the preaching of men unordained to Office Chap. 8. Answering divers Arguments brought against the preaching of men unordained to Office Chap. 9. Answering such arguments as are brought to prove that none may do the work of the Ministry without Ordination Chap. 10. Answering several arguments brought by Mr. Collings to prove gifted persons may not ordinarily preach without a solemn setting apart to Office Chap. 11. Concerning Election as belonging to a particular Church Chap. 12. Concerning Election as Essential to a Call to Office Chap. 13. Wherein many arguments are answered which are brought against Election as giving the Essence to the call to Office Chap. 14. Wherein is shewn that the Essence of the Ministerial Call doth not consist in Ordination Chap. 15. Wherein is proved that Ordination doth not so belong to a Presbytery but that a Church or the people may in some cases lawfully act in it ERRATA Page 15. line 24. for the read their or else after intervention add of some acts put forth by these p. 18. 1. 8. r. ex officio p. 37. 1. 2. add and the preaching of a gifted person p. 40. 1. 12. r. undoubted p. 41. l. 3 r. r. privately p. 44. l. 28. r. private p. 54. l. II. after about add it p. 67. l. 20. r. mentioning p. 92. make a parenthesis before else l. 6. to end after assert l. 10. p. 92. l. 11. after if add it be said p. 94. l. 19 20. 21. r. secondarily thirdly c. p. 94. l. 25. r. offices sol 27. p. 114. l. 12. r. tongues p. 123. l. 27. r. party p. 203. l. 17 r. ingenious p. 208. l. 4. r. name argueth p. 208. l. 15. r. if p. 210. l. 9. r. teacheth p. 211. l. 15. r. restrain p. 212. l. 31. r. restriction of p. 225. l. 12. r. firstly p. 231. r. l. 17. r. it p. 243. l. 21 22. r. chose p. 252. l. 13. r. firstly p. 23. 1. l. 17. r. it p. 243. l. 21 22. r. chose p. 252. l. 13. r. was ordinary p. 256. l. 9. blot out to also l. 10. p. 258. l. 9. blot out Act. 6. 2 4. and put it in l. 8. after the word prayer p. 260. l. 14. r. promise p. 264. l. 6. r. subsequent so l. 9. p. 270. l. 13. r. there Of Preaching without Ordination CHAP. I. Wherein is shewn that Office is not a Relation to the work or employment of the Ministery but a Relation to a Church AMongst the many Books lately published against the preaching of Gifted men and for Ordiantion as that which gives the Call unto that work of the Ministery there are two which we suppose have the strength of all the rest in them the title of the one is Jus Divinum Ministerii Enangelici or The Divine Right of the Gospel-Ministery published by the Provincial Assembly of London The title of the other is Vindiciae Ministerii Enangelici by Mr. Collings of Norwich In these we finde some positions which we can freely subscribe unto but there are other assertions wherein we profess our dissent And though we intend not to reply to every particular yet we shall give such Animadversions upon the most considerable things as will leave it unnecessary to speak to the rest We freely acknowledge That Officers are necessary in the Churches of Christ by Divine Institution and also that they are to continue untill the second coming of Jesus Christ And therefore we shall not put in exceptions against the Arguments brought by our Brethren in their Jus Divinum for the proof of these Propositions Only we shall except against part of their explication of their first Proposition The Proposition is That the Office of the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments is necessary in the Church by Divine Institution For the understanding of this they undertake to shew 1. What is meant by Ministery 2. What by Office Quest What is meant by Ministery Answ Ministery as our Brethren well observe standeth in opposition to Lordly Domination or Principality as Matth. 20. v. 25 26 27. The Princes of the Gentiles exercise Dominion over them and they that are great exercise Authority upon them but it shall not be so among you but whosoever will be great among you let him be your Minister and whosoever will be chief among you let him be your servant Ministery is not Dominion but service Officers in a speciall sence are called Ministers yet we conceive that others may properly be called Ministers also according to the service they do for Christ Both the words in the Original which our Brethren here mention to express the Office of the Ministery viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are frequently in Scripture applyed to Saints that are no officers as 2 Cor. 9. 1. For as touching the Ministring to the Saints Act. 24. 23. Forbid none of his acquaintance to Minister or come unto him In these and other places Christians who are no officers are said to Minister in giving Alms c. and therefore let none thinke that the name Minister is appropriated only to officers It is the office of Deacons to Minister about carnal things and yet other Christians doe Minister about such things also as the forecited Scriptures shew So Officers Pastors or Teachers doe Minister in the Gospel and yet gifted men may be said to Minister in the Gospel also for there is ministration or service in their preaching and therefore gifted brethren whose ordinary work or calling it is to Preach may properly be called Ministers of the Gospel as well as those who are officers for ordinary Ministration denominates the person a Minister Occasional acts of preaching may be called Ministring and the persons therein do Minister in the Gospel but because they do not addict and give up themselves to that as their work hence they cannot properly be called Ministers of the Gospel for such a denomination followeth an ordinary and nor an occasional acting in any work A general course of acting is necessary to the making a general title proper to any person As a man is not denominated a Brewer or a Baker that doth but occasionally brew or bake but he that doth it ordinarily or constantly and maketh it his work to do it So here This we have added the rather because some call gifted men Speakers and their preaching speaking and that to distinguish them and their actings from officers and their acts they are afraid to call gifted men preachers or Ministers or their actings preaching or Ministring Quest 2. What is meant by the word Office Our Brethren give us a description of Office and it is this The Office of the Ministery is a spiritual relation to the whole employment of the Ministry in a person qualified founded upon a special and regular call This description we apprehend to be very faulty and because a right understanding of this What Office is doth much conduce to the clearing this whole controversie we shall
were unfaithful that they might learn to be faithful not only to such as were able to teach others but to such as were to be taught therfore it must follow that it is the other committing that is meant Ans 1. It is not said commit them to such as are able but who shall be able it is the committing these Gospel truths to them that maketh them able and therefore it is in a doctrinal way onely 2. That Restriction is necessary as well to shew that unfaithful unconverted ones are not fit to be Preachers as also to shew that more then faithfulness is necessary to fit a man to teach others viz. gifts or abilities as the following words shew they must be able as well as faithful Many faithful men are not able to teach others and so though they be faithful yet they need to have Gospel truths committed to them in a doctrinal way to render them able for that work and therefore this doth not make it follow that the other committing is meant Ans 2. Suppose the other committing be meant then it may be understood of Preachers by Office and it is not exclusive as Mr. Shepherd observeth but private men gifted may do it other Scriptures allow them that liberty Though the Apostle speaketh de re teach others and not expressely de modo of the manner of performance authoritatively office-wise c. yet the manner must necessarily be understood else it will not help him at all For some teaching of others he cannot deny to be allowed to ordinary believers to whom the Gospel is not committed in that sence he pleadeth for He will grant that a private Christian may privately teach others it is the teaching publikely by persons gifted unordained which he opposeth And the Text speaketh no more of that then of preaching office-wise we may as safely read it thus Who shall be able to teach others office-wise as he may read it thus Who shall be able to teach others publikely Arg. 5. Whosoever may lawfully preach the Gospel and interpret Scriptures may warrantably require a maintenance competent for them of the Church to which they so preach 1 Tim. 5. 18. Mat. 10. 10. All Gospel labourers are worthy of their hire but they are Gospel labourers Ergo Gal. 6. 6. But all those members in a Church that are gifted cannot require a competent maintenance of the Church in which they are according to Scripture rules Therefore they cannot lawfully preach the Gospel ordinarily Ans The Scriptures alleaged speak of a constant preaching so as to make it a mans work or calling to preach Mat. 10. 10. the Apostles were to make it their employment and 1 Tim. 5. 18. he speaketh of Officers whose work and calling it was v. 17. The elders c. Gal 6. 6. he that is constantly taught is to communicate to such as do constantly teach him and if by ordinarily he intendeth thus much then we grant his Major That whosoever may lawfully make it their work and calling constantly to preach the Gospel to a Church may warrantably require a maintenance of the Church to which they so preach But his Minor is very faulty both in the matter and form There is in it Fallacia tertii argumenti the third argument is changed it is not assumed in the Assumption as it is in the Proposition but there is a change not onely in the sence but even in the tearms His Major saith they may require a maintenance of the Church to which they so preâ—ch and his Minor saith they cannot require it of the Church in which they are We say they may warrantably by Scriptures he alleageth require a maintenance of the Church to which they so preach i. e. to which they constantly preach making it their work and calling so to do and this is all that his Minor can deny from that Major and in that sence we deny his Minor None of the places quoted do prove that they may require a maintenance of the Church in which they are but they may prove that they may require it of the Church to which they so preach But then 1. It concludeth not that they may require a maintenance when they preach but occasionally and not constantly which is often the cause where many gifted men are in a Church They cannot all constantly preach to the Church in which they are as members there cannot be time or opportunity for them all to speak or for others to hear constantly There were many brethren gifted in the primitive Churches as Corinth 1 Cor. 14. yet it will hardly be proved that they might all require a maintenance of that Church 2. If a Church hath many gifted men and they be desired to preach constantly to other Churches or to the world they may require a maintenance of those that are constantly taught by them though they cannot require it of the Church in which they are as members And thus it doth not tie ungifted brethren to maintain all those that are gifted but onely such as constantly preach to them which is a duty they may be able to perform If men preach occasionally at Lectures may they require a maintenance competent for this or might those Disciples Act. 15. 32 33. require a maintenance for their occasional preaching Where there are many gifted men in a Church they cannot all exercise constantly but only occasionally to that Church and so cannot require a maintenance His sixth Argument about Mission we answered before His seventh Argument That the Churches of Christ in all ages have rejected this opinion and practice we deny But we are to follow Churches no further then they follow Christ and the primitive Churches we have shewn practised what we have pleaded for Thus we have answered objections against the preaching of gifted men un-ordained CHAP. XI Concerning Election as belonging to a particular Church HAving shewed That Office is a Relation to a particular Church and that some men who are not ordained Officers may preach we shall now proceed to speak something concerning the requisites to an Officer about which the opinions of men are various some place the essence of the call to Office in Election others in Ordination We shall pass over what our brethren in their Jus Divinum Minist Evang. lay down concerning an immediate call to the Ministery and shall reply onely to what they say about a mediate call Many Arguments here they level against the Congregational way which we cannot but account a way of Christ and this hath been a great provocation to us to this undertaking The main thing they drive at is to prove 1. That the essence of a call to office doth not consist in Election but in Ordination 2. That it belongeth to a Presbytery to Ordain We shall proceed to their Propositions concerning Election Proposit 1. That the Election of a Minister doth not by Divine right belong wholly and solely to the Major part of every Jus Divin Minist
that the Election of the one made him an Officer it strongly evidenceth that Election is that which giveth the essence of the call to Office There was a compleat Ordination in all the acts of it Acts 13. 2 3. and yet that was not constitutive and that speaks more against Ordination giving the essence to the call to office then this can against its consisting in Election 3. As for Act. 6. there is granted to the people a power to chuse v. 5. And the saying pleased the whole multitude and they chose Stephen c. here was not a bare nomination but an Election they chose which is far more then to snominate and frequently expresseth the constitutive act of an Officer in Scripture as John 6. v. 70. Jesus answered them have not I chosen you twelve Luke 6. v. 13. He called unto him his Disciples and of them he chose twelve whom also he named Apostles Act. 1. v. 2 24. So that the being chosen made or gave the essence to the immediate call of Officers and surely this is expressed alluding to that which maketh the mediate call Christs chusing did constitute Apostles and therefore chusing is that which constituteth other Officers Will any say that Christ did but nominate the twelve to be Officers Surely he constituted them Officers by his chusing of them But we shall speak more fully to the objection from Acts 6. and shew how we are to understand those words v. 3. whom we may appoint when we answer their arguments about Ordination As for Acts 14. 23. we have sufficiently proved before that they that did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were the Churches and that this holdeth out that the essence of the call is in Election we referre the Reader to our former answers to that objection Arg. 3. All those Texts which we shall hereafter bring for the asserting of the Divine right of Ordination do prove that Jus Divin Min. p. 135. the essence of the Ministerial call doth consist in Ordination and not in Election there are more and more clear Texts for Ordination then for Election and Texts that make it not to be an adjunct but an essential constituent of the Ministerial call Ans 1. If they intend all those Texts which they alleadge to prove their first assertion viz. That Ordination of Ministers is an Ordinance of Christ p. 157. they are much mistaken in saying that all those Texts do prove the essence of the ministerial call to corsit in Ordin Act. 13. 1 2. 3 4. is one Text insisted upon there and that proveth that Ordination doth not give the essence to the call for there it did not Other Texts they all eadge to prove that assertion speaks of laying on of hands as 1 Tim. 4. 14. 1 Tim. 5. 22. Heb. 6. 1 2. but that this Imposition of hands giveth the essence to the call to office they prove not neither do our brethren assert it when they come to their third assertion which is about laying on of hands If by all those Texts they mean all the Texts alleadged for their second assertion pag. 164. we shall speak to them in their place 2. They are as we apprehend as clear Scriptures for Election as for Ordination What can be more plain then Act. 6. v. 5 The saying pleased the whole multitude and they chose and in regard the Apostles there did give Rules to the multitude to regulate their choice and mentioned divers qualifications that ought to be found in the persons chosen v. 3. Look ye out among you seven men of honest report full of the holy Ghost and wisdom c. Hence we conclude that all those places which largely set forth the qualifications of Officers have respect to Election As for Deacons when the Apostles here laid down their qualifications they directed their speech expressely to the Church or multitude of the Disciples and that purposely to inable them to make a due Election and therefore when Paul writeth to Timothy about the qualifications of Deacons 1 Tim. 3. v. 8 9 10 11 12. it cannot with found reason be concluded that his end was to translate the use of his directions to Timothy or Officers only when the Apostles end in laying down like Rules upon a like occasion was to help and regulate the people in their choice of the very same Officers if this were his inrent which example should we follow the Rules and qualifications about other Officers viz. Bishops or Elders are not limited in their use more to Timothy and succeeding Officers then these about Deacons which are undoubtedly extended to the people Act. 6. v. 3. And therefore we conclude that these directions were given to Timothy not chiefly to order his own practice by about Ordination but that he might as the Apostles did give them forth in a doctrinal way to the people to order their practices by about Elections either of Elders or Deacons And seeing the Apostles do so much insist upon and are so copious in the laying forth these Rules the great use of which are to regulate Elections which are before Ordination hence there are as clear Texts for Election as for Ordination Arg. 4. We argue from the nature of popular Election Election by the people properly is nothing else but their designation of a person that is to be made their Minister or that is already a Minister to his particular charge it is not simply a making of him a Minister but the making of him a Minister of such a place this appears in the Election of Deacons all that the people did by Election was onely to design the persons and to set them before the Apostles but it was the Apostles praying and laying on of their hands that made them Deacons This likewise appears from Deut. 1. 13. the peoples taking of men did not give them the essentials of their Office they nominated the persons but it was Moses that made them Rulers If the people have no Office-power belonging to them how can they by Election make an Officer c Nihil dat quod non habet nec formaliter nec eminenter Why then did the Apostles take so much pains to return to Lystra Iconium and Antioch to ordain them Elders in every Church Act. 14. 21 23. and why did Paul leave Titus in Crete to ordain Elders in every City Tit. 1. 5. why did they not spare their journey and send to the people to make their own Ministers by Election can we imagine that they took such pains onely to adde an Adjunct to the Ministerial call c Answ 1. Election is more then a designation to a particular charge or place for Election with acceptation bringeth in such a special relation as the person chosen is over and hath the charge of the chusers committed to him thereby and it must needs be an Office-making designation which setteth a man over those which he was not over before A man may nominate a woman to another to be
act as a publick person because his work is publick and so he acteth not barely as a private Christian yet not as an Officer for then he might be actually an Officer to three or four flocks or Churches because he may lawfully keep up so many Lectures constantly and without asserting Episcopacy he cannot be said to be actually an Officer to so many flocks at once As to the preaching of private men we have spoken to that before Object 3. Hence it will follow That when a Minister baptizeth a child he baptizeth him onely into his own Congregation For if he be not an Officer of the Catholick Church he cannot baptize into the Catholick Church which is directly contrary to 1 Cor. 12. 13. Answ 1. If by baptizing into a Church they mean a making one a member of a Church by baptism we deny that a Minister baptizeth in that sence either into his own Congregation or into a Catholick Church for if baptism giveth admission either into a particular or a Catholick Church then while baptism remaineth valid the party remaineth a member of that Church for so long as he hath that upon him which giveth membership he must needs be a member as Mr. Hooker saith where the form is the formatum must needs be And then either Excommunication doth make baptism a nullity and render the person who is excommunicate unbaptized or else Excommunication doth not eject a person out of the Church because it doth nullifie baptism which they say giveth membership And this may answer their Argument to prove that a Minister is a Minister of the Church Catholick visible Jus Divin Min. p. 139. They say He that can Ministerially admit or eject a member into or out of the Church-Catholick visible is a Minister and officer of the Church-Catholick visible But every Minister by baptism or excommunication admitteth or ejecteth members into or out of the Church-Catholick visible Therefore c. We deny the Minor If we grant such a Catholick visible Church yet we cannot grant that a Minister by baptism admitteth into that Church for then if Heathens be converted at a great distance from any Church or Officer whatever glorious profession they make yet they are not to be deemed members of that Catholick visible Church until they be baptized which soundeth very harsh if those belong to Satans visible kingdom who are without that Church as they intimate in their next objection And also then it will follow either that Excommunication doth not eject a man out of the Catholick visible Church and then the other part of their Minor is fals or else that Excommunication maketh baptism a nullity and then re-baptizing must be asserted because there may be a re-admission after excommunication upon repentance witness the incestuous person 2 Cor. 2. v. 6 7 8 9 10. Or else a man may have that upon him which maketh one a member of the Catholick visible Church viz. baptism and yet be no member thereof he may have that which admitteth and giveth the formal being of membership and yet be no member which is a contradiction If an excommunicate person be no member of the Catholick visible Church then he must be re-baptized if ever he be admitted a member thereof if admission into it be by baptism Also we deny that a Minister by Excommunication ejecteth out of the Catholick visible Church the person may eject himself out of it if there be such a Church by renouncing or contradicting his former profession which if any thing made him a member thereof before Excommunication and so may lose his membership in the Catholick Church before he loseth membership in a particular Church or however he may be ejected with and not by Excommunication And how a mans being ejected out of a particular Church by Excommunication should make him no member of the Catholick visible Church if being ejected out of Office in a particular Church doth not make a man no Officer to the Catholick visible Church we find not 2. We may assert that a Minister baptizeth onely in a particular Church i. e. only such as are members in some particular Church or other and yet not assert that he baptizeth onely into a particular Church much less onely into his own congregation This baptizing into his own congregation onely may seem to intimate that if he loseth his relation to that particular Church then he must also lose his baptism which it is supposed was onely into that But if that be driven at it falleth as heavy upon themselves if such a baptizing into a Church were granted for then if a man be baptized into the Catholick visible Church if he be ejected out of that which they say he may be by excommunication then he must as much lose his baptism there also 3. As for 1 Cor. 12. v. 13. It speaketh of the baptism of the Spirit into the mystical body of Christ not of water baptism into any visible Church at all for the words are these For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body Object 4. Hence it will follow That a Christian who by reason of the unfixedness of his civil habitation is not admitted into a particular Congregation hath no way left him to have his children baptized but they must all be left without the Church in Satans visible Kingdome Answ 1. We deny as before that baptism admitteth into Christs Kingdom or delivereth out of Satans visible Kingdome By vertue of the Covenant they are Co-members with their parents of the visible Church before baptism 2. Some will grant that Offiers may baptize in such cases by vertue of membership in the Catholick Church as well as they may baptize members of other particular Churches because baptizing is an act purely Ministerial in it self and doth not necessarily imply his being over or being an officer to those it is performed towards 3. We rather answer thus that a Christian notwithstanding the unfixedness of his habitation yet ought to join as a member with some particular Congregation or other and so the difficulty vanished those that joined to the Church at Jerusalem Act. 2. v. 41. 47. yet were many of them men of other Countries as appeareth vers 5. 9. 10 11. and though they had no fixed habitations there yet they listed themselves as members and were baptized at Jerusalem vers 41. when they cannot by reason of the unfixedness of their habitations enjoy such constant Communion with a Church as they would yet they are to joyn with some Church and hold as much communion with it as they can else a wide door is open to multitudes to keep from under discipline altogether for if they offend what Church can call them to an account or passe a censure upon them in case of obstinacy Object 5. According to this assertion there is no way left us by Christ for the Jus Divin Min. p. 141. baptizing of Heathens when it shall please God to convert them to the
intend an Officer 4. When there is a necessity of sending men for the conversion of Heathens we deny that they are sent forth as Officers or that they ought to be ordained to make them Officers before they be sent If such as are Officers and have been ordained do take a journey and preach unto Heathen people it is not in the capacity of Officers for those Heathens are of no Church but they act as persons gifted and warranted by Christ to lay out their gifts in such publick works for such ends The conversion of souls is the work of the Ministery not the proper work so as the Lord useth none but Ministers therein Parents and Masters and Neighbours may be converting instruments as well as they Ministers are lights not by vertue of Ordination or Office but illumination and gifts if men in darkness be ordained yet they are in darkness still Officers are not made lights when made Officers they were lights before therefore to shine in the exercise and improvement of their gifts and might have been Embassadors to the world though they had not been Officers to a Church Gifted men are Embassadors in a general sence for Christ and in Christs name and stead are to beseech people to be reconciled unto God for as we have proved they are warranted and commanded by Christ to preach We desire some Scripture-proof That Ordination may in any case precede Election to Office Object 2. It will also follow That there must be Churches before there be Ministers which is against Scripture and sound reason we do not deny but that there must be a Church before their Minister but not before a Minister the Church Entitative is before a Church Ministerial but yet a Minister must needs be before a Church for every Church must consist of persons baptized unbaptized persons cannot make a Church and therefore there must be a Minister to baptize them before they can be made capable to enter into Church-fellowship Our Saviour Christ chose his Apostles for the gathering of Churches there were first Apostles before Churches and afterwards the Apostles ordained Elders in these gathered Churches and one great work of these Elders was to convert the neighbouring Heathen and when converted to baptize them and gather them into Churches and therefore Elders as well as Apostles were before Churches And whosoever with us holds That none but a Minister in office can baptize must needs hold that there must be ordinary Ministers before Churches and that therefore the whole essence of the Ministerial call doth not consist in the Election of the Church Answ 1. That a Church must needs be before a Minister or Officer is evident because if one be made a Minister an Officer it is to a Church that is necessarily presupposed before one can be made an Officer to it 2. If Apostles were before Churches yet seeing their call was extraordinary and Immediate from God that doth not prove that ordinary Officers who are called by men are before Churches and the contrary is evident Act. 14. 23. When they had chosen them Elders by suffrages in every Church c. the Churches must needs be before the chusing Elders in every Church Neither can it be proved that these were Elders before they were their Elders or that ever any ordinary officers were before Churches Suppose unbaptized persons could not make a Church yet the utmost it could amount to would be but this that there must be a Minister before this or that Church it would not follow thence that there must be Ministers before Churches in general or before any Churches for look upon any Church and if it be said there was a Minister before this or that Church to baptize the persons which it consisteth of we may say then there was a Church before that Minister for he could not be an officer unless it were to some Church because Officer and Church are Relatives if it be said there was some Minister before that Church else the persons therein could not have been baptized we may answer to there must be some Church before that Minister c. and still Churches are before Ministers until we come to the Apostles dayes if the line of succession holdeth so far and if that line breaketh before we ascend so high then where the stop was made either the person baptizing was no Minister and that cutteth the throat of the objection for then they being baptized by one that was no Minister after their baptism they might become a Church before any Minister or else the person baptizing was a Minister and then it must be said he was a baptized person and yet no Church-member or else a Minister and yet an unbaptized person a Church-officer and yet no Church-member for if he were a Church-member then Church was still before the Minister and how could he become a Minister if a Church were not before If the line of succession holdeth to the Apostles dayes their call was extraordinary and they being the onely Officers that were before Gospel Churches it speaketh nothing at all against Election of the Church as giving the whole essence of the call to ordinary Officers and it is the call of ordinary Officers onely that this question is about whether that consisteth in Election or not 3. That a great work of ordinary Elders was to convert the neighbouring Heathens we grant but that they acted as Elders in their conversion we deny that ordinary Elders did baptize then when converted before their being gathered into Churches is a thing which they have not given us any Scripture-proof for A Church is not to suffer persons in it to continue unbaptized but we conceive unbaptized persons may make a Church and then either by Communion with other Churches or by chusing and ordaining an Officer for it self persons in it may be baptized and thus we may hold that none but a Minister in office can baptize and yet need not hold that there must be ordinary Ministers before Churches which to be sure the Gospel speaketh as little of as of unbaptized persons making a Church And so we have answered their arguments against Election as essential to the call to office Two Arguments of Mr. Hookers they undertake to answer by asserting that Officers as such do sustain a relation to a universal Church and by distinguishing between the persons which give being to a Minister as to be their Minister and those which give being to him as to be a Minister but because neither the assertion nor the distinction are proved to have any sooting in Scripture therefore we passe them over CHAP. XIIII Wherein is shown that the Essence of the Ministerial Call doth not consist in Ordination OOur Brethren in their book called Jus Divin Mini. pag. 140. c. endeavour to prove that Ordination of Ministers is an Ordinance of Christ If Ordination be taken in a right sense by Ministers be nnderstood officer we can own the Assertion
to prove that Ordination ought to be with imposition of hands And because we have spoken briefly to that already and shewed that it is like laying on of hands was of extraordinary use for the conveyance of gifts or onely an indifferent significant Ceremony to declare who the party was that was solemnly ordained and so may without sin be omitted or the end of it may be attained without its use by some other sign it may be declared who the person is also because themselves do not assert it to be any more then an inseparable Adjunct to Ordination therefore we shall not spend time about this onely take a Rule which may serve as part of an answer to most if not all their Arguments for imposition of hands viz. That it is usual in Scripture to expresse things by that which is neither necessary nor of constant use about them So Chain is put for bondage and suffering Act. 28. 20. I am bound with this chain Jud. ver 6. Key is put for power authority Government Isai 22 ver 21 22. Rod is put for correction 1 Cor. 4. 21. Prov. 13. 24. The crosse is put for suffering and persecution Mat. 16. 24. A chain is not necessarily or constantly used in bondage nor a key in the exercise of power or Government nor a rod in correction nor a crosse in persecution yet because sometimes such instruments were used in such cases therefore the Holy-Ghost expresseth those things by them So though imposition of hands be neither of necessary nor of constant use about Ordination yet the whole of Ordination may be expressed by it hence Pauls forbidding Timothy to lay hands suddenly doth not imply that it was his duty to lay on hands or that he must necessarily and constantly use that ceremony but that it was duty to ordain men which they assert to be the thing notified by laying n of hands which answers their second Argument so the whole work of Ordination may be comprehended under the ceremony of imposition of hands 1 Tim. 5. 22. and yet it may not be of necessary and constant use about it any more then in the former instances the putting a chain for bondage and key for the whole of Government and rod for all correction and crosse for all afflictions c. will imply that they necessarily and constantly belong to them which answers their third and fourth Arguments It is sufficient that imposition of hands was sometimes used about Ordination to render the whole of it expressed thereby but it doth not prove the constant use of the ceremony to be necessary but only of Ordination which is the thing signified by that ceremony We proceed to their fourth Assertion viz. That Ordination of Ministers ought to be by the laying on of the hands of Jus Divin Min. p. 181. the Presbytery After a brief explication of the word Presbytery c. they come to that which as they tell us they especially aim at in this fourth Assertion and they give it under this following Proposition Propos That Ordination of Ministers doth belong to Church officers and not to a Church without officers And that Ordination by people without Ministers is a perverting of the Ordinance and of no more force then baptisme by a midwife or consecration of the Lords Supper by a person out of the office We shall give some Arguments to prove the lawfulness and validity of the peoples Ordination and then answer their arguments against it Our Proposition is this Pro. That in a Church which hath no officer or officers in it some believers may lawfully or warrantably ordain without officers We say in a Church that hath no officers for if a Church hath officers in it they may go before the Church in Ordination as well as in Praying on other occasions and Preaching c. that onely officers must act in it in such a case is not clear to us as suppose a Church hath but two officers in it we do not see any necessity that the whole work of the day must lie upon them onely but some believers i. e. such as have most of the spirit of Prayer being desired may lend assistance but whether that may be or not it is sufficient to our present purpose and to any case that necessarily falleth out in the congregational way if it can be proved that when a Church hath no officers of its own then some believers being deputed or chosen thereunto by the Church may ordain without the necessary concurrence of any officers And we say some believers may ordain without officers not must for we do not reckon Ordination an act of Government and therefore Churches may for ought we yet see hold communion each with other in it as well as in solemn prayer upon upon any other occasion and so officers of other Churches may act in it yet not qua officers but qua gifted and men gifted may without any officers ordain for it is a matter wherein the Church hath its liberty who it will depute thereunto when it wanteth officers and it is not necessarily confined to officers as if none else might act in it If a Church hath officers the Law of their relation to the Church putteth them under obligations to go before the Church in Ordination as well as in other duties as Preaching administring of the Sacraments c. and therefore where officers are in a Church they act as officers in Ordination as well as they do in prayer upon other solemn occasions wherein undoubtedly other Christians eminently gisted may act in Prayer yet do it not as officers This is our sense of the question yet because our brethren do account Ordination to be an act of Government yea an eminent act of jurisdiction therefore if in some of our Arguments may seem to speak of Ordination as an act of Government of officers as officers yet we do not grant it but rather prove our sense of it by denying it in that sense which they plead for it in This being premised we proceed to our Arguments Argu. 1. Whatsoever would necessarily and unavoidably infer Ordination to be unattainable that is contrary to sound doctrine and is not to be asserted But that some believers may not lawfully or warrantably ordain without officers in a Church that hath no officers in it that would necessarily and unavoidably infer Ordination to be unattainable Ergo That some believers may not lawfully or warrantably ordain without officers in a Church that hath no officers in it is contrary to sound Doctrine and is not to be asserted The major none can deny who plead for Ordination as an ordinance of Christ still continuing for if it be of Christs appointment doubtless he hath provided a way wherein it is attainable The Minor we prove thus Because there are no officers on earth authorized or appointed by Christ to ordain in case a Church hath no officers in it any more then believers without officers and therefore
