seducing his people CHAP. X. Quest. 10. Whither or no it be lawfull to seperate from a true Church visible for the corruption of teachers and the wickednesse of Pastours and professours where Faith is begotten by the preaching of professed truth THat we may the more orderly proceed these distinctions are to be considered as making way to cleare the question 1. There is a separation in the visible Church and a Separation out of and from the visible Church 2. There is a Separation totall and whole from any visible communion with the Church or partiall and in part from a point of Doctrine or practise of the Church in a particular only 3. There is a Separation negative when we deny the practise of an errour with silence or refuse publike communion with the Church but doe not erect a new Church within the Church There is a separation positive when we doe not only refuse practise of errours and protest and pleade against them but also erect a new visible Church 4. As there is a three-fold communion 1. in Baptisme 2. in hearing of the Word 3. in communicating with the Church at the Lords Supper so there is a three-fold separation answerable therunto 5. The influence of a worship corrupt may either be thought to come from the persons with whom we worship or 2. from the matter of the worship if corrupt and that either 1. by practise or 2. by not practising somthing that an affirmative commandement of God impaseth on us 6. A communion in worship either implyeth a consent and approbation of the worship or no consent at all 7. A communion of worship when the worship in the matter is lawfull yet for the profession may be most unlawfull as to heare a Jesuite preach sound Doctrine 8. There is a separation from a friendly familiarity and from a communion in worship 1. Conclusion We are to separate in the true visible Church from all communion wherin need-force we cannot choose but sinne suppose we separate not from the Church Eph. 5. 11. Have no fellowship with the unfruitfull workes of darkenesse but rather reproove them Col. 2. â—1 Touch not taste not handle not 2 Epist. John Bid him not God speed that bringeth another doctrine 2. Conclusion from the first conclusion it will follow that a separation in part I meane in some acts of publike worship when we cannot chuse but fall in sin from a true Church is lawfull as we must separate from an idolatrous communion where the bread is adored for then the Lords Table is made an Idols Table and yet we are not totally and wholly to separate from the Church and hearing of the word and praiers and praises of that Church as we shall heare 3. Conclusion Anent separation from Rome and spirituall Babel We have two parties to satisfie if they would in reason be informed 1. Papists 2. Separatists opposers of government Presbyteriall who thinke we have all as good reason to separate from our selves and Presbyteriall Churches as from Babel But I shall speake a little of the first in some few Theses considerable for our purpose 1. Consideration It is most false that Bellarmine saith Churches all withered as branches separated from trees when they separated from Rome Joseph grew as a fruitfull Branch and blessings was on the top of his head when he was separated from his Brethren Deut. 33. 16. For 1. The contrary is seene in the reformed Churches who never flourished as since our separation from Rome 2. The Churches in Asia and Africa and especially the Greeke Church flourished ever since and they separated from Rome and had famous learned men in them after the separation as Theophylact Damascen Occumenius Zonaras Cedrenus Elias Cretensis Basil Nilus and many others and especially the Aethiopian and Armenian Churches had both their Bishops and Assemblies howbeit generall they could not have seeing they were apart not the whole Church 2. Consideration The faithfull before Luther the Albigenses Waldenses and others yea the Romane Doctors themselves holding the fundamentall points with some hay and stubble builded upon the foundation made a negative Separation from Babylon and did neither hold nor professe their grosse Idolatries and other fundamentall errours howbeit they did not hold them positively by erecting a new Church because the separation was then in the blade and not ripe for the Harvest 3. Consideration We hold that Rome made the Separation from the Reformed Churches and not we from them as the rotten wall maketh the schisme in the house when the house standeth still and the rotten wall falleth 1. Because we left not Christianity in Rome but the leprosie of Popery growing upon Christianity seeing we kept the Apostolike faith and did positively separate from the pookes blybes and ulcers of Christian Rome 2. We did not separate from the Westerne Churches either collective or representatively gathered in a generall Councell 3. We departed not from a Nationall Provinciall or Parishonall Church or Pastors that we had before nor from the materiall Temples and Churches except that some not very considerable hyrelings and idoll-pastours would not goe before us 4. And because the succession of fundamentall truths from generations to generations is as necessary as the perpetuall existence of the true Catholick Church while the covenant with night and day and the ordinances of Heaven shall continue Jer 31. 37. therfore there were a succession of professours and members of the Catholick Church that did ever hold these fundamentals which we to this day hold against Rome suppose Histories cannot cleare the particular persons by name 5. We have not separated from Romes baptisme and ordination of Pastors according to the substance of the act nor from the letter of the twelve Articles of the Creed and contents of the old and new Testament as they stand with relation to the mind and intent of the Holy Ghost howbeit we have left the false interpretations of the Lords of poore peoples Faith and Consciences 4. Consideration We separate not from acts of love to have the reliques of Babel saved howbeit we have separated from communion in faith and worship 5. Consideration The essentiall ingredients and reasons of a lawfull divorce are here 1. we could not lye in one bed with that sometime sister Church of Rome but our skin behoved to rub upon her botch-boyle and therfore we did separate from nothing but corruption 2. There was there persecutions and in that we are patients and ejected rather then departers on foot and horse 3. A professed dominion over our consciences 4. Necessity of receiving the marke of the beast and so the plagues of the beast to worship Images and the worke of mens hands a necessity of professing fundamentall errours that subvert the foundation of faith did all necessitate our seperation 6. Consideration The Church of believers might lawfully use justâ tutelâ aetâ—rnae salutis a necessary defence for salvation and forsake her corrupt guides and choose others
A PEACEABLE AND TEMPERATE PLEA FOR PAVLS PRESBYTERIE IN SCOTLAND OR A modest and Brotherly Dispute of the government of the Church of SCOTLAND Wherein Our Discipline is demonstrated to be the true Apostolick way of divine Truth and the Arguments on the contrary are friendly dissolved the grounds of Separation and the Indepencie of particular Congregations in defence of Ecclesiasticall Presbyteries Synods and Assemblies are examined and tryed By Samuell Rutherfurd Professor of Divinity at Saint Andrews PSAL. 48. 12. Walke about Zion and goe round about her tell the Towers thereof VER 13. Marke yee well her Bulwarks consider her Pallaces that yee may tell it to the generations following LONDON Printed for Iohn Bartlet at the guilt-Cup neare St Austins-gate 1642 TO THE HONOVRABLE And truly Noble Lord Earle of Lindsey Lord JOHN PARBROTH c. one of his Majesties Honourable Privy Councell Grace Mercy and Peace c. COnsidering my Lord your Lordships good minde and constant fidelity and care in advancing this blessed Reformation and fending both your shoulders to hold up the Kingdome of our LORD JESUS and also your singular respect and reall affection to this famous Vniversity and the faculty of Divinity in this Society I thought it rather a matter of debtfull necessity then of arbitrary election and choise that this little peece that pleadeth for the Government of the Church of Scotland should thrust it self through the thick and throng of many worthier monuments of Learning under the honourable Patrociny of your Lordships name I am not ignorant that two blocks closeth the passage to many of greater parts and abilitie then I am to adde I may have leave to borrow the word to the Presses child-birth◠travelling with no end of making many books and these be the opinions of men and the event of Printing I may say of the former that Opinion is a Witch and a great Inchantresse while men call for Bookes as nice banqueters call for dishes to the Table for they make such wide oddes betwixt taste-pleasant and goodnesse of meat as if they were sworne to the roofe of their mouth rather then to health and life so that it is much more obvious to please few and gratifie none then to satisfie all And for the event it is not unlike dicing for it is doubtsome if Fame be not a lost prize in writing and if the game goe not crosse the Authors haire And such is our corruption that the ayre or figures of a printed name is a peece of our self and as our skin wherin our flesh and bones are kindly inchalmbered and so were most tender of one penny breadth of this hide or of letting one droppe of bloud of this kinde fall to the Earth Notwithstanding of these prejudices I have howbeit most unable dared to appeare also in the Presse to say somewhat in way of a peaceable defence of our Church-government in Scotland The pens of the worthy Reformers of the Christian Churches have beene so blessed in the conscience if not in the evill eye of envy it selfe that they have cleared the Scripture way of the Government of CHRISTS Kingdome to lye in a midline betwixt the Popes and Prelates lawlesse Church Monarchy and the unorderly confusion of Democracie It is not unknowne the savoury perfume and honourable name that this poore Church hath gained partly by the whole hoast of Protestant Writers and ancient Fathers who have unanimously put downe in print what wee have done in practice according to our Nationall Oath partly by the testimony of the blessed Lights and faithfull Witnesses of IESUS I might name Reverend Beza learned Brightman that manly and stout Witnesse of CHRIST M. George Wishart the body of the Confessions of Faith And it is as well manifest to the world Sunne and Moone being Witnesses what Prelates have attempted against Presbyteriall Governement but one said well I beleeve IESUS to be a good man and the Evangell blessed because Satan malice and Persecutours have done so much against them both with fire and tortures What dust of late have they raised against it in Church State Court Parliament three Kingdomes in Rome in the heart of King and many others in Campo Martio in open field yea in the Sea that the Sea should speake contrary to that stile of the Prophet I travell in birth I bring up children and nothing could be the reason but they saw the Woman looking foorth as the morning faire as the Moone cleare as the Sunne terrible as an Army with banners and when they saw Mount Zion beautifull in situation they marvelled they were troubled and hasted away And what daring insolency is this when the Prelate could not finde his Father and thought shame of his native Father Diotrephes that one D. Hall and others have put him in the line of the blood royall and printed him an office jure divino by divine right Their Predecessours were content of the good old jus humanum Yet I hope put the Prelate in the Calendar of well-borne officers bastard as he is yet many must die ere he be here This boldnesse putteth me in minde of the saying Laus nova nisi oritur vetus amittitur except Prelates grow in new honour they loose their old honour But why may we not hope that both they their god-father the Pope and their god-Mother Rome shall loose both new and old God hath fetched as broken a Ship to land and yet they will be of Divine Right Is it not true that the Learned said of necessity Necessitati quodlibet telum utile est Any clubbe is a sword good enough for poore necessity or then it is true Necessitas egentem mendacem facit Necessity turneth the poore man in a lyar or which I rather thinke Necessitas quod poscit nisi das eripit If you give not willingly to necessity what it suiteth it must take it by strong hand and club-law CHRIST hath fairely begun to his Vniversall conquest Gird thy sword upon thy thigh ô most mighty and blessed shall all ages to come call all these Nobles who have shoulders to carry one stone to the raising of the wall of this Temple and to build the Citie whose name is the LORD is there And in this course my Lord live flourish and grow and JEHOVAH build you a sure house which is the prayer of Your Lordships obliged servant at all respective obedience in CHRIST SAMUEL RUTHERFURD To the Christian Reader I Am bold reverend and Christian Reader to appeare in print to contribute my weake judgement for the government of the Church of Scotland In which suite I have to doe with foes and friends To the former I speake not now I meane Prelates Papists and haters of the truth I doubt not but I am condemned in their books of both errours and crimes my hope to prevaile with such is small if that be true Damnati lingua vocem habet vim
