his representing to his Minister Mr. W. how he was unsatisfied in the doctrine of the general admission contended for Mr. W. for the satisfaction of his Parishioner had shewed himselfe willing and desirous to admit of a collation with some Ministers of a different judgement from him therein as I have to shew under the hand of Mr. M. the Gentleman aforesaid And indeed I was cordially desirous to have the controversie search't into to the very bottome as being of great moment and my selfe sufficiently inclinable if I know mine own heart to receive any convictions Mr. W. might afford rationally to sway me to his part as the most desirable upon many outward accounts if it could but appeare to be warrantable which made me the more willing to consent to the Requests aforesaid Now when this Paper of mine by Mr. M. was communicated to Mr. W. Mr. M. hath certified me under his hand that Mr. W. in stead of returning a private answer as was expected for a candid brotherly impartiall discussion of the point as if he had gotten some mighty advantage with abundance of triumphing and insulting expressions gave out he would print it And further Mr. M. attests under his hand in these words And whereas some of Mr. W. his friends had given out on his behalf that the reason why he answered this paper of Mr. Langleys in print was because several Copies were dispersed of it in his parish and he had no way to meet with them but this of printing his answer I doe hereby declare that this is utterly untrue I was so far from giving or suffering Copies to be taken of it that to my knowledge I never shewed the paper to any in the parish but himself and there were no Copies of it extant among us I my self not so much as reserving a Copy but that which was in his own hands till they were printed and published by him T.M. Many other passages Mr. M. hath testified under his hand but I shall omit inserting the same here in respect to Mr. W. whose disparagement I seek not to the Reader to whom personall matters I know will be tedious and to the cause it selfe I defend which needs not the infirmities of its opposers to raise it selfe by When I had intimation of the resolution for printing my paper I said I would not lift up my lip to desire a forbearance I think I could have been content to have seen my self rationally confuted But when I saw the answer and how in stead of close answering the argument before him he did so pitifully extravagate and so sedulously seemed to endeavour the disgrace of my person rather than the confutation of my cause I was much confirmed thereby in the opinion I had asserted Let the equall Reader freely judge herein 22 Mr W. saith p. 150. Truly I have not done pious and renowned Timson the honour I should in omitting the many and material passages that I find in his Epistle to the Reader and every where so exactly set forth in his excellent Book It were pity but he should honour Mr. Timson as the Scholar did Zabbarel who being set to epitomize him transcribed every word saying all was so sweet he could leave out none But some Palates count mouldy cheese the best and the material passages Mr. W. hath honoured his renowned Timson with the quotation of are so unsavoury and tainted as will disgrace the judgement of the Author and Citer of them p. 37 38 99 100. He calls your Church-officers saith M. W. Intruded Elders c. This forsooth is an honourable quotation It is not my business now to discuss the Controversie whether any persons but Ministers or preaching Presbyters may be chosen and designed by the Church to joyn with the ministers in the Ecclesiasticall externall government thereof If I should speak any thing concerning it in this last Digression I should premise a distinction to be put betwixt what is appointed in Scripture by divine institution and command for all Churches at all times to observe and what is gatherable from Scripture precedents and passages to have then been lawfully used in the Church of God and therefore may still lawfully be imitated Of this later sort are Lords-dayes Collections 1 Cor. 16.1.2 Pastors and Teachers as distinct offices allotted to severall persons Rom. 12.7 8 c. Of which sort also I humbly conceive the Station of such as are now called Ruling Elders is to be accounted not meerly so an excogitation of prudence as if it had no footsteps in Scripture paterns nor yet so absolutely by divine appointment as that all Churches sin who in any times have not made use of them And this I take as a mean betwixt two extreams I shall not so much as name the Arguments commonly produced for the Scripturalnesse and Reasonablenesse of their Office I shall onely crave leave to offer one Scripture which is not so much taken notice of as I think it should be for the clearing this point having before warned the Reader that it is not the name but thing I aim at Acts 15. The Synod there mentioned wrote Decretall Letters after this manner v. 23. The Apostles and Elders and Brethren send greeting unto the Brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch Syria and Cilicia c. And then the Decree it