Church rightly constituted hath in it the power of a whole Church therefore 't is not a part whatever our Brethren deny us in our Congregations yet may they obtain a concession for a National Church-constitution we doubt not but they would be therein Independent and not allow the Authority of any Nation or of all the Nations in the Christian world to impose a form of order or Government upon them wherein they are not satisfied acting in all Church-work not as a part but a whole which they could not regularly doe if but a part of a Catholick Church 2. Every whole is really distinct from every part and from all its parts collectively considered they are constituting that is constituted but where that Church is which is really distinct from all particular Churches or wherefore it is we profess we know not 3. There is no Universal visible meeting to worship God Ergo no Universal visible Church The Synagogical meetings of the Jews were the meetings of several parts of that Church and there never was in them the power of the whole Church and we know not how it can be stiled a National Church unless it be from a national meeting Statis temporibus the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being never used either in a civil sense as Act. 19. 32 41. or a Sacred sense but propter Conventum either in fieri or in facto esse because the persons were met or under engagement to meet together yea the Church of the first-born however dispersed and scattered upon the Earth yet doth as an invisible Church meet invisibly and in Spsrit to perform the acts of worship required of such a Church we are confident whatever it be is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 assembling together is the formal reason of that denomination which is Coetus convocatus or the Congregation as 't is every where Coetus à Coeundo translated by Mr. Tindal in his translation of the New Testament 4. There are no distinct Officers appointed for such a distinct Church ergo there is no such Church Diocesan Bishops Provincial Arch-Bishops National â—atriarchs universal Popes would surely have been found in the Scripture had a Diocesan Provincial National or Universal Church been found there 5. There is no Church greater then that which hath the power to hear and determine upon offences committed in the Church but that Church is particular Mat. 18. 17. We know dissenting parties lay claim to this Text on both sides we say but this If it means the Congregation it excludes all other if it means the any other it excludes the Congregation which is unscriptural irrational absurd Obj. If notwithstanding all this some may judge that although Churches do not meet in their members actually yet they may meet in their representatives which being met may be called The Classical Provincial National Universal Church Answ We answer each of us in the words of Zuinglius to a like argument Representativam credo veram esse non credo i. e. That such a Church is a representative I believe but I believe not that it is a true Church 3. It 's a holy company a company of Saints Rom 1. 7. 1 Cor. 1. 2. said therefore to be in God the Father and in Jesus Christ 1 Thes 1. 1. 1. It 's the Kingdom of Christ the Body of Christ the Church of Christ yea Christ 1 Cor. 12. 12. implying neerness of relation unto him but none visibly related unto Satan as the visibly uncalled are can be respected as visibly related unto the Lord Jesus therefore not of his Kingdome Body Church c. 2. The visibility of that which constitutes a member of the invisible Church declares a man meet to be received unto Communion in the visible but the Heavenly Call constituteth a member of the invisible Church ergo the visibility of that Call declares a man meet to be received unto Communion in the visible the members whereof are Saints by calling no Churches of Christ by institution but are Churches of Saints by constitution 1 Cor. 14. 33. 3. Every Body is to be considered first in its essential state before it can be determined such a body in its integral or organical state as man is compounded of soul and body and so constituted an essential whole who hath further more eyes and ears hands and feet parts and members which put him under another notion yet cannot all his parts and members which are integral compleat him in the being of a man Univocally if he be deficient in any part which is essential so is every aggregate in forming a flock of sheep 't is necessary to consider the nature of the creatures to be formed and none not sheep can be numbred to such a flock in forming a Church of Saints 't is necessary to consider the nature of the members to be formed and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Saints visibly can be numbred to such a Church Invisible unbelievers may as well belong to the invisible Church as visible unbelievers to that which is visible We forbear multiplying arguments for further proof because we have the consent of our Brethren in the general as to the necessity of Saintship the whole strife being at the door of visibility and about the rule for the judgement thereof which some mistaking have their charity so large as to embosome nations of men Separatim conjunctim as Saints upon the account of a bare dogmatical faith especially if it be not contradicted with enormous scandals reckoning it among the errours of Jus Divinum Regim Eccles preface the Independents that they affirme the matter of the visible Church must be to the utmost judgement of discerning such as have true grace real Saints Concerning therefore a judgment of visible Saintship we are thus minded according to rule 1. Errours of judgement overturning the foundations of faith are inconsistent with grace Saintship Tit. 3. 10 11. 2. Errours of life everturning the foundations of holiness are inconsistent with grace and Saintship Gal. 5 19 20 21 24. and thus far we suppose our Brethren will walk with us 3. Total ignorance of the way and working of Christ in the heart is inconsistent with grace and Saintship 1 Pet. 3. 15. We ask our Brethren what rule they would walk by in applying comfort to particular souls if they would not enquire after truth of grace what experience of sins burthen what experience of Christs relief yea further we would know what reason they have to justifie a practise of enquiring after truth of grace in order to Communion in the Lords Supper and yet condemn us for the same practise in order to the Communion of Vindication of the Presbyterial Government and Ministry printed 1650. Saints who write thus He that would come to the Sacrament must examine himself 1. In general whether he be worthy to come c. 2. In particular whether he have true faith in Christ without which he cannot worthily eat this
bread nor drink this cup. 2. Whether be truly repent c. 3. Whether he be truly united by love to Jesus Christ his members c. Vind. p 52. 53. They further say that such as are grosly ignorant and such they intimate them to be that cannot examine themselves their faith repentance c. should be kept from the Sacrament by Church-Officers upon diverse reason else 1. Church-Governors should be very unfaithful Stewards 2. They should be guilty of polluting and prophaning the Sacrament 3. They should express much cruelty to the Soul of him to whom they give the Sacrament because they give it to one who will eat and drink his own damnation 4. They make themselves accessary to his sin of unworthy receiving 5. They grieve the Godly members of the same congregation and as much as in them lieth defile the whole Congregation For know you not saith the Apostle that a little leaven doth leaven the whole lump 6. They bring down the judgments of God upon the Congregation pag. 54 55. 56. Upon this they build a third proposition viz. It is the will of Christ that Church-Governors have some way sufficient to discover who are ignorant c. page 57. What they would do at the table we would do at the door and entrance into the house receiving thereinto all those whom the Lord hath received to the best of our discerning and no more knowing no rule for an ordinary suspension of compleat and owned members of the body from the priviledges given and by our Lord bequeathed thereunto Let not any stumble at the corruption found in some of the Gospel-Churches an incestuous person was a member in that of Corinth and more disorder may be found in it to which we say filthy matter may be found in a Church rightly constituted which is not fit matter in the constitution thereof It were absurd to affirm an unclean person may de jure be a Church-member because a Church-member de facto was unclean As for the National body of the Jewes we respect it as a typical president purge out the leaven remove the leper him that hath an issue that is unclean by touching of the dead c. and we are satisfied concerning the matter of the Church 4. It 's an united Company A Company however qualified are not a Church except an united Company Member-hood speaks relation relation if Political is founded in consent my brother indeed is my brother whether I will or no this relation is natural so beleevers are brethren without consent but my companion not so the mutual relation found in Companies and Societies of men is not so We would not quarrel about a word expressing the meaning of union may we obtain a grant of the thing it self call it consent agreement covenant or joyning Act. 5. 13. Thus we argue That whereby a number of fit persons are joyned together to walk and worship God together in the same Ordinances is the form of a particular Church But by Covenant consent or agreement a number of fit persons are so joyned Ergo. The Minor we prove thus That which giveth being of Member-hood distinction of Churches and power of Ecclesiastical operation is that by which a number of fit persons are joyned together c. But Covenant consent or agreement giveth being of member-hood in a particular Church distinction of Churches and power of operation Ergo. 1. The being of Member-hood is conveyed in Covenant not in profession or baptism Ergo in Covenant the excommunicate Corinthian was a visible beleever and also under baptism before he was received into the Church again by consent yet till then he was no member 2. The distinction of every member and so of the whole Church from other members and other Churches is by Covenant The members of Smyrna are not members of Ephesus nor è contra the distinction is not in place Phebe is a member and servant of the Church at Cenchrea when she is at Rome Did the Church of Smyrna convene at Ephesus and do an act there it were the act of the Church of Smyrne asmuch as if it had been done in Smyrna where ordinarily they meet and walk together nor is the destinction from profession what is common to the Members of every Church cannot be the form of any Church but the destenction is from mutual ingagement The power of acting as Members one towards another is hereby when a way is solitary work solitary a man may walk alone work alone not so where social how can two walk together except they be agreed The Associated Pastors and Churches in Worcestershire upon their debate about consent conclude We have reason to require as things now stand a more express signification of our peoples consent to our Ministery and Ministerial actions and their Membership of our particular Churches Christian Concore pag 11. Which conclusion is strengthned with many reasons wherein they urge Antiquity Reason 11. Conveniency Reason 12. and speaking of the Primitive Churches to that Question Whether express consent were required then among other things they or M. Bâ—xter for them affirm that without the peoples express consent none could then have ruled them by meet Ecclesiastical rule pag. 15. Who have therefore the form of a covenant drawn up and added to the profession of faith to be taken by the Members of every particular Church respectively And the late Assembly in their answer to the reasons of the dissenting Brethren against the instance of the Church of Jerusalem attribute so much to consent in a Church organical that although they say Elders receive their power and commission for the whole Church of Christ yet they may not exercise that without a Call and the mutual assent and agreement of the persons among whom and to whom they should exercise it is proximum fundamentum exercitii pag. 10. So it is of every act of special duty by one man in reference to another according to Mat. 18. 15. that should a man proceed upon that rule in dealing with one not in special covenant ingaged he would soon see his error and that he had no call because no consent Our Brethren need not be so much offended that we make consent the form of a congregational Church when themselves as it seemeth unto us make it the form of a Presbyterial For granting that the Elders of a bordering Presbytery though Neighbors may not intermeddle with the congregations under another Presbytery they say They take themselves bound in a special relation to those Congregations who are associated in that Presbytery in those things for which they are asscciated and their mutual consent and agreement Assemblies Answer gives them that relation and calling to those things pag. 11. Moreover considering how far our Brethren are agreed in this matter we much wonder at their offence at our Covenant or Agreement for they will grant 1. That the members of particular Churches are under special engagement to special duty in
Jews and ordinary Saints are commanded to be fervent in Spirit Rom. 12. 11. Therefore these will not prove an extraordinary Call 2. His being so uninstructed in the way of the Lord as Aquila and Priscilla excelled him in knowledge therein v. 26. strongly argueth his not being extraordinarily gifted 3. The people at Ephesus where he preached v. 24. 25. were after his departure from them ignorant of those extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost Acts 19. v. 1 2. We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost If Apollos who before preached to them had been indued with those extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost surely they should have heard of it Obj. 2. But how will it be proved that Apollos being one of Johns Disciples had no commission from John to preach Answ 1. Let those that can prove that he had such a commission from John the Gospel is silent about it we read that he was gifted v. 24. Might in the Scriptures and that he had a zealous disposition to exercise those gifts and that put him upon preaching v. 25. Being fervent in Spirit he spake and taught This seemeth to hold out that persons really gifted being fervent in spirit may speak and teach where opportunity is offered 2. We cannot find that John gave commission to any of his Disciples to preach the Objection is built upon this Supposition and this being denyed it is altogether groundless we ask how it will be proved that John gave a commission to any to preach if it cannot be proved that he did the Objection is vain Obj. 3. Apollos abilities were eminent he was eloquent and mighty in the Scriptures and he preached where there was no Church and therefore this will not warrant their preaching who have not such gifts in places where Christ is known Answ 1. It matters not how eminent his gifts were the Question is not whether persons not eminently gifted may preach but the Question is whether persons so eminently gifted as according to Gospel-Rules Preachers ought to be may exercise those gifts in publick Assemblies though they be not ordained to Office-work If they will grant that men of like abilities with Apollo may preach without Ordination then they cannot with any colour of reason deny a like liberty to others to preach without Ordination if their gifts be so eminent as according to Gospel-Rules Preachers ought to be though far inferiour to Apollos 2. The Objection supposeth that gifted men without Ordination may preach where no Church is we wish that liberty were not denyed them But let it be proved that it is more unwarrantable to preach where a Church is then where no Church is 3. If it be said that because there was no Church therefore Ordination could not be had and so he might lawfully preach without it which otherwise he might not have done if there had been a Church to give Ordination We answer Though Ordination could not be had there if there were no Church yet it might have been had else-where at Jerusalem Obj. 4. Apollos seems to be more then a gifted Brother for he is ranked with Paul and Peter 1 Cor. 1. 12. he is called a Minister 1 Cor. 3. 5. Answ That was afterward when he was at Corinth he might be an Officer for ought we know and be ordained but his preaching at Ephesus Act. 18. 24 25. was before his going to Corinth v. 27. when he was disposed to pass into Achaia the Brethren wrote exhorting the Disciples to receive him Act. 19. 1. And it came to pass that while Apollos was at Corinth This intimateth that Apollos going to Corinth which was in Achaia was after his preaching at Ephesus his being an Officer afterward at Corinth doth no more prove that he was an Officer before at Ephesus then his knowing the baptism of Christ at Corinth doth prove his knowing of it at his first coming to Ephesus when he is said to know onely the baptisme of John And those who are now but gifted Brethren may afterwards become Officers 2. From the preaching of the scattered Saints Act. 8. 11. we infer the lawfulness of gifted mens preaching though not ordained It is said Act 8. 1. And at that time there was a great persecution against the Church which was at Jerusalem and they were all scattered abroad thorow out the regions of Judea and Samaria except the Apostles v. 3. As for Saul he made havock of the Church entring into every house and haling men and women committed them to prison v. 4. Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the Word Act. 1. 1. v 19 20 21. And the hand of the Lord was with them and a great number believed and turned unto the Lord. From hence we observe 1. That these scattered Saints preached publickly Act. 8. 4. they went every where preaching the Word 2. That they had Divine allowance in this their preaching Act. 11. v. 21. The hand of the Lord was with them and a great number believed the Lord eminently owned their labours with his blessing which argues his approbation of them in their work 3. That these scattered Saints who preached were many of them at least unordained This may appear from Act. 8. v. 1 4. The persons who preached are said to be the scattered Saints v. 4. They that were scattered abroad went every where preaching and who were scattered is declared v. 1. There was a great persecution against the Church which was at Jerusalem and they were all scattered abroad We argue thus Those who were scattered abroad upon the persecution they preached the word with Divine allowance But many men un-ordained were scattered abroad upon the persecution Ergo Many men un-ordained did preach the word with Divine allowance The Major is proved Act. 8. 4. The scattering abroad is the very Character which the Holy-Ghost doth set out these preachers by neither is it said some of those that were scattered but they that were scattered therefore very very many a very great if not the greatest part of those who were scattered they preached otherwise if but a few of them had preached it had been improper to set out who were preachers by the scattering Those that had not abilities could not doe it but all that were scattered who had gifts did it else the phrase were improper The Minor is proved Act. 8. ver 1. If it was the Church at Jerusalem that was scattered abroad upon the persecution then many men un-ordained were scattered abroad for surely none will say that the Church was ordained Church according to the usual acceptation of it must imply the generality of the members and surely our Brethren will not say that the generality of Church-Members were ordained or were Officers But it was the Church at Jerusalem that was scattered abroad upon the persecution Ergo many men un-ordained were scattered abroad The Minor is plain Act. 8. ver 1. There was a great persecution against the
sinned in it and they had no Divine allowance therein but these had a Divine allowance to preach Act. 11. 21. 3. The Question is when is there such a case of necessity when is the case so extraordinary as a man may lawfully preach without Ordination who otherwise should sin in preaching without it Surely when Ordination can be attained in Gods way those who are required to submit unto it may not lawfully be without it upon any pretence of necessity or an extraordinary case And if Ordination cannot be had in Gods way or according to his will and appointment then the case is extraordinary and necessity may be pleaded for being without it as well as if it could not be had at all for a man sinneth who taketh up an Ordinance of Christ out of Christs Way or not as he hath appointed and it were to be under a necessity of sinning to be obliged to do any thing out of Christs Way Now we find no rule for Ordination to Office-work without Election from a Church as antecedaneous thereunto and it were to go out of Christs Way and to act not according to his Will and appointment to be ordained to Office-work before such a Call from a Church and therefore all gifted men lie under such a case of necessity or it is an extraordinary case until some Church of Christ hath given them such a Call and so they may preach until then without Ordination 2. They that preach in such an extraordinary case either they are Officers or no Officers First If they be no Officers then preaching is not an act peculiar to Office then there is a difference between preaching by Office and preaching by Gift then there is a notion besides Office under which men may warrantably preach and this will be applicable to gifted men as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith it is a contradiction that the formal act should be before the form be introduced That which one who is no Officer may do cannot be an act of Office in it self but as performed in this or that manner Let not gifted brethren then be charged with assuming the Office of the Ministery or intruding into the Office because they preach if they do no more then persons who are no Officers may do then there is no usurpation of the Office in doing of it That which can be done in any case lawfully by a person that is no Officer cannot without contradiction be said to be an act peculiar to Office or an act of Office in it self Preaching it self then is not an act of Office but preaching in such a manner or under such a relation And let not gifted brethren be denyed liberty to preach but onely to preach Office-wise seeing Preaching may be by a person not in Office Secondly If those that preach in such extraordinary cases be Officers then 1. Ordination is not essential to Office Office nor any other thing can subsist or be without its essentials if essentials Matter and Form be not found the compositum is denyed to have a being If Office may be preserved in being where Ordination is not then Ordination cannot be essential to Office much less be the formal cause of it As well may there be a man without a reasonable soul as Office without Ordination if Ordination be the formal cause of Office Take away the essence of Office and the formal cause or that which is constitutive thereof and there can be no Officer 2. Then another Mission must be found out besides Ordination or else men may preach who are not sent and men may believe without hearing a Preacher sent and then that Rule is not universal Rom. 10. 14 15. 3. Then if men baptize without Ordination their acts may be valid according to their own arguing for say they Those that may preach may baptize Matth. 28. 19. And by the way why may not Baptism be valid when performed by persons whose Ordination by the corruptness of it is a nullity as well as when by persons who are altogether without Ordination Argum. 5. From Gospel-Rules about Prophesying All that are Prophets may publikely preach But some men who are not ordained Officers are Prophets Ergo Some men who are not ordained Officers may publikely preach The Major That all that are Prophets may publikely preach is proved 1 Cor. 14 29. Let the prophets speak vers 31. For ye may all prophesie one by one Here is an universal liberty given to all the Prophets to exercise their gifts publikely in a setled Church vers 23. If therefore the whole church be come together into some place vers 24. if all prophesie This prophesying therefore was publikely in a Church-meeting and not onely some but all the Prophets have a liberty of prophesying granted to them vers 31. We do not say that all hath reference to every member of the Church of Corinth as if all the people of the Church might prophesie whether they had the gift or no we grant the liberty doth not extend so far and therefore many Arguments used by our Brethren to prove that all doth not include every member in the Church of Corinth do not touch us That all the Prophets in that Church had the liberty of prophesying granted to them is as much as we assert and this our Brethren cannot deny The Minor That some men who are not ordained Officers are Prophets we prove thus All that have the gift of Prophecie are Prophets But some men who are not ordained Officers have the gift of Prophecie Ergo Some men who are not ordained Officers are Prophets The Major That all who have the gift of Prophecie are Prophets is evident 1. From their denomination the name Prophet is properly applicable unto all that have a gift of Prophecie yea the reason of that name must be either onely because they do actually prophesie and that cannot be because they must be Prophets before they can warrantably do that or because they have a gift to prophesie How can they be denyed the name of Prophets who enjoy that gift which giveth the denomination 2. From the Apostles calling prophesie a gift 1 Cor. 13. 2. Though I have the gift of prophesie and Rom. 12. 6. Having then gifts differing whether prophesie let us prophesie Those that have the gift of prophesie are commanded here to prophesie 3. From their being no Church-Officers who are by the Apostles called prophets and are commanded to prophesie that some of these prophets were no Church-Officers we shall endeavour to prove by and by And if they were not prophets by Office then they must be prophets who have the gift of prophesie Either an Office or a Gift must give the denomination If the gift be enough to give the denomination then all that have the gift of prophesie are prophets To clear the Minor viz. That some men who are not ordained Officers have the gift of prophesie There are three things necessary to be proved 1. That prophesie
is a Gift not an Office 2. That some men have the gift of prophesie or that prophesying is a gift still continuing 3. That some men who are not ordained Officers have that gift of prophesie This last position is proved thus 1. Because there is no Scripture-warrant for the ordaining prophets and without a Scripture-warrant they may not be ordained Let any be produced 2. Because they cannot warrantably be ordained Prophets until they be discerned to have the gift of prophesie they must have the gift first and therefore some men not ordained have the gift of prophesie if it be a continuing gift 3. Because there are some who have the gift of prophesie who are no officers as will appear in what followeth and Ordination according to our Brethrens Judgment is the essential constitutive thing of an Officer He that is ordained say they is an Officer Many of these Prophets are no Officers and therefore not ordained For we suppose they will not say that a man may be lawfully ordained and yet be no Church-Officer Our greatest difficulty therefore is to prove the former Propositions Prop. 1. That the prophesying spoken of 1 Cor. 14. is a Gift not an Office Argum. 1. Because all who have the gift of prophesie are Prophets Our two first Arguments before given prove this we shall not here repeat them The Consequence is clear because all who have the gift of Prophesie are not Officers they must first have the gift before they can be made Prophets by Office If they be Prophets so soon as they have the gift then they are Prophets who are no Officers for if there had been such an Office the gift must have been before the Office Argum. 2. That which ought in duty and might warrantably in faith be coveted by every man who was a Member of the Church at Corinth that was a gift onely not an Office But the prophesying spoken of 1 Cor. 14. was such as ought in duty and might warrantably in faith be coveted by every man who was a Member of the Church at Corinth Ergo The prophesying spoken of 1 Cor. 14. was a gift onely not an Office The Major we prove thus 1. That which the Lord had no where promised to accomplish that could not in duty nor warrantably in faith be coveted for it is a humane faith that hath not a Divine promise to bottom upon But the Lord had no where promised to make every man who was a Member of the Church at Corinth or any other Church a Church-Officer Let them shew a promise of it that will assert it Ergo Every man who was a Member of the Church at Corinth could not in duty nor warrantably in faith covet to be a Church-Officer Ergo That which ought in duty and might warrantably in faith be coveted by every man who was a Member of the Church at Corinth that was a Gift onely not an Office 2. That which was impossible to be attained that could not in duty nor warrantably in faith be coveted It 's in vain to covet that which can never be had or which is unattainable But for every man who was a Member of the Church at Corinth to covet to become an Officer had been to covet that which was impossible to be attained 1 Cor. 12. v. 17. If the whole body were an eye where were the hearing v. 19 29 30. Ergo It could not in duty nor warrantably in faith be coveted 3. To say that the Prophets were extraordinary Officers as they must be if they were Officers at all else being ordinary Officers they must be still continuing and so there is still another Order of preaching Officers in the Church besides and distinct from Pastors and Teachers which they will not assert is more absurd If they were extraordinary Officers that maketh the case worse Can it be imagined that every man who was a member of the Church at Corinth ought in duty and might warrantably in faith covet to be an extraordinary Officer when it doth not appear that he might covet the ordinary Office of a Pastor or Teacher Doth it not sound harsh to say that every man in a Church ought to covet to be an Officer in the Church Can our Brethren exhort all the men that walk with them in Ordinances to covet that they may be Pastors or Teachers or do they unfeignedly desire it If they did surely they would not lay so much discouragement before gifted men to hinder their preaching And can they imagine that the Apostle should exhort the generality of men in the Church of Corinth to covet to be extraordinary Officers when themselves cannot exhort the generality of Christians to covet to be ordinary Officers Thus we have proved the Major of our second Argument for the evincing that the prophesying spoken of 1 Cor. 14 is a Gift onely not an Office The Minor viz. That the prophesying spoken of 1 Cor. 14. was such as ought in duty and might warrantably in faith be coveted by every man who was a member of the Church at Corinth we prove from vers 1 5 39. There is a command for it vers 1. Follow after charity and desire spiritual gifts but rather that ye may prophesie Vers 5. I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied Here he wisheth that not some onely but all prophesied the gift of prophecie then may lawfully be wished to all men that are members of a Church and he addeth a reason of his wish for greater is he that prophesieth then he that speaketh with tongues except he interpret that the Church may receive edifying because prophecie tendeth more to the edification of the Church then speaking with tongues without interpretation v. 39. Wherefore brethren covet to prophesie Here is an exhortation left in general among the Corinthians whereby he layeth it upon them as a duty and therefore it was that which any man amongst them might warrantably in faith covet to attain unto All had not attained to it but every man might covet to prophesie Ergo It was no Office Obj. Prophets are enumerated amongst Officers of the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28 29. God hath set in his Church first Apostles secondly Prophets thirdly Teachers Ephes 4 11 12. Yea they are set next Apostles Mr. collings above Evangelists and Pastors and Teachers Apostles and Teachers were Officers set by God in his Church so also were Jus Divin the Prophets Answ 1. The placing of Prophets before Evangelists Pastors and Teachers cannot prove them to be in dignity above Pastors or Teachers Our Brethren themselves use these words Priority of Order is no infallible Argument Jus Divinum Regim pag. 133. of priority of worth and dignity we finde say they Priscilla a woman named before Aquila a man and her husband Act. 18. 18. Rom. 16. 3. 1 Tim. 4. 19. is therefore the woman preferred before the man the wife before the husband And in another place Ib. p.
