8 9. the matter of it should be visible Saints and Believers 1 Cor. 1.2 True so it should when an Army is to be raised a City begun Answer a Family set up much more when a Church is to be erected or continued the matter of them should be visible yea reall Saints beloved of God elect blessed Deut. 38.14 Isai 1.21.26 Acts 16.34 Rom. 1.7 Ephes 1.1.2 3.4 And we heartily wish they were all such 1. The meaning of the Position is this Reply Visibility of Saintship is requisite to warrant the setting upon such an action as erecting of a Church else the action for the nature of it is naught might not be performed Better no Church erected then not of visible Saints The rule is broken sin committed Is this granted by you If so why is the position quarrelled at seeing it is all that is asserted 2. But why do you jumble these actions together The raising of an Army the erecting of a City the setting up of a Family and the erecting of a Church As if they were actions of a like nature As if visibility of Saintship to them all were of like necessity Do you conceive that the matter of an Army must either be visible Saints or there must be no Army raised The matter of a city visible Saints or no city erected Doth the nature of those actions necessarily require any such qualification in the subject persons performing them that without such qualifications the subject persons are in a state of incapacity according to Gods true scope and intention to set upon such actions Wee know you hold it not Heathens may raise Armies and wage war and not sin because they do so if the cause be just They may erect cities and remain Heathens still and not sin because they do so for it may be their duty so to do but may they erect a Church to God and remain Heathens and not sin in doing so An Atheist and prophane wicked person may buy and sell and labour in his Calling and not sin because he doth so because it is his duty but may he be one to erect a Church of and to partake in the seal of the Lords Supper and be an Atheist and visible person still without sin Men need not be Believers and Saints to warrant them to perform civill actions or some religious actions for irreligious wicked persons while in that state are called to them but to do them with acceptation and so as to be accounted righteous in the doing of them they must be Believers and Saints But to erect a Church which is Christs body and is called to have communion with Christ in his body and blood in that Supper which he instituted is an action of another nature and requires faith and holinesse in the persons that constitute it to warrant the constitution of it For Church state being holy and the Ordinance of it holy either the subject persons must be holy also or all will be grievously prophaned and God foully dishonoured But why do you say They should not only be visible but reall Saints except it be to cast another mist before the eyes of the ignorant For if an Army were to be raised to fight on the Purliament side against the Cavaliers you would say it must consist of visible friends which seem sincere and cordiall else let it not be raised at all but you would not say it must consist of reall friends for then it would not be raised at all For if it must consist of reall friends God must be the raiser of it and not man who alone knoweth who are reall friends So of a Church if it must consist only of reall friends God alone must erect it and man must not meddle with it And though we reade these phrases Beloved of God Elect blessed yet either they received these denominations from the judgement of Charity because they seemed to be such as Phil. 1.7 or if there were infallibility it was applicable only to a party within the Churches whom the Apostle discerned to be such and not to the whole Church Yet we dare not use unscripturall wayes and means for the procuring and preserving of Church-members sanctity Answer To be wise and holy above the rule is to be foolish prophane presumptuous superstitious Could you shew us out of Scripture that the Church must examine persons that come to be admitted and that they must make any other declaration then professing of faith and repentance and that the Congregation ought to reject such of whose sincerity and sanctity they are not satisfied and that the want of this care in the first constitution of a Church doth nullifie it or make it unlawfull for men to joyn to it or continue in it and that it is necessary to know that a Church was constituted of visible Saints before he can in faith joyn to it we should not differ about the sanctity of the members Here is a deep charge of some things practised by us Reply to preserve the Churches sanctity and purity to be foolish prophane superstitious and presumptuous And there are instances given in examination of persons whether there be the works of Grace wrought in their hearts or no c. We answer for our selves First there are some things fathered upon us which we hold not as 1. That there must be some further declaration besides profession of faith and repentance We contend for no such thing but conceive profession of faith and repentance if in the judgement of charity it may be accounted reall if there be any thing that may serve to give witnesse unto it that it is not meerly verball may be judged sufficient 2. That the want of care to try the sincerity and sanctity of men doth nullifie the Church This is an opinion which we renounce as none of ours 3. That we must know that a Church was constituted of visible Saints before we can in faith joyn to it We hold flatly against such an assertion and do believe a judgement may be made from the present faith and order which any Church holds forth whether it be safe or unsafe to joyn to it or to continue in it Secondly there are other things which some Churches hold and practise which we think cannot be condemned As that a Church must examine persons that come to be admitted whether the work of grace be wrought within them or not Your self will now admit none of whom you doubt to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper till you have first examined them of their knowledge and why may not we examine them of their grace Is the Lords body discerned by knowledge most or by grace Faith is a grace and faith is the best discerner of the Lords body and if we can but finde grace we shall be sure to finde knowledge The Scripture saith Let a man examine himself yet you think not that sufficient unlesse you examine him if it be no Scripturall way to examine others why will
yet they may be performed by a gift without Office to another people and are not authoritative to them To this purpose speak the Elders in answer to the 8th Position and the reason will be good to us till you yeeld a better The relation of Ministers and People is mutuall Answer if the people my receive the Sacrament from another that is not their Minister then the Minister may administer it to them that are not of his flock In one sense all that you say is true Reply people may receive the Sacrament from one that is not their Minister being recommended to him and the Minister may administer the Sacrament to such as are so recommended to him but then this recommendation is as it were a dismission differing not really but only in time recommendation commends them for a time to fellowship with that Church and dismission commends them for continuance without returning See Cottons Keys a Cottons Keys pag. 17 18. which you make so much use of against us When persons of another Church do orderly intermingle themselves with this or that Church then they are as members and the Pastor is as their Pastor and so he may dispence the Sacraments to them But it will not follow that therefore he may act Ministerially out of his own Church and People in and maong another Church and People nor will relation of Ministers and People being mutuall bring such a conclusion about Magistrates and Subjects are Relatives and if any Subjects of one county come to another county and be wronged in the county whither he is come he may request justice from the Magistrate of the county where the wrong is done him and receive it But yet this will not draw on another thing that hereupon because a Magistrate may dispence justice to a stranger coming among his people he may therefore go from among his people to another county and dispence justice among them so of Ministers it may be said They are Pastors to their own people and perform Pastorall acts to their own and to those that orderly are recommended to them as theirs but when they leave their own they are not Pastors to other Congregations to dispence Pastorall acts to them By vertue of communion of Churches you may Answer and do receive known approved recommended members of another Church to the holy Communion If you may receive one why not two three six seven eight which it may be are the whole Congregation Where doth the Scripture allow the one and not the other We grant all you say Reply in this also that if one two seven eight do come by recommendation they must be received by vertue of communion of Churches yet we demand if these seven or eight be the whole Congregation who shall recommend them For without recommendation they cannot orderly be received Or suppose they commend themselves to the Communion of another Church they are now sallowed up in the fellowship of the other Church and counted pro tempore as members thereof and have not the consideration of a distinct Church And though it be lawfull for a Minister to dispence the Sacrament to them with his own people yet not lawfull to go forth from his own people and to give it to them alone If a whole town should come to live in another town they might have the justice of that town and yet the Magistrate though he might do justice to them in the town being mingled with his own people cannnt notwithstanding dispence it unto them abiding in their own place But you ask Where the Scripture alloweth the one and not the other We answer the Scripture alloweth the recommendation of the members of one Church to another Rom. 16.1 2 Cor. 3.1 But can you produce any place where the Minister of one Church hath acted ministerially in another Church You grant that Elders have a calling to ordain Elders in other Churches whereof themselves are neither Elders nor Members Answer by request of that Church where the Elders are to be ordained (k) R. M. W. T. to C.H. p. 48. Reply While Mr. Mather saith they may intreat help he holds by consequence that the Elders of other Congregations have no proper right of their own to ordain in other Congregations and that their power is derived to them from those Congregations that intreat them and then it wil follow that the help that such Elders do afford is not as they are Elders in reference to their Office but as better gifted and in reference to greater ability which such Elders have to carry on such a businesse The reason is because if such Elders acted in Ordination as Officers in another Congregation then they would have proper power so to act without intreaty for intreaty makes not them Officers which were none before and if they were Officers before intreaty is not needfull to inable them And if they act as Officers in another Congregation then they may in all Congregations for they are Elders alike in all as in any save only where they are fixed Now this is against Mr. Mathers principles his meaning therefore was that as if in case a Church want Elders to preach to them they may intreat Elders of other Churches to preach to them not because they conceive that an Elder only may preach but because they judge an Elder to be more able to do it so it must be understood in the businesse of Ordination In this sense we wholly concurre with Mr. Mather but in your sense cannot grant it Whereras the 26. and 27th Sections concerne one and the same head of controversie we shall make one defence for both POSITION XXVI Gifted men This is but a little altered from Answ to 32. q. p. 80. 73. T. W. to W. R. p 44. 56. viz. so reputed by competent Judges though not called to the Ministery nor intended for it may preach They that were scattered abroad upon the Persecution which arose about Stephen were not Church-officers at least not all of them yet these men did preach the Word and Philip which was but a Deacon preached without the calling or privity of the Apostles Acts 11.19 8.14 POSITION XXVII Iehosaphat sent Princes who were neither Ministers nor intended so to be See Answ to 32. Quest to teach with the Priests and Levites viz. at least to incourage the people to hearken to the Priests and Levites 2 Chron. 17.7 8 9. as Iehosaphat did 2 Chron. 20.20 yea and was their mouth to God in Prayer vers 2.5 to 13. As we conceive something in that prophecying 1 Cor. 14. to be extraordinary So we conceive it to be ordinary that some private men grown Christians of able gifts who may have received a gift of Prophesie need no more extraordinary calling for them to prophesie in the Churches then for Iehosaphat and his Princes to prophesie in the Church of Israel These Positions thus laid down are by you accused of injury
doth 2. We allow the case to be much different For when we live under a Christian Magistrate inteuding and endeavouring Reformation we are raised up unto an expectation of having all the wayes of Christ countenanced and confirmed by his authoritie which would be a very blessed thing which we have no such ground to look for living under a Heathen Magistrate But how the case is different in your sense we understand not For the Christianity of the Magistrate or his piety and sedulity in intending and endeavouring Reformation cannot take any person or persons off from their dutie which they would be bound unto if a Heathen Magistrate bore sway The Magistrate and the Ministers and the people must each doe their part because each stands engaged for himselfe to Jesus Christ unto the work of his own place The impediments that come from any unto other cannot be a discharge unto any Would our Brethren in New England allow a Presbyterian Church Answer or but a new Independent Church to be erected in New England against the will and mind of the Magistrates and Churches there 1 T. W. to W.R. p. 31. 