self is recorded in the following verses That which I would have here observed relating to the point in hand is that some under the name of Brethren are joyned with the Elders or Pastors from whence ariseth this Argument viz. If these called Brethren acted authoritatively in this Ecclesiasticall Decree and yet were not privat Christians the Disciples or Members of Jerusalem Church then some select persons not Ministers did act authoritatively in Ecclesiasticall government But the former is true Therefore the later In the Consequence of the Antecedent I see nothing likely to be denied The Minor I shall endeavour to prove in its two parts 1. That these brethren acted authoritatively in this Ecclesiastical Decree is evinced by many of these strong Reasons whereby the Reverend Assembly in their Answer to the Reasons of the Dissenting Brethren concerning Presbyterial Government presented to the Honourable Houses of Parliament p. 65. do prove that the Elders did act authoritatively as well as the Apostles the which are further improved by the London Ministers in their Jus Divinum Reg Ecclesiastici p. 224. to evince that both the Elders and Brethren acted authoritatively as well as the Apostles The Elders and Brethren say the London Ministers who were as authoritatively members of the Synod as the Apostles did in all points as authoritatively act as the Apostles themselves For 1. The letters containing the Synodical Decrees and Determinations were written in the name of the Elders and Brethren as well as in the name of the Apostles vers 23. 2. The Elders and Brethren as well as the Apostles brand the false Teachers for troubling the Church subverting
of soules declaring that they gave the false Teachers no suck Commandment to preach any such doctrine v. 24. 3. The Elders and Brethren as well as the Apostles say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us v. 28. 4. The Elders and Brethren as well as the Apostles did impose upon the Churches no other burthen then these necessary things v. 28. In all which its manifest the proof is as strong for the joynt authoritative acting of the Brethren here as it is for the Apostles and Elders I speak of a joynt act in the same kinde of power how farre the Apostles might excell the Elders or the Elders the Brethren in the degree of power in each respectively is not now enquired for All I can thinke of which may be objected against this proof is 1 That in divers places the Authors of this synodical Decree are mentioned under the name of the Apostles and Elders without joyning the Brethren with them As 1. The Antiochian Delegates are in their Instructions directed to make their address to the Apostles and Elders about their Question v. 2. And 2. the Apostles and Elders came together to consider of this matter v. 6. And 3. the Decrees of this Synod are said to be such as were ordained by the Apostles and Elders which were at Jerusalem Act. 16.4 2 That the Brethren may be named here no otherwise then as in Pauls Epistles Timothy or Sosthenes and sometimes all the Brethren with him are which denotes only their consenting thereunto To the first of these I answer 1. That its ordinary to name the whole from the predominant leading more noble part 2. These Scriptures do not say the Apostles and Elders only excluding others were Authours of this Synodical Determination and therefore they are no prejudice to those other Texts which put in the Brethren with them To the second I say Though Paul joyne others with him in his Epistles sometimes yet 1. the title of those Epistles beare his name only 2. He manifests in the Epistles themselves that they are his only speaking in the first person therein Gal. 1 2 6 9 10 c. 1 Thes 5.27 2 Thes 3.17 The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand which is the token in every Epistle so I write 3. If we had no such cleere Reasons elswhere to prove Paul only the Authour under the Holy Ghost of such Epistles the joyning others with him in the Preface would be a sufficient ground of our taking them who are so mentioned in the Preface to have been joynt Authours with him thereof But now here 's nothing can be shewed to invalidate the title of the Synodicall Decree in its strictest sense Act. 15.23 2. The Decree speakes all along in their names which are prefixed thereunto 3. Decrees and Lawes speake most strictly and properly especially in the Titles and Prefaces thereof which declare the power whereby they are made and promulgated as a Law made by Kings Lords and Commons Although in familiar Epistles there 's ordinarily more liberty of a larger expression 2. The latter part of the Minor proposition in the Argument I am upon is this viz. That these Brethren were not private Christians the Disciples or Members of the Jerusalem Church 1. This I beleeve will not be denied by our Brethren either of the Episcopall or Presbyterian judgement if they be convinced that these Brethren acted authoritatively in the Synod Which I thinke is cleerly proved above For no private Christian is allowed by them as such to have right of authoritative suffrage in