a relation yet it doth not follow that it is so by whomsoever it be performed Obj. 2. Heb. 7. Without controversie the lesser is blessed of the greater Answ The Apostle asserteth Christ to be an High-priest after the Order of Melchisedec Heb. 6. ver 20. and giveth a reason of it Heb. 7. 1. and in the excellency and greatness of Melchisedec he setteth forth the excellency of Christ who is after has order ver 2 3 c. he proveth the greatness of Melchisedec and so of Christ because he blessed Abraham ver 6. and so must be greater then Abraham who received the blessing ver 7. without all contradiction the less is blessed of the greater But what is all this to prove that preaching is an act of authority Doe preachers succeed Melchisedec or Christ Can they bless with a High-priests blessing Are they greater then Abraham as he that gave this blessing was There is a blessing of reverence and worship so men bless God Psal 68. 19. Blessed be the Lord who dayly Dickson londeth us with his benefits There is a blessing of Charity so men bless one another by mutual prayer Rom. 12. 14. Bless them which persecute you bless and curse not It is required as a duty not of preachers only but of all Christians thus to bless yet neither of these kindes of blessing do imply superiority or authority or that he is greater who blesseth then he that is blessed He that blesseth by an Original inherent power as Christ doth he is greater then he that is blessed and of such blessing the Text speaketh but he that blesseth Ministerially and instrumentally is not alwayes greater then he that is blessed nor is the blessing alwayes an act of authority Object 3. The Apostle suffers not women to preach because they may not usurp authority over the man 1 Tim. 2. but is commanded to be in subjection upon which place Oecum The very act of teaching is to usurp authority over the man Answ There is a plain distinction and difference made in the very text alledged between teaching and usurping authority for the words are these But I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man but to be in silence 1 Tim. 2. 12. That particle nor doth plainly intimate that two things are forbidden 1. Teaching 2. Usurping authority And a womans usurping authority over her husband seemeth to be the thing directly forbidden by the Apostle rather then the usurping of authority over the Church and hence the words are nor usurp authority over the man and the reasons inforcing it from the mans being first created ver 13. and from the womans being first deceived ver 14. speak it to be an usurping authority over her husband rather then over the Church that is forbidden However there is no such thing found in the Text as that the act of teaching is to usurp authority over the man Object 4. The publick work of the Ministry of the word is an authoritative administration like unto that of Cryers Heralds and Embassadors to be performed in the name of the Lord Jesus and therefore may not be performed by any but such as are authorized and immediately or mediately deputed by him 2 Cor. 5. 19 20. appears because in preaching the Key of the Kingdom of Heaven is used Answ 1. These titles we spake to in another place and thither we refer the Reader 2. A warrant from the written word to preach is authority enough and this we have shewn gifted men have If men who are not authorized by Christ to preach will do it and if this be an usurping of authority yet what is all this to prove either 1. That it is to usurp authority over the Church Or 2. That to preach without Ordination to the work is to usurp such authority over the Church These are the things which not being proved their Argument falleth 3. That there is a Key of Knowledge we grant Luk. 11. v. 52. which Christians who are not in Office may use 1 Cor. 12. ver 7 8. 1 Cor. 14. 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. And in Discipline the power of 1. Excommunication is the binding Key that which shutteth the Kingdom of Heaven the Church against offendors 2. Re-admission is the loosing Key or that which openeth the Kingdom of Heaven the Church to such as repent Matth. 18 vers 17 18. If he neglecteth to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican Verily I say unto you Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Here the binding Key and the loosing Key are used about Church-censures and if both these were given to the Officers onely which we deny yet gifted men might preach neither can they gain any thing from the Keyes to prove that preaching is an Act of Authority much less to prove their Proposition Argum. 6. That which the Scripture reproves may no man practise But the Scripture reproves uncalled men for preaching Therefore The Minor say they appears in that the false prophets are reproved Jerem. Jus Divin Minist p. 89. 23. 21 32. not onely for their false doctrine but also for running when they were not sent I am against them saith the Lord a fearful commination if God be against them who shall be with them The false prophets themselves accuse Jeremiah Jerem. 29. 27. for making himself a prophet which though it was a most unjust and false impuration yet it holds forth this truth That no man ought to make himself a prophet the false prophets themselves being witnesses The Apostles in the Synod of Jerusalem speak of certain men that went out from them They went out they were not sent out but they went out of their own accord and this is spoken of them by way of reproof And then it follows They troubled you with words subverting your soules He that preacheth unsent is not a builder but a subverter of souls Answ 1. We deny that the Scripture reproves the preaching of gifted men who are unordianed to Office This Argument if it were wholly granted yet it proves not at all what it is produced for Their proposition is That none may do the work of the Ministry without Ordination or being solemnly set apart thereunto Their Argument to prove this is The Scripture reproveth uncalled men for preaching therefore uncalled men may not preach We may grant that uncalled men may not preach and yet may assert that unordained men if gifted may preach For gifted men are called to preach though they be not ordained Let them prove that Ordination is the onely Call to preach if it were granted that Ordination is the Call to Office as elsewhere they endeavour to prove yet it would not follow that there is no Call to preach without that unless it can be proved that there is no preaching but by Office 2. The places alledged
preaching is the chief act of the Ministerial function because it is the first act Order of words is an unsafe ground to build an argument upon and here more then in other scriptures because preaching was to be in order of time first or before baptizing of the Gentiles they were by preaching to be fitted for baptism and therefore preaching might be first mentioned though baptizing were the chief act Dr. Homes In his Church Cases cleared pag. 49. saith Preaching is but a preparation to baptism and therefore cannot be a greater thing then baptism And if order of words were a forcible argument we might prove baptizing to be the chief act for that is put before preaching Mark 1. verse 4. John did baptize in the wildernesse and preach Here is first baptizing mentioned and then preaching Obj. 2. 1. Cor. 1. 17. Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel Intimating that he lookt upon that as the chief act of his Ministery Answ 1. Some as we shewed before judge that this doth not intimate preaching to be the greater work 2. If preaching in some respects be greater then baptizing yet baptizing may be more limited to office then preaching seeing they must be first discipled before they may be baptized Matth. 28. 19. not before they may be preached to and baptism being more limited to Church membership hence it s more like to be the act of a Church Officer Obj. 3. If preaching the Gospel be not the chief act of a Minister he hath no act proper to him but administring â—he â—acraments for the Elders say we the members 〈◊〉 brethren have as much to do in the Government of the Church as he c. Answ 1. What aâ—â—â—â—ity will follow if we say that he hath 〈◊〉 proper to him but administring the Sacraments Mr. Callings giveth us nothing to evidence that such an assertion would be either against Scripture or Reason 2. We have proved that gifted persons may preach and if we finde a Scripture allowance for their preaching and cannot finde that they have a Scripture allowance to administer Sacraments there needeth no more to evidence that the administring of Sacraments is more the peculiar act of the Minister then preaching but onely that It is enough to say one is written the other is not 3. Himself affâ—cteth that the main work Paul had to do was to Preach the Gospel 1 Cor. 1. 17. and yet he also useth these words in the very same page It is plain that it was not the distinctive act of his Apostleship for so his universal governing and ordering the Churches was his chief and distinctive work Whence we gather that a lesser work may according to his principles be the chief distinctive act of a mans Office and yet a greater work be the main work he hath to do And so administring of Sacraments though a lesser work yet may be the distinctive act of Pastors and Teachers Office and yet Preaching be their main work for there is no necessitie that the distinctive act should be the main work 4. Whatever others judge according to our present light Preaching is the chief and main work of an Officer We do ingenously confess that place 1 Cor. 1. 17. doth intimate to us that it is a greater work especially being performed office-wise then baptizing Yet we do not find any Scripture Rule to evidence that Preaching in it self is either an act of Office or peculiar to the distinctive act of Office to make it so there is required a being over them in the Lord who are Preached to 1 Thes 5. 12. And the Preaching as under such a special Relation to them that are Preached to as having them committed to his charge for that end as his flock this we conceive doth make Preaching an Act of office and it is peculiar to office thus to Preach and thus some Preaching is a distinctive act of Office This we desire may be well observed for many are exceedingly troubled and perplexed under such thoughts as these if gifted men may Preach and the Church may put forth acts of government towards particular members then there remain no Acts peculiar to Officers but onely administring the Sacraments and these are lesser acts then Preaching and governing and so Officers are of very little use in the Church and next unto Cyphers because they can do very little more then other members may do c. Such workings we believe are in the breasts of many Saints Whereas if there were no acts performed by Officers which in themselves were incommunicable or peculiar to them if all acts which Officers put forth might be performed by members who are no Officers yet there would remain a very vast difference between officers and other members enough to speak Officers to be very necessary and of great use in the Church For 1. Although Officers and other members put forth the same acts towards the same persons yet not under the same Relation to the persons which such acts are put forth towards they act under different Relations and this speaketh a vast difference between their actings As for example A man provideth for his children under the relation of a father the obligation he standeth under by that relation bindeth to provide for them but he provideth for the poor under another notion here the acts are the same for the matter of them yet vastly different in the manner The relation is not the same between the workers and the porlons who are the objects of the works So a Christian friend or neighbonr may and ought to give gracious and wholsome instructions upon occasion to the children of his acquaintance and the parent of the same children ought to give them such instructions also but there is a vast difference between these acts the one is under a standing obligation by the parental relation to perform such acts the other not So in some corporations the power of determination of matters which concern the whole resideth in the Bayliffes and Free-men of the Corporation the Bayliffes act under a different relation to the Corporation from that which the Free-men act under yet they share in the power as well as the Bayliffes and the major part may carry matters without and against the Bayliffes when the Bayliffes would run crosse to their Charter So in Church affairs the Officers Preach to the flock committed to their charge to be fed by them with the word and Doctrine as under the special relation of Pastors to the flock and gifted men Preach also to the same flock but not as under such a Relation to it So Church-officers put forth acts of Government the flock is committed to them for oversight Acts 20. 28. the flock over the which the Holy-Ghost hath made you overseers c. They are over it in the Lord. 1 Thes 5. 12. and are to be obeyed as over it Heb. 13. ver 17. Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves
to the former objection will serve here also Possibly a Presbytery may be heretical and so the Presbytery will not consent to the Election of an Orthodox and sound Minister they will not deny that an Orthodox Eldership may act in an Election because an heretical one may not and why should they deny a Church sound in the faith a power of Election because an heretical one hath it not 2. Let them prove that the Gospel owneth any Congregation as a true Church of Christ capable of having Officers set over it by a Presbytery if the Major part be heretical Are not men to be cast out of the Church for heresie did our brethren ever read of a true Church of Christ the Major part of which consisted of Heretiques if not why do they put the case 3. By the same Argument we may prove that the power of Ordination doth not belong wholly and solely to a Presbytery for the Major part of that possibly may be heretical Because an heretical Presbytery may not ordain they will not infer that therefore the whole and sole power of Ordination doth not belong to an Orthodox Presbytery and because an heretical Congregation may not Elect Pastors why would they infer that therefore the whole and sole power of Election doth not belong to the Major part of a Congregation which is sound in the faith Obj. 4. Sometimes there have been great dissentions and tumults in popular Elections even to the effusion of blood as we read in Ecclesiastical story sometimes Congregations are destitute of Ministers for many years by reason of the divisions and disagreements thereof Ans 1. In cases of want of Pastors who can shew any Scripture rule to warrant their obtruding Pastors upon a Church without Election if dissentions in Churches be sinful a Presbyteries obtrusion of Pastors upon Churches would be sinful also 2. We say with Dr. Ames We never read that dissentions and tumults did arise among those that were Orthodox in the chusing of Pastors qualified according to Christs appointment 3. If dissentions and tumults even to the effusion of blood have attended some popular Elections yet they were but accidental to them the giving the whole and sole power of Election to a Church doth not necessarily cause but only occasion such evils and so this is no argument against popular Elections Rom. 7. 8. Sin took occasion by the Commandment yet this doth not speak against urging the Commandment Christ is a stone of stumbling to some and the Gospel an occasion of tumults when it was preached by the Apostles Asts 14. 19. the people stoned Paul for preaching the Gospel But this will not prove that the Apostles had not power to preach Christ and the Gospel Saith Dr. Ames Instituta Dei non sunt mutanda propter incommoda Ames Beller Enerv. F. 2. l. 3. c. 2. quibus sunt obnoxia sed illa incommoda sunt cavenda curanda propter instituta quae observare tenemur So much for the first Proposition CHAP. XII Concerning Election as Essentiall to a call to Office THeir second Proposition is Proposit 2. That the whole essence of the Ministerial call doth not consist in Election without Ordination Before we proceed to any Arguments we shall premise three things Premise 1. That if we should grant that the essence of a call to Office doth consist in Ordination and not in Election Yet 1. This would not overthrow the Congregational way it would not deny Congregational Churches to be true Churches for they must be true Churches before Officers can regularly be set over them whether by Election or Ordination Nor would it deny Officers in those Churches to be true Officers of Christ or to be rightly constituted for Ordination as well as Election is used in the Congregational way and so the Essence of the call is not wanting there whether it consists in the one or the other Indeed if it could be proved to consist in Ordination then one principle of most Congregational men would fall but the way would stand still It is not such an inseparable principle as the Congregational way standeth or falleth with it 2. This would not deny the lawfulness of gifted mens preaching without Ordination for though the Essence of the call to Office did consist in Ordination yet something else might give the Essence to a call to preach The written word may warrant gifted men in their preaching though unordained as well as it doth in their hearing praying private exhorting c. If Ordination doth constitute an Officer that doth not speak against the preaching of gifted men who do not assume the Office of the Ministery Unlesse they can prove all preaching to be an incommunicable work or act of Office this if granted will not forbid their preaching They are without the Essence of a call to Office yet have what is essential to a call to preach Premise 2. By Ministerial call in their Proposition we understand a call to Office and we suppose so they take it because they restrain the very work of preaching to Officers Premise 3. That though we deny Ordination to be of the Essence of the call to Office yet we assert it to be a necessary adjunct of such a call Officers ought not to be wholly or altogether without Ordination yet the Essence of a call to Office is compleat without Ordination These things being premised we shall give some grounds to evidence that the whole Essence of a call to Office doth consist in Election i. e. with acceptation and then answer the Arguments used against it Our Proposition is this Propos That the whole Essence of a call to Office doth consist in Election without Ordination Arg. 1. If Election makes a man an Elder that was not one before then it gives the whole Essence of the call to Office without Ordination But Election makes a man an Elder that was not one before Ergo Election gives the whole Essence of the call to Office without Ordination The Major they cannot deny it being clear in it self and also because they use such a Medium to prove that Ordination gives the Essence of the Ministerial Office because they say it makes a man a Minister that was not one before Jus Divinum Minist p. 164. The Minor That Election makes a man an Elder that was not one before we prove from Act. 14. 23. And when they had chosen or created them Elders by suffrages in every Church c. Whence we observe 1. That Election or chusing here mentioned made them Elders who were none before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to chuse by lifting up of hands and it is not said when they had chosen men afterward to be made Elders but when they had chosen them Elders which plainlysheweth that it was this chusing that made them Elders And our Brethren say that the word sigfieth to chuse or to appoint or to ordain and they tell us they could cite multitudes Jus
Divin Min. pag. 129 130. of Authors where the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for discerning appointing constituting and that without lifting up of hands Whether it was with or without lifting up of hands is not material in this Argument that the appointing constituting act is expressed by that word themselves clearly grant Junius Trem renders it thus Et constituerunt eis in omni caetu Seniores Some thus Quumque ipsis per suffragia creassent per singulas Ecclesias Presbyteros When they had created them by suffrages Elders in every Church From all which we gather that they which did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they did create make constitute or appoint those Elders 2. That not Paul and Barnabas onely but the people did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this we proved before The word cannot be denyed to signifie Electing or chusing so it is taken Act. 10. 41. unto witnesses chosen before of God c. 2 Cor 8. 19. chosen of the Churches c. it denoteth such a chusing as is a constituting creating act and let our brethren shew any Scripture that will prove that Paul and Barnabas or any of the Apostles did or might warrantably assume the power of Election or chusing ordinary Officers for any Gospel Churches without this can be evinced what shadow of reason is there to limit Election or chusing to Paul and Barnabas in this place if our former reasons be considered Especially seeing the words of the Text do not necessarily restrain it to them but rather give it to the several Churches for if the question be asked who were the persons that did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Text doth plainly answer they in every Church It runneth thus without any wresting of the sence In every Church they chose or created Elders by suffrages And the phrase is frequent in our ordinary speech we usually say They chuse them Majors Bayliffs Burgesses by voyces in every Corporation or they chuse them Parliament men by suffrages in every County or Shire and yet we understand by such expressions that the people or Free-men themselves in the Corporations and the people themselves in the Counties or Shires are the chusers and not others for them The people in the Corporations Counties or Shires are the they that answer to the question So every Church doth aptly answer to the question in this place So that the Text seemeth to us to determine every Church to be the they that did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not Paul and Barnabas onely There is no need that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be trassanted according to the Church to further this interpretation the present translation in every Church will serve as well and better to this sence Neither wil its being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speak against this for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth himself as John 4. 2. Jesus himself baptized not c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 2. 14. Luke 24. 39. and therefore in the plural number it is aptly rendred themselves and therefore it is not improper to read it thus And they chose or created to themselves Elders by suffrages in every Church And so Election by a Church i. e. being compleated by the parties acceptation who is chosen is that which maketh a man an Elder who was none before and therefore gives the whole Essence of the call to Office without Ordination Arg. 2. If Ordination doth not give the essentials of the Ministerial Office then Election doth for our brethren say it is agreed on all sides that the outward call of a Minister doth consist onely in his Election or Ordination See Jus Divin Minist pag. 164. But Ordination doth not give the essentials of the Ministerial Office Ergo Election doth That Ordination doth not give the essentials of the Ministerial Office we shall prove by three Arguments Arg. 1. That which doth not set a man over a Church of Christ or commit it to his charge that doth not give the essentials of the Ministerial office or of the outward call to Office But ordination doth not set a man over a church of Christ nor commit it to his charge Ergo Ordination doth not give the essentials of the ministerial Office or of the outward call to office The Major is evident 1. Because committing of a Church to ones charge or setting him over it is the formal cause of office and so the relation of office cannot have a beeing without it for forma dat esse He that is not set over some Church of Christ is no officer of Christ this is the specificating distinguishing character of Offiers which differenceth them from such as are no Officers 1 Thess 5. v. 12. Wee beseech you brethren to know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord c. 1 Tim. 3. v. 5. If a man know not how to rule his own house how shall he take care of the Church of God In these places being over and taking care of the Church of God expresse the nature of Office 2. Because If Ordination doth not set a man over a Church or commit it to his charge then it doth not lay him under obligation to the work of Office neither are any people under obligations to duty towards him by ordination as they are towards an Officer for a being over them is that which putteth under such mutual obligations Acts 20 28. They are commanded to take heed to the flock or Church over which they are made overseers Heb. 13. v 7. Remember them that have the rule over you c. v. 17. obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves c. No flock or Church may groundedly challenge such ordinary and constant feedings from any other but those that are over it and onely those that are over the flock can groundedly challenge this obedience and submission from it for the mutual duties are required expressesly under that notion All in it that are not over it are required to obey those that are over it and therefore if Election setteth over and giveth the charge of a Church then election layeth the person elected under obligations to act as an officer and layeth the Church electing under obligations to the performance of duties towards him as towards an officer All which may fully demonstrate that if ordination doth not set over a Church then it doth not give the essentials of the ministerial office or of the outward call to office The Lord would not command duty towards those that are over a Church as towards officers if they might be over it and yet be no officers or not have the essentials of an outward call to office upon them which they might if election setteth over because that may yea accoring to gospel order ought to precede or go before ordination Act 6. vers 5 first The Church did chuse and then vers 6. They were ordained Jus Divinum Our
brethren say That it is agreaable to the word of God and very convenient that they that are to be ordained be designed to some particular Church or Ministerial employment And a little after they adde we ordain none without a title So that according to their principles and practices election may and ought to be Antecedaneous to ordination And therefore if election doth set a man over and give him the charge of a Church then it will follow either that a man may be actually an Officer before and without ordination and then ordination doth not make a man an officer or the essence of the call to office doth not consist in ordination but in election Or else a man may actually be set over and have the charge of a particular flock or Church committed unto him and yet he actually be no officer which is contrary to 1 Thes 5. 12. Hebr. 13. 7. 17. For election and so the setting over the Church may be before ordination The Minor That ordination doth not set a man over a Church of Christ nor commit it to his charge we prove thus 1. Because without Election a man cannot be over any flock though he hath submitted formerly to Ordination if no Church of Christ hath chosen him then he cannot truly say of any Church that he is over it We ask which is he over and why over one more then another when he want Election from all A man that formerly took up Ordination if by a Patrons unjust usurpation of a power or by the peoples withdrawing subjection he be dispossessed of the flock he was supposed to be over or by his own voluntary act he leaveth that people before any other hath called him possibly he may be a moneth or a year before a new Election we ask what Church is he over by his Ordination in this Interval betwixt his departure from one flock and his coming to the other If he be over or hath the charge of any Church then he ought to feed and take the oversight of it and that ought to obey him Heb. 13. ver 7. 17. of what Church will he require this obedience and why of this more then of another he may challenge a power for the exercise of his Office in that Church he is over let him but try to put forth a such power in any Church in such a case he will quickly find by experience that he is over none If he be over no Church and yet was formerly ordained then it is plain that Ordination doth not set a man over a Church or else that Ordination in such a case is lost for so long as that which setteth a man over or giveth him the charge of a Church hath its continuation so long he must needs remain Actually over it 2. Because if Ordination doth set a man over a Church then there is a necessity of a frequent repetition and iteration of Ordination For a man by his Ordination can be set over onely one particular Church at once and so if he removeth to ten several places in his life he must so often have a new Ordination Our brethren strongly assert the lawfulness of an Officers removing in three Jus Div-Min pag. 154. cases when he cannot have his health where he is if he be denyed competent maintenance and if the glory of God may be in an eminent manner advanced Some of these cases may fall out to one Officer 4. 6. 8. or 10. times in his life and if he removeth so often either he was set over and had the charge of all these Churches which he removeth to committed to him by his Ordination or not If not then Ordination is not that which setteth a man over or giveth him the charge of them for he is ordained and yet is not over some of them There may be Ordination and yet that be wanting which setteth over them If Ordination did it then so soon as ever he was Ordained he must needs be over them and have the charge of them If the cause actually existeth the effect must needs exist also and then he ceaseth not be over that Church which he is removed from Surely he is as much over that as he is over the rest which he shall afterward remove to If they will say he is over and hath the charge of so many Churches let them prove it It doth not sound like Gospel order that one officer should be set over many Churches one Pastor have the charge of many flocks at one and the same time and this by Ordination but once used their own Arguments in their Jus Divin Minist against Episcopacy will forbid this Object If they should say that Ordination setteth him over the universal Church or maketh him a habitual officer to any or all particular Churches and the peoples Election maketh him actually an officer to or setteth him actually over them as their Pastor their Minister Answ This as we conceive cannot be 1. Because we cannot find one Text of Scripture to prove that any ordinary officer is set over or hath the charge of a Universal Church or that he is over any but a particular Church 2. Because it is not proved that the Gospel knoweth any such habitual officers and how in propriety of speech we can mention an habitual setting over we see not Either a man must be actually over a Church or else not be over it at all Either he must actually have the charge of it else not have the charge of it at all And how a man can be an officer to such a Universal Church as they assert and yet be no Officer to any particular Church would be considered a man after his Ordination may lose his relation to or may cease to be over any particular Church either by the peoples rejection or otherwise and in such a case it will be hard to him to be an Officer He is actually over no particular Church and so must be an habitual Officer onely no actual officer at all and if Ordination doth not make a man an actual officer surely it maketh not an officer at all for to be no actual Officer and to be no officer seemeth to us to be the same 3. Because all that he is over he must feed and give an account for Act. 20 28 Heb. 13. 17 He cannot ordinarily feed nor watch for the souls of the Universal Church without neglecting his particular Church and therefore that cannot be deemed the flock or Church he is set over therefore the setting him over so many Churches must not be by Ordination or else must be by a frequent repetition and iteration of it which we grant though we deny the Essence of the Call to consist in it but this will not agree with our brethrens principles For if such a repetition and iteration of Ordination be admitted of then either a man is an Officer only to a particular Church and as often as he removeth so often
he ceaseth to be an officer and is made an officer again as often as he receiveth a new Ordination or else Ordination is not an office-making act for there can be no making of him an officer by iterating ordination who is made an officer already and hath not lost that relation and if the Essence of the Ministerial call doth not consist in Ordination we have what we contend for We may conclude with this Every man that is actually set over or hath the charge of a particular flock or Church committed to him he hath the Essentials of the Ministerial office But every man who is Elected by a Church of Christ and hath accepted of the choice though as yet unordained is actually set over or hath the charge of a particular flock or Church committed to him for Election with acceptation setteth over Ergo every man who is electd by a Church of Christ and hath accepted of the choice though as yet unordained hath the Essentials of the Ministerial office And this is our first Argument to prove that Ordination doth not give the Essentials of the call to office Argum. 2. That which by the will of Christ is to be consequential unto a mans having the whole Essence of the call to office that cannot be intended by Christ for the giving the essence of that call or that cannot give the Essentials of the call to office But Ordination by the will of Christ is to be consequential unto a mans having the whole Essence of the call to office Ergo Ordination cannot be intended by Christ for the giving the Essence of that call or cannot give the Essentials of the call to office The major is evident for doubtless Ordination is to be used according to the will of Christ it is Christ that instituted it and so his will is the determining Rule about the way and order that it is to be used in and none can cross his will therein without sin and therefore if by his will Ordination be to come after a mans having the whole Essence of the call then it cannot give the Essence to that call for that which is consequential or after in its own production that cannot give a being to that which is before it Unlesse ordination it self hath a being it cannot give a being to such a call If the call to office hath it's essence before ordination hath any being upon a particular person then there is something else that giveth the essence unto the call and so ordination cannot give it The Minor we prove from Act. 13. v. 2. 3. The Holy-Ghost said separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them and when they had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on them they sent them away Whence we observe 1. That Ordination was here used in all the Acts of it and requisites to it in those dayes here was 1. Fasting 2. Prayer 3. Imposition of hands No other acts are found to be belonging unto Ordination when any mention is made of it Act. 6. ver 6. When they had prayed they laid their hands on them Act. 14. 23. And had prayed with fasting c. So that no Acts were omitted in this that usally appertained unto Ordination 2. That the ordaining of these persons was consequential unto their having the whole Essence of the call to office this appeareth 1. Because Paul and Barnabas were the persons here ordained who were immediately called to office by God Gal 1. 1. Paul an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Jesus Christ and God the Father c. He had been an Apostle by men if this his Ordination had given the Essence to his call to office As Master Hooker observeth it implieth a contradiction to be mediately and immediately called 2. The Text expressely declareth that they were before called to that they were now ordained unto Act. 13. vers 2. whereunto I have called them Their call was Antecedaneous to this their Ordination and so received not its Essence from it 3. That by the will of Christ Ordination is still to be consequential unto a mans having the whole essence of the call to office this followeth upon the two forementioned particulars For here is a plain example of Ordination as coming after the whole Essence of the call to office Now if this example be a binding Rule to us still then it is undenyable that by the will of Christ Ordination is still to be consequential unto a mans having the whole Essence of the call to office And that this example is a binding Rule to us still we prove thus 1. Because the ordainers act herein as ordinary it is the Rule our brethren give us Jus Divin Mini. pag. 161. If we should not follow the examples of the Apostles in those things in which they acted as ordinary elders we should be left at uncertainties and every man might do what seemed good in his own eyes which would tend to confusion and the dissolution of the Church these are their own words Now in this example Acts 13. 2 3. If they were ordinary Elders that were the persons ordaining then they must needs act as ordinary elders or else not as Elders at all for if they were not extraordinary elders their actings could not flow from a relation which they had not If they were extraordinary Teachers as Barnahas and Saul the persons ordained were who are also reckoned up and called Prophets or Teachers v. 1. The Act was ordinary viz. Ordaining 2. The main work was ordinary to which they were ordained viz. Preaching of the Gospel 3. There is nothing in the Text that doth evidence the order to be extraordinary any more then the act it self It s no more said that the coming of Ordination after the call to office-work is extraordinary then that the Ordination it self is extraordinary 4. This order of Ordination after the call to office doth not that yet we can find crosse any other Text of Scripture and therefore it cannot in faith be concluded that this order is extraordinary Enough is said to prove that their acting was Ordinary in this Ordination and therefore if any will assert that this particular viz. the order of the act was extraordinary let them prove it 2. Because in this example Ordination had the same uses and ends as it had when ordinary Officers were Ordained Jus Divinum Minist pag. 160. Our Brethren say That Apostolical examples in things necessary for the good of the Church and which have a perpetual reason and equity in them have the force of a Rule And surely so far as Gospel examples are ordinary so far they have a perpetual reason and equity in them and if the uses and ends of this Ordination were ordinary then this example thereof hath the force of a Rule And what extraordinary ends imaginable could it serve to Paul and Barnabas being the persons Ordained Nay separation for the work whereunto they were called
Essence to the call to office then not Ordination it self but an adjunct of it should give the outward call yea then the want of laying on of hands would speak the Ordination a Nullity Argnm. 2. That Action which cannot be performed in faith before an outward call to office hath passed upon a man that cannot give that man his outward call to officer For if the call to office be passed upon him before then that Action which followeth after cannot be said to give it and no action is to be performed until it can or may be performed in faith for whatsoever is not of faith is sin Rom. 14. 23. But Ordination is such an action as cannot be performed in faith before an outward call to office hath passed upon a man for how can one pray in faith or what warrant hath he from the Word which is the Rule of faith to justifie his praying to God for his approbation of and blessing upon a person in a work of Office before he can conclude that he is so much as outwardly called into that Office to do that work if one can groundedly conclude that he is called outwardly thereunto then he was called before the praying and so before Ordination which consisteth in prayer Ergo Ordination cannot give that man his outward call to office 3. In the description of Ordination we have also the Object and that is an Officer or one that is already called outwardly unto Office 1. Not such as are only gifted men we see no warrant for the ordaining all Preachers to Office-work The work of Preaching may be performed by gifted men but they are not so to be ordained until they undertake an Office 2. Not persons to be made Officers but such as are already Officers they are the objects of Ordination We find no rule for ordaining men thereby to make them Officers in respect of their outward call but they that are actually Officers are called to Office before they are to be ordained Act. 13. v. 2 3. They were first called and then ordained Ergo they did not receive their call from or by Ordination 4. In the description we have the end for which Ordination is performed and that is the Officers doing the work whereunto he is called so Act. 13. 2 3. their solemn admission or induction into the work of preaching as Officers to the Gentiles was by Ordination the obtaining Gods approbation and benediction are the chief ends of prayer And thus we have finished our description of Ordination and our Arguments to prove that Ordinatidoth not give the Essentials to the Ministerial office and therefore that Election with acceptation doth CHAP. XIII Wherein many Arguments are answered which are brought against Election as giving the Essence to the call to Office OUr brethren in their Jus Divin Minist produce seven Arguments whereby they endeavour to prove That the whole Essence of the Ministerial call doth not consist in Election without Ordination We crave leave to reply briefly to their Arguments Arg. 1. Because our brethren do not bring any one Text of Scripture to prove this their assertion as we can find nor do we think Jus Divin Min. p. 134. that any can be brought Answ 1. Many weighty Arguments grounded upon Scripture they may find in Mr. Hookers Survey Part 2. c. 2. p. 66 c. 2. We refer them to our foregoing arguments where we have brought one express Scriptute to prove it viz. Act. 14. 23. and other reasons which by Consequence from Scripture do evince it Arg. 2. Because that those very Texts fore-mentioned which are the chief if not the onely Texts that are brought for popular Jus Divin Min. p. 134. Election do seem to us to hold forth the quite contrary to this assertion When Mathias was made an Apostle it was not the Election of the people that did constitute him an Apostle All that the 120 did if they did that was to set two before the Lord but it was God that did constitute and appoint Mathias to be the Astle In the choice of Deacons the people nominated seven persons to be Deacons but it was the Apostles Ordination not the peoples Election that did constitute and make them Deacons so saith the Text expressely Act. 6. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Look ye out among you seven men whom we may appoint or constitute over this business The essence and substance of the Deacons call is placed not in the peoples nomination but in the Apostles Ordination As for Acts 14. 23. they that did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were the Apostles and not the Churches it rather proves that the Apostles Ordination was that which did constitute Elders in every Church Answ 1. We have produced Arguments from other Scriptures besides these to prove that the whole essence of the Ministerial call is in the peoples Election to which we refer the Reader 2. As for the instance of Mathias Acts 1. 1. It holdeth forth as much against Ordination giving the essence to the call to office as against Election for seeing as they say it was God that did constitute and appoint Mathias to be the Apostle hence it was not Ordination by a Presbytery that did it And here was an half Election Act. 1. v. 23. They appointed two but not a syllable about Ordination or imposition of hands and therefore this is as contrary to their assertion that the call consisteth in Ordination as to ours that it consisteth in Election if contrary to either 2. If Mathias his not being constituted an Apostle by the peoples Election be contrary to our assertion that Election gives the whole essence of the Ministerial call then Pauls not being constituted an Apostle by Ordination Act. 13. v. 2 3. must needs be contrary to their assertion that Ordination gives the Essence of the Ministerial call There is the same reason for the one as for the other for as Mathias was Elected and yet not constituted an Officer thereby so was Paul ordained and yet not constituted an Officer thereby and the latter must needs be as much against them as the former can be against us 3. This was but half an Election and that is the reason why it did not constitute Mathias an Apostle as appeareth because the chusing of the one which was by God was the constitutive act Act. 1. v. 24. Shew whether of these two thou hast chosen v. 26. therefore if the people had chosen but one but Mathias onely that had been a constitutive act but that could not be for then the call should have been mediate and so he had not been an Apostle but the Lord sheweth how highly he would have Election esteemed in that he would have the people chuse two one of which he would constitute an Apostle when the call was to be immediate And indeed the people might have chosen but one and yet the call might have been immediate if Election had not been the constitutive act but in
because that particular Church to which he is an Officer may belong to that Catholick-Church and yet his office may extend no further then his particular congregation he may have no relation so much as in actu primo to any other Church He cannot be denyed to be set in the Common-wealth who is set in any one place or Parish which is in it and so an Officer may be said to be set in the Church-catholick who is set in any particular Church which appertaineth to that universal and yet the office may be bounded by that particular Church may reach no further and therefore the being set in the Church-catholick cannot enforce a relation as an Officer to to that Church without which no double relation As for Ephes 4. The Apostle speaketh either 1. Of the mystical body one in spirit and faith over which never any were set as Officers in the whole part of it being in heaven when the Apostles were on earth nor in part if so then with or without its own act not without for as office and authority is Christs gift as our fountain so the Churches call is the means thereof answer of the Assembly to the reasons against the instance of the Church of Jerusalem p. 12. not with its own act for they that never met nor can meet unto a Church act put forth none Ergo though Officers be given for the mystical Church yet they have not relation to it as Officers over it in the Lord. Or 2. Of the integral body which is one by consent and agreement as the body of Antioch is one and the body of Ephesus is one the unity of the Spirit to be kept there c. We see no absurdity to say God hath given to or set in the Church viz. this and that Church Apostles Evangelists for the edifying of the body sc this and that body And whatever we have in notion we can find no Church in existence or action but must be a particular Church as it is proper to say Satan persecutes man though there be no Catholick man to persecute because he persecutes this and that man so to say God careth to edifie the Church the body though no Catholick body or Church but this and that particular Object 2. If a Minister when he removes or is removed from his particular Congregation ceaseth to be a Minister then it will follow 1. That if the Church that called him prove heretical and wickedly separate from him that then the sin of the people should nullifie the office of the Minister Or 2. If the Church refuse to give him competent maintenance and starve him out from them or if the major part unjustly combine together to vete him out that then the covetousnesse and injustice of the people should make void the Function of their Minister Or 3. By this Doctrine there will be a door opened for the people of a City or a Nation to un-minister all their Ministers which things are very great absurdities and contrary to sound Doctrine Ans 1. As to the two former particulars though such Churches do hainously sin against the Lord and commit wickedness at a great height and must expect that the Lord will reward them according to their works for separating from and nullifying of the office of such as Christ hath set over them upon such accounts yet we know not but that in such cases the sin of the people may nullifie the office of the Minister it doth debar him from the exercise of his office and why may it not make void the office Suppose upon taking up some wicked principles they cruelly murther or take away the life of their officer surely he ceaseth then to be an officer and if their sin can nullifie his office in such a way why not by an unjust separation from or rejection of him 2. If a peoples sinful rejection of their officer doth not nullifie his office we suppose the reason is not because his office-power extendeth beyond that particular Congregation but because he is de jure and of right still over that Church as its officer though he be hindred by their sinful actings from the exercise of his office amongst them as a lawful Prince may by an unjust invasion be disabled for the exercise of Government in his Kingdom though he yet be the Supream Governour and may recover his right when he can But if a Minister voluntarily removeth or be rejected by the people when either of these are upon just grounds then surely the relation between them ceaseth and so he ceaseth to be an officer 3. As to the third thing they grant that a peoples rejection of a Minister maketh him cease from being their Minister and this openeth as wide a door for the people of a City or Nation to un-minister themselves or to leave themselves without any Ministers as the other assertion doth to un-minister their Ministers if the people of a City or Nation will be so wickedly disposed as to withdraw subjection from or reject all from being their Ministers what advantage can there be in their having the name of office upon them when they cannot exercise their office there and if they be unjustly rejected and lose their office thereby they may become Officers again in other places as well as if they be but put out from being their Ministers Object 3. Because there is no Scripture to warrant the iteration of Ordination Jus Divin Min p. 147. in case of removal The Apostles went about ordaining Elders in every Church and Titus was left in Crete to ordain Elders c. but there is no mention made of any command for reiterated Ordination neither indeed can it be for Ordination being a setting a man apart to the Office of the Ministery as we shall hereafter prove and not onely to the exercise of it in such a place though the local exercise should cease yet his office still remains and therefore needs not be reiterated Answ 1. There is no Scripture that we can find to evidence that a man is an Officer to any more then a particular congregation and if his office extendeth no further then in case of removal he ceaseth to be an officer or becometh no officer And here 2. All those Scriptures that warrant the Ordination of any Officers do warrant the iteration of Ordination in case a man becometh an Officer again to any other Church As in a corporation if Bayliffs or other Officers having served their whole time do become no Officers and afterward the same persons come into the same Offices again the same Law that required such ceremonies to be used in the investment of all such Officers doth require the iteration of such ceremonies upon a new entrance into those Offices though the Law doth not require it under the notion of an iteration So all those Scriptures that warrant the ordaining of all Church Officers must needs warrant the re-ordaining of such as after a
lay hands on Timothy and if so then whether the Presbyters were ordinary or not the call to lay on hands being by prophesie was extraordinary and theresore not sufficient to ground an ordinary practice upon And thus it may be seen that none of the special rules laid down in Scripture about Ordination do either limit and restrain it unto ordinary officers when a Church wanteth officers or warrant them to be the persons that ought then to ordain any more then believers who are no officers Indeed although those special rules do prove that Ordination is an ordinance of Christ still continuing therefore that some persons are to ordain yet we cannot find that they hold out at all who ought to be the persons ordaining for in these dayes there are no such extraordinary officers none that have such an extraordinary call to ordain as these had and therefore unlesse we look to general rules which will warrant believers doing it as well as officers there are none on earth that can claim a power to ordain and so Ordination will be altogether unattainable Object But they might act as ordinary officers although they were extraordinary officers all their acts did not pertake of the extraordinarinesse of their call and so their acting may warrant ordinary officers in Ordaining Ans 1. That the act of Ordination was ordinary we grant but that the persons in ordaining acted as ordinary officers onely this we deny their acting about Ordination was in part extraordinary as the immediateness of the call and the nature of the directions do evidence 2 Tim. 4. ver 5. Do the work of an Evangelist Tit. 1. 5. and ordain elders in every City as I have appointed thee In obeying such exhortations they cannot be deemed to act as ordinary officers for to do the work of an Evangelist and to ordain in every city and by the appointment of an Apostle is that which belongeth not to ordinary officers they are not Evangelists and are fixed in their particular Congregations and therefore cannot be required to do the work of such an office as they have not or to travel from place to place as Titus was which maketh it evident that there was something extraordinary in their acting in Ordination 2. If they acted as ordinary officers yet that will not warrant officers ordaining in case a Church hath no Officers as will appear by our second Argument Arg. 2. In a Church which hath no Officer or Officers in it either some believers may lawfully and warrantably ordain without Officers or else some believers and Officers of other Churches or else Officers of other Churches onely without other believers must be the persons appointed by Christ to ordain or else in such a case there is no way laid out by Christ for the attaining of Ordination The last we suppose none that plead for Ordination will assert nor any that argue against believers ordaining for if Christ hath laid out no way in such a case to attain Ordination then either such Churches as are without Officers must for ever be without them or else some persons must ordain who are not appointed by Christ to do it and then surely believers may do it as well as any other If some Officers of other Churches and some believers be appointed by Christ to ordain then it doth not belong onely to a Presbytery to ordain for believers who are no Officers according to this grant may act in it then it belongeth to believers and is not peculiar to Church Officers to ordain and then why are the people cryed out against so much for ordaining or why may not Officers be blamed as well for ordaining without the people as the people for ordaining without Officers But we suppose they will assert the other viz. That Officers of other Churches onely without believers must be the persons appointed by Christ to ordain and let them prove it When we say without believers we mean without their concurrence in a way of acting for our brethren will grant their concurrence by way of presence they will give liberty to believers to be present when they ordain but not to act in Ordination Our Brethren who say Ordination by people without Ministers is a perverting of the Ordinance c. let them prove that it belongeth to Officers of other Churches to ordain or that Christ hath appointed Officers to ordain who are without that Church to which a person is ordained an Officer or else their Ordination by a Presbytery of Officers of other Churches is as much a perverting of the Ordinance and of no more force to use their own words then baptism by a Midwife c. for what can hinder the peoples Ordination from being lawful and of validity but their wanting a Commission from Christ or a Gospel Rule to warrant their acting in Ordination And the Officers of other Churches are as much without a Commission from Christ or a Gospel rule to warrant their becoming a Presbytery and acting as a Presbytery in ordaining Officers to Churches that have no Officers as the people can be We have under the former Argument found that all the Texts which speak about Ordination they intimate either the officers that acted in it or the call to be extraordinary Neither is there any one instance that doth certainly prove any ordinary Officers acting in Ordination in all the New Testament much less is there any colour for either one precept or president to warrant a Presbytery of officers of divers Churches to be of Christs Institution or to have any allowance from him to act in Ordination We cannot but wonder that some should go about to assert that acts ought to be performed by a Presbytery without giving proof that such a Presbytery consisting of the Officers of divers Churches is of a Gospel stamp Surely it should be proved to be an Ordinance of Christ before it be asserted what it ought to do As for Act. 6. Act. 13. Act. 14. Tit. 1. 1 Tim. 5. either they acted as Apostles and Evangelists whose Commission reached to all Churches or as Officers in those Churches where they ordained men and their general Commission made them Officers in and to all Churches where they became and therefore whatever Churches they acted in they acted not barely as Officers as Ministers but as their Officers as their Ministers for Paul saith that he had the care of all the Churches 2 Cor. 11. 28. and therefore these examples will not warrant Officers of divers Churches to ordain Officers unto Churches that have no officers Because the Apostles and Evangelists ordained in Churches they were officers to Ergo ordinary officers may ordain in Churches which they are no officers to surely the inconsequence will be evident As for 1 Tim. 4. 14. It is probable it was a Presbytery of extraordinary officers however that it was a Presbytery which consisted of ordinary officers of divers congregations there is not a syllable in the Text that way 1.