1. The question is not what they would allow Reply but what a company of people planted there which cannot without unfaithfulnesse to their own light be subject to any other government save the Presbyterian ought to doe Whether if their livelihood lie there and that they cannot remove they are not bound to keep Faith and a good Conscience what ever it be that they suffer for it 2. Our beliefe of New England is this that they would suffer the godly and peaceable to live amongst them though they disser in point of Church-government from them Because so farre as we could ever learn they never banished any but unpeaceablenesse together with desperate erroneousnesse was the cause of it Our Brethren at London I heare doe hold it at least unseasonable Answer to gather Churches now how their opinion and yours are reconcileable I see not If you had said Reply some of them did once think it unseasonable you had not much missed it But what crossing is in this which should need a reconciliation The Position saith it cannot be unlawfull the Brethren say it was unseasonable for that time Many things may be unseasonable at least in opinion and yet not unlawfull It may be the Brownists Answer Anabaptists Antinomians Familists and other grosse Hereticks and Schismaticks in old or new England doe also pretend the Doctrine and practice of the Apostles for the setting up of their Churches yet our godly and conscientious Divines doe therein oppose them If grosse Heretikes and Schismaticks doe so pretend Reply they must be found to be liers and so their practice will be found to be unwarrantable whether they have or have not the commandement of man yet this will hinder nothing but that those which not in pretence but in truth have the Doctrine and practise of the Apostles with them may lawfully practise according to it though they want the commandement of man to warrant it The false Apostles pretended to be true Apostles but the Church of Ephesus tried them and found them liers and rejected them and yet accepted of those that were Apostles of Christ indeed POSITION II. Seven eight or nine may make a Church In Adams and Noahs time there was not above seven or eight will you deny them the being of a Church What will you make of Christ and of his Family which were not above twelve besides himselfe and of the first foundationals of the Church of Ephesus which were about twelve The number in the first beginning of the greatest Church was small enough in comparison Acts 1.15 The case of Adam and Noah was extraordinary Answer there were no more in the world and therefore could be no more in the Church You grant in an extraordinary case seven eight Reply or nine may make a Church The Position saith not that more may not make a Church but if there be but so many the truth and being of a Church cannot be denied them We say further that such a number may but make a Church in the first foundation or while there be no more persons sitted for membership For when more Saints by calling offer themselves they are to be received and so the Church will be increased Acts 19.7 8 9 18.19 20. Adam and his wife Answer and first sonnes yea Adam himselfe was the Church if then there was any yet you hold not that two or three yea one may make a Church We conceive that the Church is Christs body Reply and that every body consists of members If all were one member where were the body How therefore one Adam could have been a Church we understand not Put this we hold that look how few have ever made a Church since the beginning of the world the same number may still make a Church And the reason is because God hath not precisely determined what number doth make a Church Cain lawfully married his own sister may other men doe the like Answer Have we not a manifest prohibition of such marriages in the Scripture Reply so that though sometimes they were lawfull yet now they are not lawfull But what Scripture have you against this that what number of beleevers have formerly been a Church such a number may yet be a Church And no greater number is required to the simple being of a Church Twelve are more then seven or eight Answer and an hundred and twenty are a competent number yet it appeareth not that they were called or counted a Church till they were more increased First Reply though twelve be more then seven or eight yet twelve is not more in the truth of constitution of a Church then seven or eight Is there more of the essence of a Church in twelve then in seven or eight Except you mean it so you declare onely in saying so that you can number twelve And if you so understand it we shall demand proof of you for it Secondly the Scripture determines not what number is competent and what not competent to the being of a Church How come you then so to passe your verdict about it when further you adde That it appeares not they were called or accounted a Church till they were more increased that is till those three thousand persons were added to them Acts 2.41 If so are you not then the more presumptuous in saying that an hundred and twenty are a competent number to make a Church Notwithstanding if you will you may see them a Church before they were so increased For they performed one great act of a Church in electing an Officer to be over the Church Acts 1.23 And when three thousand were added to them they came into their state and if their state were not Church state then neither were they made a Church by this addition for let three thousand be added to no Church and they are still no Church
which to affirme were slat against the Scripture Acts 2.47 If there were no more Beleevers in Ephesus then twelve as there was Answer viz Aquila and Priscilla which knew no more then Johns Baptisme Acts 18.26 with 24.25 if not others yet there were more in ferusalem then an hundred and twenty even five hundred brethren at once c 1 Cor. 15.6 First though Aquila and Priscilla were at Ephesus Reply yet they were but sojourners there as they were also in many other places sometimes at Rome sometimes at Corinth as appeares from Acts 18.2 Rom. 16.3 But to what place they did belong is not certain Secondly your five hundred brethren at Jerusalem is as slightly collected from 1 Cor. 15.6 For 1. doth the Apostle say that he was seen of those five hundred in Jerusalem He shewed himselfe in Galilee and some other places as well as in Jerusalem 2. Though the place of manifesting himselfe might be Jerusalem must the persons therefore be of Jerusalem Why not appertaining unto Judea Or suppose of Jerusalem why might they not be dispersed before Christs ascension For present afterwards when they chose an Apostle they were not which was yet a Church action and without doubt the major part of the Church would have been present at it Adam and Noah with their Families Answer if they were Churches they were but Domesticall Churches not Congregationall Domesticall Churches enjoying Congregationall Ordinances Reply and congregationall Churches are not divers species of Churches neither doe they differ in their nature or kind but in quantity as one Congregation differeth from another as one small Countrey Chappell differeth from a numerous Towne Church What will ye make of Christ and his Disciples Answer a Church distinct from the Jewish You know Christ did not make a new Church or gather men into it but lived and died a member of the Jewish Church d Answer to to 32. q. p. 14. Had they been called a Church as some housholds are in the new Testament e Phile. 2. witnes T.W. to W.R. you had had some more pretext and yet they are but a Domesticall Church c. 1. Whether Christ died a member of the Jewish Church Reply is questionable But that he gathered certain persons to him and that he instituted Baptisme and the Supper amongst them is most certain which were Ordinances of the Gospel Church and he either thereby prepared them for or laid the foundation of a Gospel Church before his death For immediatly after his ascension they were a Gospel Church as appeareth from Acts 1.14 15. 2. For the denomination of Church we passe not much whether we meet with it or not provided that we find the reality of a Church among any persons 3. Many Domesticall Churches may be in one Congregationall in your sense but not in ours We deny and put you to prove that two or three converted in a Family enjoying some Christian Ordinances but no Church Ordinances are called a Church It is an Argument you will not own Answer seven eight twelve may make a Domesticall Church therefore they may make a Congregationall We acknowledge not any such distinction of Congregationall Church Reply and Domesticall as you presse after But say That the foundation of a Congregationall Church may be laid in one Family and may spread unto many It may be laid in seven or eight and may grow up to an hundred or a thousand or to as many as can meet together constantly unto edification in one place The Church in Abrahams Family was the same which was in the Families of all his sonnes and in the Families of their children after them which afterwards grew up into a nation And though the Gospel Church is not now Nationall as the Jewish was yet a congregation of many Families may spring out of a Church of one Family more easily then a Nation did formerly And if seven eight or twelve may not make a congregationall Church in our apprehension what have you been consuting all this while If seven or eight may make a Church Answer then two hundred persons in a Citie may well make twenty distinct Churches and by consequence so many Independent Judieatures First this collection is made to bring an Odium upon congregationall Churches but it may be thus retorted foure or five in a house may make a family therefore three hundred in an house may make sixtie distinct families Foure or five in a family may make a Domestick Church say you then three hundred in a family may make sixty Domestick Churches two thousand in a Field may make an Army therefore two hundred thousand in a Field may make ten distinct Armies under so many independent Generals Secondly we have declared our selves before that seven or eight may make a Church in the first foundation and whilst there are no more persons fitted and that as more in that place shall be converted the Church of them is to be increased And we are utterly against the unnecessary multiplication of Churches as conceiving such small Churches inconsistent to Christs ends which is edification by Pastors Teachers Ruling Elders Deacons which he hath given to his Church But that a Church of seven or eight should require so many Officers or be able to maintain them we cannot understand And we perceive from the patternes presented in the New Testament that Churches in cities which at first were small grew great by the daily addition of others to them Acts 1.14.15 with Acts 2.41 19.7 8 9 with 18 19 20. Acts 20.17.28 So that we would not have beleevers of one citie be of so many Churches if one congregation will conveniently hold them except there be some eminent reason for it But though there should be many Churches consisting of a few members yet without Officers amongst them we doe not assert them to be Independent Judicatures POSITION III. A visible Church in the new Testament consists of no more in number then may meet in one place in one Congegation The like you have Answer to 32 q p. 9. 1 Corinth 11.20 14.23 If you seek for Congregations meeting for prayer hearing the Word Answer Sacraments in one place or that they were called by the name of Church or that all Beleevers in some Cities and Countries when they might did meet in one place I will not contend We plead for congregations meeting together Reply not for prayer hearing the Word Sacraments alone but for the executing of censures also 1 Cor. 5.4 which you leave out as if Church censures belonged not to congregations as those Ordinances you mention do And we say that there is no sacred Worship or Institution prescribed in the Gospel which may not be observed to have been exercised in or appertained unto the congregations And these congregations are called Churches in the Scripture And further we say not onely that all beleevers in some cities did meet together in one place but that there can no instance be
every one of them and the whole is the flock of each amongst them and each of them hath as full power over the assemblies that he never saw as over that from which he came and which sent him as in the representative civill body every Knight and Buegesse hath the care of the kingdome upon him and each hath equall authority of inspection and decision of matters concerning cities and countries which hee knowes not as of those whence hee came Now if it be so the Question is whether each be not a Passor to every purpose as well as unto one And whether hee be not to feed by doctrine as well as by the rod of discipline all such assemblies which are under his charge Which thing is yet impossible to be done And what warrant there is of non-residencie with the flock unto purposes that do most concern the flock seeing themselves are Christs Ministers and substitutes and have not power of appointing Ministers and substitutes under them and what ground there is why they must joyntly rule all the assemblies but severally teach each man the congregation to which he is designed without care of the rest Or if there be any such combination of assemblies in a Nation what is there to warrant it more then the combination of all Christian assemblies in the world represented in an oecumenicall councell the members of which must be universall Pastors having power over and care of all churches under them For if a Congregationall church must depend upon a Nationall church as the lesser upon the greater then a Nationall church must depend upon the universall as the lesser upon the greater For look what a Nation is to a Congregation that the universall is to a Nation and if Nations may be independent of the universall Congregations may be independent of the Nationall And if an universall visible instituted church be acknowledged why are there not universall representative conventions What a defect is this in Christendome And what a fault that all Christian nations do not endeavour it But we conceive that they are so farre from the endeavouring it that if there were any such though they might make use of them for advice yet they would be loth to subject themselves to the binding decrees of them Nor say wee that the Scriptures do mention a Nationall church Answer for the supreme Magistrate was an enemy to Christian Religion and Regis ad exemplum c. Believers it is like were not so many as to beare the name of a Land or Nation nor could they have liberty safely to meet in Nationall Synods Shew mee a Nation of Magistrates and people converted and I will shew you a Nationall church Ultra posse non est esse whether Nationall churches be lawfull or unlawfull 1. Reply You might have said Shew me a Nation of Magistrates and people converted and I will shew you a Nationall Christian church framed like the Jewish church with one Nationall Bishop over it one Nationall Cathedrall in it c. for so would Prelaticall men and the Pope himself argue No one Nation was converted then and therefore there could be no Nationall Pastor Many nations were not converted then therefore there could be no universall Pastor But what hinders but that there might be afterwards when a Nation and when the world should come to be converted 2. Though there was no Nation converted wholly and therefore as you say no nationall church could be yet Christs will and minde in that matter might easily have been dictated in the Scriptures had he intended any such Church afterwards as Moses tells the Jewes Deut. 12.8 9 10. That they should not do when they should come to Canaan every man what he listeth as they did in the Wildernesse but there should be a place appointed and thither should they bring their offerings and tythes and though there were not Nations converted yet there were so many in a Nation converted as made many Assemblies In little Judea there were Congregations and why together with the Church at Jerusalem might there not have been a Diocesan or Classicall Church There were enough converted for such a purpose But shew the sootsleps of a Diocesan or Classicall Church and it shall serve the turn then wee will yeeld there might in time be a Nationall Arguments taken from the appellation of the word Church Answer or Churches are very unsatisfactory because of the various acceptations of the words Kahal Gnedah Ecclesia Synagoga which we sometimes translate Church but should alwayes translate Convocation or Congregation a company called out or gathered together In this answer you labour to overthrow our Argument Reply for Congregationall churches setched from the appellation of the Apostle when he speaks of Countries and Provinces where more Congregations were he calls them perpetually churches in the plurall number and not church by these suggestions rather then arguments 1. That the words Kahal Gnedah Ecclesia Synagoga should alwayes be translated Convocation a company called out or gathered together if this be yeelded wherein it will advantage you we know not A nationall Convocation or Congregation or gathering together will sound harsher then a nationall Church for every one knows that we have no Nationall Congregation in England But 2. You suggest The English word church Saxon Cyrick and Scots Kirk Answer are derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Cambd. Rem or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Sr. Hen. Spelm. which as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth the place of meeting Hence we reade of robbers of Churches or Temples Acts 19.37 Kahal whence our English word call is sometimes Metonymically understood of the place The Heathen enter into the Sanctuary which God hath forbidden to enter into the Church Lam. 1.10 with Deut. 23.3 Nehem. 13.1 To come together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is if it be rightly translated to come together in one place and so Ecclesia is opposed to the buildings or houses in which they did eat and drink 1 Cor. 11.19 20 21 22. Synagoga is evidently taken for the place of meeting Luke 7.5 Acts 18.7 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the proper signification Reply is appertaining to the Lord and may more properly relate to people appertaining to the Lord then to place because the people do more appertain to the Lord then the place 2. Though Kahal once perhaps and Synagoga oftener may be understood of the place yet Ecclesia never That place in Acts 19.37 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 robbers of Temples not Churches That place in 1 Cor. 11.18 When yee come together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to be rendered in one place Pareus upon those words utterly denies it And there is good reason why they should rather be referred to the people as a church then to the place For the meaning is when yee meet in the church when yee meet as the church that is to perform Church-work For they
