will conclude also that we should not hear Preaching with them for our hearing Preaching with them is a countenancing of them as well as our coming to the Sacrament with them And the wicked man profaneth the holy things in the one as well as in the other And by this it should follow that Jesus Christ should have been polluted which were Blasphemy to speak by His Preaching to Prophane multitudes For in That He countenanced them Therefore Secondly For a more full Answer we say Worshipping with them is not a consenting to their sin except it were in our power to hold them out but not otherwise Thou doest say Amen to what they do profess that They are serving God doing the commanded Duty But not to Their Hypocritical Way in doing of It Did Christ say Amen to the Pharisees way of Hearing although He Preached to Them So neither doest thou But as is already said Thou approves of Them in so far as They do the Commanded Duty But that it is done Impenitently Thou by Thy joyning in the Worship approves it not This for their Objections IV. For Use Our first is this To regrate that there is so much occasion given to this Error in the Churches of Christ We may regrate that there are so many of the Members of the Church Prophane and Wicked And that People walk not like Their Holy Calling We may regrate that the Officers of the Church Ministers and Elders do not Purge out Scandalous Persons Do not Labour to find Them and Censure Them and debarr Them from Communions But most of all it is to be regrated That many of those who should Purge out others Their Life is such that They deserve to be Purged out as Scandalous Themselves For this cause it is that the Lord threatens to Rent the Church And if He should let men arise among our selves under pretence of Pious strictness to cast at Our Worship We behoved to say Just is the Lord Although on the other hand it is no excuse but a fearful sin to Them who by Their carriage Rent and undoe the Church because of some Corruptions that are in it Use II. The Second Use is That ye would not think all alike Guilty that may encline to this Error of Separating from Lawful Worship because of wicked Men's being admitted to it It 's true there may be some Piously strict that upon the one hand loath at that which is Good when they cannot get it but in wicked Mens company And upon the other hand because they cannot live without the Ordinances therefore They encline to make up a Litle Church of Good Men of Their Own choise By which means the Devil takes advantage of Their zeal to make them dishonour God by runing to the other extreme Now although the Humour of such should not be given way to yet those who encline this way from a desire of strictness are much to be Pitied But on the other hand we are not to think so of the Ring-leaders of this Error It hath been found by experience that such have been more carried on by a conceit of their Own Holiness than any true Love to Holiness it self It hath been usually found in Heady men who had a mind to make a Rupture in tâ—e Church that
this has been the Method they used to walke in To cry up Holiness in themselves and to cry down all who differed from them as untender That so they might carry all with them at last At least to Rent and divide the Church To such we will say nothing but Christs Curse and the Churches for Renting her bowels will fall on Them But unto the other we will speak something that is To those who are piously Strict and really loath at the good Service of God because such Persons are at it who should not be there To those I shall say First Know what it your Duty And Secondly What is not your Duty in reference to Prophane Men Oft-times we mistake our Duty and leap over it to what is not our Duty Now your Duty in reference to prophane Men Is not to take your hands from the Ordinance because Their hands are at it To turn your backs on your Duty because Prophane Men join with you in it It will be but a small excuse to pretend when God reckons with you when the Lord will say What made you neglect such a Duty to say Lord I grant it was my Duty but I could not because such Men were at it Therefore ye should know your Duty in reference to those and it is this In the place where ye live when ye see a fault committed ye should tell the guilty persons of it If the Fault be open and a Fault ye can get proven ye ought to delate it to those who have power to Censure them If so be they may be gained by this mean Or if not ye have done your Duty Or if the Church do their Duty in casting out the Obstinate then ye have your intent But if so be that notwithstanding ye have done your Duty yet the Church do not Theirs in purging the House of God In this case ye are to regrate the matter to God to mourn for it ye are to testify that ye do not approve their way and in so doing ye have done your Duty and may have peace For the presence of the wicked Man makes not the work sinful in it self to you He eats and drinks Damnation to himself And not to you His presence doth not make the Worship sinful to thee And so it looses thee not from they obligation to join in the Worship For if that were true That the presence of wicked Men did defile the Worship to Thee then Christians would be in a very hard condition For there was never a Church so pure but there were some admitted to it whom a Man truly tender would think should not be there There was never a Church so pure but a tender Man zealously strict would find some to challenge And so according to that Doctrine there should be no Church that a tender Christian could joyn with And so he should be forced to serve God apart and by himself alone And this hath been the Separatists way They have Separated from one Church to another till at last they could get none to join with And so turned Seekers that is A Sect who think there are None they can join with And therefore they cast off all Publick Duties and serve God by themselves alone Because they can see none so Holy as themselves And therefore ye would suspect Zeal when joyned with Error And fear Error most when it is covered over with Zeal For Error