pray for them for the very same ends that such a set day is intended for we find not And by this we see cause to think that the Apostles had no such low esteem or account of the prayers of the people as some have Heb. 13. ver 18. Pray for us hence one well observeth that the greatest Apostle hath need of the prayers of the meanest Christian and may be helped thereby Act. 12. ver 5. Peter therefore was kept in prison but prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God for him ver 12. many were gathered together praying Not the officers onely but the Church prayed and not distributively but collectively many prayed together here is publike prayer by the Church for an officer under persecution and why may not believers as well pray together for an officer at his Admission into his work By this it appeareth that the people may perform the substantial act of Ordination viz. Prayer and that for the very same end that it serveth to in Ordination 3. That imposition of hands if still continuing may be used by believers we might wave this because it is so questionable whether by the will of Christ it be still to continue or not but if it be of use about Ordination then believers may lay on hands also This appeareth 1. Because imposition of hands at the utmost can be but an Adjunct to Ordination our brethren in their Arguments for it yet do not assert it to be any more then an Adjunct neither is there any Scripture evidence that it was any more in the Primitive times And therefore the people may lay on hands for our brethren tell us that they see no reason why they that give the Essence should not also give the Adjunct The people as we have proved may give the Essence of Ordination viz. Prayer Ergo They may give the Adjunct viz. Imposition of hands 2. Because the people did with Gods allowance lay on hands in old Testament dayes Num 8. ver 10. And thou shalt bring the Levites before the Lord and the children of Israel shall put their hands upon the Levites This Argument will be of the more weight because as our brethren assert imposition of hands is not a proper Gospel duty never used but in the new Testament but is a Rite and ceremony borrowed from the old Testament c. from hence we infer that we have more reason in this then in other matters to look to the old Testament for a warrant about the use of it especially in a case where the new Testament doth not clearly direct us as must needs be the case when a Church wanteth officers because it was borrowed from the old Testament neither can a National Church or other old Testament orders be inferred from our using this Argument because it cannot be proved that National Churches c. are by Christ made Gospel institutions as imposition of hands is if it be continuing Saith Master Mâ—â—ther An example in the old Testament of a Mr. Mather of the power of Synods p. 95. practice not abolished in the new as Ceremonial typical or of some peculiar reason specially concerning those time and 〈◊〉 but of moral equity and reason such an example we think a sufficient warrant unto us for the like practice upon the like occasion in these dayes c. And they that were appointed to say hands on the Levites were the children of Israel as the Text expressely saith And as Master Mather also observeth this term is used in the ninth verse immediately preceding and in the eleventh verse immediately following and fifteen or sixteen several times in this Chapter Num 8. and yet of all these not so much as one where it can be understood of the elders and officers as such but is used to signifie all the Congregation as he rightly thinketh The people might lay hands on officers in old Testament dayes from whence the Rite is borrowed Ergo The people may lay hands on officers in new Testament dayes if the Rite be still of use in case a Church hath no officers in it Our Brethren object several things against this which we shall briefly answer Objeb 1. Here Aaron and his sons were present and if it proves any thing it proves that the people may Ordain where there are elders Answ If it will prove that the people may impose hands when elders are present then much more when they are wanting This is not against our assertion but more for it and much against our brethrens principles Object 2. The children of Israel were commanded by God immediately to lay on hands upon the Levites But in the new Testament we meet with no such command laid upon the people We read that Timothy and Titus and the Presbytery are to lay on bands but not a word of command for the people Answ 1. The command was immediate to Moses but not immediate to the children of Israel Num. 8. ver 5 6. And the Lord spake unto Moses saying take the Levites c. vers 10. And thou shalt bring the Levites before the Lord and the children of Israel shall put their hands upon the Levites The command was mediate to the children of Israel i. e. by Moses Thus whosoever the persons be whether officers or the people that in new Testament dayes are to ordain and lay on hands they are commanded by God to do it as immediately as the children of Israel were here to lay on hands upon the Levites for the Lord gave forth those commands immediately to the Apostles as he did this to Moses and therefore this objection will as much deny that officers may ordain or impose hands on officers as that the people may do it 2. If the children of Israel had been commanded by God immediately to lay on hands upon the Levites yet seeing this was the first institution of the Levites office it would not deny it to be a pattern For the institution of a new office must be given forth by the Lord immedediately to some persons or other 3. If imposition of hands was used in old Testament days by the people and in new Testament dayes there can be shewn no repeal of that Rule by which they did it then they may still use it Let any shew a repeal in the new Testament if they can We read that Timothy and Titus and the Presbytery laid on hands but at the utmost that can onely prove an enlargement of the power or that more persons may do it it doth not prove that the persons who formerly did it now may not do it It can onely shew that some officers may lay on hands it doth not shew that the people who formerly might now may not lay on hands Object 3. When it is said that the children of Israel laid on hands it is not imaginable that all the Israelites did put on hands but it was done by some chief of them in the name of rest c. Answ
rescue her she would be carried away Captive or lie fallen and oppressed in our Streets The learned and judicious Authors of this Treatise hath the Lord stirred up at last to vindicare some Truths which seemed to them to suffer wrong therefore are they come into the Field and whether they quit themselves like men the ensuing Discourse will declare It 's of a Polemical Nature and Controversies are seldom managed without heat in such engagements men are apt to offend persons whilst they defend Truth and proceed too far upon the account of their own interest minding not so much what 's to be said for Truth opposed as what 's to be laid upon the Opposers These Brethren and Friends to Truth have no such Spirit in them they contend for the Truth yet are not contentious like Moses and Michael they are milde and meek having nothing provocative in their Lips or Pens their Moderation will appear to all men more love sweetness and candor in a work of this nature can hardly be found or expected Reader wouldst thou know whether men unordained may warrantably preach whether Election or Ordination do give the Essentials to a Minister or Church-Officer whether such an Officer relate to the Church universal or to a particular Church which are things of great concernment consult this Tractate read it without prejudice weigh things seriously and doubtless thou wilt finde much satisfaction and see cause to bless the Lord for the labours of these his Servants That the God of Truth would give us all hearts to love the Truth and receive the love of the Truth is the prayer of Thy Friend in the Truth M. L. A Catalogue of Books printed for and sold by Livewel Chapman at the Crown in Popes-head-Alley AN Exposition of the nineteen first chapters of Ezekiel in three volumes quarto By William Greenhil Sermons on Christ's last discovery of himself octavo By William Greenhill An Exposition of the 13 chap. of the Revelations quar By John Cotton Jacob's Ladder c. octav By Fr. Raworth Truth with time proving none of the 7 last Vials are yet poured out quar By J. Canne The time of the end A treatise of the last Apostacy the little Horn and the Beast that slayeth the Witnesses octav By J. Canne The holiness of Church-members quart By John Cotton Singing of Psalms a Gospel-Ordinance quar By J. Cotton An explicite Declaration of the testimony of Christ according to the plain sayings of the Gospel quar By Tho. Moor Senior A Treatise of the Person of Christ c. quar By Tho. Moor Senior An Antidote against the spreading Infections of the Spirit of Antichrist in these last days under many Wizards being a Discovery of a lying and antichristian Spirit in some of those called Quakers quart By Tho. Moor Junior The Knowledge of Christ c. wherein the Types Prophecies Genealogies Miracles Humiliation Exaltation and the Mediatorial Office of Christ are opened and applied quarto By John Davenport of Newhaven in New-England The legislative power Christs peculiar prerogative quar By William Aspinewal A presage of sundry sad calamities yet to come quar By William Aspinwal The abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath or the Sabbath of the 7th day of the week quar By William Aspinwal Arrows against Babylon By John Pendarves Sighs for Sion By John Pendarves The Fear of God what it is and exhorted to a Sermon preached by John Pendarves The Voice of the Spirit A discovery what the witnessing-work of the Spirit is how the Spirit witnesseth who are capable of attaining the witnessings of the Spirit how a Soul may know its enjoyment of them by what means a Soul may attain them octav By S. Petto A Voice from Heaven a testimony against the remainders of antichrist yet in England octav By Gaulter Postlethwait Christ and Moses excellency a triplex Treatise distinguishing the 2 Covenants octav By V. Powel Saving Faith set forth in three Dialogues octav By Vavasor Power Generation-Work in three parts 1. part shewing what Generation-work is that Saints in their several generations have the peculiar works of their generations that its of great concernment for a Saint to attend to and be industrious in it wherein the work of the present generation lies how a man may finde out that part of it which is properly his work how it may be so carried on as God may be served 2. part being an exposition of the 7 Vials Rev. 16. 3. part an exposition of the 7 Vials Rev. 16. 3. part an exposition of the prophesie of the 2 witnesses from the 11 12 14 ch of Rev. to which is added a Key to unlock the mystical numbers of Daniel and the Revelations By John Tillinghast Mr. Tillinghasts 8 last Sermons viz. The fifth kingdom founded on the new covenant the signs of the times Christ the only Foundation the promise of the Father the evil of the times look to your aims and ends the idols abolished oct 6 several Treatises viz. the promises made and fulfilled in Christ absolute promises made to sinners as sinners the life of Faith in justification sanctification expectation the Saints anchor rightly cast Christs new command of offences octav By John Tillinghast Knowledge of the times or a resolution of the question how long it shall be to the end of the wonders By J. T. Elijah's Mantle or the remains of that late worthy and faithful servant of Jesus Crhist M. Joh. Tillingh viz. 1. the conformity of a Saint to the will of God 2. the will of God and Christ concerning sinners 3. no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus 4. Christs love to his own 5. true Gospel-humiliation 6. the most effectual means to kill and subdue sin 7. the advocateship of Jesus Christ a great ground of Saints comfort and support under sins infirmities 8. the only way for Saints to be deliver'd from the errors and evils of the times 9. of the old covenant being so far as the Author had proceeded in a Treatise of the two coven before his death The Contents of the CHAPTERS Chap. 1. WHerein is shewn that Office is not a relation to the work or employment of the Minstery but a relation to a Church Chap. 2. Wherein is proved that Officers stand in relation to a particular Church onely and that they are no Officers to a Church Universal Chap. 3. Wherein is given a Description of Office and the several parts of it are proved from Scripture and some conclusions drawn from the whole precedent discourse Chap. 4. Wherein the question is stated about the preaching of gifted men and several things propounded for the cleering the state of it Chap. 5. Wherein two Arguments are urged proving the lawfulness of the preaching of gifted Brethren though not Ordained Chap. 6. Wherein the third fourth and fifth Arguments are urged for the proving the lawfulnes of gifted Brethrens preaching though not Ordained Chap. 7. Answering the first Argument brought against
contra the name of a son doth imply a father to be the other Relative and so for other Relations Now the names and titles which the Gospel giveth unto Officers have such reference unto a Church as they do aloud proclaim that Officer and Church are the Relatives and not Officer and imployment If the question be asked To whom are they Officers the answer must be To a Church Officers are called Pastors and that intimateth that they are related to some flocks They are called Teachers and that speaketh them to be related to some who are Learners Therefore we conclude that Office is not a Relation to the imployment of the Ministry but to a Church one special end of which Relation is the work of the Ministry therein CHAP. II. Wherein is proved that Officers stand in Relation to a particular Church only and that they are no Officers to a Church universal Quest 2. WHat Church hath Office Relation to or whether Officers stand in Relation to a Particular Church only or whether they be Officers of an universal Church Answ We affirm That Officers stand in relation as Officers to a particular Church onely and we deny that they are Officers to a Church Universal Our Brethren at last grant a Relation between Officers and a particular Church page 143. and 151. and it 's proved from Act. 20. 28. We shall here hint a few words chiefly to shew that they are not Officers to an Universal Church and then it will necessarily follow that the Relation is between the Officer and a particular Church only We deny Pastors or Teachers to be Officers to an Universal Church Argum. 1. Because we can finde no Scripture-warrant for any Universal-visible-Political-Church The Gospel knoweth no such Catholick or Universal Church that we can any where finde Argum. 2. Because the Titles given unto Officers doe speak their office to be limited unto a particular Church and do forbid or deny their bearing any office-relation to a Church Universal In those Scriptures where our Brethren say there is an enumeration of Officers and so where it is most needful that their properest Names and Titles should be given them yet there those Officers which are still continuing are called Pastors and Teachers 1. Cor. 12. ver 28. God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers And Ephes 4. ver 11. He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers And also where the qualifications of such Officers are layd down and so the properest Titles are necessary that it might ever be known what Officer ought to be so qualified there they are called Bishops which is no more but Overseers as Act. 20. 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy-Ghost hath made you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishops or Overseers 1 Tim. 3. 1 2. A Bishop must be blameless the husband of one wife vigilant sober Tit. 1. v. 7. For a Bishop must be blameless c. These Titles being given upon such special occasions unto Officers they must undenyably be such Names and Titles as are proper to them so long as they are Officers It were an impeachment to the wisdome of the Holy-Spirit to say that then it did impose such names upon them as they might lose before they lost their Office We suppose our Brethren will not say that any are Preaching-Officers who are neither Pastors Teachers nor Bishops or Overseers Now we argue thus Major Proposit That Church only that is a mans flock doth or can he bear the Relation or Office of a Pastor to That Church only that is committed to ones charge for teaching doth or can he bear the Relation or Office of a teacher to That Church only that is committed to a mans oversight doth or can he bear the Relation or Office of a Bishop or Overseer to All this appeareth from those Relative names You may as well say a man is a father to that which is none of his childe or a master to him who is none of his servant as you may say a man is a Pastor to any that are not of his flock or a Teacher to those that are not committed to him to be taught or a Bishop and Overseer to those that are not under his oversight So that if a man ceaseth to have a flock then he must needs cease to be a Pastor if he ceaseth to have a Church to be taught by him then he ceaseth to be a reacher by office if he ceaseth to have any to be overseen by him then he ceaseth to be a Bishop or Overseer Minor propos But only a particular Church is a mans flock or is committed to a man for teaching and oversight and not the Universal Church Concl. Ergo A man beareth the relation or office of a Pastor a Teacher or a Bishop or Overseer only to a particular and not to an Universal Church That only a particular Church is a mans flock or is committed to a man for teaching and oversight and not the Universal Church We suppose our Brethren cannot deny for in their Jus Divinum page 143. they have these words Though we beleeve that every Minister is a Minister of the Universal Church yet we are far from thinking that he is actually an Universal Minister The Apostles had the actual care of the Church Universal committed unto them and they were not fixed to any particular charge but were Ministers alike of all the Churches of Christ But it is far otherwise with ordinary Ministers they are fixed to their particular congregations where they are bound by Divine right to reside c. So that according to the judgment of our Brethren ordinary officers such as Pastors and Teachers are have onely the care of particular Churches committed to them their actual power is limited by Divine right to these and not extended to the Universal Church they have no actual power to perform Ministerial offices or administer the Ordinances of Christ in any Churches without a special call but only in those particular Churches where they are fixed And that it is only a particular Church that is a mans flock or is committed to him for teaching and oversight and not the Universal Church we prove thus Because every Pastor Teacher or Overseer is expresly commanded by Christ actually to feed teach and oversee all the flock that is committed to him or them Act. 20. vers 28. Take heed therefore unto your selves and to not only some but all the flock over the which the Holy-Spirit hath made you Overseers to feed the Church of God All that flock or Church over which the Holy-Spirit hath made any man a Bishop or Overseer he is commanded actually to feed and take heed to all the Universal Church so as he sinneth if he doth not Ergo The Universal Church is not that flock or Church over which the Holy-Spirit hath made any man a Bishop or
Overseer If they were to feed and take care of all the Universal Church then their power were as extensive and large as the Apostles and then they must not fix and abide with any particular Church for that would hinder the feeding all the Universal Church but they must travel all the world over that they may feed all the flock And it 's impossible that any particular Officer should feed his particular Church and all the rest of the Universal Church also and therefore all were under a necessity of sinning against this command if that were the flock intended The same Argument holdeth as well for Pastors and Teachers for they are the same Officers under different names The Pastors work is to feed all the flock and he is plainly intended in that Text. And all that Church which is committed to any man for Teaching he is commanded to Teach and he is unfaithful in his trust if he doth it not And seeing it cannot be the Universal Church hence undenyably it s only a particular Church that is a mans flock or that is committed to him for Teaching and oversight The Argument may run thus That Church onely that a man is a Pastor or Teacher a Bishop or Overseer to doth he stand in the relation of an officer to the Names and Titles of Officers do evidence this But it is only a particular Church that a man is a Pastor or Teacher a Bishop or Overseer to Act. 20. 28. and not an Universal Church Ergo It is only a particular Church that a man doth stand in the relation of an officer to und not an Universal Church Object If any should object and say If a man for a time be destitute of a place or be fixed to no particular Church yet preacheth constantly in one place or other may not that name of office a Teacher be properly applyed to him seeing he doth reach and some are taught by him Ans 1. In a general sense he may be called a Teacher if any be taught by him but if the word Teacher be taken in a special sense to express Office in that sense we deny he may be called a Teacher Men are not Teachers by Office to all that are taught by them As for example Our Brethren often urge it that ordinary teachers by office must be sent Rom. 10. 15. How shall they preach except they be sont the word for sent is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore in a general sense they must say that ordinary Officers as Pastors and Teachers are Apostles because Apostle signifieth one sent Yet Pastors and Teachers are not Apostles by office the Office of the Apostles is distinct from the office of Pastors and Teachers and in this special sense the name of Apostles is to be denyed them So they are not Teachers by Office to all that they may preach to and may be taught by them If a man preacheth to Heathens and Indians though they retain heathenish principles still and will not receive instruction yet in respect of his teaching they are said to be taught and such as stumble at the word are said to be taught Matth. 13. ver 54. He i. e. Jesus taught them and yet ver 57. They were offended in him But a man is not a teacher by office unto such Hearhens Indians and opposers for without some knowledge or profession of Christ our Brethren will not account them members of the Universal Church and if they will say they stand in the relation of officers to such then they must assert that they have a treble relation as officers one to a particular Church another to an Universal Church and a third to the World or to Heathens and Indians who are of no Church of Christ or else they must say that they preach as officers to those they are no officers to and it will hardly be proved that they are officers to the world or to any out of the Church 2. Onely that Church which a man is set over hath taken the charge of is committed to him for teaching is he a teacher by office unto if he preacheth in an hundred places and thousands receive instruction and in that sense are taught by him yet we deny that he standeth in relation to any of these as a teacher by office unless as a Church they be committed to him for teaching For it is setting over taking the charge of and the committing a Church to the care of such a person for such and such ends which giveth being to office or maketh one an officer It 's the committing of a flock to such a person for feeding or his taking charge of it that onely maketh him a Pastor It is the setting one over a flock or Church for oversight that onely maketh him a Bishop or Overseer and hence Act. 20. ver 28. The flock over which the Holy-Ghost hath made you Overseers They are limited in their oversight unto the particular flock and the nature of their of their office is expressed by their being over the flock for that end For this see more in our description of office in the formal cause of it and in our Arguments to prove that election giveth the Essence to the call to Office CHAP. III. Wherein is given a description of Office and the several parts of it are proved from Scripture and some Conclusions drawn from the whole precedent discourse FRom all which hath been layd down we may gather this description of Office Office is a spiritual Relation between a particular Church of Christ and a person rightly what Office is qualified founded upon a special and regular call Or more particularly Office is a spiritual Relation arising upon a regular Election on the Churches part and Acceptation on his part who is Elected by which the Lord committeth a particular Church to his charge or setteth him over it for the work of the Gospel or imployment of the Ministry In these Descriptions there is 1. The general Nature of Office It is a Relation and for its property it is a spiritual Relation to distinguish it from natural and civil Relations The relative names by which the Gospel expresseth office as Pastor and Teacher doe prove it to be a Relation 2. The terms of the Relation the Relate and the Correlate The Relate is a person rightly qualified i. e. qualified according to Gospel rules 1 Tim. 3. v. 2 3 4 5 6 7. A Bishop must blameless the husband of one wife vigilant sober of good behaviour given to hospitallity apt to teach c. Tit. 1. ver 6 7 8 9. The Correlate is a particular Church of Christ Act. 20. 17. The Elders of the Church Act. 14. 23. Rev. 2. 1. Unto the Angel of the Church And ver 8 12 18. Rev. 3. ver 1 7 14. They are Officers to the Churches of Christ not to the world nor to civil Societies or Assemblies and to particular Churches as the distinguishing each from other sheweth
Rev. 2. and 3. 3. The efficient causes The principal efficient cause is the Lord he instituted and appointed officers to be in the Churches It is the Lord that giveth qualifications sutable to office It is the Lord that giveth in his word rules and directions to be observed in the constitution of officers 1 Tim. 3. ver 1 2 3. c. Act. 6. And when there is a due observation of those Divine rules then the Lord maketh the officer Act. 20. 28. The instrumental causes are the flock or Church and the person qualified It is by the intervention that the relation is introduced The Lord maketh use of them in the making officers or the Lord doth make officers by some acts put forth by these Act. 6. 5. Act. 14. 23. 1 Tim. 3. 1. 4. The formal cause of office a special and regular call or the Lords committing of a flock or Church of Christ to a mans charge and setting him over by election on the Churches part and acceptation on his part who is elected We term it a special call to difference it from the call which officers may have to lay out their gifts occasionally amongst those that are no Church or they no officers to and to distinguish it from the call that gifted Brethren may have to preach which cals are common we term it a regular call because it is to be made according to Gospel-rules The external or outward call which is to be so regulated consisteth in election with acceptation A Church is to chuse its officers Act. 6. ver 5. They chose Stephen An inferior officer a Deacon must be chosen much more is a free choyce necessary to a higher officer who is to take care of Souls Act. 14. 23. In every Church they chose them Elders Let any prove that the Gospel alloweth any man to take the charge of a Church by compulsion or whether the people will or no. And a Church cannot compel or force a man to be over it or to be a Pastor to it without his free consent and therefore acceptation on his part is necessary to the introduction of the Relation 1 Tim. 3. 1. If a man desire the Office of a Bishop An inclination or disposition to the office is to accompany an entrance upon it The doing the work of office would be by constraint and not willingly contrary to 1 Pet. 5. 2. if the undertaking that work were not with free consent By election the Church offereth to commit it self unto his charge who is elected By his acceptation he actually taketh the charge of that Church I Gospel-rules be observed in both then the Lord doth set him over it The Lords committing of a flock or Church to a mans charge or setting him over it for the work of the Ministry is the formal cause of office or that which giveth being to it this is the specificating distinguishing thing of an officer from no officer For duty is commanded from a man upon such a setting over a flock as from an officer he is to feed and take heed to all the flock or Church that he is over Act. 20. 28. Take heed to all the flock over the which the Holy-Ghost hath made you Overseers to feed the Church of God c. And that Church is commanded duty towards him that is over it as towards an officer Hebr. 13 ver 7 17. Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your Souls as they that must give account c. That which is not committed to a mans charge he is not to give an account for and therefore it is here intimated that he which is over a flock hath the charge of it committed to him the flock ought to obey and submit to him as an officer which could not be if setting over or giving the charge of a flock did not give being to the Relation or office That the setting over is by Election with acceptation we shall afterwards demonstrate more fully 5. The final cause or the end of office the work of the Gospel or imployment of the Ministry i. e. in that Church he is set over for he doth not act as an officer to any other The Apostle giveth this as the end of office-gifts Ephes 4. ver 11. He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers for what end ver 12. For the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edisying of the body of Christ c. And thus we have shewn what office is From what hath been already cleared we might draw many conclusions take two Conclus 1. Hence it followeth That there is no difference between that which maketh a man a Minister a Pastor a Shepheard and that which makes a man their Minister their Pastor their Shepherd and so that distinction so often repeated by our Brethren and so often called in for their relief will lend them no help at all being a distinction without a difference For we have proved that a man is an officer to a particular Church only and therefore that which maketh him an officer a Pastor maketh him their Officer their Pastor as the same that maketh a man an husband or a woman a wife doth make him her husband and make her his wife We would not overstretch the similitude to say that the Relation between an officer and a Church doth in all things agree to that between man and wife but in this it may agree and doth illustrate very fitly Conclus 2. Hence it followeth undenyably That the distinction between preaching and office and ex dono by office and by gift is Scriptural or founded on Scripture for if a man be a Pastor or officer only to a particular Church then if he preacheth to any other Church but that he is an officer to or to any other persons but of that Church he preacheth to them but ex dono by gift not as an officer to them Now our Brethren cannot deny the lawfulness of preaching to those that are not of a mans particular Church preaching is a special means for the conversion of Heathens and Indians c. 1 Corin. 14. 24. If all Prophesie and there come in one that beleeveth not So that unbeleevers and such as are no Church-Members may be permitted to come into Church-meetings to hear the Gospel preached And it is lawful in some cases to go and Preach to unbeleevers when they do not come to Church-meetings Act 16. 13 16. 11. ver 19 20 21. Yet they are no officers to such unbeleevers they have not the charge of such unbeleevers souls committed to them they are not over them in the Lord they cannot as officers exercise Church-Government towards unbeleevers that are no Church-Members they are not their flock for then they might do it and therefore in preaching to Heathens Indians they do not act as officers but meerly as in the capacity of gifted brethren
and this leadeth us unto that great question about the preaching of gifted Brethren CHAP. IV. Wherein the Question is stated about the Preaching of Gifted-men and several things propounded for the clearing the state of it The Question is this WHether some men who are not ordained Quest Officers may preach Or whether persons who have preaching gifts and graces or are apt to teach may ordinarily exercise those gifts in Publick Assemblies though they be not ordained Officers Before we come to the determination of this question we shall premise four things 1. That the question is not Whether every Christian may publickly preach But whether some not in office who have such eminent gifts and graces as render them apt to teach may not exercise those gifts in a way of Preaching That objection which our Brethren bring from 1 Corin. 12. 29. toucheth not us for many Christians have not such gifts and so all are not Prophets all are not Teachers Our inquiry is not whether every beleever but whether those beleevers who have such gifts and qualifications as the Gospel 1 Tim. 3. ver 1 2 3. requireth preachers should have may preach 2. Neither is the question Whether Ordination be necessary for an officer We grant that when a man undertaketh to be an officer to or taketh the charge of a Church of Christ there ought to be ordination before the exercise of his Office Act. 6. 6. Our question is Whether a man who hath grace and such gifts as render him apt to teach may exercise those gifts ordinarily or frequently without Ordination he being no Officer to any Church of Christ 3. Neither is the question Whether any man that thinketh himself gifted may preach If some think themselves gifted who are not and thereupon preach we plead not for them But if a man be really gifted as the Lord requireth officers should be 1 Tim. 3. ver 1 2 3. If really he be apt to teach c. Our question is Whether he may not publickly do it though he be not ordained It is another question Who shall judge of his gifts Yet if a man be judged able by those who are able to judge or by those that are appointed by Christ to judg of his gifts we apprehend he may preach And the Apostles referred it to the Church to judge of their gifts and qualifications who were to be Deacons Act. 6. ver 3. Look yee out among you seven men of honest report full of the Holy-Ghost and wisdom There is not a fillable about any other proving of them after the Church was required to look out men so qualified and therefore a Church of Christ is to judge of the gifts of its Members Deacons are to be proved 1 Tim. 3. ver 10. and it is by the Church Act. 6. ver 2 3. And though one that is really gifted for such a work for ought we know may lawfully especially in some cases preach without such approbation from a Church or others who are able to judge of gifts yet it may be inexpedient and sometimes it proveth of ill consequence to others and uncomfortable to himself 4. By preaching we understand any publishing or declaring opening or applying Gospel truths to any persons for the uses and ends they serve to Sometimes the word for preaching is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to tell good news or bring or publish glad tidings Luk. 16. ver 16. The Kingdom of God is preached 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 4. 2. Unto us was the Gospel preached 1 Cor. 9. ver 16. Though I preach the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the same word is used for preaching in many other Scriptures and denoteth a declaring or publishing Gospel-truths and hence it is so translated often and that necessarily Act. 13. ver 32. We declare unto you glad tidings The word for declare is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 10. ver 15. How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and bring glad tidings of good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here the same word is used and signifieth to bring glad tidings In the beginning of that verse another word is used for preaching Rom. 10. ver 15. How shall they preach 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and this word signifieth to publish as Heralds or cryers do it is explained twice in the latter end of the same verse why he is called a herald or cryer because he publisheth or telleth glad tidings So that to preach is to declare or publish to open or apply Gospel-truths to any persons whether publickly or privately Though a Herald or cryer doth deliver a matter in an open place yet that Metaphor may be uused because preaching is by lively voyce and frequently in a publick place yet it may be properly called preaching though it be in private Act. 5. ver 42. Daily in the Temple and in every house they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ Here is preaching not only publickly in the Temple but also privately in every house Yea Philip is said to preach to one man Act. 8. ver 35. So that it is preaching if the Scriptures be opened or expounded to a particular person as well as if it be to a publick Assembly And therefore our Brethrens description of preaching is faulty They say Jus Divinum page 77. By preaching they understand an authoritative explication and application of Scripture for exhortation edification and comfort to a Congregation met together for the solemn worship of God in the stead and place of Christ They say The subject is the word the work the explication and application of this word Nehem. 8. 8. 2 Tim. 2. 15. The end is the exhortation edification and comfort of the Church for which they alledge 1 Corin. 14. 3. 2 Tim. 3. 16. The object a Congregation met together for the solemn worship of God for which they alledge 1 Corin. 14. ver 23. They say The word is to be preached to infidels Matth. 28. Mar. 16. But the principal object of this work is the Church 1 Corin. 14. 22. 1 Corin. 12. 28. Ephes 4. 12. The manner of doing this work 1. Authoritatively not Magisterially as lords of faith but Ministerially as being over the Church in the Lord. 1 Thes 5. 12. Tit. 2. 15. 1. In the stead and place of Christ 2 Corin. 5. 20. Luk. 10. 16. From this description they give us five distinctions wherein they grant us several things We say 1. That place 1 Corin. 14. will serve for us to prove a gift of prophesying to be still continuing as well as it wil serve to prove their description of preaching If prophesying were an extraordinary gift as they say pag. 97. 98. it was why then doe they alledge it to prove the way of that standing ordinance of preaching 2. It is properly preaching to publish declare and open Gospel-truths though there be not a Church or congregation for the object of it