might meet in the place even those very persons and yet not meet as a Church as it might be said when such meet in a Synod it 's meant as a Synod to act some thing as a Synod * As convenire in Senatum is to meet as a Senate not so much referring to the place as to the persons so meeting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 misacrum conventum Beza ibid. i. for a holy meeting Musculus in coetu sacro queÌ„ liâ—vocat Ecclesiam i. in a holy Assembly which he calleth the Church Item Pet. Mart. bid It referres not to the place nor to the persons barely meeting but to the persons meeting as a Synod to act Synodically Besides though Kahal and Synogoga may by a Metonymy be referred to place because there were places built and set apart for Church-services yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the new Testament cannot be so taken because they had no set stated appointed places for the Christian churches to meet in your self assert so much p. 26. Nor is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposed to the buildings and houses in which they did eat and drink in 1 Cor. 11.19 20 21. The words are or despise yee the Church of God which respects the people the godly amongst them which told them of their fault and other Churches also as Pareus upon that place observes Unlesse you will say there must be a reverent observance of the place where the Church meets more then of all other places They met in Woods Dens Caves many times in times of persecution and must those places be more respected then mens houses where they did eat and drink in But what would you inferre if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Church were taken for the place Would it profit you Yes for you say afterwards The Scripture calls them Church or Congregation often Answer and sometimes in respect of their severall Synagogues Psal 74.4.8 No wonder therefore if that Christians of one countrey meeting in severall Synagogues James 2.2 Heb. 10.25 Acts 19.8 9. 22.19 Acts 13.15 16 43. and houses Acts 12.12 Rom. 16.5 do receive the denomination of Churches which in Scripture phrase is all one with Assemblies many whereof we confesse were in Galatia Macedonia The place you bring from Psal 74.4.8 is impertinently alledged Reply for the Church of the Jewes which was one is not called Congregations in vers 4. in reference to divers Synagogues they met in vers 8. But Congregations there is Metonymically used and is all one with Synagogues and signifieth the place and not the people at all They roare in the midst of the Congregations that is in the midst of those places where the Congregation met which places were many but the Congregation but one having one high Priest for their chief Pastor though meeting in its parts in many places So that the Church of the Jewes is not called Congregations as Mollerus shewes upon that place Neither can you shew as wee suppose that ever any one Church was called churches in the plurall number either in the old or new Testament in reference to plurality of places they met in For if it were so how comes it that a Church in a city such as Jerusalem Corinth Ephesus and Rome which met and assembled in many places as our Brethren of the Presbyterie say are never called Churches but alwayes Church And yet a Church in the countrey meeting and assembling in many places are called Churches and not Church And you say there is no wonder of it for this reason because the Houses and Synagogues in the countrey were many in which they met See brother whether you do not in this assertion crosse your self In the city you can finde many meeting houses and but one Church but in the countrey you can finde so many Churches as meeting houses But the truth is it is not place but the combination of a Christian people to meet together for Ordinances that makes a Church For the same Church may meet sometimes together in one place for Church worship and sometimes asunder in many places for Christian worship but they are not therefore divided into sundry Churches And many distinct Churches or parts of them may meet occasionally in one place yet they become not one Church hereby but combination to enjoy Church ordinances together in a constant way makes a Church and all in a city were in this combination to enjoy ordinances together therefore they were a Church But all in a countrey could not be in such a combination to meet together constantly therefore they were not a Church but churches But you go on and say The word Kahal and Gnedah do signifie a dispersed multitude Answer that never met together that the people of Israel though divided into severall domesticall assemblies to keep the Passeover are called one Church That an Assembly is all one with Kahal Ecclesia whether it be good or bad lesse or greater that when the Israelitish men women and children were together they were but one Congregation And when all did not meet though searce half or a third part met yet they were called all the Congregation And when there was a great Assembly then the Scripture tells us there was a great Church accounting no more persons of the Church but those that were then assembled Yea Simeon and Levi's assembly is called a Church and those many which were gathered to pray in the house of Maty are called the Church though many were absent Yea four or sive in a Family joyning in the worship of God are called a Church But suppose there be truth in all that is said what are all these acceptions of the words Kahal and Ecclesia to the purpose Reply Among all these can you finde that ever any one Church is called two or more Churches For except there can be brought instances of this nature the air is but beaten all the while and our assertion stands immovable We find many churches in little Judea in which of the ennumerations of acceptions of those words Kahal Ecclesia doth it appeare that a Church that is really but one multiplies into many and is called churches and yet is but one If you finde not this we cannot believe that a whole Nation or Province of Believers are but one Church in the dayes of the Gospel Besides is your scope to confound and lose your Readers in the various acceptions of the word Assembly or Church so that when they reade the word Church or Churches they shall not be able to know what to make of it How then will they understand your Nationall Church at which your Discourse drives It had been your part to have taken your Reader by the hand and to have shewed him when the word Church is taken properly and when improperly Both you in your Nationall and wee in our Congregationall understand a people combined together into one body to worship God And in the old Testament let the words Kahal
Gnedah be taken as they may there was but one kinde of Church so combined which was Nationall And in the new Testament we say there is no other combination to enjoy all ordinances and worships instituted in the Gospel but Congregationall and we produce the small countrey of Judea containing a plurality of Churches and thence collect that they must be Congregations and that Congregations are therefore Churches And this is not weakened by what variety of acceptions is brought Furthermore wee do not know that Church or Flock or Lump or Body when referred to God and Christ and is properly taken is used otherwise then in two or three senses either for the mysticall Church Ephe. 5.25 26. or the * 2 Cor. 8.1.19 Congregationall 1 Cor. 1.1 sometimes indeed Rev. 1.4 we reade of it in a sigurative sense as in 1 Cor. 12.28 Gal. 5.9 James 2.2 1 Pet. 5.2 and many more places For though you say That four or five in a Family joyning in the worship of God are the Domesticall Church spaken of by Paul many times in his Epistles yet we conceive otherwise for seeing usually when there were any heads of Families converted some of the houshold were converted with them as we can give many instances wee think that many or the most that Paul saluted had in that sense churches in their Families and therefore Paul would not have singled out and with a note of distinction have spoken of some persons and the churches in their Families for that reason if some other reason had not moved him either then these Families were large and great Families and might be as numerous as some Congregationall Churches or the foundation of a Church might be laid in the persons of a Family but not so to continue but to grow to a Congregation or else some Congregationall Church might meet in such houses which was ordinary in those dayes And for the word Church in Acts 12. either it is to be taken for the mysticall church or else for that particular visible society of Believers which was at Jerusalem though some of them were absent But you proceed to give more particular answers and incounter with a part of the forementioned Position viz. There were Churches in Galatia therefore they were Congregationall Galatia was a large countrey in England a far lesse countrey Answer severall Churches have been heretofore and yet not meerly Congregationall And why are Galatia and Macedonia taken hold of Reply and made use of and Judea left out which in the Position was mentioned as well as they Surely the reason was because in both those countries there was more room for your Nationall Church then in Judea You could not find breadth enough to make a plutality of Diocesan Churches and therefore durst not contend for Nationall But grant wee the largeness of those countries according as you speak were either of them too large to make one Nationall Church wee know you think not so Why then doth not the Apostle knit them all up into one Nationall Church if hee had so intended them But you add The Churches of Galatia might he combined one to another Answer as the Churches of England Scotland Holland France are respectively combined for the Apostle speaks of them as one lump 1 Cor. 5.6 with Gal. 5.9 c. Such a combination wee easily grant to be among the Churches of Galatia as is among the Churches of England Scotland Reply c. and that is none at all or at the most a combination without jurisdiction But if by respectively you mean a combination which each of these Churches hath in it self in all the Congregations of and belonging to it such a combination wee deny to have been in the Churches of Galatia For all our Congregations have been united under one Metropolitane Archbishop of all England and as yet there is none other established and for other combinations such as in Scotland Holland c. without proofe we cannot grant them in Galatia And if Paul had intended by saying A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump that we should gather thence that they were all one Church hee would never have called them churches in the Preface of his Epistle but in a distributive sense it is to be understood For suppose one speak in a literall sense and say a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump doth he thereby make all the dough in a countrey one lump No but of every lump how many soever they be it is to be understood a little leaven leaveneth each of them so of churches a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump that is the whole Church every Church in which it is this maketh not all the Churches in a countrey to be one And the Churches of Macedonia were not so severall Answer but they joyned in one to choose a Brother which I conceive was an authoritative act to go with Paul for the managing of the Churches contributions 2 Cor. 8.18 19. 1. Reply Then to choose an Officer is much more an authoritative act which you grant to appertain unto the people then the people may act authoritatively which is none of our assertion but yours and the people are beholden to you for it 2. A combination of churches without jurisdiction will enable them to such an act nay if there were no combination at all yet when many churches are alike interessed in a businesse reason shews they ought to joyn alike to promove it 3. They did not make him an Officer by this act of choosing him but they deputed him thereby to a particular work which when accomplished all was ended The churches of Judea Answer consisting of Myriads of people did come together Acts 21.20 21 22. to be satisfied of Paul concerning an accusation that they had received against him and are called a Church Gal. 1.13 Acts 12.1 and an House Heb. 3.4 Not the Jewes of Judea alone did gather together Reply but the Jews of all other parts as appeareth from Acts 21.27 But be it that they gathered alone yet are they called one Church the place alledged is Gal. 1.13 I persecuted the Church of God What Church Churches in Judea No Paul saith hee persecuted them unto strange cities and Damascus was one of them The meaning is them that were of Jerusalem he persecuted to strange cities or he persecuted the Saints in generall Who as they are parts of the mysticall Church may be called by a Synecdoche the Church And Herod stretched out his hands to vex certain of the Church What church Either the mysticall or that at Jerusalem or any Church within his reach And his house Heb. 3.4 to be understood of the churches of Judea What strange mis-interpreting of Scripture is this house in that place is all the churches that were then or ever were to be in the world Christ is the builder of them all POSITION V. When a visible Church is to be erected This is not unlike the Answer to 32. q. p.