is never so dangerous as when it gets on the mask of Zeal It being then most cruel and most impudent People then have no will to medle with it lest they should seem to be Enemies to True Piety And therefore because it is suffered and born with it turns impudent until it undo all I only give One word to guard this and so I shall end There is not one Error that we refute but if not guarded Prophane Men may abuse it and so may they This to cast at those who are piously strict though in an orderly way And therefore We say it is every Christians Duty to walk tenderly and to be so strict towards others as God requires of him The thing we have Refuted as an Error is only this That because a Man cannot get all Duties gone about by All so strictly as God commands That therefore he will Separate from altogether But withal we did show That not only a Man should be strict on himself where right strictness will alwayes begin but also do what in him lyes according to his Duty and Calling That the Ordinances of God may be keeped pure by others FINIS A SERMON Preached before the SYNOD AT GLASGOW APRIL 5th 1653. The first SERMON 1 Corinth 1. 10. Now I beseech you Brethren by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye all speak the same thing and that there be no Divisions among you but that ye be perfectly join'd together in the same Mind and in the same Judgement THIS Text begins a new Purpose so it is not necessary to speak much for clearing of the Dependance and Cohesion Only ye would know somewhat of the State of this Church at the time when this Epistle was written which will help us not a little to take up the Occasion and Scope of the Words read Paul having planted a Church at Corinth was after driven from thence by the sury of the Jews as appears from Acts 18. 12. In whose absence partly through the malice of Satan partly through the subtilty of false Apostles the Church was rent in Factions some taking part with one Pastor and some with another according to the diverse estimation they held them in for their Humane Eloquence great Knowledge and other parts The Church being thus rent the Apostle addresseth himself timously to the Cure of this so Great an Evil But because he was almost out of request with the most part of that People tho as he himself Chap. 4. v. 15. declares he had begotten them in Christ Jesus through the Gospel Therefore as a skill'd Physician being to administer a bitter Potion he suggereth the brim of the Cup by shewing That whatever was Their respect to him yet his Affection did remain the same towards them And this he insisteth on from the beginning to the tenth Verse wherein he falls upon the Sore he intends to Cure to wit Their Factions and Schism's Obtesting them gravly in the Name of Jesus Christ That they would set about the Healing of these woeful Rents before they should turn to worse In the Words there are two things 1 A Duty to which they are exhorted 2. Some Arguments moving them to set about this Duty The Duty is last in order of the Words and propounded in three Sentences 1. That ye all speak the same thing 2. That there be no Divisions among you 3. That ye be perfectly joined together in the same Mind and in the same Judgement The Duty pressed in all these may be taken up in two 1. An Evil they were to Eschew 2.
again attained We read Act. 15. 39. that Paul and Barnabas parted but we hear nothing of their meeting again And Church History sheweth us That Schisms in a Church for almost just nothing have continued incureable for some Generations until not only the Authors and Ring-leaders of the Schism but also their Disciples were removed by Death Osiand Gent. 4. Reas. 6. When a Rent is made in a Church as it is hardly curable so it still groweth wider It is easier to know whereabout a Rent begins than whereat it will end The greatest of Church Divisions some of them at least have been observed to have had but small Beginnings hence is that commonly received Maxim Omne Schisma desinit in haresin The Faction of the Donatists at first made but a Schism separating from the Communion of the Church upon pretence of some faulty Officers and mixed Communions but it was not long until they fell into several Heresies The Doctrine being thus Explained and Confirmed from Scripture and Reason I shall now apply it to Use. Our first Use is for Refutation The Doctrine refutes at least layeth a just odium upon the Doctrine of Separation and that Way which is called Independant or Congregational in so far as it is made up of such Principles as lay a Foundation for the perpetual Renting of the Church Of which Principles I shall reckon Four The First is That Principle whereby They maintain the Lawfulness of gathering Churches out of Churches acknowledged by themselves to be True Churches A most dividing Principle in so far as it gives way for every Man to Separate from his Own and to join himself with another Church supposed Purer with contempt of the former Congregation To gather Churches out of Churches is the way to destroy but not to heal diseased Churches It is to destroy many Churches for making up of One as if one going about the Cure of a Natural Body should cut off and take out all the sound Members and leave the rotten and diseased Members either to Cure one another or to perish A strange and desperate way of Cure A Second Dividing Principle in that Way is The Rule according to which they will have Ecclesiastick Judgement pass'd upon their Church Members to wit Conviction of their Inward good Estate which Rule being variable and uncertain some will judge one way some another according as they are more or less enclined to Charity yea the same Man at several times will have a various Judgement of the Inward State of another according as the Presumptions and Probabilities by which only he is led to judge of what is within are more fully or sparingly represented Hence there is a Seed of Breach upon Breach But God hath not left his Church in the matter of Authoritative judging to walk by such uncertain Rules A Third Dividing Principle in the Independant Way is this That all