of the keyes without any subjection to any superiour Ecclesiasticall indicatorie p. 187. CHAP. 14. QVEST. 14. Whether or no the power Ecclesiasticall of Synods can be proved from the famous Councell holden at Jerusalem Acts 15. p. 199. CHAP. 15. QVEST. 15. Whether or noe by other valid Arguments from Gods word the lawfulnesse of Synods and Assemblies can be concluded p. 217. CHAP. 16. QVEST. 16. Whether or no it can be demonstrated from Gods Word that all particular Congregations have of and within themselves full power of Church-discipline without any subiection to Presbyteries Synods and higher Church-Assemblies where also the question about publike prophecying of such gifted men as are not in office is discussed against the tenent of Separatists p. 231. CHAP. 17. QVEST. 17. Whether or no some doe warrantably teach that no man hath Pastorall power to preach and administer the Sacraments as a Pastor without the bounds of his owne Congregation And from whence essentially is the calling of a Minister from the Presbytery or from the people p. 260. CHAP. 18. QVEST. 18. Certaine Quares or doubts following upon the Doctrine of independent Congregations p. 272. CHAP. 19. QVEST. 19. Doubts generally seeming to oppose Presbyteriall government discussed and loosed as anent ruling Elders Deacons Widowes the power of Kings in matters Ecclesiastick p. 280. CHAP. 20. QVEST. 20. Whether or no the government of the Church of Scotland can be demonstrate from the cleare testimonies of Gods Word p. 362. CHAPTER I. Whether the power of the Keyes of the Kingdome of CHRIST be conferred upon the multitude of believers as upon the first and proper subject or upon the Church-guides THe Question is not understood of that Royall and Kingly power of excellency and Independencie called all power which is only in Christ Iesus but of the supreme Ministeriall power as all expound it Bucanus Cartwright Amesius Parker that is given to the Church By the Keyes wee understand not the Monarchicall power of Teaching supreme defining Articles of faith and judging the Scriptures as the Jesuites of Rhemes doe dreame Vulcane not Christ made these Keyes We deny not what Bellarmine saith that the keyes signifie a Princedome in Scripture as the key of Davids house promised to Eliakim This key Christ only keepeth Chrysostome and Gregory both say that the care of the whole Christian Church was committed to Peter which proveth not his Princedome but only his ministeriall power given to all the Apostles as well as to him but the Metaphor is borrowed from a Steward or Master-household who hath the keyes of the house given to him to open and shut doores at his pleasure as Calvin Bucan Whitaker explaine it well and it is the power of preaching and governing given to the guides of the Church as servants to open and shut Heavens doore to believers or impenitent persons If wee rightly proceed these distinctions are to bee considered 1. There is a power physicall and a power morall of the Keyes 2. A power popular of the Keyes that belongeth to all and a power authoritative that belongeth to the Guides only 3. The power of the Keyes is in Christ as in the formall subject and fountaine 2. In the Church of believers as in the finall object seeing all this power is for the Church 3. In the Guides as in the exemplar cause representing the Church as we say the image is in the glasse and learning in the booke and this Petrus de Alliaco and Gerson hath the like 4. The Keyes may be thought to be given Mat. 16. to Peter as Prince and King of the Apostles as Papists say or 2. As Peter representeth the Church of believers as some say or 3 As bearing the person of Church guides as we shall demonstrate God willing 5. There is a power ordinary and a power extraordinary 6. The Keyes may be thought to be conferred by Christ immediately either by the immediation of Christs free donation and gift or or by the immediation of simple designation in the former respect the keyes were given by Christ once to the Apostles and still to the Worlds end to the Church guides immediately without the Churches power intervening in the later respect Christ giveth the keyes mediately by the popular consent and election of the Church of believers who doe under Christ designe and choose this person rather than that person Thomas rather than John for the sacred office of weelding the Keyes neither is any man now elected immediately by Christ as the Apostles were 7. Then we may well distinguish in this question these foure 1. Power physicall 2. Power morall 3. Power of order and jurisdiction 4. The use and exercise of that power Wee are to observe that it hath beene a noble and grave Question betwixt the Church of Rome and the Vniversitie of Paris as Spalanto and Robert Parker with others have observed whether Christ hath given the power of the keyes immediately to all the faithfull and by them to the Pastours and Doctors as the Parisians hold so teacheth Almain Ioan. Major Gerson and Occam or if Christ hath given the keyes immediately to the Church guides as we maintaine from Gods Word The mistake hath beene that some Doctors believe that the power of the keyes seeing it is for the good of the whole Church must have some common subject viz. the universall Church in which it must for orders cause first reside before it be given to certaine guides But neither Scripture nature nor reason requireth such a shifting of the keyes from hand to hand seeing Christ can keep them and immediately put them in their trust whom he liketh best Hence for the determination of the Question I. Conclusion The physicall power of the keyes is given to men as they are professors that is men and not Angels are capable of that power for when they are made members of the visible Church they are differenced both from Angels and Infidels as Pagans and Turkes for Angels according to Christs humble love and deepe wisedome are not upon the list to be office bearers in his house but this is not formally a power of the keyes but a popular power about the keyes whereby popular consent may be given to the key-bearers for their election II. Conclusion There is a power popular but not authoritative a power of private Christians not an officiall power of charge given to the visible professors to make choise of their owne office-bearers those against whom we now dispute brethren reverend learned and holy doe confound and take for one and the same the power of electing or choosing officers and the power of Ordination And they make election of Elders which by Gods Word is due to all the faithfull an act of jurisdiction whereas it is a private and popularâ—act flowing from that spirit of grace in believers and from
being a number of preachers Acts 20. 36. Paul prayed with them all and yet they were set over that flocke by the Holy-Ghost Acts 20. 28. therefore they had each their owne Church and one canot officiate or exercise Pastorall acts amongst the flock of another Pastor as our brethren would prove from this same place Acts 20. 4. What shall we say the Church of Rome was onely an independent single Congregation that met in one place or house seeing the faith and obedience of the Saints there was heard through all the world Rom. 1. 8. Rom. 16. 19. so that Tertullian in his time saith halfe of the City was Christians And Cornelius saith beside himselfe there was forty and five Presbyters Consider how many prime persons families Paul saluteth Rom. 16. Paul stileth them one Church and one body that had jurisdiction common to all Rom. 1â— 3 4 5 6 5. So Galatia is written too as to one Church and had one government and discipline Gal. 5. 9. A little leaven of false doctrine leaveneth the whole lump as 1 Cor. 5. v. 6 7. and Gal. 5. ver 10. He that troubleth you shall beare his judgement whosoever he be ver 12. I would they were even cut off by the rod of discipline as Pareus and Perkins expound it that trouble you So Gal. 6. 1. the spirituall are to restore in meeknesse the weake falling in sinne and yet they were many Congregations in Galatia Gal. 1. 2 1 Cor. 16. 1. 6. We finde a Presbyterie at Antioch of Prophets and teachers Acts 13. 1. who laid hands on Paul and Barnabas 2 3. and ordained them to goe and preach And a Presbytery at Lystra Acts 16. 1 2 3. where Timothy was recommended to Paul and received in his company and laid hands on by him Now that this imposition of hands was not done by the collective body of the Church but by the Elders and Presbytery is cleare from 1 Tim. 4. 14. as Iunius collecteth for that the people laid on hands there is no ground 7. And Acts 21. 18. There is a Presbytery at Ierusalem of Iames and the Elders exercising jurisdiction for before them Paul giveth account of his ministery amongst the Gentiles v 19 20. and they enjoyn Paul for the believing Jewes sake to purifie himselfe v. 23 24. which Paul obeyed v 26 27. and this Presbytery taketh on them the Canons of the Councell of Jerusalem made Acts 15. at least as a part of that famous Councell 8 To ordaine Elders in every city is all one as to ordain Elders in every Church Act 14. 23. so doth Luke expone it as Parker confesseth Act 20. 17. And from Miletus hee sent to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church he saith not of the Churches Act 16. 4. And when they went thorow the cities they delivered them the decrees c. now what is meaned by cities is exponed in the next ver 5. So were the Churches established So Tit 1. 5. That Thou shouldest appoint Elders in every city as I appointed thee Then that there bee an Eldership and Presbytery of Pastors in every city is an Apostolike Institution and so the commandement of our Lord Iesus for that Paul understandeth there especially preaching Elders in every city is cleare by the words following that sheweth what sort of men preaching Elders should be ver 9. able by sound Doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gain-sayers c. Hence if an Eldership in a city as Ephesus and Ierusalem and Antioch where all cannot meet for multitude bee an Eldership in one Church as our book of Discipline hath it then there was Presbyteries in great cities where there were many Congregations but the former is proved already ergo the Presbytery of many Congregations is the Apostles Presbytery 9. If Gods word warrant a number of officers in Gods house who ordaineth Pastors by laying on of hands and who tryeth these who say they are Apostles and Pastors and are lyars and who hath jurisdiction to punish false teachers as Balaam and Iezabel and who appointeth Elders in cities and Churches then is there a Presbytery and society of Pastors and Elders in moe consociated and neighbour congregations appointed for this effect But there is such a number of officers in Gods House of which number are no single believers not cloathed with any Ministeriall calling Therfore there must be a Presbytery diffâ—rent from private Professours that overseeth many Congregations I prove the proposition First that there is such a number and that they are different from ordinary professors 1 Tim 4. 14. Neglect not the gist that is in thee which was given by the laying on of the hands of the Elders Re 2. 2. Re. 2. 14 20. Tit 1. 5. 1 Tim 5 22. now that ordinary professours who are not Elders doe lay hands on Pastors ordain or appoint Elders and judicially try and choose or refuse false Teachers and censure or deprive them wanteth precept promise or practice in the Word of God except we say the Epistles to Timothy and Titus are not written to Church-men but to all professours that they should lay hands suddenly on no man that they should appoint Elders in every city Now also that this united Presbytery is a Presbytery of one single Congregation is 1 Against that which we have prooved of the great Church of Ephesus Act 20. Act 19. Rev 2. as also against the necessity of Pastors labours who are not to stay in numbers together upon one single Congregation where two or moe cannot be had To the place 1 Tim 4. 14. some answer that that laying on of the hands of the Presbytery was extraordinary and ceased with the Apostles Others say he speaketh of the office not of the persons Answ The latter is a devise of Prelates refuted by our Divines an office neither hath hands nor feet but persons only have hands 2. Castalio calleth this with good warrant The Senate of Elders Chrysost and Hugo Cardinalis a Colledge of Presbyters Iunius saith it is all one with the Church Mat 18. But thirdly we deny not but there was an extraordinary laying on of hands by the Apostles by which the Holy Ghost was given Act 8. 18. But this is the laying on of the hands of the Apostles as Presbyters which is ordinary and is limited and ruled by the Word and must not be done suddenly 1 Tim. 5. 22. now no such rule is laid upon the miraculous laying on of hands there is no feare that the Apostles in working of miracles should partake of other mens sinnes and that the ordinary laying on of hands such as this was did not give the Holy Ghost is cleare Act 14. 3. The Elders layeth hands on Paul and Barnabas who before had received the Holy Ghost Act 9. 17. 3. This answer is against the nature of this Epistle where Paul setteth down a plat-forme of Church government to be keeped unviolably to the second comming