such a Generall called to be souldiers this name shewes the intrinsecall nature of the thing to which applied Such is the name Saint when applied to the Church of God but there are other names which are extrinsecall and superadditionall to the nature of the things given to and separable and may be in some and not in other of that kinde As if one should write to the Army of such a one enriched with gold and silver apparell this is extrinsecall and casuall and may agree to some Armies and not to others such are the Epithets 1 Cor. 5. inriched with wisdome utterance c. Concerning the names Elect c. we have answered them before POSITION VI. The form of a Church is the gathering together of these visible Saints and combining and uniting them into one body by the form of a holy Covenant Deut. 29 1.10 11 12. by which is plainly shewed that a company of people become Gods people that is a Church by entring into Covenant with God If it be said they were a Church before yet that was when the Church of the lewes was constituted in Abrahams Family by Covenant You intend not that this Covenant doth make a true Church Answer but a pure Congregationall Church as it is refined according to the platform of the Gospel We intend that the combination of Saints into one body by some kinde of Covenant either expresse or implicite Reply or by some kinde of speciall bond as Dr. Ames calls it doth make a true Church The seed of Jacob and the Sechemites could not make a Church together Gen. 34.15 16. but by becoming one and they could not become one but by coming into the same Covenant therefore they say though deceitfully for they never meant it yet therein they shew how such a thing could only be done if you will be as we be that every male be circumcised then we will become one people and we would demand had those Sechemites been Believers and had this businesse been carried without guile whether they had not by this doing become one Church We conceive relation or combination into one unto domestick ends and purposes is the form of a Family and relation and combination into one unto politick and civill ends and purposes is the form of a Commonwealth and relation and combination of one man and one woman unto conjugall ends and purposes is the form of matrimoniall state and that covenant alwayes makes this relation and combination into onenesse where the persons are free from each other and no naturall tie amongst them and so relation and combination of so many Saints as do or may well meet in one place unto religious ends 〈◊〉 the enjoyment of Church-ordinances doth make a church and because the persons are free from one another therefore covenant or agreement together which is all one must make the relation A solemne expresse and verball covenant or agreement we assert to be necessary unto the purity and strength of a Church and so consequently unto the welbeing of a Church for how Saints and they alone living promiscuously in the world should yet be severed from the world with which they be in habitation mingled and how they even they alone should have communion together in all holy ordinances without expresse verball consent we cannot conceive which yet we judge ought to be if the rule be well attended which saith Nothing shall enter into the holy city which defileth Rev. 21.27 22.14 And how such loosenesse which is in our Parish-churches from which any may depart to another Parish-church without rendering any reason removing their habitation it may be but a stones cast which we conceive to be a great evill For the members in a naturall body are not so loosly joynted nor stones in any house so loosly set unto which yet a particular Church is compared Eph. 2.22 and 1 Cor. 12.27 How this evill may be prevented but by expresse agrement we cannot apprehend and therefore conceive such a covenant to be necessary to such purposes A Church-covenant s especially in relation to Church-estate Answer and Church duties as a marriage-covenant is with relation to the marriage state and marriage duties but the Covenant here enentioned was not entered into in reference to Church estate and Church duties rather then to other duties of the morall Law and may be taken by two or three though they be too few to make a Church or by persons of severall Churches in a ship or a journey and yet leave them in the same Church-state they were before and not make them members of a distinct Church A Church-covenant is especially in relation to Church duties Reply but not only so for Christian duties are comprehended under it and the Covenant in Deut. 29.1.10 11 12. respects principally Church-duties more then other duties of the morall Law as appeares from vers 16 17 18. for he warns them of Heathenish worships such which they had seen in Egypt and among the Nations and would ingage them by holy covenant to all Gods holy worships which were of his own institution of which were the worship and service of the Passeover and all the offerings of Gods prescription which were to be brought to the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation and the covenant of two or three to perform such duties might not be taken because some of them did seal their union and communion with that body and were to be celebrated when the whole body was assembled And though a covenant binding to the performance of some of the duties of the morall Law may be made by two or three and by persons of severall Churches and yet leave them in the same Church-state and not make them members of a distinct Church from what they were of before yet not so a covenant that binds to Church-duties as if a company of persons of divers churches should covenant to meet together to pray one with another this would not make them a Church nor change their state but if they covenant to walk together in the constant enjoyment of all Church-ordinances which God requires of a Church this would make them a Church and change their state that afterwards they could not be of divers Churches but of the same Church and Body A Covenant in generall doth not make a Church nor a marriage Answer a Covenant betwixt this man and that woman makes it but a Covenant with appropriation and application to this or that Pastor or people but the Scripture covenants are not with appropriation and application to this Pastor or people viz. that they would serve God with this people or Pastor rather then with that therefore they are not Church-covenants Who ever read or heard of any Covenant in generall of duties to be done Reply without application to persons mutually ingaged to perform such duties As a covenant of duties in a marriage would be ridiculous without application to persons this man or that woman to be
concession that the Church Reply Acts 2. bad no ordinary Officers for none were then appointed and yet they were a church and Acts 14.23 shewes so much they were churches before the Apostles ordained Elders in them and this is all that the Position drives at And though there were generall Elders which had inspection over all Churches yet neither these nor any other Elders do * Come into the essence of Churches ingredi essentiam Ecclesiarum nor is it any formall reason why a Company of Believers are a Church because they have Elders whether extraordinary or ordinary for were it so then their priviledge to choose their Officers would be when they have Officers for then they are a Church and it would follow that they cannot choose Officers when they want them and have most need of them for then they are not a Church and so can have no such power and it is very uncomfortable for the death of an Officer might be the unchurching of a people But that which may give more satisfaction in this matter is the consideration of such Scriptures where the members mentioned apart from the Officers are called the Church of God Acts 20.28 the Elders are the persons spoken to feed the flock over which the holy Ghost hath made you over-seers the believing Ephesians are the flock who are also called the Church of God purchased with his blood * Acts 20. vers 28. So Phil. 1.1 So that a Christian people united together with an intent of constant congregating to enjoy Ordinances for their edification are a church without officers or if they have them yet without consideration of them POSITION IX She hath also full and free power to choose her own Officers without the help of Synod This though not so fully is asserted by R.M. W.T. to C. H. Classis or Presbyterie Act. 1.15 Acts. 6.3 14.23 In Church-affairs Answer of weighty and difficult common concernment as election and ordination of Elders excommunication of an Elder it is safe and wholesome and an boly Ordinance to proceed with consultation and consent of the churches Prov. 11.14 (p) Cottons Keys p. 55. Reply This Position saith not that a particular Congregation or Church of Brethren have full and free power to choose her own Officers without asking or seeking the help of advice and direction from Synod Classis or Presbyterie nor do we think that there is any such meaning in it but without authoritative help of a Synod Classis or Presbyterie for in all those places of the Acts the churches had the help of direction but they were not strengthened by the interposition of the authority of the Apostles or of any other You will not take upon you hastily to censure the many notable precedents of ancient and latter Synods Answer who have put forth the Acts of power in ordination and excommunication (q) Cottons Keys p. 28. Reply 1. The grave Author of this speech meddles not with election in that place quoted but this Position runs of election 2. He keeps himself from an hasty and peremptory censuring of ancient precedents who have put forth acts of power in ordination and excommunication but he declares his opinion against it and we approve as well of his modesty as we do agree with him in his judgement We hold it a priviledge of the people especially if they proceed wisely and piously to elect their Officers Answer and an injury to obtrude any on them without their consent 1. What people are these that have this priviledge Reply Cottons Keys pag. 12. the Author whom you make use of so oft calls them Church of Brethren is it a people-priviledge or a church-priviledge to choose Ecclesiasticall Officers 2. What if they do not proceed wisely and piously is their priviledge lost must it be taken from them and then it would be no injury to obtrude an Officer on them It is an Officers priviledge to rule the Church but what if he do it not wisely and piously is the privilege then lost it is a Master of a Families priviledge to rule his own house but what if he do it not wisely and piously must it now be taken from him or rather must he not be directed and exhorted to do it rightly and the priviledge remain stil with him so of the people we have Junius of our minde herein (a) Junius Eccles p. 1963 Answer But let us view your Scriptures Seeing that you agree with us in the substance of the Position Reply and yet immediatly bring all the Scriptures brought by us to strengthen the same into question and none of them will passe for currant with you it had been convenient that you should have produced the Scriptures which do sway you unto the asserting of the same thing that it might have appeared to the world that you have found out some better bottome to set such a tenet on then we have produced For we conceive that if the Scriptures you oppugn are not pertinent to prove the Position there will be none found in all the new Testament but they will be more liable to exception then these and it is to be noted that all our modern Writers that we know of that grant any liberty to the people of choosing their own Officers they do it upon the evidence of these Scriptures which are excepted against in so much that we know not what should be the reason why you grant the thing alledged and bring no proofes of your own to confirm it and yet allow not of ours which we bring except you be resolved to contradict all that comes from us But what are your exceptions let us prove what weight is in them you say The Assembly Answer Acts 1. it is likely was not a body politick but occasionall only no part of Church-government being as yet set on foot here were not all but some of the sounder members of the Jewish Church and they had no commission to separate from the Jewes before Acts 2.40 the Company was not without Elders all the Churches and Elder at that time in the world were present if there had been any more Elders they must have conveened upon that occasion the choice was limited by the Apostle Peter First to the persons present Secondly to those that accompanied the Apostles all the time c. and was determined by God whose it was to choose an Apostle by his directing of the lot The meaning is Reply they were not a Christian Church but some of the sounder members of the Jewish Church and not yet separated from the Jewish Church and then 1. There is a contradiction unto some other of the exceptions which follow If they were no Christian Church how were the Apostles Elders of it and how was it an Oecumenicall councell all the Churches and Elders in the world being at it 2. Is there not some mistake in point of truth For those persons who were commanded to separate Acts