Church Power is solely in a Particular Congregation Hence if a Particular Congregation go wrong tho but made up of seven Persons which is a competent number with them there is no Authoritative Mean in all the Churches of the World to reclaim them This must needs open a Door to as many Divisions as there are Churches A Fourth Dividing Principle is That there is not a Catholick Visible Church yea no Church Visible but a Particular Congregation and another Principle they hold which followeth upon this to wit That a Minister can exerce no Acts as a Minister to any but those of his own Flock Hence 1. There can be no Communion of Churches as Churches there remaineâ—h only a Communion of Members There can be no Church Act from one Church or many towards another The Results and Determinations of the most Famous Synods made up of never so many Churches are to be look'd upon but as the Actings of so many private Christians Yea 2. Hence it will follow that there can be no Communion amongst Members of several Congregations in publick Church Ordinances as in hearing the Word jointly from a sent Minister in Receiving the Seals together For according to this Principle a Minister cannot Authoritatively Preach nor in any respect Administer Baptism or the Lords Supper unto any though never so Gracious except to those of his own Flock no not tho they be occasionally present when he is dispensing these Ordinances unto his Own Which Consequence is expresly granted by some of the chief of that Perswasion So it is a Principle which destroyeth all Communion of Churches and Members and therefore inconsistent with Union Several such like Principles in That Way might be reckoned out Concerning which the Doctrine warrandeth us to say this much If Unity be so necessary and so much to be sought after then such Dividing Principles cannot be of God Our Second Use is for Direction If Unity be so necessary and so much to be laboured for then we are to bewail that we our selves are so far and every day a step further from it Our Divisions grow I fear all the three wayes and in all ranks Our Heads are divided our Tongues divided yea and our Hearts divided Synods are divided Presbyteries are divided Congregations divided Ministers divided People divided yea and in some places Families divided Husband and Wife Father and Son Mother and Daughter Master and Servant yea and all divided We are as Mad-men every one eating the flesh of his own Arm. Manasseh Ephraim and Ephraim Manasseh And they together against Judah An Evil never enough lamented and the more to be lamented that there is no appearance how it shall be helped There are many things may make us look upon the present Division as our saddest Affliction and greatest Weight I shall reckon Six things 1. The many particular Evils which upon an exact search it will be found Our Divisions have brought upon Peoples own Spirits How much of our precious time is spent in vain jangling by which our Heart cannot but â—e made worse Many I fear too too many so taken up with their Heads that they forget their Hearts the sweetness and profit of mutual converse and fellowship is much marred Our mutual freedom and benefit that way much impaired Our Peace with God by our hot Debates untender Expressions and bitter and unnecessary Reflections of times brangled and shaken A Second Thing that may make Us look on our Present Divisions as our great Weight is The name of Praise which this Church hath had for Unity in times by-past amongst the Reformed Churches In the Harmony of Confessions the Preface to the Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland makes mention of this as a rare Priviledge of This Church beyond many and that which makes Her very Name Famous among Churches abroad That for the space almost of Sixty Years She had keep'd Unity with Purity without either Schism or Heresy Now if Unity hath been formerly this Church's Praise how sad and weighty is it and how woeful men are we that
immediatly after the Giving of the COMMUNION The Third SERMON LUKE 7. 23. And blessed is he whosoever shall not be offended in Me. Beloved in the Lord THAT place 1 Cor. 1. 23. We Preach Christ crucified unto the Jews a stumbling block hath had its accomplishment in all Ages and in no Age more than in this Jesus Christ and His way of working both with Churches and Particular Souls hath been a stone of stumbling and rock of offence to many yea moe and moe are stumbling still what through one occasion or other many who once did seem to run well in the way to Heaven in the way of Truth and in the way of Piety have either already taken up or are in hazard to take up such an halt as Christ may be conceived to say to those very few who seem resolv'd to follow him through Better and Worse as once he said Joh. 6. 67. Vnto the twelve when many of his Disciples went back and walked no more with him will ye also go away I have therefore chosen this Text to speak from now immediatly after having engaged your selves to walk in Christs Way that thereby ye may guard against that woeful common evil of Being offended in Christ or of stumbling and taking up an halt in his Way of Truth and Piety notwithstanding all the stumbling blocks and rocks of offence ye may meet with For Blessed is he saith Christ whosoever shall not be offended in me The Words are a Part of Christs Answer to that Question propounded to Him by Two of John's Disciples at John's desire verse 20. Art thou he that should come or look we for another Ye may wonder that John who knew Christ so well should have moved such a Question But the Answer is First Tho Souls know Christ never so well they 'l desire and have need to know him better and to get what knowledge they have of him confirmed to them especially in the day of Trial For John was now in Prison And 2dly They 'l desire that others may know him also For it appeareth from what goeth before that John propoundeth this Question for his Disciples satisfaction and to satisfy their Doubts more than his own Christ's Answer hath two Parts 1. He bids them shew John what they saw him doing Verse 22. Tell Iohn saith he what things ye have seen and heard how that the blind see the lame walk the lepers are cleansed the deaf hear the dead are raised to the poor the Gospel is preached If ye ask what makes this to the Answer of the Question I answer It maketh much for it shews he was doing that which Scripture foretold the Messias would do Isai. 35. 