of Christ as is cleare 1 Tim. 6. 14. and so he saith himself 1 Tim. 3. 15. These things I write that thou mayest know how to behave thy selfe in the Church Gerson Bucer These were written for ages to come so the Refutator of Tilen and our own Rollock and so the Fathers Oecumenus say he setteth downe the summe of Ecclesiasticke Discipline So Chrysostome Augustine Enthim Cyrillus 10. Suppose we should grant a Presbyteriall Church be not expresly in the Word as we thinke it is Mat. 18. as we shall prove yet the thing it self cannot be denied hence take away a Presbytery whose it is to ordaine and censure Pastours of necessity the government and power of the keyes must be in the hands of the people against the arguments in the former Chapter that cannot be answered for the multitude of believers cannot ordaine a Pastor suppose we grant they are to chuse and elect their owne Pastor yet it is not warranted by the Word that ruling Elders with one pastor should ordain pastors seeing ordinations is given still to preaching Elders Act 14. 3. Tit 1. 5. 1 Tim 5. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 2. Rev 2. 2. Act 20. 29 30. and to moe pastours then to one only But by the way let us heare what is said against this 1. The word Church signifieth alwaies a gathered together Church or such as may gather together Act 11. 26. a whole yeare they assembled with the Church Act 20. 7. The Disciples came together to breake bread so Act 1. 10. Act 2. 44 46. Act 5. 12. Act 15. 25. An. Our brother M. Gillespi saith many Interpreters expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were together that is of one accord in love and amity and also Churches not being builded and they meeting in private houses as in Maries house Act 12. schoole of Tyrrannus Act 19. 9. in an upper chamber Act 20. 8. Pauls lodging at Rome Act 28. 13. What private houses could ordinarily contain so many thousands 2. The Scripture speaketh so to give us an example of the publick meeting for publick worship where it is not needefull that all met in one place collectively it is enough they meet all distributively 3. Neither doth the word Church alwayes signifie a meeting of one single Congregation as Act 12. Prayers was made by the Church that is by all professours Herod vexed the Church Act 8. Saul made havocke of the Church I persecuted the Church There is no necessity to expound these of people meeting ordinarily to worship God for Herod and Saul persecuted all whither Apostles or professours in houses not respecting their meeting in one place also it shall follow that prayers were not made in private but only in the Church that is in the conveened Congregation for Peter which is absurd And that they were a visible Church is cleare els Herod and Saul could not persecute them Parker answereth The whole Nation of the Iewes did meet at one meeting and are called by Luke the Church and there came innumerable multitudes to heare Christ. Answ. That is for us the Church of the Iews contained six hundreth thousand fighting men beside women children and aged persons and the Levites that attended the Tabernacle and Arke it were a wonder to make out of this an independent Congregation all judging and governing both themselves and their governours Therfore there may be a visible Church under one government that cannot ordinarily meet to heare the Word of God and howbeit there met innumerable multitudes Luke 12 to heare Christ and that with great confusion that is forbidden in Church meetings 1 Cor 14. So that they trod on one another that multitude could not be a Church 1. Ordinarily meeting 2. To heare one pastor 3. To judge all the people and over-see their manners 4. And to communicate ordinarily at one Table in the Lords Supper this is against the nature and true use of a Congregation met in one place for the publick worship Thirdly they reason the Church visible in the New Testament are called the Churches in the plurall number the Churches of Judea Galatia Asia Macedonia Hence it followeth there is no visible Church larger then a Church meeting in one house Answ We reade of the Church of Hierusalem Act 15. where certainly there were moe particular Churches 2 It followeth not for moe Churches were visible and audible Act 15. at that famous councell and are called so united the whole Church and yet separated they were sundry churches they are so named in opposition only to the Nationall and typicall Church of Iudea not in opposition to provinciall and Nationall Churches and Synods 5 Conclusion A Church may be called representative three waies 1 Properly as if the Rulers stood in the persons of believers judging for them as if the believers were there themselves as a deputy representeth the King So Israel did sweare a covenant Deut 9. 14 15. for their posterity not borne this way the Eldership doe not judge for the Congregations as if the Congregations did judge by them as by their instruments as Robinson saith because the multitude of believers should not judge at all therfore Elders doe not in governing represent their persons So Bannes said the Pope this way hath no Legate for he cannot give an Apostolike spirit to his Embassadour for then he miâ—ht leave saith he an apostolike spirit in legacy to some successour We acknowledge no representative church in this sence as the authour of presbyteriall government examined unjustly imputeth to us 2 A representative Church may be thought a number sent by a community and elected to give laws absolutely tying as if believers should say We resigne our faith and conscience to you to held good whatever you determine without repeale or tryall that is blinde faith that we disclaime all our Rulers acts in our Assemblies do bind 1 conditionally if they be lawfull and convenient 2 matters to be enacted are first to be referred to the congregations and Elderships of particular congregations before they be enacted 3 A representative Church is a number having election and designation from the Church of believers but ordination from the Eldership to voice determine and command as those who are over them in the Lord to make constitutions and decrees according to Gods word and this way we hold a representative Church Mat 18. and 1 Cor 5. which made acts according to Gods word tying the whole congregation even the absents for the presents representeth the absent If the incestuous person had bin judicially excommunicated the Apostle Paul and all the absents that neither had bin actours nor witnesses had bin tied to abstain from bortherly conversing with him and this way the decrees of the Councell of Jerusalem tyed the absent Churches Act 16. 4. and Chrâ—sts power of the keyes Iohn 20. were given to Thomas howbeit absent
may joyn in Gods worship IT is maintained by these of the Separation that the rightly constituted Church must consist of the Lords planting as saith M. Barrow all taught of God all plants of righteousnesse sons of Zion precious stones a redeemed people a royall generation so the Guide to Zion The true visible Church say the Separatists is a company of people called and separated from the world by the word of God and ioyned together in a voluntary profession of the faith So Separatists in their petit Mr. Ainsworth M. Canne the discovery of N. Light For the clearing of the Question we remit to the consideration of the Reader these distinctions 1. Distinct. There be some Saints by externall calling but not chosen some Saints by internall and effectuall calling called and chosen of God 2. Distinct. There be some members of a visible Church who de jure by right and obligation should be such there be other members of a visible Church de facto and in practise who are such and such members 3. Distinct. There is a morall obligation and so all the members of a visible Church are obliged to bee Saints by effectuall calling there is a physicall obligation and so that persons may be members of a visible Church as visible it is not essentially required that they be effectually called 4. Dist. If a true Church and a visible Church as visible may not for a time be opposed by way of contradiction as a believing Church and a non-believing Church I remit to be considered and shall God willing bee cleared 5. Dist. It is one thing to be wicked and scandalous indeed and really and another thing to be scandalous juridicè and in the Court of the Church and notarily 6. Dist. A knowne and openly scandalous person and a well lustred and dyed Hypocrite are to be differenced in the Church 7. Dist. Let it be considered if the preaching of the word be not in divers considerations 1. A mean of constituting and making a visible Church 2. A true note of a visible Church 3. A meane of saving the believing Church now visibly professing the Faith 8. Dist. Let it be considered if the Magistrate and King may not compell men to the confessing and professing of the faith actu imperato by an externall forcing power and yet neither Magistrate nor Pastour can compell to heart-believing actu elicito by an inward moving of the heart 9. Let it be considered if a visible Church may not be a true Church by reason of some few sound believers and sincere seekers of God and that same whole body an infected lump and whoorish in respect of some visible professours who are hypocrites and proud despisers of the Lord. 10. Let it be considered if a Church may not be tearmed by Gods Spirit an whoore no Church no Spouse jure merito quod vocationem passivam in respect of bad deserving and their not answering on their parts to the call of God and yet that same Church remaine de facto formaliter quoad vocationem Dei activam formally and in regard of Gods part and his active vocation and calling the Spouse and bride of Christ. Hence our first Conclusion The Saints by externall calling are the true matter of a visible Church 1. The word Ecclesia the called of God proveth this For those are a true visible Church where God hath set up a Candlestick and whom God calleth to Repentance Remission of sinnes and life eternall in Christ because there bee a setled Ministery calling 2. Because all to whom the Word is preached are called the visible Church as all within the house are vessels of the house visibly howbeeit there bee in the house Vessels of Honour and vessels of dishonour 3. So saith Ainsworth this we hold That Saints by calling are the only matter of a visible Church yet withall we hold that many are called but few chosen So also the kingdome of Heaven or visible Church is a draw net wherin are good and bad fishes a barne-floore wherin are chaffe and good wheat See 1 Corinthians 1. 23. Collossians 1. 1 2. Romans 1. 7. Philip. 1. 1. Math. 20. 16. 2. Conclusion All the members of the visible Church de jure and by right or by morall obligation ought to be Saints effectually called 1. Because the commandement of making to themselves a new heart Ezech. 18. 31. and to be renewed in the spirit of their mind Eph. 4. 23. Rom 12. 2. and to be holy as he who hath called them is holy 1 Pet. 1. 15 16. It doth lay an obligation morall upon all within the visible Church 2. Because the preached Gospell is the grace of God appearing to all men teaching them to deny ungodlinesse c. Tit. 2. v. 11 12. 3. Conclusion But de facto as the visible Church is in the field of the world all the members of the visible Church are not effectually called justified sanctified neither is it needfull by a phisicall obligation for the true nature and essence of a visible Church that all the members of it be inwardly called and sanctified every professor is obliged to beleeve else the wrath of God abideth on him and he is condemned already But to make a man a visible professor and a member of the true visible Church as visible saving faith is not essentially required so as he should be no member of the Church visible if he beleeve not That this may be right taken observe that the visible Church falleth under a two-fold consideration 1. In concreto as a Church 2. In abstracto as visible The visible Church considered in concreto is a part of the universall Catholike and unvisible Church which partaketh of the nature and essence of a true Church and Christs misticall body in which consideration we deny reprobates and unbelevers to be members of the visible Church 1. Because there is no reall communion whatever Bellarmine and Papists say on the contrary betwixt righteousnesse and unrighteousnesse light and darkenesse the seed of the woman and the seede of the Serpent so as they can make up one true Church 2. Because these who are not Christs are not members of Christ and so no part of his misticall body 3. Because they are not bought with a price nor his purchased flock in the blood of God as Acts 20. the true Church is nor builded upon a rock as Mat. 16. 18. 4. Christ is not their Redeemer head High-priest King and Saviour and so neither are they his redeemed his members his people subjects and saved ones 5. Because the promises made to the chosâ—n and beleevers to give them a new heart regeneration sanctification remission of sinnes are made to them only and in Gods gratious intention and not to reprobates Whence I inferre these conclusions 1. Seperaâ—ists arguments must be weake for they all conclude that which we deny not and no other thing to