duty may not be neglected or that command broken Our Brethren grant that men ordained have not power to administer the Ordinances of Christ without a special call Jus Divin pag. 144. Gifted persons have power to preach and the Churches calling or desiring them to exercise their gifts may be sufficient to give an opportunity to preach yea the desire of a particular person sometimes may be enough Act. 8. 34 35. And the Eunuch answered Philip and said I pray thee of whom speaketh the Prophet this of himself or of some other man Then Philip opened his mouth and began at the same Scripture and preached unto him Jesus The Eunuchs request I pray thee was sufficient to give Philip an opportunity to preach Yea the desire even of an unbeleeving Magistrate in some cases may give opportunity to exercise ones gifts in a way of preaching Act. 13. ver 7. The Deputy of the Country Sergius Paulus a prudent man called for Barnabas and Saul and desired to hear the word of God and ver 12. Then the Deputy beleeved being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord. So Act. 13. ver 15 16. The rulers of the Synagogue sent unto them saying Ye men and Brethren if ye have any word of exhortation for the people say on Then Paul stood up c. The desire or call of a Magistrate or Minister yea the desire of the people as Act. 13. ver 42 44. may be call sufficient in some cases to exercise a mans gifts in a way of preaching But when a gifted person hath no such call to exercise his gifts he doth not sin in not preaching though possibly others may sin in not desiring him to preach 3. In such cases there ought to be a waiting in the use of means to satisfie the Church before the exercise of gifts though it be a duty in it self and a Church may sin in hindring a man from preaching either in the Church or elsewhere yet at this or that time it may not be his duty to doe it until other duties be done It is his duty to use means to satisfie the Church that he may act in it without offence to that and until this be done we conceive it is not immediately his duty in case of a Churches dissatisfaction about his ability to preach Obj. 3. This will prove that women may preach if every one that hath gifts may Mr. Collings Ans A particular exception is enough to restrain any general rule Women are expresly forbidden and that is one limitation of this general rule 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. But let it be shewn where all men not ordained are forbidden preaching without such a particular exception every gifted man may preach and find a warrant for it from that general rule It 's said Gen. 2. 16. The Lord God commanded the man saying Of every tree of the garden thou mayst freely eat But will Mr. Collings say That this will prove that Adam might i. e. lawfully eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because it is said Of every tree doth not the particular exception v. 17. limit that general rule v. 16 It 's said 1 Cor. 14. v. 31. Ye may all prophesie will he therefore say Women may prophesie in the Churches and doth not all bring them in here as much as it doth 1 Pet. 4. 10. Every gifted man not excepted by some particular rule may preach Obj. 4. If all that have gifts and abilities to preach may do it then those who are fitted with abilities to be Generals of an Army or Captains or Parliament-men or Pleaders at the Bar may do the work of Generals Captains and Parliament-men and plead at the Bar. Answ 1. Those that have abilities for civil or military imployments may exercise those abilities if a King or Supream Governour doth command them to do it He that hath abilities to be a Captain may do the work of a Captain if the General biddeth him He may do the work of a General of an Army or a Parliament-man or a Pleader at the Bar being fitted with abilities if the King or those who are to appoint unto such works do impower him thereunto Now Christ the King of Saints and the great Captain-General of our Salvation who had all power in Heaven and Earth given unto him he hath commanded every man that hath grace and is gifted to preach and therefore every man who hath Grace and is gifted may Preach 2. He that doth the work of a General of an Army assumeth an office in the Army the General is the chief Officer there And he that doth the work of a Parliament-man assumeth the office of a Magistrate and so the Argument is impertinent We grant that Election and Ordination both are necessary in Order before the exercise of gifts Office-wise 3. Our Argument is not taken from a general Rule onely but from a particularizing of Preaching gifts therewith when a general Command is given to every man who hath a gift to minister with it unto others and one gift is particularly mentioned then it is undouted that every man who hath that particular gift ought to minister with it unless he falleth under some special prohibition and let our Brethren shew any such prohibition else their consequence is not good And let this alwayes be observed it is not Gifts but Christ by Gospel-Rules that warranteth and giveth the Authority or power to gifted persons to preach Gifts do qualifie and enable a person to the Act. Christ by Gospel Rules warranteth the acting in that way Gifts with graces are declarative that the person is warranted or authorized to Preach Charity bindeth to follow Gospel-Rules in the exercise of gifts for the good of others Obj. 5. Every one is to use his gift with respect to the gift it self and to his place and calling and no otherwise These spiritual gifts are to be exercised by every one in his own Sphere Jus Divinum pag. 102. by private persons privately by those that are in Office publickly and in the Congregation Aquila and Priscilla private persons yet of eminent gifts insomuch as they knew the way of Christ more perfectly then Apollos himself kept their own place they as gifted Christians did not undertake to preach publickly but took him to them and privately expounded to him the way of God more perfectly Act. 18. This is a notable pattern for private Christians even of the highest form to walk by in this way that they may find imployment for all their gifts Those women whom the Apostle honours with the Title of Labourers with him in the Gospel Phil. 4. 3. they laboured not by publick preaching for this the Apostle permits not to women 1 Tim. 2. but by private Advertisements and Admonitions as opportunities were administrd Therefore it follows not that because all gifts are to be improved therefore a gifted Brother may preach for first there are other ways of making use of our most excellent
not peculiar to Office and therefore it cannot argue that a man not in Office goeth out of his place and calling because he acteth publickly one great ground of their mistake seemeth to lie here they suppose but they have not proved it from any Scripture that publickness in acting or in preaching is limitted and restrained to Officers onely Spiritual gifts are to be exercised say they Jus Div. p. 102. by every one in his own Sphere by private persons privately by those that are in Office publickly and in the Congregation Whereas publickness doth not make an Act to be an Act of Office nor privateness hinder it from being so An Officer may put forth Acts of Office privately as when he rebuketh or admonisheth a Brother as one set over him in the Lord though it be not before the Congregation yet surely it is an Act of Office The Act may be preaching Office-wise in a private house as we proved before The publickness of the Act doth neither make it preaching nor as they call it Authoritative preaching And therefore gifted Brethren cannot be said to assume the Office of a Pastor or Teacher because they exhort and admonish publickly Also in many cases a man not in Office may act either in civil or religious matters publickly and so may exercise both natural and spiritual gifts when yet he taketh no Office upon him nor goeth out of his Sphere As in any business of publick concernment to a Town the management whereof is committed chiefly to the Officers of the Town or place yet another man of eminent natural abilities and fit for the management of such a work though he be no Officer may be called in for assistance or may act publickly in the case Constables may ordinarily call in others for their assistance in publick works and so in many other cases men that are no Officers may do the same works that Officers do either alone or as Assistants and that publickly It is an ordinary thing for men to distribute worldly goods openly in publick Assemblies to the use of poor Neighbours or of such as live at a distance who have sustained losses by fire and it is not unlike that they did it publickly Act. 11. v. 29 30. Now it is the work of a Deacon who is a Church-Officer to distribute our Brethren interpret that so Rom. 12 v. 8. He that giveth i. e. the Deacon and if Jus Divin Regim pag. 125. any man may do the same work publickly which a Deacon by his Office doth without going out of his place and calling why may not a gifted Brother do part of the same work which another Officer doth why may he not teach and exhort and that publickly without going out of his place and calling also Nay Church-Members that were not in Office did publickly act in that Assembly Act. 15. v. 12. Then all the multitude kept silence This necessarily implieth that the multitude did speak before in the Assembly and it cannot be restrained unto Officers onely for the whole Church did help to make up the multitude in that Assembly v. 22. Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church to send chosen men of their own Company c. There Church is distinguished from Apostles and Elders which were the Officers and the Church is said to Co-operate with the Apostles and Elders in those publick acts of choosing and sending Messengers So verse 23. All which doth fully prove that it belongeth to the Sphere Place and Calling of men not in Office to act in religious matters publickly and therefore unless some special Gospel-Rule can be found forbidding gifted men to teach or exhort publickly it will not appear that they go out of their Sphere therein 5. Charity bindeth sometimes to an acting occasionally in some works that belong not to a mans own but anothers Calling and then it cannot be a going out of his Sphere to act therein in civil employments what is more ordinary then for a man of one Calling upon request to do the work of another mans Calling yea to leave his own work to do work for his Neighbour Yea in publick employments who questioneth the lawfulness of a gifted mans tending a School occasionally for a few days at the request of the Schoolmaster and this is a publick work and yet a man that is no Schoolmaster doth not go out of his Sphere Place or Calling herein though he doth the work occasionally that belongeth not to his own but anothers Calling And why may not gifted men as well preach in publick without any sinful going out of their Sphere Place or Calling Charity putteth upon doing good to others to the urmost of our ability 2 Cor. 8. v. 3. 1 Joh. 3. 16. We ought to lay down our lives for the brethren and therefore surely Charity calleth to lay out a mans gifts for the good of others to the utmost of the gift and opportunity it is less to lay out gifts then to lay down life And if a man hath publick gifts and doth not use them publickly he neither acteth to the utmost of his gifts nor layeth them out in that way wherein he may most promote the good of others 6. A man may lawfully choose it for his Calling to preach if he be gifted and qualified according to Gospel-Rules for the work and then it is no going out of his Sphere Place or Calling to Preach Some men from their Childhood have an inclination to that work of the Ministry and spend many years in preparation for it in the Universities and elsewhere are blessed with Grace and gifts fit for the employment they can finde no rule for Ordination unto Office until a precedent Election from a Church how can it be a going out of their Calling to Preach who never owned any other Calling but that if Ordination did give the Call to the Office yet would it hardly be proved that it made it a mans Calling to Preach or that he could not have that as his Calling without Ordination Men may being fitted for that work many years Preach for ought we finde in order to or before they undertake Office if they have no Call from a Church unto Office or no such Call as they can with clearness accept of in that time for every man is to minister his gift which warranteth a constant as well as an occasional use of gifts as opportunity is offered And the same is to be said for men who have used other Callings if they be gifted for the work of preaching have a Disposition thereunto and the Lord openeth a door for a constant use of those gifts then they may lawfully leave their other vocations and then they go not out of their Place or Calling if they ordinarily preach it being become their Calling to do it That place speaketh much this way Heb. 5. v. 12. When for the time ye ought to be Teachers ye have need that one teach you again
it is enough to us that these are included neither doe we say that every Christian ought publickly to preach many have not the Talent of preaching gifts But whatseover Talents any man who is a professed Servant of Jesus Christ hath as vers 14. Who called his own servants he falleth under this promise in the improvement of them that to him shall be given He that hath private gifts if he useth them to him shall be given he that hath publick gifts if he useth them to him shall be given Now none can deny that many un-ordained men have preaching gifts i. e. gifts that render them apt to teach for a knowledge of their having such gifts is pre-required unto ordination And here is a promise annexed unto the use of any Talents that any professed servant of Christ hath and therefore they that have preaching gifts whether they be ordained or not do fall under this promise in the use of their gifts Object 1. There is no great trust to Arguments for positive truths from parabolical expressions what Talents are there meant is not exprest Answ 1. Parables are proofs of some positive truths else of what use are they To strain parables beyond the scope of Christ in them is unsafe But that by Talents are meant gifts by trading a using or improving those gifts by Servants not onely Officers but visible Saints professing subjection unto Christ as their Master c. it is not to be denyed with any colour of reason So that Arguments drawn from the parable this way would be strong 2. Our Argument is not from the parable but from a general rule that hath a promise included in it Indeed it is applyed to the parable as a reason of that proceeding ver 28. but also it is applyed unto other things as Mark. 4. 24 25. Take heed what you hear and unto you that hear shall more be given for he that hath to him shall be given If they improve Gospel-opportunities if they keep the word themselves which they hear and measure out or communicate unto others what they have heard they shall not miss of their reward more shall be given them So that it is no parabolical-argumentation but from a clear rule that saith whatsoever gifts the Lord hath bestowed upon his servants in the Church they are in a way to enjoy the promise of encrease if they be in the improvement of them Object 2. This will prove that women may preach too Answ It is denyed because women are excepted It is sayd Josh 5. ver 5. All the People that came out i. e. out of Egypt were circumcised will any conclude therefore women were circumcised All includeth women in that case as much as all that have gifts or Talents doe include women in this case Object 3. But may it not be meant of Ministerial Talent and a called Ministry ver 14 15. his servants Answ Though the parable of the Talents might be understood of them yet this general rule and promise cannot be restrained to them because it is applyed even to hearers Mark 4. 24 25. Unto you that hear shall be given For and because the rule is so general 2. Neither can the parable be restrained to them seeing others besides Officers are in the Kingdome of Heaven are servants have their Lords goods and must give an account Obj. 4. But they must do it orderly first be ordained and then preach and is there no way of improving gifts but in publick preaching he that that hath them must improve them in his Sphere Answ 1. It is granted that he must be ordained when he undertaketh to be an Officer but Election or a Call from a Church must precede that let it be proved that a man may have ordination to Office-work before he hath Election from a Church or that he may suspend the exercise of his gifts until he hath such a Call from a Church It is possible that a man may have gifts which render him apt to teach divers Yeares before any Church may elect him to Office but he would be in danger of losing the benefit of this Promise to him that hath shall be given and of falling under that dreadful threatning from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath if all this time he should not exercise his gifts 2. It belongeth to his Calling who hath gifts fit for publick use to improve them publickly the very end of the Lords affording such gifts is That they might be laid forth in such a way 1 Cor. 12. 7. The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal If one ordained to Office-work should use his gifts in a private and not in publick he would be called to an account for not using or improving his gifts and not barely because being ordained he did not use them publickly Men shall not be called to an account barely for the not using gifts but for the not using them in that way wherein they might most have promoted the Lords glory and the publick good Argum. 5. From Gospel-presidents or examples That which is holden forth by Gospel-presidents or examples with Divine allowance that may lawfully be practised But the ordinary exercise of preaching gifts in publick Assemblies by persons who are not ordained Officers is holden forth by Gospel-presidents or examples with Divine allowance Ergo The ordinary exercise of preaching gifts in publick Assemblies by persons who are not ordained Officers may lawfully be practised The Major we suppose will not be denyed It is our duty to walk as we have Christ the Apostles and primitive Saints for a pattern Phil. 3. 17. Brethren be followers together of me and mark those that walk so as ye have us for an ensample There was the same rule of obedience then as now viz. The Gospel and therefore what those Saints did unless by an extraordinary Call with Divine approbation must needs be our duty as well as it was theirs the Lord would not then give allowance to any sinful practise The Minor that the ordinary exercise of preaching gifts in publick Assemblies by persons not ordained Officers is holden forth by Gospel-presidents or examples with Divine allowance we prove 1. From the preaching of Apollo Act. 18. 2. From the preaching of the scattered Saints Act. 8. v. 11. 1. From the preaching of Apollo Act. 18. v. 24. And a certain Jew named Apollos born at Alexandria an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures came to ephesus ver 25. This man was instructed in the way of the Lord and being fervent in spirit he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord knowing onely the baptism of John ver 26. And he began to speak boldly in the Synagogue ver 28. He mightily convinced the Jews and that publickly shewing by the Scriptures that Jesus was Christ From these verses we observe these things 1. That Apollos preached v. 25. He spake and taught diligently 2. That he preached in
publick assemblies v. 26. He began to speak boldly in the Synagogue v. 28. and that publickly shewing by the Scriptures and the expressions laid together will speak it to be his ordinary practise 3. That Apollos had Divine allowance in this his preaching the Holy Ghost would never have vouchsafed to give him such high Commendations for his being mighty in the Scriptures v. 24. for his knowledge v. 25. instructed in the way of the Lord for his Zeal and this as an occasion of or a leading thing to his preaching v. 25. being fervent in Spirit he spake and taught if the Lord had not approved of his preaching And the mentioning so many matters of his praise to usher in a narration of his preaching without limiting any word of dispraise for that doth strongly intimate Divine approbation in his preaching Yea his preaching it self is declared with Commendation He is said to preach 1. Diligently not negligently v. 25. He spake and taught diligently 2. Boldly not with a carnal fearfulness v. 26. He began to speak boldly the same as a Commendation is given unto Paul when the Disciples were afraid of him Act. 9. 27 28. But Barnabas took him and brought him to the Apostles and declared unto them how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the Name of Jesus 3. Successfully or prevailingly v. 28. He mightily convinced the Jews his labours were seconded with a Divine blessing All these Commendations of his preaching do evidently speak forth his having Divine approbation therein And this is enough to answer that Objection which some bring viz. That this is but an instance of the liberty given by the Jews or taken where as yet there was no Church in being and the liberty given in the Jewish Synagogues is no more a president for Christian Churches then their exercise of power We say That if onely the Jews had given such a liberty that would not have been enough to make it a president for us but Christs approbation in Gospel-days of such a practise as the Jews gave liberty for is enough to speak the warrantableness of such a practise and to make it a president unto us We do not urge the lawfulness of gifted mens preaching because the Jews gave such a liberty to Apollos but because with Divine allowance Apollos took the liberty to preach 4. That Apollos was not an ordained Officer and that we prove thus He that knew onely the baptism of Iohn was not under the Ordination to Office-work which was instituted by Christ But Apollos knew onely the baptism of Iohn Act. 18. 25. He spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord knowing onely the baptisme of Iohn Ergo Apollos was not under the Ordination to Office-work which was instituted by Christ The Minor is undeniable being the very words of the Text. The Major That he that knew onely the baptism of Iohn was not under the Ordination to Office-work which was instituted by Christ we prove thus 1. Because the instituting of Ordination was Subsequent to the baptism of Iohn the baptisme of Iohn spake nothing of Ordination of Officers and therefore he that knew onely the baptisme of John could know nothing of that Ordination especially seeing in order of time the baptisme of John was precedaneous to the institution of Ordination of Officers He that knew onely the baptisme of John which was Antecedent to the instituting of Ordination he did not know that Ordination which was Subsequent to that baptisme But Apollos knew onely the baptism of John which was Antecedent to the instituting of Ordination Ergo Apollos did not know that Ordination which was Subsequent to that baptisme 2. Because the importance of the expression doth deny his being ordained for the Baptisme of John is distinguished from the baptisme of Christ Act 19. v. 3. Unto what then were ye baptised and they said Unto Johns baptism v. 4. Then said Paul John verily baptised with the baptism of repentance saying unto the people that they should believe on him which should come after him that is on Christ Jesus v. 5. When they heard this they were baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus Whence we observe 1. That the baptisme of John and the baptisme of Christ are they which in Scripture-phrase are distinguished each from other as appeareth by comparing v. 3. with v. 5. and therefore to say That Apollos did know onely the baptism of John is to say That he did not know the baptisme of Christ without which he could not know Ordination which appertained onely to the baptisme of Christ and not to that of John 2. That the baptisme of John doth comprehend the Doctrine and Ministry of John as well as the outward signe of water v. 4. The baptism of Iohn did teach repentance and faith in Christ it declared that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ the Messias and no other to be expected and that he should come after i e. openly to shew manifest and reveale himself to be the Redeemer of the world The baptisme of Christ teacheth That Christ is already revealed and in his death and resurrection our Salvation is made perfect So that to know onely the baptisme of John is to know Jesus of Nazareth to be the Messias and to have repentance and faith in him as afterward to reveale himself but to be without a knowledge of Christ as already revealed in his death resurrection and in those clear doctrines of the Gospel and Miracles for the confirmation of those doctrines which are given forth by the Apostles as fruits of the Ascention of Jesus Christ And therefore he that knew onely the baptisme of John could not know the Ordination which was instituted by Christ because the institution of Ordination is found amongst those doctrines which belong to the baptism of Christ and was not given forth before yea the knowledge of Ordination presupposeth a knowledge of many other doctrines of the Gospel as concerning Christs establishing Church-Order for his Worship and the profession of his Name and that he hath instituted such Offices c. which none by the baptisme of John onely could reach unto Therefore there being this defect in Apollos knowledge hence he was not an ordained Officer for then he had known more then the baptisme of John yea he had known the baptisme of Christ which to assert were directly to cross the words of the Text which declare that he knew onely the baptisme of John Obj. 1. But was not Apollos an extraordinary Officer or had he not an extraordinary Call to preach Answ 1. Let him prove it that will assert it The Text speaketh not of any thing extraordinary a man may be eloquent without extraordinary gifts and mighty in the Scriptures ordinary Officers are to hold fast the faithful Word and to be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and convince the gainsayers Tit. 1. 9. and this is to be mighty in the Scriptures Act. 18. 28. He mightily convinced the
Church which was at Jerusalem and they were all scattered abroad Our Brethren Jus Divin Minist pag. 110. assert That they were men in Office who were scattered and that these all were all the Church-Officers The Text saith The persecution was against the Church they say it was onely against the Officers of the Church The Text saith all were scattered They say only the Officers who were few in comparison of the Church were scattered We confess we cannot but wonder at such interpretations 1. The very Grammatical construction will forbid its being restrained to Officers or their being chiefly intended For ask the Question Who were all scattered abroad The answer must be The Church which was at Jerusalem there are no other persons spoken of for it to have reference unto Officers were not mentioned before Church was and therefore it was the Church and not Officers onely that were scattered and did Preach 2. The Apostles who were the chiefest Officers were not scattered ver 1. They were all scattered except the Apostles Now if the persecution scattering had been of Officers onely then the scattering would have been rather of the Apostles who were the chiefest Officers then of inferior Officers Therefore it 's probable their spite was rather against Church-order and their design rather to break the Church then to scatter Officers Object 1. All the Beleevers were not scattered for it is said ver 3. That Saul made Jus Divin pag. 110. havock of the Church entring into every house and women committed them to prison And Act. 11. 22. There is express mention made of the Church at Jerusalem notwithstanding the persecution Had all the Beleevers been scattered what should the Apostles have done at Jerusalem Answ 1. That by Church is not meant Officers onely ver 1. is cleared ver 3. and that the persecution was against more then Officers for men and women suffered by it 2. Pauls making havock of the Church might be one means of the total scattering of it it may be a narration how the Church came to be scattered rather then of what followed its scattering It may be a declaration of Sauls carriage in this persecution rather then after it It is not said that all were scattered and then Saul made havock of it his making havock of it might be that which fully scattered it and hence the scattering is mentioned again after his making havock of it ver 4. Therefore they that were scattered 3. All the Beleevers might be scattered and yet Saul might be said to make havock of the Church entring into every house after scattering Some of that all might be scattered in Jerusalem and so Saul might be said to make havock of the Church in haling our individual Members of the Church out of those private houses into which they were scattered and putting them in prison The Church might be said to be scattered when deprived of liberty to hold up Church-meetings though the Members had not been driven out of Ierusalem The Text doth not say that they were all driven out of Ierusalem by this scattering though it mentioneth other places into which they were scattered The Church might be scattered thorowout those places mentioned and in Jerusalem too and Saul might make havock of it at Jerusalem 4. Whereas they say there is express mention made of a Church at Jerusalem notwithstanding the persecution Act. 11. 22. We answer This doth not hinder but that all the beleevers might be scattered but onely denyeth that the scattering was perpetual Before the dispersion we read onely of a Church at Jerusalem but before the time mentioned Act. 11. 22. we read of Churches in Judea Act. 9. 31. new Churches were planted in the time between and therefore it is easie to conceive that there was space enough for so many of the scattered Saints to return the persecution ceasing as might walk as a Church at Jerusalem again And for this end might the Apostles tarry still at Jerusalem to put the Church in order again when the heat of persecution should be over and to preach for the conversion of others so soon as liberty should be offered And Sauls entring into every house and haling men and women to prison ver 3. doth argue that not the Officers onely but the Church was now scattered why else should he mention women or make such a narrow search in every house for them if Church-meetings had still continued where he might have taken many together Therefore the beginning of the scattering seemeth to be by depriving of liberty for publick Church-meetings the full scattering by haling out of private houses Object 2. The word all is used here with an exceptive partcile which necessitates to be meant not of Beleevers but of men in Office for if all relate to Beleevers then it will follow that there was not one Beleever left in Jerusalem except the Apostles The particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Genitive case in the New Testament being alwayes exceptive to the utmost as appears Joh. 8. 10. Act. 15. 28. and 22. 22. Mar. 12. 32. but this we are sure is false Answ 1. All is frequently taken for the generality of those persons spoken of yet not including every individual as is often urged against those that assert Universal Redemption as Matt. 21. v. 26. All hold John as a Prophet Yet many did not know John and so could not take him for a Prophet Mark 1. ver 5. There went out unto him i. e. to John all the land of Judea and they of Jerusalem were all Baptized All i. e. very many every individual went not out nor was Baptized by John we read of some that were not Baptized of him Luk. 7. 30. And if we take all in this sence it amounteth but to thus much all i. e. the generality or very many of the Church were scattered 2. There are like expressions used in other terms which are not exceptive to the utmost as Mat. 24. 22. Mar. 13. 20. Except those days should be shortned there should no flesh be saved i. e. very few would be saved not but that some individuals might be saved though they were not shortned Surely some shall be saved whilst the tribulation doth last viz. the Elect for whose sakes the days are shortned And if we take all in this sense it ariseth but to thus much All were scattered abroad i. e. very many were scattered so as there remained very few except the Apostles 3. Admit that all used with the exceptive particle should be exceptive to the utmost yet this doth not follow that then there was not one believer left in Jerusalem except the Apostles the utmost it would amount to is That there were not any believers which were not scattered abroad or that all the believers were scattered abroad except the Apostles But many of them might be scattered about Jerusalem for all this To shew how great the dispersion was it is said Act. 8. 1. They
were all scattered abroad and to shew how far it did extend it is added thorowout the regions of Judea and Samaria Yet not excluding Jerusalem or other parts from being places to which some were scattered Their being scattered thorowout the regions of Judea and Samaria doth not deny their being scattered about Jerusalem and other places also Or the meaning may be None continued together in Jerusalem except the Apostles no visible company of them continued worship together but the Apostles the rest were driven into corners Obj. It is Jus Divin said That they that were scattered went every where preaching the Word it is not said Teaching which may be actus Charitatis but Preaching whith is actus Officii how can they preach except they be sent Rom. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 refers to the act of men in Office Answ 1. Teaching and Preaching in Scripture-phrase are the same Act. 4. 18. They called them and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the Name of Jesus Can it be imagined that they should onely prohibit teaching an act of Charity or do they not forbid all preaching in Christs Name and Act. 5. 42. They ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ Here teaching and preaching are made all one and the very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here used for preaching as one with teaching for both are in the Temple and in every house and if our Brethren will allow teaching in the Temple i. e. publickly as a Charitative act that will be as much as is contended for Here it is said Dayly in the Temple and in every house they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ And therefore in that it is said They that were scattered went every where preaching it is all one in Scripture-phrase as if it had been said They went every where Teaching the Word 2. It is evident even by their own grant in the very Objection by the place they alledge Rom. 10. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for to prove preaching to be an act of Office they alledge that Rom. 10. v. 15. How shall they preach except they be sent and the word there for Preach is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the same verse it is added as it is written How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and bring glad tidings of good things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here in the same verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used promiscuously and declared to be of the same signification now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for such as are no acts of Office Luk. 8. v. 39. The man out of whom the devils departed cannot be proved to be an Officer yet he went his way and published thorowout the whole city how great things Jesus had done unto him The word for publish is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Mark 1. 45. Christ clensed the Leper v. 42. And then charged him with silence v. 44 See thou say nothing to any man Yet v. 45. But he went out and began to publish it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Mark 7. 36. He charged them that they should tell no man but the more he charged them so much the more a great deal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they published it By all which it is evident that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in Scripture-phrase and according to the judgment of our Brethren is of the same signification with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and signifieth to preach yet this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used to express acts of men out of Office and therefore it cannot be evidenced that they who were scattered were Preachers by Office from thence because they went about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preaching the word Obj. 1. Act. 8. 5. There is but one of this scattered number named and he was a person in Office to wit Philip not the Apostle but who is numbred among the Deacons Act. 6. and called an Evangelist Act. 21. 8. By the singling out of this one who was in Office we may judge that the rest were persons in Office as well as he Philip was ordained Act. 6. 6. Answ 1. The consequence is very feeble Because one of those that were scattered was an Officer ergo all that were scattered were Officers non sequitur Some of those that were haled out of houses by Saul were women yet all that he haled out were not women Act. 8. 8. 2. Philip's Ordination was to the Office-work of a Deacon not of a Preacher Acts 6. 6. that Office and Ordination could not authorize him to preach It was to take off incumbrances from Preachers that he and the rest were made Deacons Acts 6. 2. It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables vers 3. wherefore brethren look ye out among you seven men If he were now an Evangelist it followeth no more that the rest were Officers which were scattered because he was then it doth follow that all who were scattered were Evangelists because he was one Obj. 5. It is probable that these that were scattered did baptise as well as preach Act. 11. 26. It is said there there was a Church setled at Antioch which could not be unless they were first baptised but there were none in Antioch to baptise them if they of the dispersion did not for Barnabas and Agabus and other Prophets came not to Antioch till the Church was founded Act. 11. v. 26 27. and this Church of Antioch is expresly said to be founded by the scattered Brethren Act. 21. 19. Now baptisme is to be performed onely by men in Office Mat. 28. 19. Answ 1. We cannot find that it is said there was a Church setled at Antioch before Barnabas had been there much less do we finde it expresly said that this Church was founded by the scattered Brethren Act. 11. 26. saith that a whole year they i. e. Barnabas and Saul v. 25 26. assembled themselves with the Church which clearly sheweth that then there was a Church at Antioch and also that Barnabas and Saul Church-Officers were there but Barnabas had been at Antioch before this v. 22 23. They sent forth Barnabas that he should go as far as Antioch Who when he came and had seen the grace of God was glad and after this he departed to seek Saul v. 25. But when the Church was setled whether before Barnabas came or after we finde not nor by whose hands The place alledged to prove expresly that it was founded by the scattered Brethren is falsly quoted by the Printer Act. 21. 19. for it speaketh nothing about the business If they mean Act. 11. v. 19 21. It is said there that the Hand of the Lord was with the scattered Saints and a great number believed and turned unto the Lord. But this is far from speaking expresly that a Church was founded