there is any compact betwixt Ministers and the Church how much the Ministers must have before the work be begun but it is the consultation of the Church after the work hath been performed or a consideration for the yeer past when they all agree that if there be not enough in the slock of the Church to raise it up to an honourable allowance by the voluntary gift of each yet according as God hath blessed them Otherwise were it an agreement aforehand it would be as lawfull for two or three yeers as for one But how you will answer your mis-interpreting and mis-reporting of T. W. in the page you cite wherein he doth expresse himself as we have shewed we understand not POSITION XV. There must be in the Church Teachers This for substance is alledged by Answ to 32. q. p. 75. and many others distinct from Pastors as Apostles are distinct from Euangelists Ephes 4.11 That Text proves not the same distinction between them for he saith Answer Some Apostles and some Prophets c. but not some Pastors and some Teachers but some Pastors and Teachers or rather these Apostles these Prophets these Euangelists these Shepheards and Teachers which words seeme but to explicate one another as Shepheard and Bishop do 1 Pet. 2.25 You crosse the opinion of many Orthodox modern Writers Reply while you speak contradictorily to us for it is not our tenent alone but the judgement of many learned ones that they are distinct Offices Whether you translate some Apostles or these Apostles the matter is not weighty nor are you advantaged by it The greater question is who these Teachers be and what their work is whether they be School Doctors as Junius * Jun. Eccles lib. 2. cap. 5. p 1955 thinks and so their work to train up the youth of the Church in the knowledge of Arts and Sciences especially of Divinity for the service of the Church or whether they be Teachers of the whole Church and their work to doctrinate the Church by words of knowledge The latter seems to be more consonant to the Scripture then the former Rom. 12.7 8. 1 Cor. 12.8 And Zanchy Pareus Bucer and many others are of this judgement Zanchy's words are these There are only five orders of Ministers in the Church Zanc. de Feel milit gubernatione tom 8. p. â—4â— instituted by Christ and then under this Position are these words We acknowledge not more kindes of Ministers then the Apostle expresseth in Ephes 4.11 Apostles Euangelists Prophets Pastors Teachers The three first were not tied to places but were sometimes here and sometimes there either to gather Churches or to govern them to plant or to water them The two latter viz. Pastors and Teachers he would have to be set apart for the conservation and government of particular Churches as also for the augmentation and propagation of them Pareus upon Rom. 12.7 hath these words Now he under puts two kindes of prophecies the gift of teaching which is proper to the Doctor or Teacher the gift of exhorting which is proper to the Pastor of the Church for Paul in Ephes 4. distinguisheth Pastors and Teachers and the gifts of the Spirit were distinct for to some were given a most cleere revelation and understanding of doctrine these did attend to the explication of the heads of Religion and did form the faith of the Church to others was given a faculty of exhorting Bucer also upon Rom. 12.7 saith thus One man hath the gift of propecie another hath the gift of ministring so the person that teacheth having the gift of teaching in doctrine so the person that exhorteth the person that teacheth he makes distinct from the person that exhorteth endued with the gift of exhortation and then he mentions the Deacon and Ruling Elder as distinct with their gift from the rest So that if we do put any false glosse upon the Scriptures by mis-interpreting of Ephes 4.11 yet more modest language had becomed you brother seeing such Reverend Learned men whom your self so much honour have gone before us in the exposition POSITION XVI This particular Congregation is Sion This Text is frequently alledged in answ to 32. q. and others which God loveth and he hath promised to be present Matth. 18.20 No Sir it is not Sion but one of the assemblies of Sion Isai 4.5 Answer The Hebrewes which were divided in many Congregations are not said to be come into many mount Sions but to Mount Sion Heb. 12. The Scripture warrants not the expression of an hundred or a thousand Sions Sion was a mountain contiguous unto Moriah Reply upon which the Temple was built in which God vouchsafed a speciall presence and unto which the Tribes went up and by a Metonymie it is frequently put for the Temple that was built neer to it and by another Metonymie it is put for the people that repaired thither and assembled there and so for the Church of the Jewes which Church in the times of the old Testament consisted of many assemblies and yet it self was but one Church and the Temple also was but one which was called Sion and so Sion while the Temple was to stand and the Church of the Jewes was to continue was but one But in the times of the Gospel there were to be no visible Temples where God would dwell but the visible Church 2 Cor. 6.16 and the visible Church is Congregationall and not Nationall much lesse universall as hath been proved therefore the Congregationall church is Sion therefore the speciall place of Gods presence Yet this hinders not but that the language of the old Testament when it speaks of things of the new Testament may be used in the old Testament yea in the new also as in Zach. 14.19 Isai 66.20 21. So when Sion in the new Testament is spoken of in Isaiah 4.5 there may be an allusion in phrase and manner of speaking to Sion in the old Testament We may as well reade of the assemblies of Sion though there be no such thing but each assemblie is Sion as of the Feast of Tabernacles when yet in the dayes of the Gospel there is no such thing as a feast of Tabernacles but it is spoken by way of allusion the things of the new Testament are set forth to us under the shadowes of the old therefore because Sion was then but one it is spoken of as one still and yet it is more then one Now that there are many mounts Sions your self doth really confesse though in words you contradict it 1. We know you hold that the Church of the Jews in the dayes of the old Yestament was called Sion 2. We know you hold that the visible Church in the dayes of the Gospel is Sion 3. Is it not manifest therefore that you hold that look how many visible churches there are in the times of the Gospel so many Sions there are Your own words are that the Hebrews which were divided in many Congregations
to the Text to which we answer 1. Here also you fall short of that ingenuity professed in your Preface for doubtlesse Mr. Cotton Reply that denies any ordinary exercise of Prophecy by men not called to the Ministery cannot but in your judgement come neerer the truth then those that say at least as you give it out that gifted men not called to the Ministery nor intended for it may preach which imply to be meant in an ordinary and stated way When you say yet that these did preach ordinarily and usually to the Churches like to Pastors is impossible to be proved Now though you style Mr. Cotton deservedly the Chief of the more ingenuous sort of Congregationall men yet you neither help forward accommodation nor honour Mr. Cottons ingenuity by the least mention of it as you professe 2. You are so far from helping forward accommodation that I know not how to excuse you from making the breach greater then it was For we have consulted advisedly with 73. 80th pages of the 32. Quest and we can find no such Position as you fasten upon the Elders For page 73. they answer the 21. Quest viz. Whether do you hold it lawfull for mere lay or private-men to ordain Ministers in any case And having proved the Affirmative by reasons grounded upon the Word of God they come to urge the consent of some worthy Divines and learned Writers as Doctor Willet Morney Whitakers and others and in the Allegation of Morney they shew that Morney expresseth himself that some of our men expected not the calling of those that under the title of Pastors oppressed the flock but did at first preach without this formall calling and afterwards were called to the Holy Ministery of the Word by the Churches and for this we have examples saith Morney First in the Acts where we read that Philip was but a Deacon preached in Samaria without the calling of the Apostles yea without their privity who for all that gave their allowance to that work So that here he speaks not of an ordinary and usuall course in preaching to the Churches without Office but an extraordinary case of those that because of the corruptions of the times preached to the people without the calling of the Prelates in such places where they had either no Officers or Popish Officers neither doth he speak of gifted men that intended not the Ministery but of gifted men that because they durst not enter by the ordinary door of Prelaticall ordination preached to the people by vertue of their gifts and that internall Prothumie or desire which God had wrought in them and so soon as by the blessing of God upon their endeavours they had so far prevailed as that there were Churches giving them a calling they imbraced that call And this is that he proves lawfull by the Allegation of Philips example So in the 80. page their scope is to shew that the Word may be made effectuall to Conversion though the man that speaks it be not a Church-officer For the people of which they alledge the preaching of those that were scattered by the Persecution of Stephen Acts 8.4 and 11.19 20 21. and Job 4.39 where many of the Samaritans believed upon the saying of the woman of Samaria and that 1 Cor. 7.16 What knowest thou O woman but thou shalt gain thy husband So that you do most miserably wrest their Allegations quite to another purpose then that for which they intended them for they never intended hereby to prove the lawfulnesse of preaching by vertue of gifts without Office but only that those which do preach without Office may be instruments of conversion much lesse did they intend as you would make the world believe that these did preach ordinarily and usually to the Churches like Pastors and received maintenance for they speak of such a kinde of preaching as may be done by a gifted woman as the woman of Samaria or the believing wife 1 Cor. 7. as well as by a gifted man Neither do they speak of the preaching of these that were scattered as it was ordinary and usuall and like unto Pastors but only as performed by men who all of them at least say they were not Church-officers and yet proved effectuall for conversion When we read your marginall note viz. This is but a little altered from Answ to 32. Quest p. 80.73 we imagined at first sight you had made some small alteration in the language and phrase which we could well have born with but we finde that you have made an alteration in the very scope and subject mater insisted upon by the Elders You have taken away their living childe and laid your own dead childe in the room of it so that in your margent we have you though in a mincing extenuating what Ciecro desires his adversary viz. Confitentem reâ—â—â—â— confessing your own guilt which is the greatest expression of ingenulty of all others in this Section 3. But that we may give satisfaction to you and to all men if it be the will of God we shall first declare our judgement concerning the point in debate and then answer your Arguments so far as we conceive them invalid First then we conceive that all the members of the Church so far as their occasions and calling will permit should strive after ability by way of prophesying to speak to exhortation edification and comfort a Hee Prophetiae donum tanquamalus praestantms maximè commendat Apostolus cuiomâ—es studeant 1 Cor. 14.1 2. Parâ—us in Rom. 12. col 1197. i. e. This gift of Propecie as more excellent then the other gifts the Apostle most commends for which all should cover 1 Cor. 14.1 2. 1 Cor. 1 p. 1. and the Hebrewes ought to have been teachers of others though they stood in need to be taught the very Principles of Religion Hebr. 5.12 2. There are for the most part and may alwayes lawfully be some in the Church who devote themselves to the study of the Scriptures and other profitable studies that so they may be the better inabled to understand the meaning of the Word Such were those sons of the Prophets bred up under the Prophets 1 Sam. 19.20 1 King 20.35 2 King 2.3.5 Such were many of our Saviours Disciples who addicted themselves wholly to learn to be fishers of men Such it is probable were some of those Prophets which were in Corinth Antioch and other Churches For the Rules to be observed in the exercise of Prophecie were not proper to the Church of Corinth alone but the same were ordained in all Churches 1 Cor. 14.33 And therefore Prophets whom the Rules concern were or might be in all Churches for having no publike Vniversities or Colledges for Christians 't is probable this was the way of training up men for the work of the Ministery under the Teaching Officers of the severall Churches 3. That ordinarily God chose of those that were sons of the Prophets to be Prophets yet this was not
Church that hath all Officers compleat For the understanding of which we will lay down certain Positions 1. No Believer as a Believer may challenge a liberty to preach or prophesie publikely For though it were with Moses to be wished that all the Lords people were Prophets Numb 11. and that the Lord would put his Spirit upon them yet for as much as God hath not indowed all them with parts fir for the work all may not prophesie some there are that have need of milk Heb. 5.13 because they are unskilfull in the word of righteousnesse for they are babes and so not able to prophesie 2. No Church-member though a Brother meerly as a Church-member may challenge a liberty of publike prophesie This appears because the Apostle exhorts the Corinthians to strive after ablitie to prophesie 1 Cor. 14.1 which shewes that they might not prophesie meerly in the capacity of Church-members for if so God would have entailed abilities upon all the Fraternity of the visible Church at their first admission There were in the Church of Corinth some that occupied the room of the unlearned 1 Cor. 14.16 that expressed themselves no otherwise then by saying Amen with an audible voyce when those that possessed the room of the learned gave thanks as Tertullian and Justin Martyr tell us and therefore when the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 14.23 24. If all speak with tongues c. but if all prophesie c. he is not to be understood of the whole Fraternity but only of those that were in a capacity to speak with tongues and prophesie Now that all were not indowed with these gifts appeares 1 Cor. 12.10.29 3. Church-members upon whom God hath bestowed eminent parts that are able to divide the Word of God aright and to weild the sword of the Spirit with dexterous abilities may lawfully preach publikely in the Assembly of the Church This may appeare 1. From the end of gifts which is the use of them for the edification of others as well as of our selves Now private or mean gifts are of private use but publike or eminent gifts are of publike use When the young man told Moses that Eldad and Medad prophesied and Joshua exhorted Moses to forbid them it was because they exercised that office that was as they thought peculiar to Moses but Moses is well content Numb 11.29 I would saith he all the Lords people were Prophets and God would put his Spirit upon them ut contra nihil tantopere expetam quam ut singuli qui in populo Jehovae sunt eodemspiritu instrcti prophetare possint Jun. Paral. Appen par 3. p. 353. q. d. if God would put his Spirit upon all the people as well as upon my self they might all lawfully prophesie as well as my self for together with extraordinary gifts there went along an extraordinary call to exercise those gifts So the Apostle speaking of the exercise of prophesie Rom. 12.6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace which is given to us whether prophesie let us prophesie according to the proportion of fatith So that where there is the gift there may be a lawfull exercise of the gift in an orderly manner 2. That which Church-members not in Office nor intending Office may lawfully strive after that they may lawfully exercise being once obtained But Church-members may lawfully seek after an abilitie to prophesie publikely 1 Cor. 14.1 Follow after c. and v. 12. even so ye for as much as ye are zealous of spirituall gifts seek that ye may excell to the edifying of the Church Those that are fit to be instrumentall in a publike way must not be men of vulgar and triviall parts but must excell that they may edifie the Church the conclusion is some Church-members though not in Office nor intending Office may prophesie publikely 3. From a like necessity at this day of the exercise of acquired