5 6. And therefore he behoved to be the Messias 2. In thir words he answereth a main Objection against this Truth taken from Christ's own low condition and the practice of his Followers which made many bear off him For they expected a Glorious Messias a Great earthly Monarch And because Christ was but obscure and mean therefore they stumbled and were offended in him To this Christ answereth Blessed is he whosoever shall not be offended or scandalized in me The word rendered here offended or scandaliz'd seems to be a Metaphor taken from Travellers who having dashed their Foot or Leg at some stone or block in the way do stumble or take up an halt so as they can go no further at least advance not so quickly in the way as they did And Secondly while he sayes Offended in me take this first Actively And so the meaning is They should not take occasion of stumbling from any thing in Christ or in His Way 2. It may be taken Passively so as to point out the Way that we should not stumble nor take up an halt in For there are some wayes to wit Every sinful course and way that it were good for People to stumble in and turn their backs upon But this Way wherein we should not stumble is Christ Himself and the Way of Truth and Piety prescrib'd by him Blessed is he saith Christ who shall not be offended in me As if he had said Happy is that Man who taketh not occasion from Me or any thing in My Way to stumble or turn his back upon Me and that course of Truth and Piety wherein I have commanded him to walk The Words are but One entire Proposition and Sentence I need not therefore spend time in dividing them But shall come to the Doctrines First The Lord applyeth the general Prophesies Concerning the Messias in the Old Testament to Himself in particular shewing they were verified in Him For the Words in me have in them a direct Answer to the Question propounded by John's Disciples and shews the Messias was come and that He is That Messias Whence we might mark That JESUS CHRIST the Son of Mary who was Born in Bethlehem brought up in Nazareth and Crucified in Jerusalem is that very same Messias who was to Come and promised to the Fathers We might observe 2ly That before He gave this Answer that He was the promised Messias whom they were to follow and not to stumble at He doth first prove by Scripture that it was so while he hids John's Disciples tell their Master he was doing such miraculous Works as the Scriptures did foreshew none but Christ should do Whence we might learn That all Questions and Debates about Religion should be determined from Scripture and according to the Rule set down in Scripture For here when a Question ariseth among John's Disciples If JESUS the Son of Mary was the promised Messias neither John the Baptist than whom there was not a Greater Prophet among these that are Born of Women yea nor Christ himself who was Greater than he do take it upon them to determine in it But John sends them to Christ and Christ sends them to the Scripture for a Solution Thus To the law and to the testimony saith the Lord Isai. 8. 20. if they do not speak according to this word it is because there is no light in them The neglect of this Rule hath been the In-let to Humane Traditions without and contrary to Scripture both in Worship and Government in the Antichristian Church And if this Rule once be laid aside there can be no end of Humane Ceremonies untill all that trash which is in the Roman Church be brought in upon the Church of God For if the Authority of a Man can make way for One it may also make way for all the rest But passing those The two following Doctrines are these that I intend most to insist upon And both of them are implyed 1. That there are many stumbling Blocks in Christ's way whereat People are apt to Offend take up an Halt and stumble And yet Secondly There is nothing of that kind which ought to make us stumble For if there were not some stumbling Blocks Christ needed not so much guard against them and by his guarding against them he
Yet it follows not that the Man who is perswaded of Truth to be Truth is deceived likewise There is a Man who in his Dream thinks certainly he is awake and speaking that Man certainly is deceived But it were a strange thing to conclude from that that the Man who is really awake cannot know if he is so but must alwayes suspect he may be deceived and in a Dream This much then for things out of Doubt and wherein a Man upon good grounds hath attained to a full perswasion of the Truth that is in them But the greatest Question of all is concerning Points of the Truth whereof we are not absolutely perswaded without some scruple and ground of Doubt to the contrary how we may know what is God's Way in those And for this I shall give you some Marks 1st The Light of Nature will teach us in things Doubtful to encline to the surest and safest side and that against which least can be said As for Example in that Controversy concerning the adding of Sacred significant Ceremonies invented by Man to God's Worship As Bowing to Altars Kneeling at the Communion Signing with the Cross at Baptism c. Those who plead such Additions to be superstitious and unlawful do bring Deutr. 12. 