Ecclesiastical Councils 2. I have only here against me the Brethren of the Congregational way who though from other Scriptures they own the Officers I dispute for yet here say that these Brethren were the members of the Jerusalem Church as such But that I humbly conceive cannot be The Apostles Elders and Brethren v. 23. are the same with the whole multitude v. 12. And the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church v. 22. Now this whole Church and whole multitude must either referre to the whole Church of Jerusalem or to the whole synodical Assembly only of that and other Churches there met together which the Reverend Mr. Cotton in his book of the Keyes p. 54 59. is pleased to call a Synod of Churches or a Congregation of Churches yea a Church of Churches It cannot referre to the whole Jerusalem Church because neither that whole Church nor the greater part thereof could meet in one house much less a private house as its probable this was to manage the synodical affaires orderly as appeares by the great numbers of that Church recorded upon count 120 Act. 1.15 3000 Act. 2.41 5000 men Act. 4.4 here are above 8000 and multitudes besides Act. 2.42 5.14 6.7 as is more largely shewed by the London Ministers and most excellently by the Reverend Assembly in their Answer to the Reasons of the dissenting Brethren where they undoe the Exceptions made against it so solidly learnedly and perspicuously that they seeme to have left no place for a colourable Reply Whereby among other Arguments they demonstrate that the Jerusalem Church was a classical Church or a Church by association of sundry particular Congregations called one Church Act. 8.1 11.22 15.4 It remaines therefore that the whole Church and multitude Act. 15. must be the synodical Assembly of the Apostles Elders and Brethren which Brethren must needs be the Delegates of the Brethren or those who represented the Brethren members of several Churches The Delegates of Antioch are expressly mentioned v. 2. and probably there were some from Syria and Cilicia v. 23. who were as much concerned in the businesse consulted about as Antioch was Thus farre it s evinâ—ed that some of the Brethren not preaching Elders being delegated and appointed by the Church may according to Apostolical patterne authoritatively joyne with preaching Elders in acts of external government of the Church And then if Presbyters with such delegated brethren may be the subject of Church power in higher Assemblyes and matters it will easily thence follow such brethren may have and exercise a proportion of Ecclesiastical power in lower matters and Assemblyes This Argument I humbly submit with all else I have written to the peaceably judicious I shall conclude with the 34th Psalme that these 22 Digressions may be attended with a refreshment proportionable to the 22 Chapters of the Treatise above The 34th Psalme in the original whereof the initiall Letters of the Verses proceed Alphabetically save only that the 5th Yerse beginning with He ends with Vau the next Letter and so the Psalmist omitting Vau in the beginning of the next Verse goes on with Zain c. whereby it comes to pass that the 22 Hebrew Letters being gone through and ending in the 21st Verse the last verse of the Psalme is super-numerary rendred according to the Acrosticall conceipt of the Original 1 At all times I the Lord will blesse my
longer I shall make bold at the urgent request of some whose judgement is not to be sleighted here to annex a short discourse concerning the privacy or publiquenesse of administring the other Sacrament viz. of Baptisme which will not be unsutably joyned with the main subject of the discourse following And this challengeth its place here because it so particularly concernes the Ministry and is therefore to be submissively presented to your serious consideration and candid censure Let this then be the Question to be discussed before you viz. Whether or if at all in what cases Baptisme may be now administred privately not publiquely To publique is sometimes opposed in Scripture that which we render from house to house especially in that text Act. 20.20 But I humbly conceive the phrase so rendred viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not equivalent to private or per singulas demos as Erasmus in Act. 2.46 renders the phrase for which he is justly blamed by the Learned Beza The phrase and the importance thereof is worth a strict enquiry In Pauls farewel speech to the Elders or Bishops of the Church of Ephesus Act. 20. for to them only he there speaks and if from house to house be to be understood of private houses its manifest it must relate only to the private houses of the said Bishops not the private houses of the people he avoucheth his integrity in the discharge of his Apostolical Ministry as in other Instances thereof so especially in that he saith ver 20. I have kept back nothing from you that was profitable for you But have shewed and taught you publiquely and from house to house or at the houses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 testifying both to Jewes and