gifts with that the churches had in those times of the exercise of infused gifts If in those times when the Apostles did often visit the churches the Euangelists did water the churches and there were in the churches many Prophets that not only addicted themselves to the study of the Scriptures but were also extraordinarily many times assisted by the Spirit of God yet if a Brother that had a Revelation must have a liberty to utter his revelation for the edification of the Church how much more now when there are neither Aposiles to visit nor Euangelists to water nor Prophets extraordinarily gifted to expound the Word but in many Congregations not one teaching Officer in the most but one Minister indowed with acquired gifts if any Brother have an excellency of acquired parts he not only may but should be stirred up to inploy his talent as God shall offer occasion for the good of the Church 4. Church-members how ever eminently gifted may not presume to speak in the Church-assembly before they have a calling to the work by those whom it doth concern Paul though an Apostle did not offer to preach in the Synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia till the Rulers of the Synagogues had sent unto him for that end otherwise through the corruption of men there might be great confusion in the Church and the Officers much disturbed by the proud interposition of Exthusiastick spirits for such may arise in the purest Churches venting their frothy phantasmes tanquant ex tripode dicta as if they were the undoubted Oracles of God Now if there may be discerned a spirit of erroneous pride in the men that desire to speak they ought to be denied and admonished but if they be holy able humble men of whom the Church may presume that they will speak to edification in such a case the preaching officers must have a spirit of humility to give way unto them 1 Cor. 14.32 The spirit of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets that is the Prophets have a command of their spirits that they can easily give way to any to speak and themselves sit down as auditors provided they be such as expound divide and apply the Word profitably And that this is the meaning of the place appears by that which followes vers 33. For God is not the author of confusion but of peace Now we will consider your Arguments with which you endeavour to prove these Texts to be abused This Text cannot be generally understood of all that were scattered Answer your selves explain it of men not of women 1 Cor. 14. Of gifted men and called to that work by the Church not of ungifted and uncalled men yet the words in their indefinite latitude will prove the preaching as well of ungifted men and uncalled as others We understand not the Text of all as your self confesse Reply If it may be understood of any that were scattered being not Officers we have what we desire Will it follow The text taken in its indefinite latitude must needs be wrested therefore it is wrested by us who take
foundationalls of the Church of Ephesus which were about twelve the number in the first beginning of the greatest Church was small enough in comparison Acts 1.15 p. 9 POS. 3. A visible Church in the new Testament consists of no more in number then may meet in one place in one Congregation 1 Cor. 11.20 14.23 p. 13 POS. 4. A visible Charch in the new Testament is not Nationall as the Jewes was hence we reade of the Churches of Galatia Macedonia Judea not Church of Galatia 1 Cor. 16.1 2 Cor. 8.1 p. 21 POS. 5. When a visible Chuch is to be erected the matter of it should be visible Saints and Believers 1 Cor. 1.2 p. 31 POS. 6. The form of a Church is the gathering together of these visible Saints and combining and uniting them into one body by the form of a holy Covenant Deut. 29.1.10 11 12. by which is plainly shewed that a company of people become Gods people that is a Church by entring into Covenant with God If it be said they were a Church before yet that was when the Church of the Jewes was constituted in Abrahams Family by Covenant p. 37 POS. 7. Every Member at his admission doth promise to give himself as to the Lord to be guided by him so to the Church to be guided by them which is no more then the Members of the Church of Macedonia did in a parallel case 2 Cor. 8.5 p. 44 POS. 8. This particular Congregation is a Church before it have Officers Acts 2.47 p. 45 POS. 9. She hath also full and free power to choose her own Officers without the help of Synod Classis or Presbyterie Act. 1.15 6.3 14.23 p. 46 POS. 10. The particular Congregation though they want Officers have power and authority to ordain Officers as the children of Israel did put their hands upon the Levites Numb 8.9 10. p. 52 POS. 11. When the Apostles were sent out by Christ there was no mention of Ordination in that Commission of theirs but only of teaching and baptizing Mar. 16.15 Mat. 28.19 20. If ordination of Ministers had been such a speciall work there would belike have been some mention of in in their Commission p. 56 POS. 12. The Church hath power to censure her Officers if she see just occasion Col. 4.17 p. 58 POS. 13. These Officers are to be maintained by contribution every Lords Day 1 Cor. 16.1 p. 60 POS. 14. The great Mountain burning with fire cast into the Sea upon the sounding of the second Trumpet Rev. 8.8 9. is applied by some good Writers to those times in which Constantine brought settled endowments into the Church p. 68 POS. 15. There must be in the Church Teachers distinct from Pastors as Apostles are distinct from Euangelists Ephes 4.11 p. 69 POS. 16. This particular Congregation is Sion which God loveth and he hath promised to be present Mat. 18.20 p. 71 POS. 17. So long as a Believen doth not joyn himself to some particular Congregation he is without in the Apostles sense 1 Cor. 5.12 p. 74 POS. 18. The Elders are not Lords over Gods heritage 1 Pet. 5.3 nor do exercise authority as the Kings and Princes of the earth do remembring our Saviours lesson Mat. 20.25 26. Luke 22.25 26. p. 78 POS. 19. The Power of Government is expresly given to the Church where we are bidden Hear the Church which is a particular Congregation Mat. 18. p. 85 POS. 20. Matth. 16.19 Christ directeth his Speech not to Peter alone but to all the Disciples also for to them all was the Question propounded by Christ vers 15. Nor to them as generall Officers of the Churches for that Commission was not yet given them but as Disciples and Believers p. 90 POS. 21. 1 Cor. 5. Paul himself though an extraordinary Officer yet would not take upon him to excommunicate the incestuous person without the Church but sends to them exhorting them to do it and reproves the Brethren of the Church of Corinth as well as the Elders that they did no sooner put him away p. 95 POS. 22. The Lord Jesus reproving the Angel of Pergamus for suffering Balaamites sends his Epistle not only to the Angel but to the Church The Spirit saith not only to the Angel but to the churches Rev. 2.11 And the Church-members are seen by John in a vision sitting on Thrones clothed with white raiment having on their heads crownes of gold Rev. 4.14 Now thrones and crownes are Ensignes of Authority and governing power p. 101 POS. 23. The particular Congregation takes Christ for her only spirituall Prophet Priest and King Deut. 18.15 Acts 7.37 Psal 110.4 Heb. 5.4 Isa 9.6 7. Rev. 15.3 p. 104 POS. 24. Christ left but one way of Discipline for all churches which in the Essentialls of it is unchangeable and to be kept till the appearing of Christ 1 Tim. 6.13 14. p. 107 POS. 25. The Church or the Ministers thereof must not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 4. And therefore the Minister must not perform a Ministeriall act to another Congregation Acts 20.28 1 Pet. 5.1 2. p. 111 POS. 26. Gifted men viz. so reputed by competent Judges though not called to the Ministery nor intended for it may preach They that were scattered abroad upon the Persecution which arose about Stephen were not Church-officers at least not all of them yet these men did preach the Word and Philip which was but a Deacon preached without the calling or privity of the Apostles Acts 11.19 8.14 p. 118 POS. 27. Jehosaphat sent Princes who were neither Ministers nor intended so to be to teach with the Priests and Levites viz. at least to incourage the people to hearken to the Priests and Levites 2 Chron. 17.7 8 9. as Jehosaphat did 2 Chron. 20.20 yea and was their mouth to God in Prayer vers 2.5 to 13. As we conceive something in that prophesying 1 Cor. 1.4 to be extraordinary so we conceive it to be ordinary that some private men grown Christians of able gifts who may have received a gift of Prophecy need no more extraordinary calling for them to Prophesie in the Churches then for Jehosaphat and his Princes to prophesie in the Church of Israel p. ibid. A Defence of certain Positions and Scriptures against an examination thereof by R.H. in which they are charged to be faultie POSITION I. GAthering of Churches in the Name of Christ See almost the same Argument verbatim in answer from New England to 32. q. p. 35. and setting up of Church-Ordinances cannot be unlawfull for want of a Commandement from Man as appeareth by the Doctrine and Practice of the Apostles Acts 4.19 5.29 THe Apostles never taught or practised to gather or separate some Christians from others one part of this true Church Answer and another part of that especially persons which themselves converted not to make a purer Church neither with nor without the Magistrates Authority THe Apostles both taught and practised the separating of some Jewes
from other Jewes Reply and gathering them into a Christian Church while yet the Jewish Church was not dissolved for they ceased not to be a Church of God till the body of them pertinaciously and desperatly rejected Christ Therefore they preached to the Jewes first and thought themselves bound so to doe because they were the people of God Acts 11.19 13.46 And yet they had commanded some to separate from the rest as your selfe acknowledge Acts 2.40 And their communion they had with them in Jewish worships shews that they counted them a true Church And some think that their Church state ceased not while their Temple stood And yet before that time many Jewes were gathered into many Christian Churches as both the Acts of the Apostles and their Epistles doe declare And if they might gather out of one Church they might as lawfully have gathered out of twenty or an hundred had there been so many at that time Secondly if the Apostles never taught nor practised such a thing what warrant then have our brethren for their Presbyterian Church which is gathered out of many Churches For they Interpret Matth. 18.17 Tell the Church of a Presbyterian Church which consists of the Elders of many Churches Thirdly why may not one Church be gathered of the members of many Churches as well as many Churches consist of the members of one Church For we read that the Church at Jerusalem was scattered upon Stevens persecution and we read not that they returned again but fell into membership with other Churches as is probable which were planted in severall parts of the world Fourthly such a Church which consists of the members of many other true Churches hath formerly been without exception in the dayes of the Prelates how comes it now to be questioned For at least fourteen yeares since such a Church was extant in Wiâ—â—all in Cheshire the vocall covenant being onely wanting which consisted of the choycest Christians of many Parishes who met constantly together upon the Lords day and enjoyed the Word and Seales of the Covenant and maintained a Pastor to dispense the same unto them and never or very rarely repaired to such Parishes where their habitations were And we think it cannot be denied but Mr. John Angiers Church at Denton in Lancashire hath of long time been such and many other such there have been besides And it was accounted an high happinesse to have liberty to make such a Church but was never accounted by the godly sinfull before But if you should answer That the Church consists of such as lived within such a Parish or Chappell and that the rest were strangers We reply If assembling constantly together and participating in all the Ordinances that the rest doe partake of and contributing with the rest in the maintenance of the Minister of such a place and an adhering rather to such a Minister and people then to any other in affection and action if all these together make members of a Church then these persons of other Parishes were not strangers but members and with the rest made such Churches except it shall be said that habitation alone in other Parishes when all the other are wanting makes membership and constitutes Churches which some of our brethren who are Presbyterians have and doe deny Fifthly are not some Parish Churches constituted sometimes of members of other Parish Churches when many persons have left their own places and removed into other Parishes without any consent Yet this hath been judged pious at least honest sometimes upon one ground and somtimes upon another some to have liberty of conscience in such places whither they have removed others to have better preaching others to meet with better society and others for better worldly accommodation What Christian knoweth not well that this hath been common Sixthly that a Church may consist of persons that have been members of other Churches if such persons have been orderly dismissed from such Churches and have come away with consent will be granted of all For none hold Church-membership to be undissolveable The question then will be Whether the members of Churches may depart without consent 1. According to the present constitution of Churches they may For they come in without consent meerly by removing their habitations therefore they may so depart 2. If consent must be had from whom must it be sought From the people or from the Minister That the people have any power either to give or with-hold their consent hath not been granted heretofore That the Ministers consent should be necessary for the departing of every member when yet himselfe it may be hath had his entrance amongst them without their consent seemes to be unreasonable 3. Suppose consent hath been sought and cannot be obtained may not members withdraw their membership in some cases without consent Suppose some Ordinance be corruptly dispensed without all hope of redresse and that men must partake therein without having any power so much as to witnesse against such corruptions unlesse they will be accounted factious and disturbers of the Churches peace or that by remaining where such corruptions are they be in danger to be leavened with the corrupt lump of such a Church of which they be members 1 Cor. 5.6 what must they now doe Doth not that Rule that bids a Church purge out one person that may endanger the leavening of the whole lump when there are no other means to prevent such an evill give warrant to every member that is endangered to be leavened by the lump to withdraw from such a lump because power to purge out the lump they have none when there is no other means to prevent the evill 2 Cor. 13.10 Church membership is for edification of the members not for destruction But you stumble at this because they converted them not To which we reply Persons whom the Apostles converted were ordinarily committed to others to be further edified and the ordinary Pastors and Elders of the primitive times did almost perpetually build upon anothers foundation The persons that watered for the most part were not the same that planted In Acts 11.20 21. we read of a great conversion wrought by the preaching of the scattered Disciples but we read not that they were gathered into Church-state till Barnabas was sent unto them and both Barnabas and Paul assembled with that Church and taught it which yet they converted not And in Acts 19.1 9. Paul found twelve Disciples converted to his hand though not fully instructed and gathered them into the Church which he planted at Ephesus But Brother how comes this to be a stone to stumble at If you hold a succession of Pastors in the same Church the successors may feed a flock which their predecessors converted and not themselves And if you hold transplantation of members from one Church to another then they may feed the members which were of other Churches which themselves converted not But you will say This must be orderly