32. What things soever I command you observe to do it thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it And such like Scriptures for a Proof The Patrons of Ceremonies answer That God forbiddeth such Additions only which are contrary to the Word but not such as are besides the Word neither forbidden nor commanded by it Now that is the very Answer which Papists give to Our Protestant Divines while we use the same Scripture for an Argument against all their superstitious Ceremonies invented by Men And indeed if that Door be once opened a Door is opened not only for one or two but all the Ceremonies of the Church of Rome for on that ground only do they plead for them When we ask what Warrand have they from Scripture for their frequent Crossings their use of Salt Spitle Exorcisms in Baptism their use of Holy Water Baptising of Bells Pilgrimages and Pennances They Answer it is enough of Warrand for the Church to Command them that they are not expresly condemned in Scripture Now seing the way that is pleaded for such Ceremonies casts up so wide a gap It 's sure that to abstain from them altogether is the safest 2. That Way in things Doubtful is most like to be Christ's the Chief Promoters whereof are not carried on with by-ends self designs to acquire Worldly Honours or Riches or Faâ— Benifices to themselves but on the contrary the very thing they plead for and that part of the Contradiction which they mantain is That nothing of that kind further than honest Compitency and Ministerial respect should be bestowed on Christ's Ministers And upon the other hand it is a shrewd Presumption at least that such a Way is not Christ's wherein the Chief Promoters do palpably seek themselves and their own Worldly Interests The Apostle Paul useth to lay great weight on this Mark especially Rom. 16. 18. Such serve not our Lord Iesus Christ but their own belly So that if they seek their own Bellies they serve not our Lord Jesus Christ. And Philipp 3. 18 19 Many walk that are the enemies of the Cross of Christ whose God is their belly who mind earthly things If it be evidently seen they mind earthly things They are but Enemies to the Cross of Christ. 3. When People doubt about several Wayes which of them is Christ's Way they are to stick by that unto which they are most engaged and by more solemn tyes obliged until at least they be clearly convinced it is wrong for very common understanding will judge That to be the surest 4. That way which by the grant of its Adversaries hath ground in Scripture for it tho they also say men may change it must certainly look more like Christ's Way than the contrary which is confessed by its prime Maintainers to have no ground in Scripture but that the great Warrand which is given for it dothâ—ly in the Authority of men Even an heathen King Artaxerxes did know so much that every thing in the House of God behooved to be done according to the revealed will of God whence he issueth forth a Decree Ezra 7 23. Whatsoever is commaded by the God of Heaven let it be diligently done for the house of the the God of heaven for why should their be wrath against the realm of the King and his Sons Lastly That which tends most to the promoting of Piety and is attended most with the Fruits of a Godly life and tender conversation in it's most eminent mantainers and followers and this not for a little short flash only at it's first beginning and when it is as it were upon it's Tryals but at all times when ever there was any Controversie about it That Way I say looketh most like to Christs Way For all His Way and every Piece of it tendeth unto That to make People lead a Godly and Holy life Titus 2. 11 The Grace of God that bringeth Salvation hath appeared to all men Teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly righteously and Godly in this present World And upon the contrary That way whereof the most zealous mantainers and and followers as to their generality have been still plagued with prophanity and looseness That way I say looks not like the way of Christ. Wee 'l find Christ himself doth lean no small weight on this Mark Matth. 7. 15 16 Where he gives a general rule whereby to try false Prophets and teachers to wit The Fruits and Effects which their Doctrine hath upon their own Lives and Conversations Ye shall know them saith he by their fruits Do men gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles And verse 20. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them Now all these things are such undoubted Truths as none will get them deny'd in the general and yet such as through Gods Blessing being rightly improven may give People light in the former Question To know which is Christ's Way among the many wayeâ— on foot in the Church of God so as we need not any further application but exhort you with the Apostle Paul 2 Tim 2. 7. Consider what I say and the Lord give thee understanding in all things A SERMON PREACHED AT KILWINNING Upon the Munday immediatly after the giving of the Communion The Fourth SERMON ACTS 11. 23. Who when he came and had seen the Grace of God was glad and exhorted them all that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord. THE Scope of my Sermon yesterday from Jeremiah 3. 22. was to bring you to God The Text in hand holds out a main Duty ye should make conscience of when ye are brought to him and have closed with him as all of you by your approaching to
ground your self in this Truth It may cost you much and though it should stand you never so much it is worth the avowing Christ himself suffered on this account as we have already shown and others of his servants have thought it their Glory to be called unto suffering for it Who am I saith Master Welsh That he hath not only called me to be a Preacher of glad things but also to be a sufferer for his cause and Kingdom To wittness that good confession That Jesus Christ is the King of Saints and that his Church is a most free Kingdom Yea as free as any Kingdom under Heaven That she is free in her Government from all other Jurisdiction on Earth except only Christs We are waiting saith he with joyfulness to leave the last Testimony of our blood for the confirmation of this Truth If it would please our God to be so favourable as to honour us with that dignity Thus He. And who knowes how soon he may honour some of us with that dignity A dignity indeed to suffer for the Royal Crown and Diadem of Our Lord Jesus SECT IV. A BRIEF REFUTATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF Independency Head I. The Power of Church Government is in the Church Officers and not in the Body of Church-Members THE dayes by-past we spake against the Doctrine of Erastianism And shew