also to the Greeks repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ This adverb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seemes to signifie not only publiquely but openly popularly and agrees to an action exposed to open view and cognizance of the people and multitude without distinction of Christians from Jewes or Heathens and that with or pretending to the State authority Act. 5.18 the word is translated openly Act. 16.37 They have saith Paul beaten us openly i. e. exposed us to open shame before the promiscuous multitude Act. 18.28 Apollos mightily convinced the Jewes and that publiquely in their Synagogue vers 26. that Jesus was the Christ And being here opposed to the Christian houses it denotes the Temple Synagogue Market places or such open conventions to which persecutors and enemies as well as Christians had a free accesse and then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not meere private houses but the Church Assemblyes which used to convene in severall houses appointed for that purpose which are therefore opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they were not built nor appointed by any publique act of the State and 2. because here was not a reception of the people friends foes promiscuously at least not at all times but of the brethren joyned together in ecclesiastical Christian society For the cleering hereof I shall shew 1. that this phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the N. T. though sundry times there used is ever appropriated to the signifying of the Church meetings in their houses 2. And always I take it some other phrase is used to denote such as are in a meere private house This latter may be seene in Act. 16.32 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 11.34 14.35 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal 2.2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The former I shal more insist upon for the demonstration whereof I shal produce all the places of the N. T. where the phrase is used Rom. 16.5 Greet the Church in their house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 16.19 Aquila and Priscilla salute you with the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 4.15 Salute Nymphas and the Church which is at his house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philemon vers 2. to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That this phrase in these Texts signifies the Church meetings and Christian Assemblyes is demonstrated already by the learned Mr. Mede above all contradiction I shall only quote one passage or two of his for this which he hath in his discourse called Churches i. e. appropriate places for Christian worship p. 22. Unlesse saith he this should be the meaning why should this appendant be so singularly mentioned in the salutation of some and not of others and that not once but againe if the same names be again remembred as of Aquila and Priscilla Had none in those catalogues of salutation christian families but some only who are thus remembred It is very improbable nay if peruse them well we shal find they had but otherwise expressed as in that prolix catalogue Rom. 16. we find Aristobulus and Narcissus saluted with their houshold Asyncritus Phlegon c. with the brethren which are with them c. Others with the Saints which are with them 2 Tim. 4.19 the houshold of Onesiphorus this therefore so singular an appendix must meane some singular thing not common to them with the rest but peculiar to them alone And what should this be but what I have shewed thus that happy Interpreter There are only two more places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in the N. T. both which comply with the forementioned sense of Church meetings in houses Act. 2.46 Breaking bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compared with ver 42. referring to the love-feasts which they had in common to which the celebration of the Lords Supper was sometimes annexed in several houses appointed among them for that purpose see Beza on the place Act. 5.42 the Apostles dayly in the Temple and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ceased not to teach preach Jesus Christ where preaching in the Temple promiscuously is opposed to the preaching in Church meetings of the Christian brethren as it was in the text last quoted and therefore is fairly interpreted to the same sense here as it was there I shal only adde one thing more which makes it probable that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Act. 20.20 should denote the Church Assemblyes rather then the private houses of the Ephesian Elders as such One designe of Pauls speech appeares to be the confirming the Ephesian Elders by his example of constancy and boldness in the Christian faith and his function notwithanding all persecutions v. 19. Yet saith he v. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have not through fear or cowardize withdrawn in any thing needful see the importance of the word as it s used elswhere Gal. 2.12 Heb. 10.23 25. comp with ver 38. his boldness is instanced in preaching both publiquely or openly before friends and foes and at their Church Assemblyes notwithstāding the danger of coming thither which made some to withdraw themselves Heb. 10.25 Now to instruct privately in Christian families was no such instance of boldness as