wit that haereticks adulterers forcerers blasphemers be no parts of Christs visible Church as it is a Church Yea we say that as the tree leg and the eye of glasse and the teeth of silver by art put in the body are no members of the living body so neither are these members of the true Church and so much doe all our Divines as Calvin Beza Junius Whittaker Tilen Piscator Pareus Vrsine Trâ—lâ—atius Sibrandus Amesius prove against Papists 2. Preaching of the Gospell is called a note of the Church and profession of faith a note of the Church both the former is a noâ—e of the teaching Church or minsteriall Church called Ecclesia docens The latter is a note of the professing Church who professeth the faith which we may call Ecclesia utens or Ecclesia practicè consideram 3. Profession of the faith is thought to be true either Subjectively 2. Objectively Or 3. Both Subjectively and Objectively Profession subjectively is true when the professor doeth indeed professe and avow the truth and doth not only seem to avow professe the truth and this is no note of a true Church because it may be in hypocrites who really goe to Church really heare the word and partake of the Sacraments but not sincerely Profession true objectively is when the professor doth professe that faith which is indeed sound and orthodox And this is a marke of the true teaching or ministeriall Church and may be in a visible company of professors who for the time are not sincere beleevers But a profession of the faith both objectively true and subjectively is when the object is orthodox and sound truth and the professor sincerely and gratiously and with an honest heart beleeveth and professeth the truth and this way profession of the truth is a true and essentiall note of a visible Church as it is a true Church and body of Christ and so are our Divines to be expounded in this doctrine about the notes of the visible Church But withall the visible Church is to be considered in abstracto under the notion of visibility and as visible and as performing all the externall acts of professing governing hearing preaching praising administrating the seales of the covenant binding and loosing in the externall and visible court of Christ and under this reduplication as obvious to mens eyes and therefore in this notion all externall professors who are not manifestly and openly scandalous are to be reputed members of the true visible Church and therefore this tearme would be considered a true visible Church For the adjective true may either be referred to the subject Church and so signifieth the true misticall body of Christ visibly and with all sincerely professing the sound faith Or it may be referred to the other adjective visible and so it is no other but a company of professors visible to our senses and so truely visible whose members may be unsound and false professours Then the question is whither visible Saints 1. forsaking all knowne sinnes 2. Doing all the knowne will of God 3. Growing in grace as saith Smith and the discov of N. Light be the only true matter of a right and lawfully consistent visible Church and congregation so as we are to joyne with no company of worshippers of God but such visible Saints as these and to acknowledge no other society a true Church whereto we are obliged to adjoyne our selves as members save only such a sâ—ciety Or is this sufficient for the nature and right constitution of a true visible Church that the company that we are to joyne our selves unto as visible members have in it these true markes of a visible Church The pure word of God purely preached and the Sacraments duely administred with discipline according to Gods word and withall a people externally professing the fore-said faith suppose they cannot give to us manifest tokens and evidences that they are effectually called and partakers of the divine nature and translated from death to life and are elected called and justified This latter we hold as the truth of God these of the Separation hold the former Now we must carefully distinguish here what are to be distinguished for there are many questions infolded here of divers natures For 1. The question is if the society have the word seales and right discipline and they professe the truth suppose their lives be wicked whether they should not be answerable to that which they professe I Answer No doubt they ought to be answerable to their light and obey the holy calling 2. What if many of them leade a life contrary to that which they professe and yet the governours use not the rod of discipline to censure them then whether should the members separate from that Church They ought to separate say the Separatists They ought not to separate from the Church and worship say we they are to stay with their Mother but to plead with her and modestly and seasonably say that Archippus and others doe not fulfill their Ministry which they have received of the Lord. 3. What if there be purity of doctrine but extreame wickednesse contrary to their doctrine whether is that company a true Church or not I answer it is a true visible and a teaching or right ministeriall Church but for as farre as can be seene not a holy not a sanctified Church and therefore must not be deserted and left 4. What if the guides receive in as members of the Church those who are knowne to be most scandalous and wicked and not such Saints as Paul writeth unto at Rome Corinth Ephesus Colosse Answ. The faults of the guides are not your faults who are private members you are to keepe publike communion in the publike ordinances of Christ but not to take part with their unfruitfull workes but rather to reprove them 5. What if the members of the Church can give no reall proofes that they are inwardly called sanctified and justified and yet you see no scandalous out-breakings in them to testifie the contrary I answer for as much as grace may be under many ashes as a peece of gold amongst mountaines of earth If they professe the sound faith they are a true visible Church and we are to acknowledge them as such and to joyne our selves as members to such a society or being already members we are to remaine in that society and not to separate from it in any sort The Separation doth complaine that in our Church are as Ainsworth saith swarmes of Atheists Idolaters Papists erronious and hereticall sectaries witches charmers sorcerers theeves adulterers lyars c. The Gentiles enter unto the temple of God the holy things of God the Sacraments indifferently communicated with cleane and uncleane circumcised and uncircumcised And amongst you are thousands who cannot tell how they shall be saved So say others as M. Barrow and Smith Hence inferre they our Church is a false Church not right constitute no Spouse of Christ no royall generation not
and so we had the consent of the Church to the separation and a voice from Heaven Come out of her my people 7. Consideration A collaterall and sister-sister-Church such as Rome ever was is not said to separate from another the lesser separateth alway from the greater the member from the body Where there is a schisme sister-Protestant Churches then cannot be said to separate one from another nor can the crime of schisme here be more objected to us then to Rome but rather to Rome separating from Orthodoxe and right beleeving Rome 8. Consideration We separate not from men but errours 2. We separate from Papisme kindly properly and totally from Christian Articles in no sort 3. From points of truth sewed and engraven with Popery only by accident breaking the thread and needle that sowed them together But as concerning the other point We see not how we are to separate from the reformed Churches as Ainsworth saith and how M. Jacob saith Our reformed Divines cannot satisfie the obiection that Calvin and Luther and Zuinglius who had their ordination and calling to be Pastors from the Church of Rome and so from Antichrist and so our Ministers having ordination and calling from Ministers who had their calling from Antichrist cannot be lawfull Ministers nor our Church a true Church seeing it wanteth a true Ministery except we say with them they had their calling essentially from the suffrages and consent of the Church of beleevers who have power to ordaine Ministers and power to depose and excommunicate them if need be But I answer this power is in the backe of the Bible and amongst unwritten traditions not in the holy Oracles of the old or new Testament Hence I will speake a word of the calling of our reformers 2. of the Church of Rome if they could give a calling to our reformers seeing we hold them to be an Antichristian Church Some answer and Walleus approveth them that Luther Zuinglius Farellus were Pastors ordinary of Churches and so had power to convince the gainsayers But the question yet remaineth from whence had these before them their calling Our Divines Tylen Bucan professors Leyd Walleus distinguish here three things 1. Something in the calling of our reformers was from God so authoritatively they were called of God the Ministery being of God 2. The Christian Church lying under Popery called designed and ordained the men to be Pastors so their calling according to the substance of the act was from God and the Romane Church as a Christian Church 3. There was corruption in the way and manner of their vocation as the Antichristian ceremonies and an oath to maintaine the doctrine of the Church of Rome not onely as a Christian Church but also as Romish if any of them did sweare to defend the corruptions of the Church this latter was taken away by Gods illumination of their minds A called Minister sweareth to defend the truth and this truth of this Church but aye under the notion of truth and if he see it to be errour he still holdeth the substance of his oath in as far as it is obligatory and tyeth him in conscience It is objected An Antichristian Church cannot ordaine Christian Ministers Rome was then an Antichristian Church Ergo Answ. That which is wholy as touching its whole essence Antichristian cannot ordaine Christian Ministers True A dead man cannot beget a living barne The Romane Church was not wholly Antichristian but kept some of Christs truth That which is Antichristian in part onely may ordaine Ministers who have the true essence of a Ministeriall calling for Israel no wife but a whore Hos. 2. 2. a whore and no wife merito iure in ill deserving yet a mother and a wife de facto and keeping something of a covenanted bride is called Gods people Hos. 4. 6. and Ezech. 16. 21. Thou hast slaine my children then her barnes were Gods barnes in Covenant and not bastards God was still Samaria's God Hos. 13. 16. a remnant according to election remained Rom. 11. 5. The Orthodox Fathers acknowledged the Africanes as a true Church who defended heresie that barnes baptized by heretickes were to be baptized againe 2. A calling is extraordinary either in habit or in exercise in habit as to be an Apostle and have the gift of miracles Thus our reformers calling was not extraordinary they were not immediately called by God from heaven for they would not have concealed such a calling if they had had any such Or a calling is extraordinary in the exercise and that two wayes Either in the Principle moving them to teach or 2. in the manner of teaching and efficacy a calling extraordinary in the principle moving is twofold Either a meere Propheticall impulsion of Revelation stirring them up to such an act as the Spirit of the Lord came upon Saul and he prophecyed this our reformers had not because we never finde that they alleadge it 2. A more then ordinary motion with illumination by Gods Spirit speaking in the Scriptures in which motions they were not subordinate in the exercise of their Ministery to the Church of Pastors but immediately in that subordinated to God and in this I prove that our reformers were extraordinary Doctors 1. Because Ezech. 34. in a universall apostaâ—ye of the Prophets and shepheards the Lord extraordinarily worketh v. 11. For thus saith the Lord God behold I even I will both search my sheep and seeke them out Now this is by Pastors when the ordinary Pastors are all failed So Rev. 11. in that universall Apostacye under Antichrist when the Gentiles treade upon the utter Court of the Temple and the holy City God stirreth up two witnesses to prophecye in sackâ—loth that is some few Pastors for two is the smallest number and they prophecye and are slaine and yet they rise againe We need not apply this to men in particular as to John Hush and Jerome of Prague but certainly some few spake against Babylon and they were borne downe and oppressed and killed and men of that same spirit rose and spake that same truth as if the very two men who were slaine had risen within three dayes againe 2. Because when the Church is overgone with heresie and Apostacye our reformers in the exercise of their Minestery were not to keepe a certaine flocke as in a constitute Church and suppose they had no calling but eminent gifts they were to spread the Gospell to Nations as Luther did and suppose the people should resist them as in many places they did yet God called them and they were not to expect election from people So Cyprus and Cyrenus preached Act. 11. and 18. and we reade of no vocation that they had from either people or Apostle So Origen preached to a people in a certain Town where there was not one Christian and afterwards he was chosen their Pastor As for the Church of Rome suppose our Reformers have their calling thence yet