given in all the new Testament that Christians ordinarily meeting together in divers places are yet called one Church except where Church is taken improperly in a distributive sense And therfore in cities where they might and did meet together they are called a Church and in countries where they could not all meet in one but in divers places they are called Churches Many such Churches or Congregations we have in England Answer We say so too Reply and add that either we have such in England or none at all For what other besides such can you shew us And the Beleevers in every Christian Church Answer even in the Church of England and in the Jewish Church also might and did at first meet 1. Reply Can you shew that the Beleevers of any Christian church met onely at first in one place and then afterwards being increased they met not in one place but many places except at some time of hot persecution 2. If Beleevers in England ever met together in one place it was when there was but one congregationall Church in England As for the Jewish Church in it Exo. 34.23.24 Deut. 16.2.16 both at first and afterwards all the males wore to meet by speciall appointment in one place at some seasons though not alwayes and in some ordinances though not all to shew that they were but one Church To say nothing that all the people of the Jewes being about six hundred thousand Answer are called one Congregation and are frequently in the old Testament said to come together and that * One Myriade is 10000. Myriads did come together Act. 21.22 They were one church and therefore did and ought to congregate together and are therefore called one congregation Reply and yet neither they nor those Myriads spoken of Acts 21.22 did then nor can such a number now ordinarily come together Now our Position is to be understood that a Gospel visible church consists of no more then can ordinarily come together into one place nor of so many as sometimes in an extraordinary way have met together How will you make out this Inference The Church of Corinth did meet in one place and so did Antioch Jerusalem Answer therefore no Church in the new Testament must consist of more then can meet in one place You must take the Argument in the scope of it Reply such and such Churches did meet constantly in one place and there is no mention of any Church which did not meet together in one place therefore no Church in the new Testament doth consist of more then can meet in one place the Consequent is now good For we think that patterns that are uncontrolled either by precepts or other patterns have doctrine in them and do teach how things ought to be carried To say there was a Church in Adams house and in Noahs Answer and also in Philemons Aquila's and Priscilla's houses therefore the Church in the old and new Testament must be domesticall is an inconsequent illation contrary to plain Scripture We confesse it and for the reason you render Reply because contrary to plain Scripture Now if you could have shewed us the repugnancy to plain Scripture of the inference which you oppugne wee should have confessed a great oversight in it It is one thing and more warrantable to derive an inference from patterns when they all run one way and be patterns of one kind and another thing and lesse safe to draw an inference from patterns when there is diversity of kinds of them about the same thing Is not the Argument as good if it run thus All the believing Corinthians were of the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 1.1 2 Cor. 6.11 Answer The Smyrnians and Laodiceans of the Church of Smyrna and Laodicea Col. 2.1 4.16 Rev. 2.8 3.14 Whether they were more or fewer Hence in every city and every church seem to expound one another Acts 14.21.23 with Tit. 1.5 Acts 16.4 5. And it cannot be shewed that any church how numerous soever it grew was divided into two or more churches therefore the believers in any one city or town may be but one church whether they can meet in one place or no. No brother not so Reply because as appeares to us there is light of Scripture gain-saying it For though all the believing Corinthians were of the church of Corinth which yet you seem to contradict in the after part of your Answer while you say that Gaius the Corinthian was the host of another church besides that of Corinth which if true then all believing Corinthians were not of the church of Corinth and though in all other cities all the believers of them were of the church in each of them yet such an inference would be naught because it was so for a speciall reason and in regions and countries where that reason took not place it was otherwise All the Believers in Jerusalem were of one church there because they were not so many but that they might come constantly together into one place and did so But all the Believers in Judea were not of one church there but of many churches because they could not meet constantly in one place And if believers in cities meeting in divers places are yet but one church for this reason because they were of one city as you would seem to inferre then shew but any probable reason why believers meeting in divers places in countries may not be one church because they were of one countrey especially the believers of Judea being but a small countrey and under the same civil government The reason why city and church expound one another was this because there was not more converted in a city then could meet together in a congregation or church And when you can shew us out of the new Testament that believers were so multiplied in any city as that they could not all meet in one place then will we shew you that such churches were divided into more churches Paul writes not only to them which might Answer and did meet in one place but to all that in every place not throughout the world at appeares 2 Cor. 1.1 written to the same persons 1 Cor. 5.1 2. with 2 Cor. 2.1 2. neither is this a Catholique Epistle but that in all Achaia call upon the Name of the Lord. Paul writes and sends this Reply and applieth it to the Corinthianss and to them alone as appears almost in every chapter of the Epistle and in many of the verses of each chapter For all along proper and peculiar things belonging to the Corinthians and not to the Achaians nor Saints in all the world are spoken of in commendation and discommendation and proper reproofes directions exhortations are given yet he intended it for the use and benefit of all Achaia and of the whole world also And it may as properly be called a Catholique Epistle as an Achaian Epistle for the use redounds to the world as well as to Achaia
of the Church that is of the church he is of Not forsaking the assembling of your selves together that is no one with his own church that he is of or each church with it self But there is no need of any such figure in the Texts which wee alledge but the literall sense may passe and in some places must passe or there will be no sense For 1. The persons which wee say came together they might do it they were neither so many nor so remote but they might And if the Holy Ghost say they did wee must believe it and not seek a figure when wee are not enforced to it 2. The Text in 1 Cor. 14.23 saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when the whole church comes together Now let the Reader judge whether any of your Texts have any such fulness of words in them to sway to a meeting in one place as this one Text hath which we have brought Some of your own side have been convinced with the evidence of this Text that the church of Corinth was but one congregation and came together into one place Especially Answer seeing the Apostle writes to the Achaians 2 Cor. 1.1 1 Cor. 16.1 with 2 Cor. 9.2 11.10 Now there were other churches in that Region at least two Corinth and Cenchrea Rom. 16.1 To say nothing of the church whereof Gaius the Corinthian was the Host 1. Reply Paul writes to the Achaians no otherwise then hee doth to the Saints which call on the name of the Lord Jesus every where 1 Cor. 1.1 with 2 Cor. 1.1 2. Hee writes not to them as making one church with the Corinthians for hee mentioneth them with a note of distinction from the Corinthians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The places which you would have compared will not enforce any such thing For hee might have a scope that the other churches in Achaia from the Epistle hee sent to Corinth which they were to peruse as the Laodicean church was to reade the Epistle written to the Colossians should be stirred up to the same duty of contribution c. So that the onenesse of the Congregation of the church of Corinth is not yet infringed 4. Doth the Apostle write to the Achaians and were there in that Region two churches at least Corinth and Cenchrea why then doth not the Apostle say To the Churches of Achaia as in all other such cases he doth To the churches of Galatia The churches of Judea Macedonia Asia Why is the church of Corinth mentioned and the church at Genchrea wholly silenced in the first Epistle and not mentioned directly and by name in the second Hence there is mention of churches to which the women hee writes to for he saith Your women not women or all women did resort Answer Or how else could they keep selence in the churches 1 Cor. 14.34 1. These Epistles were written for the use and direction of all churches and therefore the Apostle nameth churches Reply because this was to be a standing rule for all churches and by your women the Corinthian women were primarily meant to whom the Epistle was sent yet in regard of use not they alone but they with the women of Achaia and all that call on the name of the Lord Jesus in every place It was a command intended for universall direction for the women of all other churches 2. Women were wont to go from one church to another upon occasion as Rom. 16.1 Phebe from Cenchrea went to Rome so might the Corinthian women go to other churches and in all churches must keep silence 3. Though it he said your women yet it is not said your churches but in the churches that is churches every where and the verse before gives some light hereto For hee had said As in all the churches of the Saints And he addes Let your women keep silence in the churches What churches The churches of the Saints every where POSITION IV. The visible Church in the new Testament is not Nationall as the Iewes was hence we reade of the Churches of Galatia Macedonia ludea not Church of Galatia 1 Cor. 16.1 2 Cor. 8.1 We say not that the Christian Church is Nationall Answer as was the Jewish church viz. that it hath a nationall Tabernacle Temple or House of God and solemne worship peculiar to it to which all the members or all the males must sometimes resort towards which the absent are to pray and in which the Priests in their courses do minister unto God 1. Why do you yet find fault with the Position Reply when you agree with us in the same 2. Why do you not lay down in what sense the Christian church is nationall and in what sense not nationall 3. If in any proper manner of speaking you will have the Christian church nationall meaning by nationall the Saints that live within such a nation as distinguished from the Saints of another nation in countrey and place of habitation without any othertie amongst them being all of them parts only of the Mysticall or Catholique church as wee know the Sea that washeth the British shores is called the British Sea and that which washeth the Belgick shores is called the Belgick Sea though they be not distinct Seas but parts of the great Ocean yet in reference to an adjunct of place they run by they receive distinct denominations and by a Synecdoche the parts carry the names of the whole in this sense we do yeeld the exposition or phrase of nationall church But if you mean by nationall church an instituted church of nationall extent in point of power and jurisdiction upon which particular congregations within that nation do depend wee want light that there is or ought to be any such church in the times of the Gospel For if there ought to be such a nationall church for patterns we have none as your self do confesse then in this church there must be some nationall combination nationall place for convention nationall Pastor upon which it must depend and nationall Ordinances For seeing there was no such church extant when the Gospel was written nor rules left for you would have alledg'd them we suppose had there been any how all things must be carried in such a nationall church what reason can be shewed if such a church must be why there should be a departing from the pattern of the nationall church among the Jewes in which they had all these things Therefore those seem to do best that in thir moulding of their nationall church come neerest to the example of the Jewish church Or if you will have another modell of this nationall church of your owne framing viz. a nation of Assemblies combined together and represented in their officers meeting in one place and consulting the good of the whole and executing authority over the whole then these persons must stand in relation to all and each one of the Assemblies of the Nation under their jurisdiction and so they are Nationall Officers