by them Surely by their believing they were not founded Church or if they were this will destroy our Brethrens Objection altogether for then either they first baptized them before they did believe and that will cross Gospel-order which pre-requireth believing in those that are Adulti unto baptisme Mar. 16. 16. Act. 8. 36 37. Or else they were first a Church by believing and afterward were baptised and then the Objection falleth for then there could be a Church setled at Antioch though they were not first baptised and they of the dispersion might settle a Church and yet might not baptise Barnabas and Saul might do that afterward 2. We apprehend there might be a Church setled at Antioch before they were baptized if baptisme be to be performed onely by men in Office Mat. 28. 19. and men be Officers onely to a Church as is proved before then they must first become a Church before they can orderly be baptised And then they might be a Church and yet not be baptised until Barnabas came to them 3. If a Church could not be setled at Antioch til first they were baptized yet in such a case of necessity where no Officers could be had why might not the scattered Christians baptize those that were converted though no Officers as well as by our Brethrens first Answer to Act. 8. they might preach in such a case of necessity yet we assert not that men out of Office may baptize Obj. 3. These scattered Brethren are said to be Prophets and Teachers Act. 13. 1. where mention is made of Lucius of Cyrene who in all probability was one of the scattered Preachers as appears Act. 11. v. 19 20. where it is said that some of these scattered were men of Cyrene Answ 1. This is a meer conjecture without any proof for it is no where said that those Prophets and Teachers Act. 13. 1. were of those scattered Christians Lucius might be of Cyrene and yet be none of those mentioned Act. 11. 19 20. 2. But suppose they were this was above a year after the dispersion some think years that these Officers are said to be in Antioch Act. 13. 1. For Barnabas and Saul assembled a whole year with the Church Act. 11. v. 26. and after that Barnabas and Saul were sent with relief to Judea v. 30. and returned chap. 12. 29. and after this are these Prophets and Teachers said to be in Antioch Act. 13. 1. And in such a space gifted Brethren might become Officers at Antioch 3. It is expresly said before this that there came Prophets to Antioch Act. 11. v. 27. And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch And why might not Lucius be one of those Prophets However it doth not appear that these Prophets and Teachers were of the scattered Brethren and if they were yet they might be but gifted Brethren at their scattering Obj. 7. But had they not an extraordinary Call seeing it is said Act. 11. 21. The hand of the Lord was with them and many were converted Answ This doth not prove it to be extraordinary for a plenteous Conversion is promised to ordinary means Isai 60. 5. The Hand of the Lord is put for his Power as Psalm 11 8. 15 16. For his Hand to be with is for him to bless and shew tokens of love as for his Hand to be against is for him to correct scourge and punish Judg. 2. 15. How the Hand of the Lord was with these scattered Saints is declared A great number believed he blessed their labours unto conversion And the Hand yea the Arm of the Lord must be revealed else none will effectually believe Isa 55. 1. Rom. 1. 16. And therefore the Hand of the Lord is with those that have but an ordinary Call to preach the Gospel Obj. 8. But might they not be of the seventy Disciples or have mission from the Apostles Answ 1. The Gospel is silent about it and therefore none can in faith assert it 2. It is improbable that they should have such a mission in regard the persecution occasioned their travels Act. 8. 3 4. Saul made havock of the Church therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word Therefore because Saul persecuted the Church it is not said therefore they preached as if they might not lawfully have preached if the persecution had not been but because they could not enjoy peace and liberty at Jerusalem therefore they went every where and in their travels they were not idle but exercised in preaching the word Then 1. The persecution not the Apostles mission occasioned their travels had they received mission from the Apostles they must have gone whither they were sent though there had been no persecution and then it had not been therefore as it is said it was v. 4. 2. The persecution and scattering in all likeliness made them want opportunity to receive such mission from the Apostles if they had desired it 3. The Church was scattered i. e. the body of the Church for the most part v 1. and they that were scattered preached v. 4. And therefore Deodat if the seventy Disciples were there yet it cannot be limited or restrained unto them as if they onely preached Obj. 9. But this was an extraordinary case it was a time of persecution Some rationally distinguish between a Church constituted and a Church scattered and dissolved between what may be done in a Church gathered and in an ordinary way and in the gathering of a Church and in the cause of necessity It is not recorded that these did preach while they were at Jerusalem in a setled Church but when they were scattered it cannot warrant preaching by persons uncalled where Churches and Ministers are or may easily be had This is no better Argument then if one should argue Because when there was no King in Israel every one did as it seemed good in his own eyes therefore Subjects at any time may do so Answ 1. It is true that a man may do some things necessity driving to it that at other times would be unlawful where there is no such necessity But 1. Though persecution necessitated these Disciples to travel yet that laid no necessity upon them to preach and therefore necessity can be no plea in this case 2. It is questionable whether necessity or an extraordinary case can make that which which is in it self unlawful become lawful if a man doth swear falsly because else he shall suffer he sinneth in it as Peter did when to avoid suffering he with oaths denyed Christ But that which is not in it self unlawful but onely at this time or in this or that case may be lawful in time of persecution If it were in it self unlawful to preach without Ordination then it were to be questioned whether in a time of persecution it could be lawful If when there was no King the people did what was right in their own eyes and not what the Law of God required they
147. they say Sometimes the Pastor is put before the Teacher as Eph. 4. 11. sometimes the Teacher before the Pastor as Rom. 12. 7 8. We may adde further that according to their own interpretation of 1 Cor. 12. 8. the Jus Divinum Min. page 97. word of wisdome denotes the Pastors work the word of knowledge the Teachers work and yet prophesie is put after these v. 10. To another prophesie And if any will build a conclusion upon the order of words which order will they stick to v. 8 10. Prophets are put after Pastors and Teachers v. 28 29. Prophets are set before Teachers 2. The enumerating of Prophets amongst Officers of the Church is not sufficient to evidence that Prophets were Officers for though some Officers be named yet we conceive that all which are named are not Officers for here are eight enumerated 1 Cor. 12. 28. first Apostles second Prophets third Teachers fourth Miracles fifth Gifts of healing sixth Helps seventh Governments eighth Diversities of tongues and elsewhere there are others to be added v. 10. Ephes 4. v. 11 12. ninth discerning of Spirits tenth the interpretation of tongues eleventh Evangelists Can any conclude that there were eight or eleven Officers in the Church in those days You may say that there were so many distinct Officers because so many are enumerated amongst Officers as well as that Prophets are Officers because reckoned up together with Officers Whereas some of those enumerated are gifts v. 4 30 31. and particularly prophesie is called a gift 1 Cor. 13. 2. Though I have the gift of prophesie Rom. 12. 6. Yea diverse of those gifts mentioned 1 Cor. 12. 28. did meet in one Officer the Apostles were Officers yet they wrought Miracles had the gift of tongues Act. 2. v. 3 4. Nay the gift of tongues is one Office if they be all Officers that be enumerated 1 Cor. 12. 28. Diversities of tongues and this gift was granted unto some before they were baptised Act. 10. v. 46 47 48. On the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost for they heard them speak with tongues and magnifie God Then answered Peter Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we And he commanded them to be baptized Here was the gift of tongues before baptisme and therefore according to our Brethrens principles before Church-Membership and if they were not yet Church-Members how could they be Church-Officers if they were not set in the Church how could they be set as Officers in it Yet if the enumerating of Prophets amongst Officers would prove them to be Church-Officers then the enumerating of the gifts of tongues amongst Officers in the very same verse 1 Cor. 12. 28. would prove those that had such gifts to be Officers also 3. If Prophets must be Officers 1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11 12. those places may be intended of the extraordinary Prophets who did foretel of future events as Act. 11. 27 28. In those days came Prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch and there stood up one of them named Agabus and signified by the Spirit that there should be a great dearth thorowout the world If such Prophets be intended in those forecited places and be extraordinary Officers yet this hinders not but that the Prophets mentioned 1 Cor. 14. may be onely by gift especially seeing the fourteenth Chapter is an entire Exhortation of it self and chiefly spent in holding forth Directions about prophesying and that to the whole Church without hinting any thing about foretelling things to come which must be their main work as Prophets if such a sort of Prophets were intended And this leads us to the second Position Propos 2. That some men have the gift of prophesie or that prophesying is a gift still continuing Argum. 1. That which was in use by Divine appointment in the primitive times and no Gospel-Rule can be shewn for the repeal or ceasing of it that must needs be still continuing If the Law which established the use of it be still in force or unrepealed surely the use of it ought to be continued for else the Law of Christ is broken and sin attendeth it But prophesying was in use by Divine appointment in primitive times and no Gospel-Rule can be shewn for the repeal or ceasing of it Ergo prophesying must needs be still continuing That prophesying was in use by Divine appointment in primitive times it cannot be denyed this 1 Cor. 14. almost thorowout is purposely to reprove an irregular use of prophesying and to direct in the right use and therefore as Mr. Shephard well observeth the Apostle doth grant and establish an use of it Now let our Brethren shew any Gospel-Rule to evidence that prophesying is now ceased which we have proved was once in use by Divine appointment We should not need produce a Rule to prove it is not ceased it is their work to prove that it is ceased Yet we shall add a few things which will conduce to the proving that it is not ceased Argum. 2. That which was practised in primitive times which was ordinary is still continuing But the prophesying mentioned 1 Cor. 14. was ordinary Ergo That prophesying mentioned 1 Cor. 14. is still continuing The Major will not be denyed if that which was practised then which was ordinary be not obligatory and binding to us we are to seek for a Rule for our duty The Minor is That the prophesying mentioned 1 Cor. 14. was ordinary for this we may refer the Reader to Mr. Rutherford's Due right of Presbyteries p. 466 467. where he proves by eight Arguments That these very Prophets mentioned 1 Cor. 14. were ordinary Prophets Indeed he asserteth that they were Officers in which he is against us but if his Arguments will hold to prove that they are ordinary Prophets then our Brethren must say either that they are Prophets by gift onely or else assert another sort of ordinary Officers for prophesying distinct from Pastors and Teachers or else retract and unsay what they have said For in their Jus Divin Minist p. 97. they speak thus The gift of prophecie is reckoned amongst the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit and put in the midst of them 1 Cor. 12. 9 10 11. and contradistinguished from ordinary gifts vers 7 8. The word of wisdom the word of knowledge the word of wisdom denotes the Pastors work the word of knowledge the Teachers work but prophesying is different from both these Here our Brethren do plainly assert that prophesying is different from the work of Pastors and Teachers and therefore if prophesying prove an ordinary Office and continuing it must be a different office from Pastor and Teacher And here we cannot but observe how the Lord hath left them to a self-contradiction if the sundry Ministers of London publishing the first Book be of the province of London which published the second For in this Book called
He doth not speak of new revelations but of a revelation of those doctrines of the Gospel which he before had preached Whence it is evident that there are ordinary revelations still continuing And this may answer the great Objection which some raise from ver 30. Say they These prophets spake by extraordinary revelation Ergo They were extraordinary Officers We deny that they spake by extraordinary revelation the Text doth not enforce it There was a disorder in the Church at Corinth viz. Divers of the prophets did speak together or at once in the assembly and so edification was hindred to rectifie this saith the Apostle v. 39. Let the Prophets speak two or three and let the other judge He would have two or three speak and the rest hear and be silent But lest two or three should speak at once or lest one should spin out all the time others who came prepared to speak should want opportunity to exercise their gifts he directeth further ver 30. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by let the first hold his peace i. e. Let not many speak together before another beginneth let the first be silent let one speak a convenient time and then hold his peace and give way or place to others that the gifts of others may be exercised as well as his and a reason is added v. 31. For ye may all prophesie one by one i. e. one after another not many at once Lest they should think that by this means the gifts of some would be cooped up and their liberty for the exercise of them infringed he tells them no they might all prophesie i. e. all who were prophets yet it must be orderly one after another but this doth not evidence the Apostles intent to be that upon a subitaneous impulse which another hath the first must abruptly break off and hold his peace The requiring the first to hold his peace doth not necessarily either forbid his proceeding so far as he intended or command a sudden silence in the midst of a discourse upon anothers having a sudden revelation to give way to that but it forbiddeth the speaking of divers together in the same assembly and commandeth so to contract a mans discourse as there may be opportunity for others who come prepared to speak or exercise their gifts also Neither can it be concluded that they prophesied by immediate inspiration without any previous preparations because what they spake is said to be revealed to them For Gospel-truths are revealed by study industry and the use of ordinary means as well as by immediate inspiration as we proved before and therefore no ground can be fetched from ver 30. that can argue these Prophets to be extraordinaty Officers Indeed the immediate Revelations and real motions of the Divine Spirit do not use to interfere with interrupt and justle out one another as according to such an interpretation they should do If the first did speak by immediate revelation and must suddenly hold his peace before he hath finished his discourse or fully declared his Revelations that another might discover his then the motions of the same Spirit should clash each with other and the Spirit should interrupt it self which it were an impeachment to the wisdom of the Spirit for any to affirm Object 2. Prophets are mentioned with a note of singularity 1 Cor. 12. 29 30. Are all Prophets Ergo Prophesie was a miraculous extraordinary gift Answ 1. A note of singularity is proper to them because all had not the gift of prophesie Some Church-members were not prophets 2. It doth not follow That therefore prophesie was a miraculous extraordinary gift For the ordinary gift of Teaching is expressed with a note of singularity also in the very same verse 1 Cor. 12. 29. Are all Apostles are all Prophets Are all Teachers Object 3. Prophets in all the Old and New Testament signifie some in Office peculiarly call'd and sent 1 Sam. 3. 20. 1 Sam. 22. 5. Act. 13. 1. Act. 21. 10 11. Act. 11. 27 28. The word Prophesying is used generally in the New Testament for that which is extraordinary and by Revelation Matth. 26. 68. Rev. 1. 3. Act. 21. 9. Luk. 1. 67. Rev. 22. 10 19. Rev. 10. 11. Mark 7. 6. 1 Pet. 1. 10. Jud. 14. Luk. 1. 76. and 7. 28. Matth. 21. 26 14 5. Mat 13. 57. Matth. 7. 22. Act. 19. 6 c. Joh. 11. 51. 1 Tim. 1. 18. Answ 1. We have given many reasons to evidence that the prophets 1 Cor 14. are neither Officers nor persons extraordinarily gifted and prophesie being the chief subject of that Chapter hence the acceptation of the word prophesie in that place is more likely to be found in that Chapter then to be fetched from other places which do not purposely treat of that subject And if the word were used there in a different sense from what it beareth in all other places yet there may be enough there to clear that to be the sense of it 2. It is questionable Whether the word prophesying be used in diverse of those places mentioned either for Officers or persons extraordinarily gifted as Act. 13. 1. Rev. 10. 11. Matth. 7. 22. It is one thing for the persons who are prophets to have extraordinary gifts and another thing for them to have the extra ordinary gift of prophesie Those Prophets mentioned Matth. 7. 22. might have power to work miracles to cast out Devils yet their prophesying might be an ordinary gift as Stephen had extraordinary gifts Act. 6. 8. Stephen full of faith and power did great wonders and miracles among the people And yet he had the ordinary Office of a Deacon upon him for all that ver 6 7. It may as well be argued that the Office of a Deacon is extraordinary because Stephen a Deacon wrought miracles as that the prophets Matth. 7. 22 c. were extraordinary because they wrought miracles 3. It appeareth to us as a certain truth that prophesying is used in the New Testament for that which is neither an extraordinary Office nor an extraordinary gift Matth. 13. ver 57. But Jesus said unto them A Prophet is not without honor save in his own Country and in his own house Here the person speaking was indeed an extraordinary prophet but the rule he layeth down is general and cannot be restrained unto him onely or to extraordinary prophets for can any imagine that the sense should only be this He that foretelleth things to come is not without honor save in his own Country Surely it extendeth to all faithfull Teachers or publishers of Gospel-Mysteries for they are subject to be despised in their own country and house as well as they which foretel things to come as Luk. 4. 24. No prophet is accepted in his own Country So Mat. 10. 41. He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophets reward Will any say that this promise runs onely to such as receive
they grant Jus Div. Minist pag. 80. that in cases of necessity men out of Office may preach and instance in Aedesius and Frumentius two private men by whose means the Indians were converted to the Christian faith c. Now the case of Saul was extraordinary the Philistims were ready to assault him he had not made his peace with God Samuel delayed his coming the people began to scatter from him whereupon he constrained himself and offered a sacrifice all these things our Brethren reckon up Jus Divin Minist pag. 81. and then call it a necessitated act So in the case of Uzza what greater necessity could there be then this when the Ark was in danger 2 Sam. 6. 6. The oxen shook it 1 Chron. 13. 9 10. The oxen stumbled If the Ark had fallen or had been broken how exceedingly Israel had suffered by it the use of it will evidence and that dolefull complaint 1 Sam. 4. 17. The Ark of the Lord is taken and ver 22. The glory is departed from Israel for the Ark of God is taken Either our Brethren must say That none may preach in a case of necessity without Ordination or being designed to Office and so cross themselves and that none must preach as probationers for that is designation to Office but they must ordain men before they hear them preach and so before they know their fitness to preach or else they must grant that these examples of Saul and Uzza are impertinent and no proofs of the Argument Let them prove that these acts might be performed so much as once by any before they were actually in such Offices as the works did belong to upon any account whatever 2. These acts were expresly forbidden and some of them threatned with death to any person that did them besides the Officers designed for the doing of them as Numb 4. ver 15. The Sons of Kohath shall come to bear it buâ— they shall nâ—t touch any holy thing lest they dy They are forbidden so much as touching of any of the holy things upon pain of death Uzzah breaking such a command he suffered the penalty was punished with death So Numb 16. ver 40. That no stranger which is not of the seed of Aaron come neer to offer incense before the Lord that he be not as Korah and his company c. All Israelites or Levites save Aarons sons only are counted strangets in this case of Priest-hood None might Offer incense Ainsw but they lest they be as Korah in sin and punishment Numb 1. 51. Numb 18. 22 23. Neither must the Children of Israel henceforth come nigh the Taberbernacle of the Congregation lest they bear sin and dy Let any shew where the preaching of gifted Brethren is thus forbidden else these examples are nothing to their purpose And besides the matter of these works as well as the manner of performing them was not allowed to any but those Officers whereas the matter of this work of preaching is allowed undenyably to such as are no Officers they may exhort and reprove privately by our Brethrens own grant but might not privately burn incense or offer sacrifice which sheweth a further difference between those acts Object 3. This practise doth make voyd or at best unnecessary and insufficient those Officers which God hath appointed What needs a peculiar Officer to be set apart to a common work Answ 1. It is common but to such as are gifted not to all Christians as they suggest 2. It is not performed in the same manner by gifted men or under such a relation as in case of Office it is Officers preach to their Churches as to those that they are over in the Lord that are committed to their charge for such ends but gifted men stand not under any such relation to those they preach unto Some Churches have no Officers and those that have yet need the gifts of other Members In some places there are no Churches to be Officers to the people having never had the Gospel preached to them It will hardly be proved that Officers must leave their Churches to preach to these and if not they must either finde some Officers who have no Churches which is to finde a shepherd without a flock a relate without a correlate or else they must say that none must preach for the conversion of such or else that men not in Office may preach and this doth not make Officers either voyd unnecessary or insufficient Officers are necessary and sufficient to the end that Christ hath appointed them unto to be over and take charge of his Churches under him but they are not sufficient to undertake the whole worke of preaching in all places and to all persons 3. This Objection lyeth as strongly against Officers being designed to admonish exhort or reprove at least in private for what need a peculiar Officer to be set apart say they to a common work other Christians may exhort and reprove and will our Brethren say therefore there is no need that Officers should be designed to this work Obj. 4. This practise doth confound disturb that order which God hath set in his Church therefore it must needs be sinful God is the God of order and not of confusion 1 Cor. 14. and hath commanded that every one should do his own work 1 Thes 4. Rom. 12. And abide in his own calling 1 Cor. 7. he hath condemned those that walk disorderly 2 Thes 3. and are busie-bodies he hath placed in his Church different orders some shepherds some sheep some Teachers of the word some to be taught as their places so their works are distinct This takes away the distinction between shepherds and flock Pastor and people c. Ans 1. We have proved that the preaching of gifted Brethren is a part of that order which Christ hath appointed therefore doth neither confound nor disturb that order which God hath set in his Church If Christ hath allowed their preaching then it is their work and in doing of it they walk orderly We have shewn before that it doth belong to their place and calling to preach and thither we refer the Reader 2. The preaching of persons not designed to Office doth not take away the distinction between shepherds and flock Teachers and some Taught because they do not act under such a relation towards them as Officers do A Father may reach and instruct his children as a Father another man may instruct and teach the same children as a School-master yet these relations are not destroyed or confounded hereby though both doe the same work Here are Fatherly teachings and yet the distinction between the Master and Scolar is not taken away and the same may be said if a friend Teacheth them who stands in no such relation to them It is a common practice in Schools for some youths of ripe wits and wel learned by the appointment of the School-master to be often set to teach fellow-scholars and yet the
power and therefore we deny that the joyning those two works together in the same commission doth conclude that all they which may do the one work may also do the other 4. It is denyed by some that preaching of the word is a greater work then baptizing Saith Dr. Homes The sealing of a Deed is a greater Act then the writing reading Dr. Homes Church-cases cleared page 47. or publishing of a Deed. Every Clerk may write out a Deed but onely the conveyancer or owner may seal a Deed. Preaching is to all even to Infidels 1 Cor. 14. Baptism belongs onely to those that are reckoned to to be within the Covenant And he addeth 1 Cor. 1. 17. doth not intimate that preaching is greater then baptising for the Apostle Ib. pag. 48. asketh Were ye baptized into the name of Paul so the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intimating that men in baptisme were baptized into the Name of Christ as Mat. 28. 20. but not in one Sermon of many is a man in any degree brought unto Christ To justifie himself that he had baptized but few he repeats his commission not the prelation of preaching above baptizing viz. that he had his commission in Act. 9. 15. c. the command Ib. pag. 49. of his commission did not so run to that as to preaching c. 5. Suppose that preaching the word be a greater work then baptizing yet it doth not follow that those who may preach may also baptize a work less weighty in it self may by a Divine institution be limited to Officers and a work more weighty not be so limited Gifted men may do what Gods word warrants them in doing though it be a greater work then some acts of Office Argum. 5. To usurp authority over the Church is a sin But to preach without Calling and Ordination to the work is to usurp authority Jus Divin Minist pag. 88. over the Church Therefore Answ We deny that to preach without Ordination to the work is to usurp authority over the Church Gifted men do not preach without Calling though they have not Ordination which our Brethren assert to be essential to a Call 1. We suppose our Brethren understand here by Ordination as they do elsewhere a solemn setting apart by fasting and prayer and imposition of hands 2. Their Argument necessarily supposeth that there is such an Ordination to the work of preaching and yet we can find no Arguments either here or elsewhere produced by them to prove that such Ordination to the work of preaching is necessary by Christs appointment Yet their position which all these Arguments are produced to prove is this That pag. 80. none may undertake the work of the Ministry but he that is solemnly set apart thereunto or That pag. 76. none may do the work of the Ministry without Ordination And therefore if it be not proved That Ordination is by Gospel-Rules to the work the position is not confirmed at all yet for ought we see this they leave all alongst unproved Their third Argument speaketh of an Officer a Deacon being so ordained but the utmost that this can conclude is That none may undertake an Office or do a work Office-wise without Ordination but this is far from pâ—oâ—ing that none may do that work at all without such Ordination None may distribute as an Officer as a Deacon but he that is ordained to the work Ergo None may distribute at all but he that is ordained to the work None may exhort or rebuke as an Officer without he be ordained to the works Ergo None may exhort or rebuke at all without he be ordained to the works What shadow of a consequence is here Yet no better do we find in the case in hand their position is general That none may do the work of the Ministry without Ordination Their proofs are particular because none may do the work as Officers without Ordination It remaineth therefore necessary for the confirming their main Position and this Argument that they prove 1. That Ordination or a solemn setting apart by fasting prayer and imposition of hands is necessary not onely to the Office but to the work of preaching Or that none may do that work without such Ordination As yet we can see no proof for this if we could we would exhort gifted men to take up such Ordination to the work of preaching but if this could be proved we should question whether they were Officers or no by this Ordination for though they were ordained to that work yet it is possible they might not be ordained to the Office of which that is but one part when a man is in Office Therefore it is further to be proved 2. That none may do the work of preaching but one in Office or that none may be ordained to that work without being ordained to Office Or that preaching the word is a work peculiar to men in Office Else some gifted men out of Office may perform it for what is not peculiar to Office may be performed by some who are no Officers 3. That to preach without Ordination to the work is to usurp authority over the Church If it were granted that none might preach the Word but such as are ordained to that work yet such as preached without Ordination might not usurp authority over the Church 1. Because preaching in it self is not that we can find an act of authority 2. Because such unordained men might preach to Heathens or Indians where no Church is planted and how the preaching could be usurping authority over the Church when no Church were preached to we see not It might be a sin against Christ but yet no usurping authority over the Church But they endeavour to prove their Minor by asserting preaching to be an act of Authority if that were granted yet but one part of their Minor is proved they should also have proved that none have that authority without Ordination otherwise we might say Preaching is an act of authority but yet men may preach without Ordination to the work for there are other ways to invest men with authority to perform such an act besides and without Ordination yet they have given us no proof that Ordination is that onely which authorizeth to perform such a work To prove that preaching is an act of authority they say Obj. 1. The Apostle 1 Thes 5. 12. gives this charge Know them that are over you in the Lord and admonish you where to admonish is to be over Answ That Text doth plainly difference and distinguish the being over from the admonishing them and yet our Brethren produce this place to prove that they are the same The being over them denoteth their place the admonishing of them denoteth but one work performed by those that are in such a place Officers are there spoken of and they admonish those they stand in that relation to as being over them and if it be an act of authority when performed under such
c. and therefore a ministerial power of Government is granted to them by Jesus Christ and in respect of this their place they are set in not under but over the flock the Church is in relation to its officers a Governed body and they are stiled Governours because a special charge of oversight and Government is committed to them as a work and business which they are to give a special attendance to Yet all the members of the Church are to have an oversight each of other and of the Officers themselves Col. 4. 17. Say to Archippus take heed to the Ministry which thou hast received in the Lord that thou fulfill it the Colossians are exhorted to admonish their Officer Archippus and so were to Oversee his conversation else how could they know what to admonish him for and if any brother offend the offended though no Officer is to admonish and if he doth not hear him or one or two not the Officers onely but the Church is to admonish Mat. 18. vers 15. 16 17. tell it unto the Church but if he neglect to â—ear the Church c. therefore the Church is to admonish else how can he hear it and this admonition is a part of Government for if the Church be not heard Communion with him is to be avoided let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a Publican And therefore the sole power of Government is not in the officers the Church hath a power to put forth some acts of it The officers are in a special sense Governors as being and or a more especial designation to take cognizance of and go before the Church in the ordering its affairs then any other particular members No other members can rightly challenge it as their place to be over the Church as they may But yet a power of Government is granted to the Church over its particular members though its actings therein be not under the Relation of office Under the Relation of a whole it putteth forth acts towards its parts as a boly it acteth sometimes to the cutting off particular members for the preservation of the body If a Church hath Officers they by their place are to go before the Church in directing and executing determinations according to the will of Christ but the power under Christ of determination admonition and excommunication resideth in the Church Mat. 18. 17. the acts are not of the Officers only but of the Church If a Church censureth an offender when it hath officers the officer acts towards that offender as one set over him in the Lord who hath taken a soecial charge and oversight of his soâ—â— and urgeth duty upon him because else he shall sinfully break the Law of that Relation which is between them in crossing still the will of Christ but the Church urgeth duty upon the same offender because he shall else not onely sin against Christ but break the Law of his Relation to the body which as a member he ought to keep If a Church hath no officers it censureth offenders as a free people or spiritual corporation invested by Christ with such a power under the general Relation as a body it is to seek the preservation of it self and if possible the healing of its diseased members For it is a Church stâ—â—â— though it wanteth officers and so the Rule of Christ runneth to it Mat. 18. 17. No Church of Christ can be exemped from that Rule Communion is to be avoided with such persons as will not hear any Church of Christ when it doth admonish for such a cause as deserveth admonition Office-power where it is afforded is but the superaddition of another Relation to adde more chains to the offender if he proveth obstinate and to prevail the more with him towards submission but the power of the censure is in the Church not in the officers onely The officers are useful for the better management of censures but have not the sole power of censuring They are to Govern in censuring but the Church hath a power to censure Yet the Church doth not act under such a Relation in cenâ—uring as an office doth as in acts of Government in a Corporation the Bayliffes by their place and office are over the whole Corporation yet the Free-men may have power for Admission or ejection of members into or out of the freedom of the place and many by vote carry it without or against the Bayliffes but when they concur they act under one Relation and the Freemen under another and this different Relation makes a vast difference between the Bayliffes and the Freemen in their actings though the matter of the acts be the same 2. No distinctive Acts are necessary by our brethrens principles for some officers They assert-Ruling elders to be of Divine institution and yet these have no distinctive acts which they onely may perform the main argument that Ruling is that which is accounted their most proper work and yet that is not accounted incommunicable for they grant a Ruling power to the Preaching elders as well as to them If a ruling power may be communicable without making the Ruling elders function frustraneous as to its main Act why should the Preaching of gifted men render the Preaching elders office frustraneous though Preaching be his chief Act. And indeed this is it which we deny in Master Collings Argument viz. That the ministrial function or office is uselesse as to this Act of Preaching of every gifted person may do it And now we expected some Scripture proof of this the Argument being of no force if this be not proved and all that we can find he saith to it is this Object What need any particuliar persons be by the Ordinance of God appointed to do that which all may do Answ 1. We do not say that all may do it but onely that those who are really gifted may do it all Christians are not gifted 2. If there be Scripture warrant for the Preaching of gifted men then it is needful whether our reason can see it so to be or not for none of Christs institutions are needless 3. The granting liberty unto gifted men to Preach doth not render it needlesse for particular persons to be by the Ordinance of God appointed to do it in the Primitive times the Preaching of Apostles Evangelists and Prophets did not render it needlesse for Pastors and Teachers to be by an Ordinance of God appointed to do it nor did the appointing of Pastors and Teachers render Apostles c. un-necessary It helpeth not to say they were all officers who by divine appointment were to do the work for we say gifted brethren are also by divine appointment to preach and besides the argument is built upon this principle That what others may do there is no need that any particular persons should be appointed by God to do and so it will strike at those as well as others If every Church-member of ability may distribute to the poor