have we a true Ministry and there was a Church in Rome before the Lateran Councell which could constitute a true Ministry as I cleare in these distinctions for the Church of Rome it hath these parts 1. Distinction 1. The court of Rome and Clergy 2. The seduced people 2. Distinction There is a teaching court professing and teaching Popery and obtruding it upon the consciences of others 2. There is a people professing and believing this with heat of zeal 3. A people misled ignorant not doubting but following 4. There is a people of God Come out of her my people ergo there is a covenanted people of God there 2 Thess. Antichrist shall sit in the Temple of God ergo GOD hath a Temple in Rome A third Distinction is necessary a true Church is one thing veritate Metaphysicâ with the verity of essence as a sick-man or a man wanting a legg is a true man and hath a reasonable soule in him and a true Church veritate Ethicâ a Church morally true that is a sound whole a pure Church professing the sound faith that is another thing Rome is a sick-Church and a maimed and lamed Church wanting legs and armes and so is not morally a true Church for vile corruption of Doctrine is there as we say a thief is not a true man but a false and a taking man yet he hath a mans nature and a reasonable soule in him the question is if Rome have the soul life and being of a Church A fourth Distinction is That the question is either of a teaching Church and a Ministeriall professing Christ the Word and Baptisme or of a believing Church and Spouse of Christ. The fifth Distinction is If Rome relatively be a wife in comparison of other Churches or if Rome absolutely in her self be a Church The sixth Distinction is If Rome be jure and merito a Spouse or an Harlot or de facto a wife not having received a Bill of Divorcement as the Church of the Iewes The seventh Distinction is If Rome according to some parts be a Spouse and keepeth any list of marriage kindnes to her husband or if she be according to other parts a cast off whore The eighth and last is if Rome be materially a Church having in it the Doctrine of faith or if formally it bee no Church having no professed faith that hath the nature of faith Hence shortly I say The Court of Rome as Popish is the falling-sicknesse of the Church not the Church But the same Court teaching something of Christ baptisme good-works c hath something of the life and being of a Church howbeit she be not a whole Church her skinne being leprous pocky and polluted 1. Because in a Church that is no Church there cannot be a true feale of Gods covenant but in the Court of Rome there is true baptisme for we baptize not againe children once baptized there some of the Separation called it Idoll-baptisme and no baptisme which is Anabaptisme for then all converted Papists must be baptized againe no lesse then converted Turkes and Iewes But 1. The covenant is there Come out of her my people then their baptisme confirmeth this covenant 2. Circumcision even in apostate Israel is true circumcision her barnes the Lords barnes Ezech. 16. 21. hee is Israels God the holy one of Israel in the midst thereof In Hezokiahs reformation the people ate the Passeover and yet all had corrupted their wayes and had beene a long time worshipping Idols and they are not 2 Chro. 30. circumcised againe and yet Exod. 12. none but the circumcised might eate the ` Passeover 2. Because the word of God and so the contract of Marriage is professed amongst them and so there is an externall active calling there and the word of the covenant sounding amongst them and a passive calling also because many secretly believe and obey 3. Many fundamentall truths are taught that may beget faith and so there are true and valid pastorall acts in that Church 2. I say there is an hid and invisible Church and Temple in Rome and these God warneth to come out of Babel and these we by writings cry unto that they would forsake their harlot mother and worship the Lord in truth and they obey howbeit they dare not professe the truth But the teaching Church teaching Popery and fundamentall truths and obtruding them upon the consciences of others is not the believing Church and so not the spouse and body of Christ. 3. Rome now compared with Paules Rome which he did write unto is no Church no spouse as a whorish wife compared with her selfe in her first moneth to her Husband while she was chaste is now when she imbraceth the bosome of a stranger no wife and yet Rome compared with Indians who worship Sathan with Persians who worship the Sunne with the Egyptians who worshipped gods growing in their gardâ—ns as Oneons and Garlick for so Juvenal O sanctas gentes quibus haec nascuntur in hortis Numina I say being compared with these they are the Lords Temple 2 Thes. 24. Rev. 18. 4. and his Wife as one saith well apostate Israel compared with Syrians Philistines is counted Gods people having the true God for their God 2 King 5. 8 15 17. But being compared with Judah which ruled with God and was faithfull with the Saints is called no wife but an harlot Hose 2. 2 5. 4. 15. 5. 3 4. 4. Rome iure and merito in her bad deserving to her Lord is no wife no Church no spouse no people in covenant with God and yet de facto and formally in possession in profession and for matrimoniall tables which she keepeth is a Church and differeth from the Jewes as a Church and no Church 1. Because albeit the Jewes have the old Testament which implicity and by interpretation is the covenant yet they want two things which Rome hath which destroyeth the essence of a true Church 1. The Iewes give not so much as a virtuall consent to the Marriage and the very externall active calling and invitation to come to Christ and all ministeriall publishing of the newes of salvation is removed from them Acts 13. 46. but there is a virtuall consent to the Marriage with Christ in Rome and salvation there in the word and some ministeriall and pastorall publication thereof as in the seed 2. Iewes directly oppugne the Cardinall foundation of salvation 1 Cor. 3. 11. Acts 4. 12. 1 Thes. 2. 15 16. Christ Jesus Papists professe him and have his seales amongst them especially baptisme 5. Rome in concreto according to her best part to wit secret beleevers groaning and sighing in Egypts bondage is a true Church but Rome in abstracto the faction of Papists as Papists are no spouse of Christ but the whore of Babel and mother of fornications 6. Howsoever Rome be materially a true Church having the materiall object of faith the doctrine of the old and new Testament common with us yet formally
they are not one Church with us but there is a reall and essentiall separation betwixt us and them as betwixt a true Church and an Antichristian Church a spouse of Christ and no spouse for faith relatively taken faith of many united in one society doth essentially constitute a Church and the formall object of their faith is the word of the Church and of men or Gods word as expounded by men and our faiths object formall is the word of God as the word of God and so doe formally differ 7. Howbeit I say Rome is a Church teaching and professing and hath something of the life and being of a true Church yet I hold not that Rome is Christs body nor his wife Neither meane I with our late novators Prelates and their faction sometimes in this Land and now in England that Rome is a true Church as they taught that is so a true Church as 1. We erred in separating from that leaper whore 2. That her errours are not fundamentall and that we and this mother can be reconciled and bedde together But what I say is holden by our Divines Calvin Junius Whittaker that famous Divine Rivetus that most learned Professor Gilbertus Voetius and our Divines Voetius maketh nine rankes of these that were not dyed and engrained Papists in the popish Church 1. Some deceived 2. Some compelled 3. Some ignorant 4. Some carelesse who tookâ— not heed to that faith 5. Some doubting 6. Some loathing it 7. Some sighing 8. Some opposing and contradicting it 9. Some separating from it Now seeing our Church hath nothing to doe with Rome and our ministry lawfull Separatists may hence be satisfied Neither yet doe I thinke with Spalato de repub Eccles. in ostensione error Suarezij cap. 1. pag. 887 888. That the Roimane Church is erronious onely in excesse seeing â—n substantiall points there is such defect also as averteth aith 4. Conclusion There be three sorts that have communion rightly with our Church 1. Infants baptised for baptisme is a seale of their fellowship with Christ and therefore of communion with the Church because Separatists will have none members of the Church while they can give proofes thereof by signes of regeneration infants must be without the Church as Infidels and Turks for none are the Church to them but the royall generation partakers of the holy faith taught of God called and separated from the world the rest are without hence baptisme shall either seale no entring of infants in the Church contrary to Gods word or the baptizing of infants is not lawfull as Anabaptists teach 2. The hearers of the word have a communion with the Church as is cleare seeing these that eate of one bread are one body these that professe in the hearing of the word that same faith are also that same body in profession yet excommunicate persons are admitted as hearers of the word Hence only the extreame and great excommunication 1 Cor. 16. 22. cutteth of men from being simply no members of the Church that excommunication that maketh the party as a heathen and Publican supposeth him still to be a brother and hearer of the word 2 Thes. 3. 14 15. And all these are members of the Church and yet not necessarily converted 3. The regenerate and beleevers that communicate of one bread and one cup at the Lords Table are most neerely and properly members of one visible body and none of these are to separate from Christs body 5. Conclusion It is not lawfull to separate from any worship of the Church for the sinnes of the fellow-worshippers whether they be officers or private Christians 1. Because Scribes and Pharisees and the Church in Christs dayes was a most perverse Church the rulers perverted the Law Mat. 5. 21. denyed that hatred and rash anger was a sinne ver 22. or heart adultery a sin Made the commandement of God of no effect by their traditions Mat. 15. 6. polluted the worship with superstition and will-worship ver 7. 8. Mark 7. 6 7 8. said it was nothing to sweare by the Temple devoured widdows houses made their proselites children of damnation Mat. 13. 14 15 16. were blind guides filled the measure of their fathers wrath slew the Lord of glory 1 Cor. 2. 8 9. killed and crucisied the Prophets were blind guides and the blind people followed them and slew the Lord of glory also The Priest-hood was keeped by Moyen Caiphas was High-priest that yeare But Christ by practice and precept forbad to separate from this Church Ergo c The assumption is cleare Mat. 23. They sit in Moses his chaire heare them Mat. 10. 6 7. Goe to the lost sheepe of the house of Israel and preach And Christ and his Disciples observed their feasts preached in the Temple and Synagogues Joh. 1. 7 37. Joh 8. 2. Luk. 4. 16. Luk. 1. 9. Christ reasoned with them about religion Ioh. 10. 24 25 26. Ainsworth replyeth to this Christ and his Disciples separated from the corruptions of the Iewish Church and from false Churches as from the Samaritanes Answ. We acknowledge separation from corruption but not from the worship of corrupters when they keepe the foundation the Samaratine-Church had not the foundation but worshipped they knew not what neither was there salvation in their Church Iohn 4. 2. but there was the true God worshipped among the Iewes and salvation amongst them 2. Ainsworth replyeth The Iewish Church consisted still as Moses had ordained Levit. 20. 24. of a people separated from the heathen and were the children of the Prophets and covenant Joh. 4. 9. Acts 3. 25. but your Church consisteth of an unseparated people Answ. The Priest-hood was changed Ioh. 11. 51. Caiphas was High-priest that yeare against the Law as Tollet observeth for the High-priest Exod. 28. 29. by the Law was High-priest till his dying day But all was corrupted saith Calvin and all bought and sold saith Iosephus this was as Anti-Mosaicall as our reformers Ministry is Antichristian if they had their calling only from Rome 2. The Jewish Church consisted of men separated from heathen who said stand back I am holier then thou Isaiah 65. but they were corrupters of the Lâ—w murtherers of the Prophets and the heire Christ Math. 21. hypocrites will-worshippers blind guides blind people c. Our second Argument If Gods Prophets and people were never commanded to separate from the publike worship but commanded to come up to Ierusalem and worship pray sacrifice with Gods people Deut. 12 11 12 13. Deut. 15. 19 20. Deut. 16. 7 8. v. 16 17. And yet that people was a crooked and perverse generation Deut. 32. 5. not his children provokers of God to jealousie with strange gods sacrificers to Divells ver 16 17. their workes for bitternesse like the clusters and grapes of Sodome ver 32. a people that had neither eyes nor eares nor heart to understand God Deut. 29 3 4. stiffe necked foolish proud