you that however it had many fair pretences yet it is to be reckoned among those Doctrines which are not of God We are now with the Lords assistance to speak against the Doctrine of Independency Ye Remember when we entered on these controversies about Church Government We shew you there were Four points of Truth which we should Labour to make good The first was That Jesus Christ the head of his Church had appointed in his word a way for the Governing and Ruling of his Church and that he had not left it to the power of the Civil Magistrate King or Parliament To establish what way of Government they please The second point was That this Government of the Church which Christ established in his word was not in the hands of the Civil Magistrate to be Executed by him Thir two points we have made good in our former Disputs against Erastianism The third point of Truth is this That Jesus Christ the head of the Church hath not committed the power of Governing his Church unto the Body of Believers To the community of Church Members but hath established it in the hands of his own officers Ministers and Elders The Fourth point of Truth which we promised to prove was this That Jesus Christ the head of the Church hath not given particular Elderships and Church Sessions the Supream power of Church Government in their hands so as that there should be none above them to call them to an account But that they are subject in the Lord to Superior Church Judicatories such as Presbytries Synods and General Assemblies These two last points we are to make out in Refuting this Doctrine of Independency This Error of Independency above all other we may call a fountain Error It is the Sluce whereby an entrance is made to all other Errors of what sort soever This is the Error whereby the most part of those that hath fallen from the way of Truth these years by past have been first hooked They first turned Independents yet rested not long there but proceeded from evil to worse Our scope shall be in this as in the former points to show That however it hath many fair pretences yet when it is brought to the Tryal it will be found not to be of God There are two main heads of this Error of Independency opposit to the two last points of Truth which we promised to make out The first is That whereby they affirm That Jesus Christ has given the power of Governing the Church unto all those that are Members of the Church Although they be not Ministers or Elders To the community of believers as they call it The second Head of their Error is this They do affirm that Jesus Christ hath intrusted particular Congregations Elderships or Church Sessions with the highest power of Church Government on earth so that there is no Judicatory above them to call them to an account As for the first Head of their Error which we are to speak against at this time Therein they have different Opinions among themselves some affirming that the power of Governing the Church is given to the Body of Church Members the community of Believers without the Minister and Elders yea a power over them to ordain them Censure depose them and inflict all other Church Censures Others give them this power conjunctly with the Church Officers Ministers and Elders Secondly Some give only the power and Authority to Govern to the Church Members But for the Exercise of that power they allow it to the Elders Yet so as to the Peoples deputs to whom they must give an account Others give the People not only the power and Authority but also the Exercise of this Government So that the People may sit down in Church Judicatories themselves enact Church Canons inflict Church Censures c. Thirdly Some give them the Exercise of this power only in some things as the Excercise of the power of Jurisdiction to make Church Canons and inflict Church Censures But not to Preach Others give them a full Exercise of Authority to do all We in opposition to all these lay down this conclusion which we shall Labour to make good from the word of God and solid Reason to wit That Jesus Christ hath not given to the Body of Church Members or to private Christians either the power or Exercise of Church Government neither in whole nor in part but hath intrusted it wholly to his own Officers Ministers and Elders I prosecuting this point we shall follow forth the former Method First We shall clear the State of the Question Secondly Bring Arguments for the Truth And Thirdly We shall propone and answer their Arguments brought against the Truth And Fourthly We shall shall apply the whole to some use I. For clearing the state of the Question Thâ—a it may be known what we do grant to private Christians and what we deny several distinctions would be given First There is difference betwixt Church power or Authority and Christian priviledges We do grant several Christian priviledges to private Christians but these do not infer any Church power or Authority of Governing the Church As for Example We do grant to the People a Power of Electing their own Officers Ministers or Elders we grant to them a power to try the Spirits whether they be of God i e They are not to believe blindly what Ministers say but have a power to Try what they say in Relation to their practice To pass a Judgment of discretion upon it whether it be according to the word or not We grant these priviledges to the People but none of them doth