right Reason doth dictate in respect of government in generall agreeing to all government as such as it doth in many things Christians are to make use thereof in reference to Ecclesiastical government Alwayes provided that that must not be accounted right Reason which thwarts the blessed Scriptures which should ever prevail against any conceit of our own Right Reason it self teaching us that God is infinitely wiser then we and that Christs lawes must be obeyed not disputed when once they appear to be his lawes But the light of Nature the spirit of man that candle of the Lord doth direct in many wholsome things for the due ordering of any society in a suitableness to the end for which the association thereof is lawfully made whether Civill in Families Towns Kingdomes States or Ecclesiasticall in particular Churches or in the associations of particular Churches greater or lesser 2. Yea the law of Nature or Naturall Reason is part of Christs law whereby he rules his Church And therefore Christians not onely may but ought to act prudentially in the administration of Church affairs as well as in other things and to make use of all the light of Reason in pursuing that general Rule Let all things be done decently and in order 3. Yet in Ecclesiasticall government Christ the King of his Church hath given us many positive Directions in his Word partly by express preceptive Rules and partly by obligatory presidents and examples such especially as were not suited to any temporary account of those times and the condition thereof but whose ground and reason still continues in all the succeeding ages and conditions of the Church These are Ecclesiasticall constitutions on a Divine right simply and strictly From these we may not digress upon any pretence of Reason whatsoever Yea because we must act rationally therefore we must close with all these the directions of wisdome it self and deal with all our conceits and humours making insurrections against the same as with mutiners which are in rebellion against their Lord and Master 4. In a larger sense also a government may be said to be by Divine right not onely in reference to its compliance with the foresaid positive Scripture rules and binding examples but also in respect of its rationall suitableness to godly prudence for the order and edification of the Church in things not particularly determined in the Scriptures and yet neither expresly nor by consequence thwarted by the same And thus I suppose who ever have owned a Church-government they have thought it by Divine right that is that it was according to the Scriptures and not contrary thereunto 5. And thus I was satisfied to comply with the constitutions of the Presbyterial government the government in substance upon the matter of all the forraign Protestant Churches in Europe composed by a learned pious and judicious Assembly imposed by authority of both Houses of Parliament when I first setled in this County and by their Ordinance of Aug. 29. 1648. still continued as much in force for ought I know as any other law at least as any other Ordinance of Parliament divers whereof are acknowledged to be still in force Upon the apprehension I say of the lawfulnesse of the said government partly upon a strictly Scripturall account in the main things and partly viz. in lesser matters upon a rational prudentiall account not contrary to the Scripture I did and do submit unto the same And I doubt not if it had been faithfully pursued according to the religious design and intention of the imposers thereof the excellent fruits thereof through Gods blessing would have been so great as might have silenced the most of its considerable adversaries §. 3. In my fifth note at Numb 10.11 12 13 14. I hinted the ordinary and common distinction among reformed Divines of the greater and lesser Excommunication Here Mr. W. crowes over me as flying to the authority of men of so late a standing for proving the abstention pleaded for Whereas any one yea one whose brains are as ill mar'd as he tells the world he fears mine are may easily perceive that I quoted them not to prove suspension but to shew that they called Suspension Lesser Excommunication And therefore those who oppose the debarring of the suspended should not have stated this question simply concerning the unexcommunicate without distinction And yet for all Mr. W. so much blames me for this he himself quotes Peter Martyr who saith he pag. 18. being as great an Antiquary and as great a reverencer of true Antiquity as any of you saith That though degrees of excommunication may easily be proved from the writings of the Fathers yet no such thing can be proved from Scripture And Mr. W. gives his own judgment thus pag. 20. 