worship while we know it and the Church rebuke and censure it but it is too long to lye in the fire and be burnt to ashes till we take notice of the secrets that are known to God that is whether the whole thousand professors that worship with us be beleevers or unbeleevers 3. This answer helpeth not against our argument for Moses Isaiah Ieremiah and the Apostles knew most part that these with whom they did publikely communicate in publike worship were stiffe-necked rebellious idolatrous superstitious and yet they did not separate from the publike worship for their wickednesse 10. Argument That which is so hainous a sinne as to prophane Gods name and ordinances to marry Christ and Belial to mixe God and Idols that are Divells should have been forbidden in the old and new Testament but separation from the true worship of God for the sinnes of the worshippers is never forbidden and communion is ever commanded in the old or new Testament therfore separation cannot be lawfull and communion cannot be such a sin 6. Conclusion A worship may be false in the matter two wayes either when we are to practice it or give our assent to it as to receive the Sacraments after an unlawfull manner to assent to corrupt doctrine that is never lawfull and here we may separate from the worship when we separate not from the Church Or then the worship is false in the matter but our presence doth not make it unlawfull to us as professors may heare a preacher who preacheth the body of divinity soundly howbeit he mixe errors with it because what every one heareth they are to try ere they beleeve as the Spirit of God teacheth 1 Thes. 5. 21. Try all things hold fast what is good 1 Joh. 4. 1. Try the spirits in so doing we separate from the Sermon while we heare the good and refuse the evill because we separate from the error of the worship therefore to heare unsound doctrine is not to partake of false worship because we are to heare the Pharisees but to beware of their leaven and finding it to be soure and unsound doctrine we are to reject it 7. Conclusion A communion in worship true in the matter where the person called for example the Preacher is a minister of Antichrist is unlawfull because we are not to acknowledge any of Babel or Baals Priests professing their calling to be of the Pope the man of sinne 8. Conclusion When we separate from a Church overturning the foundation of religion as from Rome we are to keepe a desire of gaining them howbeit not a brotherly fellowship with them Augustine saith with us we are in mercy to rebuke what we cannot amend and to beare it patiently and else where So Ciprian August Epist. 162. 50. sheweth the Africans were esteemed a Church of Christ howbeit they strictly held baptisme by heretiques to be no baptisme CHAP. XI Quest. 11. Whither or no separation from a true Church because of the sinnes of professors and manifest defence of scandalous persons can be proved from Gods word to be lawfull DIvers places of Scripture are abused by Separatists to maintaine the lawfullnesse of their separation 2 Cor. 6. 17. Come out from amongst them and separate your selves saith the Lord and touch no uncleane thing and I will receive you Ergo saith Ainsworth It is commanded us of God to come out of a corrupt Church and separate from it if we would be in covenant with God Answ. 1. This is no locall separation commanded the Corinthians as Erasmus Sarcerius observeth but a separation in affection and if it were a locall separation it is from the Idol-table of the Gentiles at which some did eate at Corinth to the great offence of the weake 1 Cor. 8. 10. 1 Cor. 10. 17 18 19 20. but from this is badly concluded separation out of the Church of Corinth or any other true Church where the word and sacraments are in purity suppose some errors be practised by some Paul borrowed this place from Isa. 52. 11. as Calvin thinketh where the Lord chargeth the people to come out from Babilon seeing Cyrus had proclaimed liberty to them to come home and applyeth it to the case of Corinth that they should flye all fellowship with Idols and Idols temples and tables 1 Cor. 8. 10. because light and darkenesse Christ and Beliall cannot agree as he citeth from Ezech. 37. Ezech 43. 7. Levit. 26. in the former verse as Marlorat teacheth Now this separation in Corinth was in a Church from the Idolatry in it which separation we allow but not a separation out of a Church else the wordes would beare that Paul will have them to forsake the Church of Corinth for idolatrous tables in it and set up a new Church of their own which the Separatists dare not say and is contrary to other places 1 Cor. 5. 4. 1 Cor. 11. 1 Cor. 14. Where he commandeth and alloweth their meeting and publike Church communion therefore this place proveth not their point 2. This separation is such a separation as is betwixt light and darkenesse Christ and Beliall but the separation is not from externall communion which Separatists urge but from all spirituall and internall communion For Separatists teach that alwayes there are in the Church visible hypocrites and true beleevers for the which cause M. Barrow saith it is compared to a draw-net wherein there are both good and bad now Hypocrites and believers together in one visible Church are light and darknesse together and externall Church communion with the hypocrite which is lawfull cannot be a touching of an uncleane thing and so Church-fellowship with the wicked cannot be Christ and Belial together 3. That Separation here commanded is from the worship of God corrupted in the matter where need force the Corinthians behoved to be joyned to Idols v 16 For what agreement saith he hath the Temple of God with Idols Now he meaneth that the faithfull who were Temples of the holy Spirit should not sit and eat at the Idols Table which is called 1 Cor 10. 20 21. The Divels Table and cup. But what Logicke is this Separate from Idols ergo separate from a Church where the true worship of God is and is professed and taught this is to be yoaked with Christs body Spouse truth but to fly the errours that are in the body which we also teach 2. They object Rev 18. 4. Goe out of her my people that yee be not partakers of her sinnes and that yâ— receive not of her plagues Ergo we must seperate from the Church where there is any thing of Romes worship Answ. It followeth not for it is as if one would say the wrath of God is to come upon the whore of Rome who hath overturned the foundation of true faith Ergo if Corinth will not excommunicate the incestuous man after ye have warned them of their duty come out of
that Babel also least ye be partakers of her sinnes For they teach were a visible Church never so sound pure holy faire in doctrine and life yet if they refuse to cast out a scandalous person and will spare and defend him they are to be separated from and those that stay in that Church and keepe communion with her are partakers of her sins Howbeit some saving truths remain in the Church of Rome and in that we keepe yet a materiall and reall union with Rome in as farre as they professe one God three persons two natures in Christ c. but we have separated from Rome 1. Because their Doctrine of professed and commanded Idolatry and their other Heresies everteth the foundation of Faith 2. Because they lay another foundation above the foundation Christ the Pope and a multitude of Idol-gods but it followeth in no sort Ergo we are to separate from every true Church of Christ that is incorrigible in one fault or other Where is there a Christian Church that we could live in in the Earth yea except the Anabaptists-Church a Church of white paper as faire as Heaven and the Sunne that there is not a spot on more then on the triumphing Church this on Earth is a city in the Moone 3. They object Come not ye to Gilgall neither goe yee up to Bethaven therfore people were to separate from Idolatrous Israel Answ. I have prooved that the true Prophets commanded Church-fellowship with Israel after their Idolatry and judge if this be good Goe not to Bethaven that is the house of vanity called Bethel the house of God where Jeroboams calves were worshipped ergo separate from all the worship of God in Israel we say Ex negatione speciei malè concluditur negatio generis separate from Ieroboams calves therfore separate from all true worship of God in Israel it is a bad consequence 4. They object In the old Testament the Law consisted of outward ordinances and if they were outwardly performed there was no cause to separate from them But under the new Testament all things are become now and spirituall where Christ hath given power to all the faithfull to censure scandalous sinnes all should separate from a corrupt Church So Barrow But Master Smith helpeth him All things were shadowes in the old Testament David Jehoshaphat c. suffered knowne sinnes in the land yet were they the true matter of the typicall Church being typically and ceremonially cleane for to the constitution of the typicall Church there was not required true holinesse but ceremoniall cleannesse Holinesse was required of them for their acceptation before God but not for the constitution of their Church so there were there typicall Saints typicall Hypocrites that might have no communion together till they were purified and yet being indeed wicked persons they might have Church-communion together But our constitution ministry communion separation are contrary to theirs true holinesse is required under the new Testament Robinson addeth No man could absolutely separate from the Church of the Jews for it was the onely one visible Church upon the face of the Earth tyed to one Temple Altar Sacrifice Priest-hood and place they had not excommunication as we have now the offender was by bodily death cut off from the common-wealth as from the Church Answ. It is most false that externall performances of duties were sufficient to make men members of the visible Church of the old Testament 1. Because man-slayers adulterers c. were to be cut off and excommunicated from the congregation of the Lord and their prayers were not accepted of God even by Moses his law Num 35. 33 34. Es 1. 10 11 14 15. Es. 66. 3 4 5. 2 It is false that all the worship under the new Testament is so spirituall that outward performances of externall profession in the new Testament doth not also make professours Ecclesiastically holy and separated from other people not of the visible Church for Ananias Saphira Simon Magus for a time were externally holy and differenced from Pagans without the Church by their baptisme and externall profession Then Barrow must quit all places in the old Testament for separation from a wicked Ministry as that Prov. 15. The Sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to God was as true in the old as in the new Testament Ergo the Sacrifices offered by the wicked Priest were no ordinances of God and did pollute others who did communicate with him 2. The Sacraments of the Jewish Church in substance were one and the same with our Sacraments Heb. 13. 8. 1 Cor. 10. 1 2 3. Joh. 8. 56. Joh. 6. 50 51. Col. 2. 11 12. 1 Cor 5. 7. all say this except Papists Anabaptists Arminians and Socinians and for notoriously wicked persons to use the Sacraments with prophane and wicked hearts was most unlawfull and made them in that no members of the true Church but as Sodome and Gomorrah â—s 1. 10. as Aethiopians Aegyptians and Philistins Amos 9. 7. and such were forbidden to take Gods covenant in their mouth seeing they hated to be reformed Psal. 50. 16 17. Their prayers were abomination when their hands were bloody Es 1. 15. their Sacrifices like the murthering of a man and the Sacrificing of a dogg which was abomination to God Isa 66. 3. and so are all the means they use but I believe if Christ was the Spouse Priest head of the body to the Church of the Iews as to us to the constitution of this body visibly worshipping him in a Church-state there was required that the people should be not only typically holy but really and that God should be sanctified not only typically but really by reall declaration of all that drew nigh to him and the Song of Solomon saith that the communion was morall spirituall beside that it was typicall in some points And this is direct contrary to their confession where they make Separation from a corrupt Church morall and to that separation of the godly from the wicked was taught of God before the Law under the Law and under the Gospell and they teach That all true Churches from the beginning to the end of the world are one in nature and essentiall constitution And would the Lord have these to receive the seales of his covenant as true members typicall of a typicall Church This they say is 1 To take the name of God in vain 2. That the Lord doth seale unrighteousnesse 3. That he prophaneth his Sons bloud and death then a people laden with iniquâ—ty a Sodome a generation of Idolaters might all by Gods typicall command claime to the promises of the covenant and they only 3. The common beleevers amongst the Iewes had the power of the keyes as well as we if Separatists teach right for they had power to rebuke one another Levit 19. 17. and this to them is a part of the power of the keyes as Smith saith they had power of ordination to