is able to do the lesser therefore he is able to do the greater Now the office of a Deacon is inferior to the office of a Presbyter c. Answ 1. Our brethren use the same Argument from the lesser to the greater Affirmatively and take it from this very instance of Deacons Surely they might take such Coyn as they pay to others To Prove Ordination of Ministers to be an Ordinance of Christ in Jus Divin Minist p. 1. pag. 158. this very book they use this Argument In the very choice of Deacons which was but an inferior office and serving onely for the distribution of the temporal estates of people the Apostle requires that they should not only be Elected by the people but also ordained to this Office much more ought this to be done in the choice of persons who are called to the work of Preaching and dispensing Sacramental mysteries a service of all others of greatest weight and worth These are their own words in which the Reader may see that they argue not onely from the lesser to the greater but even to the greatest and that Affirmatively The Argument is the same and as forcible if we apply it to Election and say thus In the very choice of their Deacons which was but an inferiour Office the people had the power of Election much more ought they to have the choice of their Pastors who are to be exercised in the work of Preaching and dispensing Sacramental mysteries which are services of all others of greatest weight and worth 2. An Argument from that which is both lesser in it self and also in probability to that which is greater may not be valid Affirmatively we grant it is no good way of arguing to say because a man is able to do the lesser therefore he is able to do the greater Our brethren are mistaken if they think that we argue thus the people are able to chuse Deacons Ergo they are able to chuse Pastors That the people have abilitie to chuse their Pastors is not the immediate conclusion of our Argument from Act. 6. but that Christ hath granted the people a liberty or power to elect their Pastors this is it which we strictly conclude thence and in the second place we may argue That because Christ hath granted them liberty or power to chuse their Pastors therefore he hath given them ability to do it These are two distinct questions 1. whether the people have abilitie to chuse their Pastors 2. whether Christ hath granted the people or a particular Church liberty and power to chuse them It is the latter of the two which we determine Affirmatively from Act. 6. If their abilitie to chuse their Pastors be questioned we have many other Mediums to prove that by as John 10. v. 4. The sheep follow him i. e. Christ for they know his voice v. 5. And a stranger they will not follow but will flee from him for they know not the voyce of strangers and v. 14. 27. Whence it is evident that not only Church-officers as Pastors and Teachers but the sheep of Christ who are to be fed or Taught even they have abilitie to discern whether it be Christs voice or the voice of strangers which they hear whether they be such Teachers as they are to follow or such as they are to flee from and what can be required more to give abilitie for Election but a knowledge what Teachers they are to own and who are to be avoided our Brethren at other times will grant that the peoples choice maketh a man their Minister their Pastor and how could this be if they had not ability to chuse and why is it that they here argue against their having the whole and sole power of Election if Officers lay claim not onely to Ordination but also to part of Election it will be next unto nothing that they will leave to the people 3. An Argument from the Lesse to the Greater in probability or in the causes of it though the thing also be greater in it self yet is valid affirmatively in Divine things from that which is less credible lesse likely hath less apparent grounds and causes for it to that which is more credible more likely hath more apparent grounds and causes for it is a good way of arguing and that affirmatively and therefore it is not a certain rule which our Brethren give that Argumentum a minori ad majus non valet Affirmative The Scripture is frequent in such arguings as Mat. 6. v. 26. Behold the fowls of the Air your heavenly father feedeth them are ye not much better then they v. 30. If God so cloath the grass of the field which to day is and and to morrow is cast into the oven shall be not much more cloath you O ye of little faith Luk. 12. v. 6 7. Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings and not one of them is forgotten before God but even the very hairs of your head are all numbred fear not therefore ye are of more value then many sparrows Luk. 11. v. 13. If ye then being evil know how to give good gifts unto your children much more shall your heavenly Father give the holy Spirit to them that ask him The Argument from the Less to the Greater affirmatively is urged in all these instances from the Lords taking care of the Lillies of the field and the fowls of the air which are of less value he argueth that he will take care of his own people who are of Greater value or far better then they From earthly Fathers providing for their children he affirmeth with a much more that our heavenly Father will provide for his children things far Greater in themselves And the same is our Argument from Act. 6. If the Lord would have the people have the whole and sole choice of their Deacons who were to take care of their bodies and worldly goods much more would the Lord have the people have the whole and sole choice of their Pastors and Teachers who are to take care of their souls as Dr. Ames saith There are more and more weighty causes requiring the consent of the Church in appointing Pastors then in appointing Deacons Indeed the spiritual welfare of souls is promoted or hindred according to the sutableness or unsutableness of the Teachers as the comfort of the natural life would many times be lost if a man should be forced to take a woman to be his wife without chusing her or a woman were forced to have a man for her husband that she did not chuse yea though the parties might be gracious that were so taken unchosen So the comfort of the spiritual life would often be lost if such Pastors were obtruded upon Churches as they did not chuse and many temptations they might be exposed to in the case of unsutable Pastors more then in the case of unsutable Deacons and therefore the whole and sole power of chusing Pastors appertaineth to the Church
requisites to those new Officers are clearly found in the Text. Here is 1. Election in its proper place before Ordination as it was Act. 6. v. 5 6. The Deacons were first chosen And after that they prayed and laid on hands So here by the direction of Paul and Barnabas the people first chose Elders in every Church by suffrages or lifting up of hands and thus the native signification of that word is retained and the peoples priviledge preserved to whom the chusing power doth belong for by their own grant they could not be their Ministers their Pastors their Shepherds without their chusing of them and these were to be made their Pastors their Elders for such are said to be created in every Church therefore here was an appropriating of these Elders to those Churches by their chusing of them and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so aptly expressing so undeniable a requisite to such a matter as the Apostle is treating of we wonder that any should offer to vex and trouble the Text by forcing a sence upon the word which the Scripture knoweth nothing of 2. Ordination which is holden forth by those words And had prayed with fasting And thus we have removed the objections against the Scriptures alleaged for the peoples having the whole and sole power of Election Their second Argument to prove that the power of Election of Ministers doth not by Divine right belong wholly and solely to the Major part of every particular congregation is drawn from the mischief that they say will inevitably flow from this assertion And four mischiefs they speak of Obj. 1. It is certain that every one that is to be made a Minister is first of all to be tryed and proved whether he be fit for so great an office 1 Tim. 3. 10. Let these also be proved c. these also that is the Deacons as well as the Bishops the Bishop therefore is to be tryed and examined whether he be apt to teach whether he be able to convince gain-sayers Now there are many Congregations wherein the Major part are very unfit to judge of Ministerial abilities and if the whole and sole power were in them they would set up Idol-Shepher ds instead of able Shepherds Ans 1. That persons ought first to be proved whether they be fit for such an Office before it be conferred upon them we grant i. e. A knowledge or good experience that they are furnished with such qualifications as the Gospel requireth such Officers should have ought to be attained before Election unto the office If they intend by it a formal examination implying the superiority of the examiners the subjection of the examined the Text doth not witness that such a probation is required If a Church by observation of a mans conversation by hearing his doctrine by its own familiar converses with him and others report of him hath gained a knowledge or experience of his fitness for the work this is all the proving that can necessarily be enforced hence 2. It was referred to the Church to judge of the qualifications of Deacons Act. 6. v. 3. Look ye out among you seven men of honest report full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom This implyeth that they were able to discern whether they were so qualified or not else it had been in vain to put them upon looking out such And it is as easie to judge of most of those qualifications required to be in an Elder 1 Tim. 3. as it was of those required in a Deacon Act. 6. The people are able to discern whether a man be blameless the husband of one wife vigilant sober of good behaviour given to hospitality v. 2 3 4 5 6 7. and therefore onely their ability to try whether they be apt to teach and able to convince gain-sayers can be questioned and we have clear proof of a Churches proving Deacons let our Brethren shew as clear proof for a Presbyteries proving Elders 3. We desire Scripture grounds to evidence that any true Churches of Christ consist of such members as the Major part are unfit to judge of Ministerial abilities this we deny and they give us their bare word for the proof of it This being unproved no such mischief as they suppose doth ensue upon the peoples having the whole and sole power of chusing 4. The Sheep of Christ are said to know his voice Joh. 10. v. 4. v. 5. A stranger will they not follow but will flee from him and this importeth their having ability and liberty to judge what Teachers they are to Elect and what Teachers they are to reject and the sheep of Christ who are hearers are thus to judge of Teachers Surely this implyeth their fitness to prove them both whether they be apt to teach and able to convince gain-sayers Obj. 2. There are some Congregations wherein the Major part are wicked and if left to themselves wholly would chuse none but such as are like themselves Ans 1. This will as well deny it to belong to the Eldership as to the Major part of a Church for there are many wicked men who are ordained so are according to our brethrens principles made Elders and if they associate are a wicked Eldership and if left to themselves would chuse and ordain none but such as are like themselves Surely our Brethren cannot deny the Election of Pastors to a wicked Congregation yet grant it to a wicked Eldership And if they say itbelongeth onely to a good Eldership to act therein we may as well say it belongeth onely to such a Congregation the Major part whereof is good 2. We do not say the power of Election of Pastors doth belong to such a Congregation the Major part whereof is wicked but to such a Church the Major part whereof is visibly godly if the Major part of a Congregation be wicked we suppose then it is no true Church If once it were a Church yet now it ceaseth to be so or is unchurched or else the Minor better part is to be deemed the Church By Congregations surely they mean Parishes our brethren know that though some pleaders for the peoples power of Election have granted that there are true Churches in some Parishes yet they never said that we can find that Parishes taken collectively are true Churches Because the major part of many parishes are wicked therefore we deny that they are Churches of Christ or that the power of Election of Officers doth appertain to the Major part of the Parishioners We cannot find that they are in a capacity to have Officers over them until they be a Church and so are uncapable of Elecing They suppose a Church or Congregation sutable to Presbyterian Principles and then deny the Election which is according to Congregational principles to belong to it Obj. 3. There are some wherein the Major part posbly may be heretical and will never consent to the Election of an Orthodox and sound Minister Ans 1. The answers
his wife and no relation may arise thereupon but that act which setteth a man over a woman as her husband is that which giveth being to a relation which had no foundation before So Election setteth over a people a Church and so maketh a man an Officer as well as their Officer 2. They conclude beyond their proof when they say all that the people did by Election of Deacons was to design the persons to their particular charge and set them before the Apostles Act. 6. 6. it is said they chose them Acts 6. 5. and we shewed before that chusing denoteth a constitutive act Neither doth that Text say that the Apostles praying and laying on their hands was it that made them Deacons They were as we suppose made Deacons by Election and the appointing at the utmost was but to the work not to the office of Deacons 3. As for Deut. 1. 13. we might make a question whether the peoples Election of Church-officers be not a further act then here was granted them about their civil Officers for the designation of the persons to their particular charge which our brethren in this objection grant is Election was not till after this nomination nay was performed by Moses v. 15. Or we might tell them what learned Ainsworth saith on the place Here the people gave them and after in ver 15. Moses gave that is made them heads for when things are done by many under the government of one principal they are said to be done by them or by him as 1 Chro. 19. 19. compared with 2 Sam. 10. 19. So 2 Kin. 11. vers 12. with 2 Chron. 23. 11. and 1 Chron. 16. 1. with 2 Sam. 6. 17. But we rather answer thus The cases do not run paralell for Moses was the Supream Magistrate and so might reserve such a power to himself in the constituting of civil officers as neither a Presbytery nor a Church can claim about the constitution of Ecclesiastical officers whether it belongeth to the Church by Election or to Presbytery by Ordination to give the call yet it is but an outward call that they give to Church officers a far greater power is put forth in the creating or constituting civil officers Neither Ordination by a Presbytery nor election by a Church do answer Moses act onely Christs acts in making Churches officers do answer Moses acts in making civil officers because onely Christ is King of his Church as Moses was the Supream Magistrate over Israel So that we may say it is not Election nor Ordination but Christs act onely which in the sense of Deut. 1. 13. doth make Church officers and therefore this place will not serve at all to their purpose 4. Is is usual in civil Corporations for the Freemen who are no officers by their Election to make their own officers It is very usual for them to Communicate an office power and to give the Essentials of a call to their Bayliffes and other officers when yet the Freemen cannot act or exercise an office-power but are in subjection unto those officers which by their election they give both place and power to and why then should this be such a riddle to any Either the Freemen in such cases have office-power vertually or else they that have it not either formally for so the Freemen have if not nor virtually yet may communicate office-power If they will say they have that power vertually then so hath a Church and by election may give the Essentials of a Ministerial call as well as the Freemen can by election make civil officers to rule over themselves 5. It is well observed by some learned men that if the people have not office-power either formally or vertually yet they may by election Communicate office-power Ministerially they may Ministerially give what they never had viz. As Ministering to him who hath power and vertue of deriving it as a man not having a penny of his own may give an 100l if the King make him his Almoner Thus the Church deriveth office-power as taking the person whom Christ describeth and out of power will have placed in this or that office in his Church It is very ordinary for those that are lesser or inferiour to communicate a power that rendreth the receiver greater in place power and dignity then the giver of it thus Free-holders and o hers by chusing do make Parliament men and Burgesses though they be far inferiour to the persons chosen c. and therefore that rule nihil dat quod non habet nec formaliter nec eminenter is not universally true 6. It doth not appear that the main or chief end of Paul and Barnabas in their journey to Lystra Iconium and Antioch was to ordain elders it is said Act. 14. ver 21 22. They returned again to Lystra and to Iconium and Antioch Confirming the souls of the disciples and exhorting them to continue in the faith and that we must through much tribulation enter into the Kingdom of God So that the Confirmation and establishment of those Saints in the faith and the encouraging them to patience and perseverance seem to be the principal ends of their undertaking this journey and therefore it is a vain question why did they not spare their journey and send to the people to make their own Ministers by election Though there had not been one Minister to be ordained yet their journey could not well be spared for then the souls of the disciples would have wanted Confirmation and it is easie to imagine that they would have taken more pains then they did in this return only to have confirmed their souls and their concurrence in Ordination is mentioned as one of the last things they did ver 23. and that may be but an Adjunct to the Ministerial call for all that is yet said against it And it is not made the sole end of Pauls leaving Titus in Crete that he should ordain elders for it is said Tit. 1. ver 5. For this cause left I thee in Crete that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting and ordain elders c. If there had been no elders to have been ordained yet it had been needful that Titus should be left in Crete to set in order other things that were wanting and still Ordination may be but an Adjunct of the ministerial call We do highly esteem of Ordination as an appointment of Jesus Christ yet we would not give it a higher place then Christ hath set it in we cannot find that Christ hath made it of that use to give the Essence to the call to office and we cannot but fear that many do too much magnifie and even Idolize that Ordinance of Christ Arg. 5. If election gives the Essentials to a Minister then may a Minister elected administer the Sacraments without Ordination For as Master Hooker well saith in another case He that hath compleat power of an office and stands an officer without exception he cannot justly
Father and a Master and is to give instruction to his neighbours also by the Law of love or charity but his omitting or neglecting to give such instructions to children is no breach of the Law of his relation as a Master but of his relation as a Father and his neglecting to give instruction unto neighbours is no breaking the Law of his relation as a Father or a Master but of the common Law of love or charity and when he giveth these instructions to his children he doth not put forth any act of the relation of a Master therein or if he giveth them to his servants he doth not put forth any act of the relation of a Father therein c. So if Pastors and Teachers do preach and administer the Sacraments to their own flocks which they are over they act as Pastors as Teachers as Officers to them therein because the Law of their relation bindeth to such duties towards them and the failing of them were to break the Law of Office-relation but if they perform these acts to any not of their own Congregations they do not act as Pastors as Officers to them therein for they stand in no such relation to them and if they refuse to perform such acts to those not of their own Congregations they do not break the Law of their relation as Pastors or Officers but they sin against the Law of the general office of charity which bindeth to seek the promoting of our neighbours good to the utmost of our ability and capacity And as it is frequently found that Oâ—ficers as in Corporations c. may extend some priviledges and immunities to some which they are no Officers to which none but such as are Officers have power to afford so in this case 3. It is an assertion contrary to Scripture for the Scripture tells us 1. That Jus Divin Min. p. 138. there is a Church general visible 2. That Ministers are primarily seated in the Church general visible and but secondarily in this or that particular Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. Ephes 4. 11 12. 3. That every Minister hath a double relation one to his particular Church another to the Church general visible he hath a vertual and habitual power to preach as a Minister in any place where he shall be lawfully called Therefore Ministers are spoken of in Scripture under a general notion to shew the indefiniteness of their office They are called Ministers of God 2 Cor. 6. 4. Ministers of Christ 1 Cor. 4. 1. but never Ministers of the people Ans 1. If by Church should be meant a general visible Church yet it would not follow that those Officers might act in any part of that Church but onely where they are fixed as we shall shew afterward 2. If they be never called Ministers of the people to be sure they are never called Ministers of the Presbytery 3. They are called Elders of the Church Act. 20. v. 17. which is as much as to say Elders of the people 4. The speaking of Officers under a general notion doth not prove the indefiniteness of their Office or the extent of it beyond a particular congregation for if they might not preach or administer the Sacraments to any out of their own congregations yet it were proper to call them Ministers of God of Christ of the New Testament of the Gospel Ministers in the Lord and Embassadors for Christ 4. This assertion that a Minister can perform no Pastoral act out of his Jus Divin Min. p. 140. own congregation is contrary to found reason They mention seven consequences hereof Object 1. Hence it will follow That when a Minister preacheth in his own Congregation to members of another Congregation he doth not preach to them nor they hear him preach as a Minister but as a gifted brother And that at the same time he preacheth as a Minister by vertue of his office to those of his own Congregation and to others of anther Congregation then present onely as a gifted brother ex officio charitatis generali cut of the general office of charity which to us is very irrational Answ If by as a Minister they mean as an Officer then we see no absurdity in it to say that he preacheth to some as an Officer as under a special relation to them as over them in the Lord and at the same time preacheth to others not as an Officer or not as over them or in any such relation to them A man at the same time may give instruction to some as a Father to others as a Master to others as a friend and neighbour as we shewed before So that a man may act under one relation to some and not under that but another relation to others in the very same act without any absurdity Obj. 2. Hence it will follow that when a Minister preacheth out of his own Congregation Jus Divin Min. p. 140. he preacheth onely as a private Christian and not as an Ambassador of Christ and when he acts in a Synod his actings are the actings of a private Christian and when he preacheth a Lecture out of his own Congregation though it be in a constant way yet he preacheth onely as a gifted Brother Now what a wide door this will open to private men to preach publickly and constantly in our Congregations we leave it to any indifferent man to judge Ans 1. We deny that in any of the cases mentioned a man facteth as an Officer his Office-power is not drawn out in his preaching out of his own Congregation or when he acteth in a Synod or preacheth a Lecture constantly in another Congregation Our brethren have given us nothing to prove that he acteth as an Officer in any of them 2. Yet we deny that it doth necessarily follow he must act as a private Christian therein if he acteth in a Synod he may act as a publick Messenger and yet not act as an Officer for such as are no Officers may be sent to act in such a meeting as the Presbyterians themselves grant and though comparing them with Officers whose actings are constantly in publick they may be called private Christians i. e. comparatively they are not persons so publick in their actings as Officers are yet they being chosen by a Church which is a publick assembly to act in a Synod in a publick work hence they may not act barely as private Christians in such works If the brethren in a Church act in a Synod as they did generally at Jerusalem Act. 15. v. 22 23. we suppose they will not say that the brethren generally are Officers or act as officers yet either they must grant it or else assert that men may act in a Synod not as Officers And then either they act as private Christians or else as publick persons in those occasional publick employments So when a Minister preacheth out of his own Congregation and when he preacheth a Lecture constantly he may be said to
Christian faith We will suppose an hundred heathens converted we demand by whom shall these be baptized not by a private Chrictian To baptize is an act of office Not by a Minister for a Minister say they cannot perform any Pastoral act such as this is out of his own Congregation Neither can these hundred converts chuse a Minister and thereby give him power to baptive them for they must first be a Church before they have power to chuse officers and a Church they cannot be till baptized neither can they joyn as members to any other Church and thereby be made capable of Baptisme by that Minister into whose Church they are admitted For in the way of Christ a man must first be baptized before he be capable of being outwardly and solemnly admitted as a member of a particular Church The three thousand were not first added to the Church and then baptized but first baptized and thereby added to the Church Ast. 2. 41. Answ 1. The difficultie of such a case if there be any in it will be found in their way as well as in ours for if an hundred heathens be converted we may ask by whom shall these be baptized not by an officer for a Minister or officer is set in the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. not in the world suppose it be the Catholick visible Church that is there intended yet still the Church is the boundary of Office it reacheth no further then that and the hundred converted heathens are no members as yet of the Catholike visible Church because say they persons are admitted into that Church by Baptisme and these are not yet baptized What have officers who are set in the Church to do to perform an act of office to such as are no members of any Church if they have an habitual power to Act as Ministers in any place of the world yet that power extendeth no further then the Church for then they must have a threefold relation one to the Church Catholick another to a particular Church and a third to the world and all as officers 2. Christ hath left these wayes for the Baptizing such as are converted from heathenisme to the Christian faith either they may joyn as members to some Church and so be made capable of baptisme by the Minister of that Church into which they are admitted Or they may joyn together as a Church and so call an officer who may baptize them We see no inconvenience in asserting that they may be a Church before they be Baptized the onely place alleadged against it doth not say that they were first Baptized and thereby added to the Church but the words are these Act. 2. 41. Then they that gladly received his word were Baptized and the same day there were added about three thousand souls They might be added to the Church either before or after baptisme and yet all this might be said and therefore it cannot prove that they were added by baptisme Their being Baptized was rather a sign of being added then that by which they were added Christs way is expressed Mat. 28. 19. Go ye therefore and Disciple all nations baptizing them c. they are to be first discipled and then baptized and a disciple properly is one in Christs School his Church Act. 8. ver 3. compared with Act. 9. v. 1. lest any should say that the discipling of them was by baptizing them those two are plainly distinguished John 4. ver 1. Jesus made and baptized more Disciples then John Here is a difference put between making a Disciple and baptizing him And therefore such converts may orderly become a Church or Church-members before they be baptized we have proved that they are not admitted by baptisme and themselves will grant that they are Church-members immediately after it and therefore surely their admission is to be before their baptisme Object 6. Hence it will follow That a Minister Preaching out of his own Congregation cannot Lawfully and warrantably prononnce the blessing after his Sermon for to blesse the people from God is an act of Office and to be done only by an officer Nu. 6. 23 24 25 26 compared with Revel 14. 5. Deut. 10. 8. 2 Cor. 13. 14. Eph. 1. 2. Answ 1. We do not judge that the Levites did blesse as types any more then they did pray or exhort as so nor that blessing should cease now Christ is come to blesse any more then other acts in which Christ is chief but they were appointed to bless as they did minister Deut. 10. 8. 1 Chron. 23. 13. 2. Blessing is an act of office we grant and to be performed by an officer but not onely to exhort is an act of office yet some not in office may exhort as we have proved and might do so under the Old Testament without offence to the Levite Act. 13 ver 14 15. we have read that the Jewes had in their Synagogues a Pew or Seat on purpose for brethren to speak out of where they that had any thing to offer did place themselves and set until the rulers therein did give liberty of speech in which Seat Paul was noted by them and not as an Apostle but as a brother among them and they sent unto him that sat viz. in the Speakers place In like manner blessing is an act of office it was performed by the Levites but not onely David did blesse and he was no Levite 2 Sam 6. 18. 3. Though blessing were to be performed by office onely yet being an act of a common nature which all have right in who are blessed of Christ it may be put forth by vertue of communion which case hath been already spoken to by us Argu. 7. If the whole Essence of the ministerial call consisteth in Election Jus Divin Min. p. 144. without Ordination then it will necessarily follow that when a Minister leaves or is put from that particular charge to which he is called that then he ceaseth to be a Minister becomes a private person and that when he is elected to another place he needs a new Ordination and so toties quoties as often as he is elected so often is he to be ordained Ans If by Minister they mean an officer we grant the consequence thus far that if he leaveth or be justly put from that particular charge to which he is called then he ceaseth to be an officer and when he is elected to another place he needs a new Ordination we can see no inconvenience in granting this consequence If by Minister they do not mean an officer then they speak nothing to the question in hand which is onely about a call to office we deny that either election or Ordination giveth the call to gifted men to Preach But we suppose they speak of the call to office and then although we deny that an officer leaving or being unjustly put from his particular charge becomes a private person for by Christs allowance he may still act in
the publick work of preaching which may denominate him a publick person yet we grant he ceaseth to be an officer when the relation to the particular Church ceaseth But this seemeth to them a very great absurdity and contrary to sound Doctrine which they endeavour to prove diverse wayes Object 1. Because every Minister hath a double relation one to the Church Jus Divin Min. p. 145. Catholick indefinitely another to that particular Congregation over which he is set Ordination is to the Essence of the Ministerial office and not onely in reference to a particular place or charge The Reverend Assembly say that the Ministery was given by Jesus Christ to the general Church visible which they prove from 1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 4 5. compared with ver 10 11 12 13 15 16. of the same Chapter Now if Ministers be seated by Christ in the Church Catholick as well as in their particular Churches then it followeth That they have a Relation as Ministers to the Church Catholick and though their relation to their particular Church ceaseth yet their Ministerial relation ceaseth not because they were officers of the Church Catholick and there doth still remain in them a power in Actu primo to dispense all the Ordinances of Christ though their call ad actum secundum five exercitium pro hic nunc as Master Hudson phraseth it ceaseth Even as every private Christian hath also a double relation one to the Church general and another to the particular place whereof he is a member and when he removes from his Congregation he doth not cease to be a member of the visible Church for then his baptisme should cease for every baptized person is a member of the Church but onely of that particular Church a Minister of the Gospel when he leaves his particular Congregation he continueth still to be a Minister though not their Minister and needs no more to be ordained a new then a private Christian to be baptized a new because neither Ordination nor baptisme do stand in relation to the particular Congregation but to the Church Catholick Answ 1 Part of this makes the question the proof of the question for their proposition is That the the whole Essence of the ministerial call doth not consist in Election without Ordination and part of the proof is because Ordination is to the essence of the ministerial office 2. Their illustration for a proof it is not doth run them unavoidably into Anabaptisme which themselves cry out so much against for they plainly assert these two things 1. That if a man ceaseth to be a member of the visible Church then his baptisme ceaseth 2. That every baptized person is a member of the Church From these we conclude That every person justly excommunicate is an unbaptized person for he is ceased to be a member of the visible Church and say they when a man ceaseth to be a member of the visible Church then his baptisme ceaseth and it followeth from the second also for we argue thus Every baptized person is a member of the Church No excommunicate person is a member of the Church for they say every Minister by excommunication ejecteth out of the Church Catholick visible Jus Divin Min. p. 139. Ergo No excommunicate person is a baptized person If no excommunicate person be a baptized person then if upon repentance one be re-admitted into the the Church he must also be Rebaptized or else be in the Church unbaptized And re-admission upon repentence is commanded 2 Corinth 2. ver 6 7 8 9 10. ye ought rather to forgive him and comfort him c. This mistake of theirs we suppose ariseth from their asserting that Baptisme doth admit or make to stand in relation to a Church whereas baptizing is not into a Church neither into a particular nor into a general Church as if that gave a being to a relation unto either but Baptizing is to or into the Name of Christ baptisme is a solemn sign of a persons taking the Name Christ upon him or of his being engaged under and to make profession of and own that Name in all wayes and for all uses and ends that it serveth to Mat. 28. 19. baptizing them to or into the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy-Ghost Acts 8. 16. 1 Cor. 1. ver 12 13 14 15. And hence although a person be baptized in a Church yet when he leaves that Church or ceaseth to be a member of it yet his baptisme ceaseth not If by excommunication he be ejected out of the Church yea if he ceaseth to be a member of the Catholick visible Church if there be such a one yet he doth not lose his baptisme that remaineth as a testimony against him as a solemn sign of his engagement for the Name of Christ which now he denyeth as if a man hath Covenanted under his hand and seal to pay an Annuitie c. to such a person if afterward he refuseth to make payment thereof yet his hand and seal will evidence against him so will baptisme against those that cast off the profession of Christs Name and upon this account if a Christian leaveth one Congregation and joyneth with another yet he need not be baptized again because he did not receive baptisme as a sign onely of his being engaged for the Name of Christ whilst he walked with that Congregation but for ever the case is not alike for Ordination for if a man after he be ordained proveth wicked scandalous or heretical he may be excommunicated and deposed and losing his office he loseth his Ordination especially if Ordination did give the Essence to the call to Office surely he hath not that upon him still for then he might be an Officer of Christ when he is no member of any Church of Christ but he doth not lose his baptism And besides it is not proved that his Office reacheth beyond a particular congretion whereas his baptism doth 3. We deny that an Officer hath a double relation one to the Church-catholick and another to his particular congregation the places cited do not prove that he hath a relation as a Minister to a Church-catholick as for 1 Cor. 12. 28. If a Church-general visible were intended there yet it would not follow that any mans relation as an Officer doth extend so much as habitually or in actu primo to the utmost bounds of that Church for it may properly be said There are set in the Common-wealth Justices Constables c. Yet will any conclude hence that Justices sustain a double relation one to the Counties wherein they live and another to the whole Common-wealth or that Constables have a double relation as Constables one to the parish where they live another to the Common-wealth or that they have a power in actu primo to do the Office of Constables in all places of the Common-wealth So an Officer may be said to be set in the Catholick visible Church