or where prophane or wicked men are suffered to be in it The Godly are bound to abstain from the Lords Table and not to communicate with the mixed multitude And because they hold it is not Lawful for any to live in any Church where they cannot enjoy the whole Ordinances of God Therefore they maintain that the Godly are bound to Separate from That Church and to make up a Church of their Own by gathering out so many of the Godly that are in it as they can get and make a little Congregation of their own choosing any of them to be a Minister and some one or two to be Elders And so they set up a Church against a Church a Church in the Bosome of a Church This is not a new Error It troubled the Church of Christ long since in the Fourth Century or somthing more than Three hundred years after Christ The Donatists a kind of Hereticks arose and troubled the Church for a long time and did teach the same very thing Against whom the Godly Fathers of the Church in that time did write Yet because this Error was carried on with a shew of Holiness and Strictness more than ordinary It took such deep rooting in the mindes of some well minding People some of them at least that it could not be driven out by force of Argument till the Lord did leave the mantainers of this Error to fall into other vile abominations for all their pretence of Strictness Which made all others to loath them And before it could be gotten rooted out of the minds of men It troubled the Church almost 100. years together The same is the Errour which we have now to Refute That ye may know what is the Doctrine of Our Church that we are sworn to And which is grounded on the Word in this particular Take it up thus First We hold that the Church should be reformed from all corruptions And that wicked Scandalous men should be casten out of the Church at least debarred from the Lords Table This we hold and herein there is no difference betwixt Us and the Separatists But the Question is When the Church Officers do not their duty as often it falls out what through negligence and what through other corruptions and what through a base want of courage so that sometimes the Rule is not put in practice By which means all wicked men are not kept back from the Ordinance of the Lords Table And some corruptions are tollerated The Question I say is what the Godly should do in that Case And concerning this we hold First That in such a Case it is lawful for a Godly Person to remove his dwelling and go dwell in another Congregation where he may have the Ordinances more purely Administrated There is no tye laid on him for binding him to remain constantly where he is if he may conveniently remove Secondly We hold that if he cannot conveniently remove from that Congregation he may remain a Member of it without sin although he know there be several things which God is angry with in it providing he keep his own hands clean of these Thirdly We hold that as long as the Godly man stayeth in that Congregation where there are abuses of that kind tollerated he is bound according to his place to endeavour the remedy of them he is bound according to Christs Rule to admonish these who are Wicked and Scandalous and if his admonition do no good he is bound to delate them to the Eldership that they may be Censured If they be Censured It is well he hath gained his point But if they be not Censured Or not so fully as he would he is to regrate the matter to God and mourn for it But Fourthly We hold that so long as he stayes in that Congregation he is not bound to keep back from Gods Worship As from the Lords Table or from any part of service in it self lawful because there are wicked men joyning with him in it Far less is he to make a Rent in the Congregation or to draw away a number with him to set up a little Church for themselves And this is now the Question we are to debate about The Separatists say He is bound to keep back from the Communion If any be admitted to it who is prophane or wicked And that lest he be defiled with them We say if the Worship and service be lawful and pure in it self He sins in keeping back from it notwithstanding that others joyn with him in it whom the Church Officers should keep back We grant indeed when the service is not pure and lawful in its self As for example when Communion cannot be had except the People Kneel And so worship the Bread In that case every man is bound to keep back that would keep himself free of sin Not because there are wicked men going to the Table But because the Ordinance is gone about in a sinful way But our Question is Concerning Worship in it self lawful That is to say when a Communion is Administrated by a Minister Lawfully Called When that Table Gesture which Christ himself used is keeped at it When in all other things done according to his command What Godly Persons should do in that case when Scandalous Persons one or moe are suffered to come to the Table We hold That notwithstanding of their being there he is bound to come foreward And the wicked man's being there defiles only the Worship to himself and not to those who come in honesty This much for the state of the Question II. Having cleared the Question we come to Our Arguments for the Truth viz. That the presence of wicked men does not defile the Worship of those that are Godly And that the Godly should not keep back from lawful Commanded Duties because wicked men have their hands at them Arg I. Our First Argument is taken from the Church of the Jews in Christs time Any who know the History of the Gospel know that it was a very corrupt Church in Christ time in Doctrine and manners Their Preachers the Scribes and Pharisees were debauched Persons They perverted the Law the blind led the blind And when the Preachers were such ye may judge what the People were And yet we find that Christ and his Apostles did joyn with them in the lawful Worship For First Christ himself came yearly up to the Feast at Jerusalem Secondly He is so far from commanding his Apostles and those who believed in him to keep back from the Ordinary Worship because of wicked men among them That upon the contrair he forbids them to stumble at any thing of that kind And commands them to come to the lawful Worship as Matth 23. 1. 2. Then spake Jesus to the multitude and to his disciples Saying The scribes c. Which is as if he had said do not keep back from the lawful Worship because they are but Godless men that go about it What they Preach according