21. We deny not degrees unto excommunication nor in excommmnication unto further degrees of severity in case of persistance in obstinacy against the authority of the Church To both which I answer 1. Comparisons are odious Doth Mr. W. know that none who assert suspension do excell Peter Martyr in knowledge and esteem of Antiquity Belike he thinks his tongue is his own and he may talk at randome Our renowned Usher hath a glorious name in forreign Countries as well as in these Nations for the Prince of Antiquaries who hath merited such an Epitaph as Doctor Hackwell in hs Apology for Gods providence l. 3. c. 6. § 2. saith was bestowed on that Phoenix of learning Johannes Picus Earle of Mirandula Johanes jacet hic Mirandula caetera norunt Et Tagus Ganges forsan Antipodes Yet hath this our most learned Doctor and Bishop pleaded for Suspension and that as grounded upon the holy Scripture in his Body of Divinity pag. 435. 2. Did the Fathers think their degrees of excommunication which they admitted were not regulated within Scripture-bounds 3. If that degrees of excommunication may be proved from the Fathers how come those who now plead for degrees of excommunication to be charged with novelty and innovation and how came it to passe that Mr. W. in his Epistle passed his word to the judicious Reader that all men of reading know how much the Church government mentioned in or collected from the Fathers and in use in their dayes differs from our mens present Model Immediatly before these words Mr. W. exclaim'd High language It may very fitly be the Title and Epithete of these his words following What was Grotius no man of reading was he not a man confessedly impartiall in this matter who yet asserts the ruling Elder from antiquity Imper. sum potest circa sacra c. 11. quoted by Mr. Blake Covenant sealed cap. 7. § 16. Was our renowned Cambridge Professor Doctor Whitaker no man of reading who in his Defence of his answer to Campions ten Reasons against Dureus London 1583. l 9. de Sophismatis p. Mihi 807. saith Ita es ignarus ut esse in Christi Ecclesia presbyteros nescias qui gubernationi tantum non verbi
Mr. W. saith p. 99. We begin now to feare the feverity of your Church Officers But our comfort is that neither Titus 1.16 nor 1 Cor. 5. nor Math. 18.15 16. nor Rev. 2.2 doe establish your suspension nor command us to submit to your Church Officers 2. That Timson calls them intruded Elders p. 99 100. 3. The Question now in agitation with us is Whether open scandalous and presumptuous offenders in the Church are to be punished by the discipline of the Church We affirme positively that they are such offenders in words or deeds The correction of these do fall properly under Ecclesiastical discipline yet not so as the Christian Magistrate is to be excluded And yet all this doth not inferre the necessity of your suspension as a censure distnct from excommunication viz. that every Parish Priest with his Elders after his own humour should be Judge in his own cause use partiality exclude men from the Lords service meerely at his pleasure for not submitting to his Examination though otherwise judicious and of good example albeit the cry be against men ignorant and of gross behaviour And then tells us It s fit the correcting discipline should lye in indifferent and impartial hands more publique then the Parish Priest and his Elders And oft-times it will fall out that a Pastour and his Elders will be Judges in their own cause and then suspension was become private revenge and parties will become Judges All this p. 101 102. 4. He askes Is your Parochial suspension with your Classical power in being by toleration civil an universal Remedy against all the Errours that belong to Ecclesiastical cognizance As yet you have no place for publique Judicature allowed by the State no Power to issue out Warrants for the legall summoning in of offenders And therefore your proceedings in suspension are without all form of Law p. 103. 5. I see that ipso facto men must be suspended by you for their former miscarriages and present words of sorrow and of promising obedience for the future must not serve the turne This he insists on in many words p. 103 104 105 106 107. and labours to confute mee by Luk. 17.4 and askes Whether the Church which is coetus misericors and deales not against men in rigour of Justice but with bowels of mercy may not take mens present words of repentance for a reall dissenting from their former evill deeds and beleeve in charity that their word-Testimonies of Repentance are serious Retractations of their former evil deeds And now I desire the Reader to do himselfe Mr. W and me that right as to compare these five answers severally and joyntly with my argumentation which should be confuted by them and let him try his best skill to fit them thereunto My reasoning for the confirmation of my Consequence recited in the beginning of this Chapter which Mr. W. here assaults thus proceeded If the above mentioned Consequence from the suspension of word-Rejecters of Christ to the suspension of some deed-Rejecters of Christ do not hold it is either because no deed-rejection of Christ is so manifest visible and hainous a rejection of Christ as word-rejecting