becoming no Officers do take up office a new again though the Scriptures do not mention it under the notion of an iteration of Ordination but under the notion of ordaining Officers at their first entrance into office Take it thus Major All that assume office in the Church ought to be ordained All the Scriptures that prove Ordination of Officers to be necessary do prove this and our brethren cannot deny this Proposition unless they will give up the whole case and say that some may assume office in the Church without Ordination and surely then gifted brethren may preach without it Minor But those that remove to take the charge of a new Church they assume office in the Church For upon a removal they became no Officers because their office extended no further then their particular Church and now they become Officers again in taking a new charge Conclusion Ergo Those that remove to take the charge of a new Church ought to be ordained When the person ceased to be an Officer his Ordination which was an adjunct of his office ceased also and then he was considered as without Ordination and he taking up office again is ordained again because else he assumeth office without Ordination as really as if he had never been ordained 3. If any example could be shewn of an ordinary Officers removal from one Church to become an Officer to another Church we do suppose it would give an example of the iteration of Ordination 4. Ordination is not a setting apart to the office of the Ministry but of such as are already Officers to the work of their office We do not say that Ordination is a setting apart to the exercise of office in such a place but to such persons or to such a Church that Church may remove to another place or meet at a great distance from the place where now it is seated yet he acteth as an Officer towards it there 5. As for Act. 13. 2 3. thus much may be concluded from it viz. That when Officers are called by the Lord to the work of office amongst a people not before committed to them or when they take a new charge upon them they are to be ordained If this example hath not the force of a Rule in the grounds and ends of it what use is it of to us for our direction or imitation if it doth not oblidge us to use Ordination upon an occasion of like nature it is binding as an example in nothing for what may be alleadged against its being exemplary in this will as well deny it to be exemplary in other things and then why do our brethren alleadge it at all for Ordination If Ordination were needful for Paul and Barnabas upon their taking a new charge for office-work when yet they ceased not to be Officers upon the coming of this new call but onely had their Commission inlarged by it then much more is Ordination needful for ordinary officers upon their taking a new charge seeing they do cease to be Officers upon such removals If this Ordination of Paul and Barnabas were as they say by the immediate appointment of the Holy Ghost that may speak that in these dayes we are not to expect such an extraordinary immediate call to ordain Officers but it doth not deny it to be a a binding example to us in all that was ordinary in it Now it is ordinary for Officers to have a call to a new charge as Paul and Barnabas had here and the ends of this praying for them were ordinary viz. that the Lord would afford his special presence to and blessing upon them in office-work in their new charge and therefore it doth warrant the iteration of Ordination in case there be a removal to a new charge Object 4. If the whole essence of the Ministerial call consisteth in popular Election then will two other great absurdities follow 1. That Ordination can in no case precede such Election 2. That there must be Churches before there be Ministers Answ We know no absurdity in asserting these but let us hear how they would prove them to be absurdities We conceive many cases may be put in which Ordination may lawfully go before Election we shall onely give two instances 1. When an ordained Minister removes upon warrantable grounds from one charge to another the people to whom he removes chuse him not as one that is to be made a Minister but as one already made and now to be made their Minister c. 2. When there is a necessity of sending men as there is now in New England for the conversion of Heathen people we think it very agreeable unto Scripture rules that these men should be first ordained before they be Elected by the Heathen to whom they are sent And the reason is because that the conversion of souls is the proper work of the Ministery When Christ went up into heaven he left not onely Apostles Prophets Evangelists but also Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edifying of the body of Christ Eph. 4. 11 12. And the office of ordinary Ministers is to be Embassadors for Christ and in Christs name or in Christs stead to beseech people to be reconciled unto God Where it may be had there we conceive it is most agreeable to the Word that men should be first ordained before sent hereby they shall go with more authority and shall have power to baptize those whom they do convert which otherwise they cannot lawfully do c. They grant liberty to preach as Probationers before Ordination yet here they say men cannot lawfully baptize without he be ordained whence we infer 1. That according to their own principles baptizing is more limited to Officers then preaching 2. That men may act as Embassadors of Christ though they be not ordained for if they preach but once as Probationers either they act as Embassadors of Christ and then Ordination doth not make them such or else there is some preaching warranted by Christ not as his Embassadors and then gifted men though no Officers and without power to baptize and though they be not Embassadors for Christ yet may preach 2. They assert a Mission here which is no part of Ordination for they say it is most agreeable to the Word that men should be first ordained before sent There is a sending then which is distinct from and may be subsequent to Ordination and why then do our brethren so often assert sending and ordaining to be all one or how will it appear that any other sending is intended Rom. 10. 15. then this which themselves grant Ordination may be before 3. When an Ordained Minister removes upon warrantable grounds from one charge to another he is to have a new Ordination but a new Election is to precede this new Ordination The Gospel knoweth no difference between making a man a Minister and making him their Minister if by Minister they
if believers without officers may not ordain then no more may any officers for one is as much warranted as the other and so Ordination is unattainable That no officers on earth are authorized or appointed by Christ to ordain in such a case any more then believers without officers we prove because such officers must be authorized or appointed by Christ to ordain either by general Gospel rules which speak nothing of Ordination it self but onely of such acts as it consisteth of and who may perform these and those general rules will warrant believers and authorize them to ordain as much as officers for believers may use Prayer upon special occasions without officers and are as well allowed to exercise themselves thereunto as any officers Or else such officers must be warranted to ordain in such cases by the special Rules and examples which are left in the Gospel about Ordination and these do not limit Ordination to officers in case a Church hath no officers in it nor warrant them to ordain any more then believers without officers For either they were extraordinary officers to whom the Rules were given about Ordination and who acted therein and so those Churches where they ordained were not without officers for they were officers in all Churches where they came Or else they had an extraordinary call to ordain and so they will not warrant any ordinary officers without an extraordinary call to ordain any more then believers without officers There is not one precept for nor President or example of any ordinary officers acting in Ordination out of the particular Church he is over upon any ordinary call in any one Text that Ordination is spoken of as will be evident by examining the several places that speak about it In Act. 6. 2 3 5 6. Either the twelve Apostles alone who were extraordinary Officers were the persons ordaining or the Apostles and the Disciples together v. 3. whom we may appoint we i. e. as some think you and we as we doth often include the persons spoken to as well as the person speaking as Eph. 2. 5. When we i. e. you and we were dead in sins v. 10. we i. e. you and we Apostles are his workmanship c. and then it belongeth to the people to ordain however the Apostles were Officers in that Church In Act. 13. v. 1 2 3. The persons ordaining were Prophets and Teachers if it be meant of ordinary Prophets such as 1 Cor. 14. then it proveth that such as are no Officers may act with Officers in Ordination if they were extraordinary Prophets so might the Teachers be also for Paul and Barnabas who were extraordinary Officers are reckoned up as some of the Prophets or Teachers that were in the Church of Antioch v. 1. and seeing it cannot be proved that any of them were ordinary Teachers and if they were yet they were in the Church at Antioch v. 1. hence this place doth not evidence that it belongeth to ordinary Officers to ordain in a Church that hath no Officers of its own And our brethren themselves tell us that this was by the immediate appointment of the Holy Ghost the Holy Ghost said separate me c. and v. 4. and they add further this was an extraordinary thing and therefore not sufficient to ground an ordinary practice upon So that from their own words we conclude that the call was extraordinary and therefore it will not warrant such persons to ordain who have no such extraordinary call thereunto In Act. 14. 23. Our brethren say the persons that did ordain were Paul and Barnabas who were extraordinary Officers As for 1 Tim. 5. 22. The person spoken to was Timothy who was an extraordinary officer an Evangelist 2 Tim. 4. 5. As for 2 Tim. 1. 6. Paul was an Apostle As for Tit. 1. 5. he was an Evangelist also as our brethren grant because he was sent from place to place 2 Cor. 8. 6. 16 23. 2 Tim. 4. 10. and was to ordain as Paul appointed him As for 1 Tim. 4. 14. we see nothing from the word to convince us that any one in that Presbytery was an ordinary officer and though it be usually taken for granted that it was an ordinary Presbytery yet we much question it and whereas it is often urged to shew a necessity of an ordinarie Presbytery in these dayes for the mannaging of Church-affairs and some are ready to say that an ordinance of Christ is wanting in many Churches because there is but one Presbyter no Presbytery to all such plea's we say it is a mercy the Lord hath afforded a Presbytery or diverse Presbyters to some Churches but suppose a Church as Corinth Ephesus c. had fix or eight Presbyters these it will easily be granted did make a sufficient Presbytery to act in Church-affairs but if the Lord added six or eight Presbyters more to the former number it was a mercy yet no ordinance of Christ was wanting when they were but six or eight in all nor no new power was given by such an addition as made the number twelve or sixteen but onely more persons were afforded for assistance in the use of that power which before fewer had So if there be put one elder in a Church the Presbyterial power resideth in him and so no ordinance of Christ is wanting then and if the Lord addeth more Presbyters that there be a Presbytery in a Church no new power is given by such an addition for if these act in a united way as a Presbytery they are but Presbyterial acts which are put forth and so they are if a single Presbyter putteth forth the same acts and therefore here is the onely difference that we can find where there is a Presbytery more persons use that power which one alone may use And as one that laid hands on Timothy and so joyned with other Presbyters in the very same act that this Presbytery is said to perform was an extraordinary officer viz. Paul 2 Tim. 1. 6. So might all the rest in the Presbytery be as well as one It might consist onely of extraordinary officers and yet aptly be called a Presbytery for they were Presbyters If the Apostles onely ordained Deacons Act. 6. yet they might be called a Presbytery or else that will evidence that it doth not belong to a Presbytery onely to ordain and why may not that be called a Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. 14. though it consisted onely of extraordinary officers as well as that company Act. 6. And the word Presbytery being no where else found but in this place in the new Testament where it can be supposed to intend any Ecclesiastical Assembly of Christs appointment and fairly admitting of such an interpretation in this place hence our brethren are wholly at a losse for a Rule for their Presbyteries However our brethren say that those words by prophecie do signifie the Jus Divin Min. p. 167. moving cause and that which encouraged Paul with the Presbytery to
The Scriptures hold forth neither precept nor president for the necessary subordination of any Church of Christ to any society of men without it self for any acts of Church-government as this is by our brethren supposed to be it is ordinary for Churches to be without any officers either by the death or removal c. of those that were seated in them and if they cannot attain officers without some officers of other Churches put forth acts of Government and jurisdiction to make officers for them that will imply a necessary subordination of Churches to other societies without them which is no where warranted by the Word 2. There is no Gospel Rule to warrant any ordinary officers in putting forth any acts of Government or any Presbyterial acts properly so called towards any persons without those particular congregations where they are fixed as officers let our brethren produce any such Gospel rule to justifie their acting both for matter and manner as Presbyters as officers towards any beyond their particular Churches over which they are made overseers They are officers whereever they act but they do not act as Presbyters to any out of their particular congregation If 40. or 100. Mayors Bayliffs or Constables meet together they may be called Mayors Bayliffs or Constables but cannot act unitedly in any acts of such offices though they be officers and have a lawful authority to act singly every one within his own precincts yet they have no power to act together as such officers all the Mayors have not power to act together as Mayors to any one Corporation all those Constables have not power to act together as Constables so Ministers have a power from Christ to act as officers as Presbyters in their own congregations but if a hundred of them meet they have not power to act together as Presbyters as Officers to any one congregation It is not not enough that they are all Officers of Christ to warrant their acting togethers as Officers but they must be commissionated by Christ to act in combination and together as a Presbytery or else they cannot justifie their actings There is no Scripture warrant for any other Presbytery but that onely which is within a particular congregation and there is no rule to justifie a Presbytery of a particular congregation in putting forth any acts as a Presbytery towards any but the members of that particular congregation where they are fixed and therefore some believers may as lawfully ordain as any Presbyters in the world for their power as Presbyters extendeth no further then their particular Congregations and if they do not act as Elders in ordaining then why may not believers ordain without Officers Divers of Mr. Collings Arguments against hearing of men not ordained we may use here and they will conclude much more strongly against calling in Officers of several Churches and their acting in combination or together as a Presbytery in ordaining Officers for a Church which is without Officers Such a company of Officers have no promise made to them in acting as a Presbytery nor the people in calling them in for that end and therefore they cannot pray in faith for a blessing upon them therein according to his third Argument Ordaining Officers is instituted worship and Officers of divers Churches are are not warranted either by Scripture precept or president to become a Presbytery and as a Presbytery to ordain and therefore by his fourth Argument it is sinful It is to run out of Gods blessing for there is no promise made by God to it and it is a running upon temptation because a Presbytery of Officers of divers Churches is no ordinary means of Gods appointment and therefore to practice that way is sinful and unlawful by his sixth Argument It is to partake of other mens sins for such a Presbytery is encouraged in ordaining and so in sinning they having no warrant as a Presbytery to ordain by mens coming to be ordained and therefore it is sinful by his seventh Argument And thus it may be seen what inconveniencies the asserting Ordination to be an act of a Presbytery as such draweth along with it But if Ordination be no act of Government no act peculiar to a Presbytery as such which as we conceive it is not then a Presbytery may ordain where a Church hath one and either some believers without Officers may ordain or the Officers of other Churches may be called in to ordain not as a Presbytery but as persons meet and able to do such acts as Ordination consisteth of in case a Church hath no Officers Arg. 3. If some believers who are no Officers may publickly preach then in a Church that hath no officers they may lawfully or warranably ordain without officers For there is no Scripture-light to evidence that ordination is so great a work as preaching or that it is more limited or restrained to officers then preaching is But some believers i. e. such as are gifted who are no officers may publickly preach as we have largely proved Ergo some believers in a Church that hath no officers may lawfully and warrantably ordain without officers Arg. 4. If some believers may with Christs allowance act in other special publick Church-works then also in a Church that hath no officers they may ordain unless some special reason can be given against their ordaining more then against their doing those works for the Scripture doth not limit and particularize all the services they may act in But some believers may with Christs allowance act in other special publick Church-works and there can be no special reason given against their ordaining more then against their doing those other works Ergo in a Church that hath no officers they may ordain The Minor we prove from Act. 15. 2. They determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them should go up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question A Church then hath power to chuse call and depute not onely officers but others of their members to act in special publick services as occasion is offered and necessity requireth and this deputation was to act in a publick Assembly as the chapter sheweth and will our brethren say that those may act in a Synod who may not act in ordination Nay the brethren acted in that Synod v. 22. Then it pleased the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch c. by which it is evident that a Church of Christ hath power by an occasional choice to authorize some believers to act in special publick businesses appertaining to the Church yea the brethren acted in making the very decree it self v. 23. The Apostles and Elders and Brethren send greeting c. The decree runneth in the Brethrens name as well as in the Officers name as the Title sheweth and therefore either our Brethren must say that some believers may ordain or else that men may act in making decrees in
of these was continued through all ages by their creating others in the place of those that died by this ceremony of imposition of hands c. To all which we answer 1. That these things except that of Moses are not recorded in Scripture as themselves confess and therefore are no cogent Arguments to evince the necessity of such a succession 2. The use and end of Imposition of hands by Moses on Joshua was the conferring of gifts Deut. 34. 9. And Joshua the Sâ—n of Nun was full of the Spirit of wisdom for Moses had laid his hands upon him c. 3. We may far better argue for the peoples imposing hands on Officers from their laying hands on the Levites then they can for Officers doing it from Jewish Writers 4. If such a line of succession be necessary how can any in these dayes prove their own standing to be legitimate for we are perswaded they cannot evidence that this line of succession hath holden all along from the Apostles dayes until themselves were ordained and if it were ever broken they are as ill as ordained by the people for then some unordained persons did ordain those that derived Ordination to them But they wave this way of arguing and would fetch four Arguments from Scripture against the peoples ordaining without officers Obj. 1. From the constant practice of the Church of Christ as it is set down in Jus Divin Min. p. 185. the Apostolical Writings We challenge any man to shew any one Text in all the New Testament for the justification of popular Ordination We read of Ordination by Apostles Act. 6. Act. 14. and by Prophets and Teachers Act. 13. and by Evangelists Tit. 1. 1 Tim. 5. 22. and by a Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. 14. but for Ordination by the people we meet not at all with it may we not say to such Churches that usurp upon this work as it is said Mat. 21. 23. By what authority do you these things and who gave you this authority Answ 1. There is not one example amongst all these alleadged which proveth that ordinary Officers ordained ordinary Officers If Apostles ordained Act. 6. Act. 14. and Evangelists Tit. 1. 1 Tim 5. 22 these were extraordinary Officers and so were some of those Teachers Act. 13. 1. as Barnabas and Saul and so might all the rest be however the persons ordained and the call to ordain was extraordinary v 2 the Presbytery is not proved to consist of ordinary Officers 1 Tim. 4. 14. and however it was an Evangelist that hands were imposed upon and the call to it extraordinary as we have shewed so that our breathren cannot find an example of ordinary Officers ordaining ordinary Oâ—ficers amongst any of these instances and therefore they are at as great a loss for an example of their practice as the people are for an example of theirs in ordaining 2. None of these examples do speak of Ordination in a Church that is without Officers we may grant that where a Church hath Officers they may ordain but the question is whether the people may not ordain without Officers in a Church that hath no Officers in it Not one of the Texts alleadged do give us an example of Ordination in a Church that had no Officers no Presbytery in it The Apostles were Officers in all Churches where they acted in Ordination and so Evangelists and so the persons ordained by them received Ordination from such as were Officers in the same Churches where they were ordained and it cannot be proved that the Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. 14. consisted of ordinary Officers of divers Churches We may turn our brethrens own words upon themselves We challange any man to shew any one Text in all the New Testament for the justification of Ordination by a Presbytery consisting of ordinary Officers of any other Churches besides that where the person ordained is an Officer And may we not say to such a Presbytery that usurpeth upon this work as it is said Mat. 21. 23. By what authority do you these things and who gave you this authority so that still our brethren are at as great a loss to warrant their practice out of the Word as the people can be 3. We have given divers Scriptural Arguments to prove that in such a case the people may ordain without Officers and so we have answered the challenge 4. None of these Texts do limit Ordination to Officers onely and therefore they speak not against the peoples ordaining without Officers If ten or twenty examples could be given of Apostles and Evangelists yea and ordinary Officers ordaining yet these could but conclude Affirmatively that officers may ordain they would not conclude Negatively that none but Officers must ordain as there are many examples in the New Testament which shew that professing believers and repenters were baptized Mat. 3. 6. Acts 2. 41. Acts 8. 12 37 38. Act. 18. 3. but they are far from concluding that none else may for then no Infants might be baptized So here because Apostles Evangelists Prophets Teachers and a Presbytery did ordain to say Ergo none else may ordain or therefore believers may not ordain without Officers the consequence is seeble If Apostolical practice be of the nature of a Gospel injunction to us in ordinary actings yet it must be affirmatively onely that some persons may in such cases act in the same duties but it doth not hold negatively that no other person may in other cases act therein We may argue as strongly from the Texts against ordinary officers ordaining in a Church that hath no officers in it as they can against believers ordaining without officers it they will conclude negatively from them as thus we read of Ordination by Apostles by Prophets and Teachers by Evangelists by a Presbytery upon an extraordinary call and in the Churches where they were officers but for Ordination by ordinary officers we do not certainly read of that and for Ordination by ordinary officers upon an ordinary call or in Churches that had no officâ—rs in them we meet not at all with it and therefore as well may we conclude hence that ordinary officers may not ordain in such cases as they may that believers may not without officers for there is as little spoken of the one as of the other in those Texts and therefore they can gain nothing by this Argument Obj. 2. Ordination by the people is not only not written in Scripture but it is against the Scripture For to what end and purpose should Jesus Christ appoint officers extraordinary and ordinary for the doing of that work which the people themselves may do to what purpose did Paul and Barnabas go from place to place to ordain elders why was Titus left in Crete to appoint elders in every city might not the people say what need Paul leave Titus to do that which we can do our selves Frustra fit per plura c. Answ 1. In this time of the first plantation of Gospel
Churches extraordinary helpes were necessary for the giving a knowledge of that Gospel order which Christ would have observed in his Churches and as Physical rules may be known in the Theoretical part and yet it is needful to have direction in and about the practical part so when the Apostles had converted people to the faith it was needful that they or Evangelists c. should give them a knowledge of Church order what Officers they should have and also direct them how to put in practice such Gospel Rules as are left about the attaining of Gospel Officers and although Paul and Barnabas and Titus had not acted at all in the Ordination yet their going from place to place had not been unnecessary because their guidance and direction was advantageous in coming up to Gospel order 2. We might as well say to what end and purpose should the people ordain in those dayes when there were Apostles and Evangelists who might by their office go from place to place and ordain many works that men lawfully may do yet if others be put in trust to do such things they say to what purpose should we act in them when they need no help we will not take the works out of their hands yet this hindreth not acting in them when help is wanting which is the case when a Church is without Officers 3. It is not proved that the principal or chief end of Christs appointing Officers either extraordinary or ordinary or of Paul and Barnabas in going from place to place or of Titus in staying at Crete was to ordain Elders that was but a little parcel of their work whereas our brethren speak of it as if it were the chief intendment of their journeyings too and fro And unless it were their main business which cannot be proved what colour of reason is there in it against the peoples ordaining because Paul and Barnabas went about confirming the souls of Saints c. Act. 14. 22 23. and ordained Elders in some Churches in their journeyings and because Titus was left at Crete to set in order things wanting Tit. 1. 5. and where they were without officers did ordain elders therefore it was to no end and purpose that they went from place to place or that Titus stayed at Crete if the people themselves might ordain Who will not discern the weakness of such an Argument it may easily be answered that if they had not ordained one elder or if the people had ordained all in their presence yet there were other necessary ends and purposes that they were sent from place to place about viz. to Preach the Gospel and confirm the Saints c. 4. Christ hath appointed officers to do some works which others may do who are no officers yet it was not in vain or to no end and purpose that officers were appointed to do them officers are appointed to visit sick the Jam. 5. 14. Is any sick among you let him call for the elders of the Church c. and yet will any say to what end and purpose are elders appointed to visit the sick if others may be called for and may visit them will our brethren say here frustra fit per plura c. There might be some officers its like in some of those Churches where they ordained elders and Paul and Barnabas Preached where they went but will any say to what purpose did they Preach if the officers that were before in those Churches did Preach frustra fit per plura c. This Argument would be as strong against Apostles and Evangelists Preaching where officers were who might Preach as against the peoples ordaining without officers The Apostles and other officers might be appointed to do it and yet the people might have liberty to ordain in a Church without officers and we can find no Scripure that this will be against Object 3. All that is written in the Jus Divin Min pag. 186. Epistles concerning the Ordainers and the qualification of the ordained c. is all written in the Epistles unto Timothy and Titus who were Church-officers In the other Epistles which were written unto the Churches there is no mention made of these things which doth abundantly prove unto us that the work of Ordination is a work belonging to Ministers and not to the people Ans 1. It is usual to direct charges unto officers when yet the duties required are to be performed by the people at least when their concurrence with the offices is called for in coming up to the duties so Rev. 2. the Epistles are dedicated to the Angels of those Churches and yet our brethren grant that they are to be understood as meant of the whole Churches as appears Revel 1. 11. Revel 2 ver 7. 11 17. So although those charges be directed to Timothy and Titus yet as Master Hooker observeth It never was intended they should act them alone c. Either these things were to be acted by Timothy and Titus with company and then why not by the people as well as by officers there is as little mention made of the concurrence of officers as of the people and if we fetch the Rule for it from other Scriptures then the qualifications of officers being laid down in those Epistles as they were before the people to regulate their Election Acts 6. ver 3. hence we may safely conclude that the people are intended and are to be acters in following these charges as well as officers If Timothy and Titus were to act them alone then they are written to them as Evangelists or else it must be granted that it belongeth not to a Presbytery only to ordain one Presbyter may do it and if to them as Evangelists then they are no Presidents unto us 2. All may aptly be written to Timothy and Titus although they acted not at all in the Ordinations because they were to give directions unto others how to act in them They might be directed to them because they were to see the things done although many of them were to be done not by themselves but by others hands as Titus 1. 5. Surely Titus himself was not alone nor with officers to set in order all things that were wanting If Deacons were wanting was Titus and other officers onely to act herein surely the people were to chuse them according to Acts 6. ver 3 5. and therefore the things written about were not to be acted onely by Church-officers but some of them by the people with the guidance and direction of these officers which they had So 1 Tim. 2. ver 1 2. I exhort that first of all supplications prayers intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men for Kings and for all that are in authority c. will any say that onely Church officers are to pray for Magistrates and those in Authority surely such Subjects as are no Church-officers may pray for their Governours as well as for other men and yet this charge is given
to Timothy as well as that about Ordination 1 Tim. 2 ver 9. 11. In like manner also that women adorn themselves in modest apparel let the women learn in silence with all subjection This charge is given to Timothy also as well as that about Ordination and yet the things given in charge were to be acted by women not by Church officers but Timothy was to give forth directions unto women to put them in practice By all which it is evident that the writing to Timothy and Titus who were Church-officers about Ordination doth not prove that the work of Ordination belongeth to Ministers and not to the people for in the very same Epistles the Apostle writeth to Timothy and Titus about other matters which undoubtedly were to be acted by the people and cannot be restrained to Church-officers It is also considerable that it is said Tit. 3. v. 15. Grace be with you all and therefore more then Titus or Church-Officers even all the Saints in those places where Titus was are written to And Tit. 2. v. 15. These things speak and exhort 1 Tim. 4. v. 6. If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things thou shalt be a good Minister of Jesus Christ. Whence we conclude that the design of the Apostle in directing these Epistles to Timothy Titus who were Church-Officers rather then to Churches was not to restrain the acting of those matters contained in the Epistles unto Church-Officers but to excite Timothy and Titus to an exhorting and putting such in remembrance to whom it belonged to do them and what is written about Ordination may be acted by the people as well as other matters in the Epistles and the writing of them to Timothy and Titus will not forbid the one more then the other If no other special reason can be produced out of the Epistles themselves we must have recourse unto other Scriptures to find out to whom it belongeth to ordain and what is the use of these qualifications which are required to be in Officers and we find that they are to regulate the peoples Election as well as Ordination Act. 6. 3 5. Some things are written to them as Evangelists others to them either as Christians or as Officers to give directions about the acting of them are to be acted by Christians who are no Officers let it be proved that the rules about Ordination are to be put in practice by Officers onely They might hold forth that some Officers might ordain and yet be far from holding forth that the people may not Ordain Object 4. From the nature of Ordition It is a potestative and authoritative Jus Divin Min. p. 186. Mission It is an eminent act of jurisdiction not onely confirming a Minister in that office which he had before by Election but conveying the very office-power of preaching and administering the Sacraments It is that which gives the essentials of the Ministerial call and therefore by the rule of the Gospel it belongs to Officers and not to private persons The Scripture doth accurately distinguish between Church-rulers and private believers Heb. 13. 17 24. 1 Thess 5. 12. Private persons can with no more lawfulness convey power to another to administer the Sacraments then they can themselves lawfully administer the Sacraments Church-power is first seated in Christ the head and from him committed to the Apostles and from them to Church-officers And they alone who have received it from the Apostles can derive and transmit it to the other Ministers c. Ans 1. We deny that Ordination is a potestative and authoritative mission We have shewn that there is a vast difference betwen mission and Ordination 2. We deny that Ordination is any act of jurisdiction at all much less is it an eminent act of jurisdiction They would prove that the people may not ordain because ordination say they is an act of jurisdiction and that it is such an act they have not proved and therefore the Argument falleth of it self What they have added is far from proving it as appeareth by what followeth 3. We deny that Ordination conveyeth the Office-power of preaching and administring the Sacraments or that it giveth the essentials of the Ministerial call the grounds of this denyal we gave before 4. If Ordination did convey office-power or gave the essentials of the Ministerial call yet that doth not prove into be an act of jurisdiction It is an ordinary thing for the Free-men of a Corporation to convey office power or to give the essentials of a call to office to their Bayliffs and other Officers and yet the Free-men are no Officers nor cannot be said to put forth an act of jurisdiction herein And as it is without Scripture-proof that if private persons may convey power to others to administer the Sacraments then they may administer the Sacraments themselves so it is against the very rules observed in civil societies where it is ordinary for such to have a lawful power to give the essentials unto the call to office who have no power to execute the places of those Officers which they make but ought to be ruled by that power so communicated In civil Corporations the Officers are as clearly distinguished from the people governed as in Church-affairs they can be and yet the persons governed convey the power to the Governors and this without any act of jurisdiction by voluntary subjection and so in Church-matters the people convey office-power not by an act of jurisdiction but by voluntary subjection or promising reverence submission and obedience in the Lord to such persons in things wherein they act according to the Laws of their places and the perscriptions given unto Officers by Jesus Christ All Church-power is first seated in Christ the head and some was from him committed to the Apostles and some power also is committed to other Church-officers but that the derivation of it is by Ordination or by any act of jurisdiction is not proved and therefore the Argument is of no force against the peoples acting in Ordination Our brethren tell us of some that renounce and disclaim all Ordination from Ministers as unwarrantable and Antichristian and take it up from the people as the onely way of the Gospel Who these are of whom they speak we know not If some have renounced Ordination by Bishops usurping power above ordinary Elders and others have asserted that the people may ordain in case a Church hath no Officers in it yet they do not hereby either renounce Ordination it self or all Ordination by Ministers one of which they must intend by the Ordinance of Christ which they say is renounced and hence they are far from running upon the evils which our brethren mention or plunging themselves into such an inextricable difficulty as to renounce all the Minister and Churches in the Christian world and turn Seekers and therefore these objections concern not us And now from all the premises we shall conclude until we receive further light that the Scriptures do witness the essence of a call to office to consist in Election and that in some cases the people may ordain their own Officers and that such as are furnished with preaching gifts and graces may exercise them publickly without Ordination FINIS