the Synod at Ierusalem proveth that in a thing common to them all they depend upon a Synod that doth oblige them all 2. How could one independent Church at Ierusalem give Lawes to an independent Church at Antioch 3. Antioch might have condemned the heresie Suppose they could not judge the heretickes if they were an independent congregation seeing the heresie troubled them 16. They object Oâ—cumenicke and universall Synods of the whole Christian Church are unpossible and the Church is and may be without Synods therefore Synods are no ordinances of Christ. So Best See Parker Answ. Whittaker saith indeed universall Synods are not simply necessary and Parker saith no more they are not absolutely necessary necessitate medij but they are necessary necessitate praecepti and conditionally if some politicke union were amongst all Nationall Churches but hence it followeth not that they are not Christs ordinances because they are not this way necessary necessitate medij for then Baptisme and the Lords Supper publike preaching of the word perfect discipline were not Christs ordinances because in time of persecution or universall apostâ—sie many yea even whole Churches may be saved without these 2. Synods are necessary for the well being not simply for the being of the Church But hence it 's a weake consequence therefore they are not ordinances of Christ. 3. It is knowne that the Popes power hindereth generall Councels for the Councels of Constance and Basill where the Popes wings were clipped made that good burnt children dread fire Adrian it may be with some honesty promised the councell of Trent anno 1522. But Clemens the seventh did openly oppose Charles the fifth his Chancellors proclaiming thereof at Bononia they feared the place that the Emperors power should shame them and learned well from Ioh. 23. as Nanclerus saith to make the place of the councell all in all And such was Trent for they licked and revised againe and againe all the circumstances of that councell that it was a birth in the Popes wombe good twenty and five yeares and then was the Popes barne borne against his will yet generall councels should be Popes hinder them to be and what wonder Theeves love not well iustice-courts yet by their owne Law they should be The councell of Constance ordained that a generall councell should be every ten yeares once Yea after the councels of Lansen and Florence the sea being void ann 1503. the Cardinals convened and sweare to Almighty God and blasphemously to Peter and Paul that whosoever of them shall be created Pope he shall convene a generall councell within two years after his inauguration which oath Iulius 2. did sweare but had neither honesty nor memory to performe The facultie of Paris and Church of France who are still as saith the Reviewer of the councell of Trent at daggers drawing wâ—th the Pope and court of Rome doe cry and write for a generall councell But they say â—he articles of Paris cannot climbe oveer the Alps. It is some hundred yeares since Thomas Bradwardine of Canterbury the hammer of the Pelagians cryed to waken Simon Peter that he might speake out of his Councell-chaire for grace against the Pelagians But Jâ—suites bellies and pennes stout for their Father the Pope thinke it wisedome that the Pope be deafe at the cryes of Dominicanes who call for his holinesse tongue to determine in bickerings betwixt their order and Jesuites in the matter of Grace Predestination Free-will Gods providence The Pope fearing a generall Councell thinketh best that they rather bloud other in the Schools then that his greatnesse hazard to face the Court of a generall Councell and therefore matters are now tryed at home Lod. Molina the Father of the new Science the middle light with that wild heed fansied to be in God was cited before Clemens the 8â—â— and holden in processe five yeares even before Paul the fifth and the Cardinals and when all was done was whipped with a Toads stoole and nothing was determined as saith Francis de Ariba Other Councels ordained that there should be in all places Provinciall and Nationall Assemblies So ordained the Councell of Nice Trulla Africa Sardis Hence I adde a third distinction From this is concluded onely that Councels are not necessary but impossible impossibilitate morali non Physicâ Councels are only morally impossible not simply impossible and that through mens corruption It followeth not therefore they are not Gods ordinances For seeing Churches independent are morally and I feare more then morally impossible and have been hindred by Prelates our brethren would not from hence conclude that they are not Gods ordinances A Congregation of visible Saints where there is not an hypocrite is unpossible morally and cannot be because of our corruption yet such a Congregation should be and so is an ordinance of Christ. Let me also adde the fourth distinction Christ may well ordaine that as a necessary meane of edification which cannot be had ordinarily in the full perfection and degrees required so it may be had in the degrees and parts that may edifie howbeit not so well and not so conveniently so Synods are ordinarily possible I meane lesser Synods if not fuller and compleater if an universall Synod cannot be had a Nationall may be in Scotland and in England also if it please the Prelates and if God will whether Prelates will or will not and if these cannot be Provinciall Synods are and may be and if these cannot be yet Synods Elderships and particular Churches may be and I thinke independent Congregations in their perfection consisting of sincere beleevers onely and a perfect Church-discipline are Gods necessary meanes of edification yet in their perfection they cannot be had But to close this point no Divine that ever did write or speake of this Chapter except some of late but they acknowledge Acts 15. to be a formall copy and draught of a generall Assembly I might cite all our Protestant Divines the Lutherans Papists Schoolemen Casuists all the Fathers and Councels all the Doctors antient and moderne but this was to fetch water to the Sea CHAP. XV. Que. 15. Whether or no by other valid Arguments from Gods word the lawfulnesse of Synods can be concluded HItherto hath been sixe Arguments against Churches independent and consequently proving the lawfulnesse of Synods Now followeth our seventh Argument 7. If there be a commandement to tell the Church when an obstinate brother offendeth a brother then must this course also be taken when an obstinate Church shall offend a Sister-church But the former is true Mat 18. Ergo so is the latter This is not mine but the Argument of Parker D. Ammes Professors of Leyden and of all our Divines Willet Whittaker Junius Beza c. Our brethren say Christ speaketh Mat. 18. of a particular Congregation and not of many Congregations meeting synodically in their members of principall note as Pastors and Elders
5. 4. 5. and since he tooke this care for a Nationall Church Numb 5. 2 3 4 5. Who can doubt but he hath care of edifying and saving in the day of the Lord Churches of Nations and Provinces under the New Testament yea and a greater care then for saving one single man seeing the influence of his love is bounded first upon the body bride and spouse by order of nature before it be bounded upon one finger or toe or any particular member of the body I meane one single person They answer God hath provided other meanes for whole Churches then to excommunicate them for it wanteth precept promise and practice to excommunicate a whole Church thâ—y are to be rebuked and we must pleade with obstinate Churches Hos. 2. 2. and if they remaine obstinate we are to with-draw our fellowship anâ— communion from them and not to acknowledge them as sister-Churches that is we are to separate from them but there is no warrant to excommunicate them Answ. 1. I say this is a begging of the question for we desire a warrant of Gods Word why sister-Churches may use some power of the keyes against sister-Churches such as is to rebuke them plead with them Hos. 2. 2. and yet we may not use all power of the keyes even excommunication now to rebuke and pleade against a Church to Parker and our brethren is a power of jurisdiction and a sort of closing and shutting of Heaven 2. The Iewes did justly excommunicate the Church of the Samaritans and Christ alloweth therof Iohn 4. 22. ye worship ye know not what salvation is of the Jewes in which words Christ pronounceth the Iewes to be the true Church and the Samaritans not to be the true Church 3. I desire to know what excommunication is if it be not to deny all Church-communion with those who were once in our Church now if this be done by one Sister-church to another sister-church it is no excommunication at all seeing Christ hath not given the power of the keyes to one Sister-church over another for one particular Church is not set over another in the Lord but when the Eldership of many consociated Sister-churches denieth Church communion to one of these consociated Churches having turned obstinate in scandalous sins I see not what this is els but excommunication and authoritative unchurching and ejection of such a Church Also our brethren pleade for the peoples power in excommunicating because all and â—very one of the beleevers are to eschew the company of the person excommunicated therfore all and every one should have hand in excommunicating him as all Israel and not the Judges onely were actors in putting away the leaven so reasoneth Parker M. Best so also the Separatistes yea if it bee right taken so also saith Beza P. Martyr Calvin Marlorat So Chrysostome Augustine for all are to consent to the excommunication of one who is a member of that visible Church with themselves but so it is that all consociated Churches are to eschew the company of an excommunicated by a single congregation supposed by our brethren to be independent Because 1. if they admit him to the Lords Supper with them they prophane the holy things of God 2. They annull excommunication supposed by our brethren duely clave non errante inflicted and so they loose on earth kim whom God hath bound in Heaven they hold him for a member of Christ and a brother whom Christ hath delivered to Satan and will have to be reputed as a Heathen and a Publican Ergo by this reason all should have hand in excommunicating such a person but many Sister-churches consociated together in neighbourly and sisterly Church-fellowship as we heard before cannot excommunicate in their owne persons being possibly twenty severall congregations Therefore they must excommunicate in their Elderships synodically conveened which is our purpose we intend It is but a womanly evasion of the Femall authour who differenceth betwixt rejection of an offending Church and excommunication We may reject saith she an offending Church but not excommunicate Saul rejected God did he therefore excommunicate God â—or this is but a suting of the question it is not simple rejection of an obstinate Church that we plead for but an authoritative unchurching and not acknowledging of an obstinate Church to be any more a Church with whom we can communicate in the holy things of God and this is more then simple rejection or refusing to obey as Saul is said to reject God I grant we seldome find the practice of excommunicating Churches in the New Testament because so long as a number of beleevers are in a Church God leaveth them not all to be involved in one scandalous grosse sinne therfore the presbytery is to censure particular persons and not the whole Church therfore when we separated from Rome which was an authoritative declaration that Rome is now no longer a Spouse of Christ but a strumpet we did not separate from the faithfull lurking amongst them 10. Argument That government is not from Christ that is deficient in the meanes of propagation of the Gospell to Nations and congregations that want the Gospell But the government by independent congregations is such The proposition is cleare 1. Because Christs keyes are perfect and opens all lockes 2. Our Divines hence prove Christ a perfect Mediatour King Priest and Prophet because he perfectly cureth our threefold misery I prove the assumption by the doctrine of independency Pastors and Doctours may not preach the Gospell without the bounds of their owne congregation neither can they exercise any pastorall acts else where saith the English Puritanisme and M. Best and so Pastors and Doctors have now since Apostles are out of the world and the Churches are planted no authority pastorall to preach the Gospell to those who sit in the region and shaddow of death and if they preach the Gospell to those who are not of their congregation 1. They doe it as private men not as Pastours 2. They have no pastourall authority or calling from Jesus Christ and his Church so to doe But certainely Papists as Bellarmine Suarez Becanus Vasquez Gregor de Valentia seeme to say better who will have the authoritative power of sending Pastors to Nations who want the Gospell to be in the Pope whom they conceive to be an universall Pastor to care for the whole Churches so Christ hath left no pastorall authority on Earth in Pastors and Doctors to make those the Churches of Christ and to translate them to the kingdom of grace who are yet carried away with dumbe Idols and howbeit the Apostles and their universall commission ordinary to preach the Gospell to all their immediate calling their extraordinary gifts be now out of the world yet it is unbeseeming the care of Christ that pastorall authority should be so confined at home and imprisoned within the lists of every particular