of Christ is or els because the Officers in the Church have some good Rule according to which they may dispense with or not deny the Sacrament for deed-rejecting of Christ rather then word rejecting of Christ or for some other Reason But neither of these do enervate the Consequence nor any other Reason therefore its good and valid not the latter because no such Rule can be produced but rather the contrary Titus 1.16 1 Cor. 5. Math. 18.15 16 17 Rev. 2.2 Not the former because c. which may be perused at numb 44 45. § 2. Mr. W. in answering hereof doth neither assert that either of the Reasons mentioned doth enervate my Consequence nor fault the enumeration of obstructive Reasons which might enervate it nor assigne any other And yet his foresaid returnes must serve for solutions and he in the strength of them thus flourisheth it out and shews his mettle p. 108. The proofe of your Consequence we have examined at large we have shewed Causes why we cannot approve of it You may take time to consider and reply if you have any stomack to the undertaking But I feare me you will consider of it ten times before you will undertake it once Truly I may consider it twenty times before I can finde any thing herein pertinent for me to reply unto such an adversary may safely challenge and provoke to Disputation Did ever any Quaker returne a more impertinent pretended solution to an Argument And yet they will be as bold as Mr. W. himselfe hath attained to be and tell you no body dare or can answer them And under the shelter of that their irrational impudence they often escape Replyes to them And so might Mr. W. for mee if others Judgement had not prevail'd against my owne for this once hereafter I hope my Friends will not urge me in this kinde any more But though these his five Reasons against my Consequence so you see he calls them else I had wanted a name for them as the Painter that wrote This is a Lyon over the picture he had drawne that no body should take it for a Bull though I say these his answers are manifestly nihil ad Rhombum yet because it may be thought he may like a squinting Fencer wound me some where els by them though he touch not the place he makes a shew to aime at I shall therefore satisfie his importunity this once as I have sometimes gratified the Quakers to make some reply to them severally and then I shall as I promised confirme my own argumentation §. 3. To his first It s plaine I cited not those texts to prove suspension immediately I brought them to prove that Church Officers have no good Rule according to which they may dispense with deed rejecting of Christ any more then with word-rejecting of Christ in point of sacramental administrations thus If there be a deed rejecting of Christ for which Ecclesiastical Censure is to be inflicted as wel as for a word rejecting of Christ then the Church Officers have no Rule to dispense with or not deny the Sacrament for the former rather than the latter The Antecedent is proved by the texts quoted Titus 1.16 In words they profess Christ in deeds they deny him And the other texts proved a deed-rejecting of Christ yea when in words Christ is owned to be causes of Ecclesiastical Censure and therefore as truly as word rejecting of Christ is To his second I say Mr. W. it seemes hath found one man as bold as himselfe to reproach Elders without offering any Argument against them or invalidating those produced for them A confident man as I have lightly met with who though then a private Christian as he stiles himselfe without blushing tells us in his Epistle to the Reader before his Bar removed I looke to
of the Church I am informed by a Manuscript Copy I have of the Resolves of a Provincial Synod held at Preston in Lancashire Novemb. 14. 1648. that the said Synod among other things resolved in their sixt particular That there is not only one way prescribed or warranted by the word of god for the Elderships satisfying themselves of the sufficiency in point of knowledge of persons that are members of their Congregations respectively that they may be admitted to the Lords Supper 7. That it is not lawfull for the Elderships to tye themselves to one way as aforesaid suppose it be examination before them when that one attaines not the end and another may probably doe it So they In the businesse of Marriage its necessary the consent of the parties should be expressed before competent witnesses but the Christian Magistrate may determine who shall be competent witnesses whether a Justice of peace or a Minister shall be present to take and record the signification of their consent Yet no sober man cryes out Why are unscriptural conditions put upon persons to be marryed The like may be said concerning the present point Yet in this case methinkes that should sway most for our direction herein at present which is commended to us by both Houses of Parliament after their removal of the Common prayer book with the advice of the Reverend Assembly Form of Church Government to be used in the Church of England and Ireland of Aug. 29. 