to the word do that and for Their wicked life follow them not in it Arg II. Our Second Argument is taken from the Church in the Old Testament We find for the most part many Corrupters and Graceless men that were Members of that Church Both of the Preachers and People And yet we never find that the Godly did loath the Lawful Worship or keep back from it because of that Yea we find The Lord commands them to joyn in the lawful Worship And when they would Separate He reproves them for it We shall make this appear from Three or Four Times of the Church of the Old Testament The First is Moses Time There was a great mixture of prophane men in the Church at that Time As ye will find Deut 32. only remember this all along that the Point we are speaking to is not to plead for keeping prophane men in the Church We shew those should be removed But the Question is when they are keeped in what the Godly should do in that Case If they should turn back and leave that Church I say we find Deut 32. the Church at that time for the most part was not very sound They corrupted themselves Their spots were not the spots of Children yet we never read that Moses and the Godly did withdraw from the Commanded Worship because such were at it yea on the contrair we find them joyning with them Deut 29. Moses enters into a Covenant with them Preaches to them Prayes for them Yea Deut 1â— 6. 7. 8. The Lord commands the People to come up to the Publick Worship in the place where he should choose to place his name and go about the lawful Commanded Duties Tho doubtles there would be many wicked men among them The Second Time of the Church in the Old Testament which we take to prove the Point is in Joshua's time there were then great mixtures of wicked men among them As appears from Joshua 24. 14. 23. He bids them put away the Strange Gods So there were numbers of them corrupt in the way of Worship and yet we find in the same Chapter v 23. That Joshua conveens them altogether to a Solemn piece of Worship and enters into a Covenant with God and Preaches to them on that Subject Now surely Joshua would not have done this if so be the presence of wicked men did defile the Worship to the Godly And if it had been a sin in the Godly to stay with the wicked when about Worship The Third Time is in Elijah's time 1 Kings 18. We find at that time there were some Godly Seven Thousand that had not bowed their Knee to Baal We find also an Atheistical Multitude in verse 29. The Body of the People Halting betwixt God and Baal They would neither say that God was their God nor that Baal was their God and yet Elijah called All together to a solemn Worship a solemn Sacrifice That is gone about verse 36. And there was Preaching and Praying to that purpose Now surely If so be the presence of that Godless Multitude which Elijah could not get reformed in a hast had prophaned the Worship to the seven thousand Godly Elijah would never have been accessory to that sin A Fourth Time is from Solomons time to Hezekiah's There was great Corruption tollerated in the Church then As Worshipping God in the High-places as is clear through the whole Tract of the History of that time And there was much Prophanity of Life in that time which also appears from the frequent Sermons of the Prophets to that purpose And yet we never read that the Prophets did separate from the lawful Worship because of that mixture in the Church Yea on the contrary we read they did joyn with them in every Lawful Duty 2 Chron. 15. Asa gathers all together and enters into a Covenant with them Isaias Jeremiah and the rest Preaches to them Prayes with them Now if the presence of Wicked Men had polluted the Service to them then Isaias his Preaching and Praying and joyning with the People in Worship should have been defiled to Him A Fifth Instance is taken from 1 Samuel 2. 16. Eli's Sons the Priests were Prophane men whereupon the Godly began to abhor the Worship And so it is said in verse 17. Wherefore the sin of the young Men was very great before the Lord for Men abhorred the Offering of the Lord. And to speak the Truth It was little wonder they did so For in verse 22. We find the Priests were so Godless that they did ly with Women that Assembled at the doors of the Tabernacle of the Congregation Little wonder then that the Godly did loath and withdraw But does the Lord approve of Their withdrawing notwithstanding of that reason No We see in verse 24. Where Eli the Prophet speaks to his Sons sayes he Nay my Sons For it is no good report that I hear ye make the Lords People to transgress Their abhoring the offering of the Lord because of wicked men that had their hands at it is called a transgressing ye make the Lords people to transgress From all which it is clear That the presence of wicked men doth not defile the Worship to the Godly providing they come honestly themselves And that therefore the wickeds presence should not keep them away There is an Exception which our Opposits have against this Argument And it is taken from the State of the Church in the Old Testament They say That to separate from the Church in the Old Testament was impossible there being no other Church to joyn with The Service was then annexed to the Temple And so the Case of the Church under the Old Testament was far different from the Case under the New We might answer several things unto this As First If so be that the presence of wicked men doth defile the Worship to the Godly then the Godly had been bound to withdraw from the Church even under the Old Testament although there had been no other Church to joyn with Better to be out of the Church Visible than to be in it if we must sin by abiding in it But to answer more briefly we shall find Instances in the New Testament that make Separation unlawful as well as in the Old which Instances shall make up our Third Argument Arg III. Our Third Argument In the Church of Corinth there was a Prophane Multitude 1 Cor 3 4. We find there were Schismaticks in it Chap v. v 1. We find Incests were Tollerated Chap. 6 v 1. We find there were men of Contentious Spirits going to Law before Infidels Yea in that Chapter We find there were some pleading the Lawfulness of Fornicatioâ— And Chap 11. We find there were Drunkards among them And such Drunkenness as was most abominable For some came Drunk to the Lords Table v 21. And Chap 15. We find there were some infected with a dangerous Heresy The denying of the Resurrection And so a number of very offensive things were