appointed wherein an Edict is read and affixed on the Church-doore and another day set for his ordination at which day the Edict is called all who have any thing to object against his life and doctrine are thrise publikely at the Church-dore invited to come and object And this we thinke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 1 Tim. 3. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 6. 3. to finde out and to try the man The day of ordination is a day of fasting and praying for Gods blessing to the ministery as Acts 13. 23. And they ordained them Elders in every Church and prayed with fasting Acts 13. 3. and when they had fasted and prayed they laid their hands on them The Presbytery and people meeting some Pastor as Acts 1. 15. preacheth for the purpose in hand as Peter doth there v. 17. 18 19. After Sermon the Pastor calleth him up before the Congregation and demandeth if he be willing to accept the charge and he must testifie his consent as Isaiah Isa. 6. 8. Jer. 6. v. 7 8. Acts 9. 20. Then the Pastor asketh the peoples consent which they testifie by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lifting up of their hands as Acts 14. 23. and the man must please the whole multitude as Acts 6. v. 5. Acts 1. 26. This being done the Pastor commeth downe out of the Pulpit and he with the Presbytery layeth their hands on his head and prayeth that God would blesse him as the Apostles did Acts 6. 6. The Apostles prayed and laid their hands on them Acts 13. 3. They prayed and laid their hands on them 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. all being done the Eldership of the Congregation give him the right hand of fellowship as Gal. 2. 9. The action is closed with thanksgiving as all grave actions should be 1 Thes. 5. 18. And this order in substance is kept in ordaining Doctors Elders and Deacons Here are no popish toyes which Papists use in ordination no man is obtruded upon the flocke against their consent and no man appointed a Pastor but of a certaine flocke as Acts 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. of the Church which receiveth the childe in her fellowship as Rom 6. 3 4 5. 1 Pet. 4. 20 21. The presenter of the childe is the father or some friend if he be dead or absent because the childe is received in the Covenant because the fathers are within the Covenant and so sealed with the same seale of the Covenant Acts 2. 37 38 Rom. 11. 14. Gen. 17. 7 8. 9 10. and the action is closed with thanksgiving as all grave but especially actions of Gods worship should be ended 1 Chron. 16. 7 8 9. and as the other Sacrament is closed Mat. 26. 30. 6. ARTICLE The Lords Supper THese onely are admitted to the Lords Supper who in the judgement of charity have tryed and examined themselvess 1 Cor. 11. 28. The prophane and scandalus are debarred from this Table as Mat. 7 6. Psal. 50. v. 16 17. This Sacrament requiring a self-examination going before 1 Cor. 11. 28. Therefore a Sermon of preparation is preached the day before even as Christ prepared and dieted his guests with heavenly Sermons preceding the action as is cleare Luke 22. 14 15. Marke 14. 18 19 20. Mat. 26. 21 22 23. Iohn 13. v. 13 14 15 16. A Table is covered not an Altar erected as is Luke 22. 21. Iohn 13. 28. A Sermon for the pupose in hand is preached before as Christ doth Joh. 13. 18 19 20. Mat. 26. 22 23. as a Sermon goeth before Baptisme Acts 8. 35 39. Acts 19. 4 5 6. The banqueters sit downe at Table even as Iesus sate downe with the twelve Disciples as is Mat. 26. v. 20. and v. 28. Marke 14. v. 18. and 22. the Lord honouring them with Table-honour with himselfe as is cleare Luke 22. 21. Iohn 13. 24 28. The Pastor taketh the bread and before he breake it he giveth thanks and prayeth for the blessing of the Elements to the end and use appointed by Christ even as Christ did Mat. 26. 26 and thereafter taketh the bread rehearseth the words of the institution and breaketh the bread and giveth to the banqueters and they divide it amongst them at Christs commandement as also he taketh the cup and saith drinke ye all of this this is the New Testament c. as Christ did Mat. 26. 26 27. Marke 14. 22 23. Luke 22. 19 20. v. 17. In the meane time while the people are eating and drinking the Pastor is speaking of Christs love in dying for man of the Lords death of faith required in annuntiating the Lords death till he come againe even as Christ all the while entertained his guests with heavenly Sermons as is cleare Mat. 26. 28 29. Marke 14. 25. Luke 22. 21 2◠Iohn 13. and having done they sing a Psalme as Christ and his Disciples did Mat. 6. 28. Mar. 14 26 all the while Elders in reverend and decent manner attend the service of the Table as the banquet requireth for that some serve at that Supper is gathered from Mat. 26. 19. Marke 14. 15. where mention is made of a large upper roome furnished and prepared which is a cleare warrant for a large Table a cleane and faire Table-cloth Basons Cups and vessels decent and comely for that service and from Christ his guirding himselfe with a towell and washing their feet and standing as a servant Iohn 13. 4 5 6. Luke 22. 27. The nature of the Sacrament requires thanksgiving and therefore afternoone a Sermon of thanksgiving is preached which is also warranted from Mat. 26. 30. 7. ARTICLE Publike Fasting THe Fast is indicted eight dayes before and the causes laid open for preparing of the people for humiliation as Ioel 2. 1 2 3. Isa. 22. 12 13. We have no anniversarie and set Fasts or Feasts either because God himselfe by his judgement imminent or already inflicted or by permitting his people to follow their owne wayes calleth to fasting and mourning Isa. 22. 13 Joel 2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 c. and so by his mercies and wonderfull deliverances calleth to extraordinary joy of thanksgiving Psal. 118. 24. The doctrine of the Law is preached as Ioel 2. and Isa 58. and the Fast observed with abstinence from meat and drinke and carnall and ordinary pleasures Ioel 2. 16. We thinke to deny the lawfulnesse of publike fasting on the Lords day as if the Christian Sabbath were a day onely of spirituall feasting and rejoycing because that day Christ ended the worke of redemption and second Creation is a wronging of the Christian Sabbath which is ordained for the whole publike worship of God joying sorrowing for sinne learning Gods will in all and every point as the Jewish Sabbath was not ordained onely for Meditation on the worke of Creation but for worships of all kinde The worship of this day Acts 20. 7. is as large as preaching and being in the Spirit on the Lords day and seeing the
14. Leo epist. 89. ad episcop per Vâ—ennensem provinc Gregor Mag epist. l 2 c. 69. Graâ—ian dist 32 34 〈◊〉 63. Obiect 3. Syrus â—inistrorâ—â— periphrasis Beza ib. Erasm. Calvin Bulling Marlorat Suâ—â—vius Brightman Scultetuâ— Obiect 4. M. Best Prâ—sb gov exam Kath. Childley p. 19 Brightman Apoc. c. 2. Bulling ib. Didoclav 11. alta Damasc. p. 132 133 135. August hom 2. in Apoc prapositis ecclâ—siaram Gregor mor. in Iob l. 34. c. 4. Primasius Beda Haymo Fulk against Rhâ—mest Rev. 1. 20. Perkins Fox 5. Obiect M. Best Parker de Poliâ— 3. c 24. Guâ—l Voeâ— de Pol. â—ccl thes 7. Edmuâ—d Richer de Pol. Eccles. potest p. 14. Dost Paris de Pol. Eccl. p 13. Gerson de Potest Eccl. consid 4. Obiect 6. 1 Cor. 12 20. 27. with 4. 17. and 5. 12. â—nd 11. 23. 26. and â—4 33. Mat 18 r. 7 â—0 1 Tim. 1. 3. 15. Separatists 3. petit â— pos p. 43. Act. 10. 34. 7. Obiect Ames Medul Theol. l. 1. c 32. â— thes 22. Object 8. Bellarm. 〈◊〉 Fuchr Pâ—eâ—â—r in Exod 10. 9. Obiect 10. Object Obiect 11. Separat 3 pet 4. posit p. 5 〈◊〉 against 〈◊〉 Aâ—nsworth communion of Saints Râ—binson against Tatâ—r p 28. a Gen 10. 7. Exod 7 â— Deut. 8 55. Iudg 6. â— 1 Saâ— 3. â—0 1 Sam. 22. 5. 1 Saâ— 7. 2. 1 King 1 8. 1 Kâ—ng 1â— 29. 1 King 13 11. 2 Kiâ—g 3. 1. Kâ—â—g 6 12. 2 King 20 1. 2 Chron. 12. 5. Psal 7â— 9. Lam. 2. 20 Hab. 1 1. Mat 1. 2 Mâ—â— 2 17. 〈…〉 7. 6. Acts 〈◊〉 10. 〈…〉 8 〈…〉 15. Rev. 11 10. Partâ—â— com Bulling ib. Calvin Pareus prolego in Hos. Hieroâ— Epist. 125. trium questionum ad Damas q â— inâ— Thes Gregor Mor. l. 2. c ult Thom. 22. q. 172. aâ—t 2. Suarez dâ— tripl virt disp 8. sec. 8. n 7. Thomas 22. q. 172. ar 2 Caâ—â—tan coâ— in 22. q. 171. arâ— 2. Pareus prolog in comâ—n Hos â—r 1. Anton Walleus iâ— loc com de Theol p. 18. â— Kin 3. 15. 〈◊〉 com in 2 〈◊〉 3 ad 〈…〉 consequeâ—ter 〈…〉 ad Deâ—m Roâ—iâ—s against Yales p. 37 38. Episâ—â—p dis 26. thes 2 ◠〈◊〉 trac de 〈◊〉 10. p. 88. 〈◊〉 c 10. p 〈◊〉 87 88. 〈…〉 Nedo Gâ—r c. 1 p. 3. Catâ—ch 〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉 c. 11. p. 〈◊〉 306 〈◊〉 Insti c 42. Socin tract de eccl ad 10 c Rom. 10. 4. 15 de exter reg 〈…〉 fo 252. Remâ—â—str confess c. â—2 sec. 1. Apol â—o 295. 2. Conclusion Heb. 3. 13 Lev. 19. 17. 1 Thess 5. 11 12. Col. 3. 16. Heb. 10. 23. Mal 4. 16. Zach. 8. 21. Calv. com Hos. 2. 〈◊〉 Bulling in â—cl 46. Beza ib. Davâ—nanit in Col. 3. 16. Whittak Tom. 2. de auth scrip l. 3. c. 14. ad 14. Parcus in Hos. 2. 2. Zanch. Muscul in Es. c. 2. 2. Gualib hom 17. Aug. de civ Dâ—i l. 1. c. 9. Châ—ys hom in â—x 23. Ambros. in Luâ— 17. Hyer in Mat. 18. Thom â— q. 33. Barnes in 22. q. 33. art 2. Suarez Vasquez ib Valentia Jesuita Obiect 13. Concâ—l Saâ—d c 17. Conâ—â—l Laodic c. 12 Conâ— Africa c. 127 Conc. Toledo 4. c. 25 August con donaâ—â—â—â— l. 2. c 3. Cypr. l. 2. ep 3. English Puritanis c. 2. aâ— 6. p. 5. M. Best against Paget p. 133 134. Pagets answer to Daveâ—port p. â—35 M. Best Church plea p. 30 31. a Heb 5 4 â— Rom â— 14 15. 1 Tim. â— 21. Acts. 23. Acts 6 5. Acts 13. 2. Acts 1â— 23. 2 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Tim 3 1 1. T it 1 5. Enerist ep 2. Calâ—tuâ— ep 2 ad Epise Gal c 3. 〈◊〉 3 c. de 〈…〉 Episc Vasquez in 3. Tho. Toâ—â— de sacr disp 240. c. 1. n. 2. 4. Arg. Theâ—â—â— in 1. Tim. 4. 14. Cypr. ep 33. Athan ep ad Oâ—th Ambros. com in 1 Tim. 5. â—hrys â—om 13. in 1 Tim. Hyper. in 1 Tim. 4. Arâ—â— in 1 Tim. 4. Profess Leyd disp 42. â—n 32. Ecc M. Plesseus de p. 30. Zanch in 4 praecep Willeâ— Synop. pap p. 2. cont 5. q. 3 Gers Buceâ— degub Eccl. sect 86. p. â—35 Zippâ—r de Pol. Eccl. 2. c. 1â— n. 8 9 10. 1. Obiect Mat. 10. Obiect 2. Hen. Iac. of Chuâ— govern c 7 p. 168. Obiect 3. Separatist Protest anno 1616. aâ— 10. 3. peâ— pos 5. p. 47. M Jacob Church govâ—â—n 〈◊〉 7. p. 47. Obiect 4. Smith ceâ—s paral p 112 113. Obiect 5. Smith paral â—2 6. Obiect Smith ib. â— Obiect 8. Object Psal. â—9 36. 37 Psal. 72. v. 4 5 6. 9. Obiect 10. Object Calv in Tit. 1. â—artwright l. 3. p. 35. Juâ—us 〈…〉 â—â—vey c. 12. Tilâ—â— Par ad Scot. Diloâ—l alt Daâ—â—as p. 918. Ruling Elders proved from 1 Tim. 5. 17. Hals humble Remonst to the Parliament an 1641. p. 198 199. Fieldâ— booke of the Church c â—6 This speech where the article 〈◊〉 is doubled anâ— the adverbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intervening signifie ever divers persons Field 5. booke of the Church c. 26. Cypâ— l. 4. ep 4. l. 3. ep â—1 Tâ—râ— in Apol. c. 39. Hier. in 3 â—sa in sit 1. Ambr. in â— Tim 5. Ambr. in 1 Tim. â— Survâ—y c. 16. p. 17 â—â—ld Chur. l. â— c. 26 Beza in Mâ—t. 16. 19 Cartwright l. 3. p 83. Nâ—ellius thes Theol. p 243. Survay c. 17◠〈…〉 Bâ—llar de conâ— l â— c 15. Concil Basil. Eccâ—us de concil Wâ—lus l. 2 de pâ—iâ—â— Deacons cannot baptize and preach 2. Arg. 3. Arg. 4. Arg. 5. Arg. 6. Arg. 7. Arg. Valent. Suarez Vasquez Bucanus 8. Arg. Survay c. 18. p. 20â— Câ—â—twright l. 〈◊〉 p. â—â—0 〈◊〉 defen p. 135. Tâ—av dist â—ccl p. 118 â—19 â—un Eâ—cl l 2 c. 4. Sarvay of discipl c. 32 33. 1. Conclus 2. Conclus Cartwright p. 1. p. 93. Virâ—tus dial 3. Calv admonitions to the Paâ—l 2. of Eng. p. 61. 3. Conclus Cartwright l. 3. p 163. Obâ—ruded 〈◊〉 c. â— v. 2. Whytgift against 〈◊〉 4. Conclus 2 Chron. 29. 2 King 2â— Whâ—tgift tract 3 to the adâ—â— c. 6. 5. divil against Cartwright p. 18â— Camâ—ro 〈…〉 Magistrate hath â— no negative voyce in Synodâ— 3. Arg. 4. Arg. 5. Arg. 6. Arg. 7. Arg. 8. Arg. 1 Cor. 9. 6. Act. â— 19 9. Arg. 5. Conclus Davenant de iud controver c. 13. p. 7â— Barclaius de priest c. 14. p. 110 Balth Meisnerus in sobr Philo. par 3. Sect. 2. c. 2. Anto Spalâ—â—â— de rep â—c l. 6. c. 3. â— 17. Glossa in C. Hadâ—i an dist 36 〈◊〉 art Cusan de conc l. 3. c. 3. Berengarius l de myst sign tâ—m â— Bibloth patr Gelasius Nicolaus I. M Anto. de Domin Arthâ—epist Spala de rep eccl l. 6. c. 3. n. 4 5 6 7. Bellarm. contra Barcl c. 2. Spal ib. n. 9. Clemens 5. tempâ—rales sua à nobis sub nobis tenet Rex Clemens l. â— c 11. Azorius inst mor. p. â— l. 4. c. 10 Papa subditos à Sacraments Religione erga Regem solvit So Sander deviâ— Monat l. 2. c. 4. Concil goâ— 8. c. 14. Bellar. contra Barclatum c. 19. See more of this in Bosius dâ— sig Eccles l. 17. c 3. and Bâ—sius de â—uinis gentium l 1. c. 18. Fazellus de reb Sion l. 8. c â— Sander de visib Monat l. 2 c. 4 Papirius Masson de Epist. Vrb. l. 5. in vita Bâ—nifacij 8. Bâ—rrom Anal tom 12. anno 1106. n. 14. all Trumpets of Treason that the Pope may deâ—hronâ— Kings Assembly at Glask Assembly at Edinburg Act at Edinburg Assembly an 641