1648. p. 30. But if people in some Congregations will not be gotten to comply with that direction in the letter of it I know not but there may be some variation without offence as the Minister or Elderships of particular Churches with advice of their Classis if extant may judge expedient for the satisfaction and edification of the Church See Mr Blake Covenant sealed Ch. 7. § 14. p. 230 231 232 233. and § 16 p. 272 273. I am afraid I have been too long on this Digression The urgency and misrepresentations of the thing here handled must be my excuse I humbly submit it to the judicious peaceable Reader who will consider how to shew a cleerer way before he censure this And I shall easily neglect discontented furious uncivil Wranglers whose businesse is to carp at others but build nothing consistently of their own in this matter 4 Your pretended Church order saith Mr. W. p. 4. requires an account of mens saith auricularly And p. 28. You deny the Lords Supper to such as will not give an auricular account to you or your Elders c. Auricular confession is a phrase used to denote that which is required among the Papists 1 viz. that every one do confesse all his sins though private to the Priest alone whispering the same into his eare Now what a shameful slander is that Mr. W. puts on us in the application hereof to the profession of faith required among us cannot but be manifest to every observer 1. We require no confession of private sins but abhorre it unfeinedly 2. Who knows not the great quarrel many have against the Presbyterial Government is because it allowes not the Minister alone of his own head to seclude the other Officers chosen by the people from joyning with him in receiving this confession of faith required But let the Reader here see what cause he hath on this occasion to accompany me in a serious lamentation that envious animosities should so farre prevaile upon any as to hurry them on to such calumnies as malice it selfe could not devise more impudent 5 Mr. W. addes p. 4. Which very auricular account is the basis of your new model or pretended Church constitution And p. 9. Those you refuse to canonize by your ghostly approbation though baptized them you look upon as the world c. The like he hath over and over p. 11 21 22. Such are no Church-members with you p. 60 61 88 113 c. To name these things is to confute them I have spoken of their untruth in the Treatise Ch. 8. § 4. Ch. 21. § 1. and need to adde no more in so palpable a falshood 6 But he addes to this sad heap of falshoods when he saith p. 124. Let men be suspended by you do what they will afterwards let them be Atheists or of what sect they will afterwards you regard not The like he hath p. 122. And woe be to us if this be truly charged on us But I defye him and the Accuser of the Brethren to boot to prove the charge 7 And the language of envy powres out it selfe further p. 123. When they are suspended you look after them no longer unless it be for your Tithes and Church dues It may be the man who affected to date his Epistle from his poor house at Leek grudgeth others their Tithes His neighbours may do well to consider his complaint But a man should carry himselfe honestly though in a poor house and then he would forbeare these criminations which our course of personal instruction may manifest to be false even to a proverb 8 He tells me p. 124. Debarring from the Lords Supper with you is the comprehensive of all Discipline and that power to debar being granted you are content And who told Mr. W. this tale perhaps he is not so ill provided as to be destitute of some body or other to father it upon no more then he was for that story he tells the world in his Apology about his Antagonists designe to obstruct the impression of his book which I could never learne any thing of to this day But we are for admonition before suspension and for a further excommunication or withdrawing Communion after suspension as opportunity may be offered and the case require see Form of Church Government p. 18 39 40. Let Mr. W. tell what figments he please to the contrary Certainly he is no child but he doth what children doe when he is so busie in raising bubbles made of his own froth and then shouting aloud tosseth them about with that breath which first raised them 9 In the same page last mentioned he further gives his word against us You saith he make your Brethren your slaves 10 And by your uncontroulable power of suspension you assume to your selves more authority over the people then ever did the most domineering Prelate among us in making poor people sland to your courtesie for the Lords Supper To both these joyntly I answer 1. How is that an uncontroulable power to make our Brethren slaves with or at our courtesie 1 which is limited by the Ordinance of Parliament so that we may not adde of our own heads to the enumeration of the meritorious causes of suspension Form of Church Government p. 30 31 34 35. c. And 2 when any may appeale from a Congregational Eldership to higher Judicatories in case of wrong done them according to the constitution of the Presbyterian Government Form of Church Government p. 15. 2. How do