you be so soolish prophane presumptuous superstitious A stranger comes to the gate of a Garrison town professeth to be a friend yet except there be something to witnesse the truth of that profession he is examined over and over again and it is strictnesse that shewes faithfulnesse to the State And shall we be more remisse and carelesse when we receive persons into the Church then we are when we receive them into a town Our too much credulity may shew too little fidelity in the matters of Christ as well as in the businesse of men Besides if the Church be not a common receptacle of all persons but that it consist of a selected number and some are received and others rejected then there are certain rules of reception and rejection And then there must be a triall made by some whether persons be qualified according to those rules and this the light of nature teacheth and the rules of Reason lead to it though there should be nothing in the Scripture expresly mentioning it The most sutable means serving most fitly to atchieve such ends are alwayes enjoyned in the ends though they be not particularly expressed But what think you Is it not as lawfull to try persons that would be Church-members and make some profession in words of saith and repentance but hold forth nothing which may probably give witnesse to the reality thereof as it was lawfull and commendable in the Ephesians to try false Apostles which professed in words to be true Apostles Rev. 2.2 And is it not as reasonable for a Church to seek satisfaction concerning the reality and sincerity of sanctity from persons of whom they doubt as it was just and equall for the Church at Jerusalem to seek satisfaction concerning Saul whether he were a Disciple in truth or in pretence only Acts 9.26 27. But you will say there was cause of suspicion and jealousie in them concerning him because they knew him formerly to be a destroyer of the Church And may not we say there is cause of jealousie when we know externall profession of faith and repentance to be so common and the fruits which are worthy of it Mat. 3.8 to be so rare and scarce to be found If the Gospel and Christian Religion was brought into England in the Apostles times then it was like it was constituted of Saints Answer Church-covenant p. 37. as well as the Church of Corinth c. Because it is uncertain what Congregation was at first constituted of Saints within this kingdome and what was not Reply we neither justifie nor condemn the constitution of any but judge according to the present state of them And if we see any visible Saints as doubtlesse there are many in some Congregations and united also amongst themselves we could wish they were all such and in the mean time for the sake of those few whom we see so united we acknowledge them a Church and in all things so farre as they carry the ordinances uncorruptly we desire to have fellowship with them The Text in 1 Cor. 1. rather shewes what the members of the Church of Corinth were at the time of Pauls writing to them Answer then that they were on ought to have been visible Saints at the first erection of that Church yet it shewes not that all the Church-members he writes to were visible Saints for many known evill livers were known Members The denomination of Saints is a parce meliore that is from the better part c. The Text shewes what they either were at first Reply or ought to have been or what some of them were at that time and ought all of them to have been viz. sanctified in Christ called to be Saints as Hemingius Gualter Pareus upon that place do note for they say a definition of a Church may thence be fetched And what rule soever there is in Scripture requiring that any be Saints the same rule requires that all be Saints And there may many Arguments be brought to hold it forth 1. The end of Church-fellowship is not conversion but edification Ephes 4.11 12. Acts 9.31 For if it were conversion then all uncoverted ones whether they make profession of faith and repentance or no might enter in that thereby they might attain one end for which they enter as we know Because one end of the preaching of the Word is conversion therefore all may partake of it Jewes Turks Heathens because they may attain one end whereto it serves It is supposed then that the persons that enter into the Church are converted already 2. Excommunication is an ordinance in the Church and one end of it is to recover persons that are desperately sick and ready to die it is in the use of it as physick 1 Cor. 5.5 and therefore supposeth the persons to whom applied to be alive therefore all Church-members are to be reputed in the judgement of charity to be living stones 1 Pet. 2.5 3. If excommunication be an ordinance to throw forth visible sinners of all sorts then the Church should consist of visible Saints 1. It appeareth that all scandalous grosse sinners ought to be cast out from 1 Cor. 5. and that all other sinners which are not seandalous if they will not be healed of their lesser faults and brought to repentance ought to be duly proceeded against untill at last it come to an excommunication Matth. 18.15 16 c. He writes to the Church called to be Saints Answer or called Saints not to the Saints called to be a Church or to the Church constituted of Saints which expression rather of the two proves there was a Church before they were Saints See vers 1. Paul called to be an Apostle then that they were Saints before they were a Church He writes to the Church of God Reply and can there be a Church of God before there be Saints What a Church of God is that which had no visible Saints in it when it was first constituted Surely except you will say they were a Church of God while they were Heathens you must confesse that professing to be turned by the power of the Gospel in a time of persecution from the service of Idols to imbrace the living God in Christ they must be judged visible Saints at the first when they were a Church of God And these words Paul called to be an Apostle will not avail you for Paul was a man and a Christian too before an Apostle but what would you have the Church of God to be before they were visible Saints But how appeareth it that all the honourable Titles and Epithets given Paul Answer are given with relation to Church-members The Corinthians were enriched by God in all utterance c. Will you thence conclude that all Church-members must be so c. There are some names which shew the intrinsecall nature of the things to which they are given Reply and they do agree to all of that kinde As if one should write to the Army of
which it was the sign and seal and we would demand whether Isaac were not in covenant before he was circumcised and whether his circumcision did not seal so much and alwayes this order is supposed First Gods promise Secondly mans faith Thirdly the sign and seal of both in some Symbole of Gods institution so in Baptisme How prove you that Melchisedeck a Priest and Lot Answer which were not of his seed nor family were out of Church-state That a believer is not a son of Abraham if he be not in Church state by covenant which things you seem to imply when you say the Jewish Church was constituted in Abrahams family by Church-covenant the family of Sem was the Church of God long before this 1. We assert not that they were out of Church-state Reply but this we say if they were not circumcised as we read not that they were they were not of Abrahams Church nor had the Passeover been on foot could they have partaked of it any more then Believers could afterward who joyned not to Abrahams family Cornelius may be an example 2. It is one thing to be a son of Abraham as a Believer and heire of promise for so all Believers are and an Heathen is when converted before joyned to any instituted Church and another thing to be the son of Abraham as a professed Covenanter with God and bearing the Symbole of it in his flesh in the former sense Abraham was the father of all Believers though uncircumcised and in the latter a father of the circumcised which were also of his faith as the Apostle shewes Rom 4.11.12 3. Though it be probable that there was a Church in the famimily of Sem yet that place Gen. 9.26 27. proves it not for first it is propheticall of the posterity of Sem and Japhet and respects not so far as we can discern the persons of Sem and Japhet at least not at that time being both as is probable in the family of their father Noah Secondly there might be a Church in Sems family and yet of another constitution then this in Abrahams family this hinders not but that the church in Abrahams family might be constituted by covenant POSITION VII Every Member at his admission See the like allegation in Answer to Pos 9. p. 73. doth promise to give himself as to the Lord to be guided by him so to the Church to be guided by them which is no more then the Members of the Church of Macedonia did in a parallel case 2 Cor. 8.5 The givers are not the Members of the Church of Macedonia Answer as you for your advantage phrase it but the Churches of Macedonia and therefore if this do prove Union or Covenant it is of the members of severall churches and not of one only 1. The allegation in answer to the 9th Position Reply pag. 73. runs in these words As to the Lord to be guided by him so to the Church according to God to be guided by them these words according to God are lest out whether wilfully to make the practice of our Churches the more odious or by oversight we conclude not 2. There was no intent to prove Vnion or Covenant of a Church but subjection of each member to the Church to which he is joyned himself and the officers thereof and the practice of the Churches of Macedonia by way of allusion is made use of it is said it is no more then the members of the Church of Macedonia did in a parallel case The Argument is fetcht à comparatis the members of the Church of Macedonia did as much in a like case they gave themselves to the Lord and to the Apostle and Timothy according to Gods will to be guided by the Lord and directed by them a whole Church or Churches to one or two persons gave themselves and an Argument is fetcht thence thus then may one person that is to joyn to a Church as fitly give himself to the Lord to be guided by him and to the whole Church and the Officers thereof to be directed by them according to the will of God and it is urged that a member should therefore promiseit and to call it Church of Macedonia or churches is neither advantagious nor disadvantagious for though many Churches gave themselves to be guided by one Paul because he was Officer to them all yet a members subjection will be only required to his own Church and the Officers thereof because there is no superiority of jurisdiction of one Church over another and the members thereof We believe you would be ready enough to make use of this pattern to prove that the members of a Congregation must submit to the guidance of their Pastors and why do you except against it because subjection of each member to the Church is endevoured to be proved thence seeing that the Church compriseth the Officers thereof POSITION VIII This particular Congregation is a Church before it have Officers Acts 2.47 In a generall sense a few private men without Officers yea Answer a few women without men yea twenty members of severall Churches may be called a Church but a governing Church they are not the Church hath not received an office of rule without her Officers (b) Cottons Keyes p. 16. Reply We take Churches for such churches Reply as the Apostles planted in all places when they had converted any considerable number of persons into which Saints were wont to be gathered that they might be built up and edified by the Ordinances Acts 9.31 and unto which Pastors were given to reside with them and to oversee them Acts 20.28 and these must be Congregationall Churches for Pastors cannot constantly feed any other Or we take Church as Amesius defines it * A company of faithfull ones by speciall bond betwixt themselves joyned together to exercise the communion of Saints constantly amongst themselves Coetus sidelium speciali vinculo inter se conjunctorum ad communionem sanctor um inter se constanter exercendam such an united company is the Church before it have Officers for it is their priviledge to choose their Officers as you confesse in your Answer to the next Position in which sense if in any sense at all a few private men or a few women or twenty members of severall churches have never been called a Church Now whether this Congregationall church be a Governing church or not because it is not asserted in the Position we have no occasion here of discussing it The Church in Acts 2. had Officers Answer and better Officers then any Church now hath even the Apostles which were the Elders of all Churches 1 Pet. 5.1 2 Cor. 11.28 (d) The Apostles were as Elders and Rulers of all Churches Cotton Keys p. 48 and particularly of the Church of Jerusalem and did act therein as Elders it is not all one to want Elders now they are instituted as before ordinary Elders were not appointed at that time There is a
2.40 were they added unto such which were not separated The Text saith there were added to them three thousand fouls to them to whom to those who are yet members of the Jewish church then these separated ones who were added were members of the Jewish church by their addition for they came into their state to whom they were added and so they were separated and not separated which yet agrees not to vers 47. where they are all together called a Church 3. It is impertinently alledged that the company was not without Elders the Apostles were present For was the company straitned in their liberty by the presence of these Elders or rather were they not acquainted with their priviledge in this matter by these Elders When as else they might not have known it but you say a little after they were limited but what is this limiting nothing else but necessary direction and the limitation is but in one thing though you would have it in two the words are these Wherefore of these that have accompanied us c. For ought that appears all that had accompanied them were present and who could be so sit to be an Apostle as one of those who had accompanied them 1 Joh. 1.1 4. If the election of an Apostle did belong to God in reference to the particular person yet they proceeded as far as they could therein and agreed in the denomination of two and when the lot determined whether of the two should be the man the Text saith vers 26. by the common suffrage of them all Matthias was numbred among the eleven Apostles 5. If all Elders and Churches must conveen upon occasion of electing of an Apostle because he is Pastor of all Churches why must they not be gathered together upon occasion of ordaining an Apostle But we reade but of one Church and the Elders thereof present at the onlaining of Paul Acts 13.2.3.23 whereupon Paul calls himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 1.1 As for the Deacons and Overseers for the power Answer though people may better discern of mens sitnesse and ability for that Office then for the Ministry Why are Deacons and Overseers for the poor made Synonymies and confounded Reply is this the reason to make the world believe that we have had Deacons amongst us because we have had Over-seers for the poor but if we have had Deacons when were they ordained who ever put their hands upon them according to the pattern Acts 6.6 or are they called so because their work is only to oversee the poor we conceive their office extends further But of that in its own place It is added Answer The people can better discern c. 1. They had direction to inable them to discern aright in choosing Deacons Reply and by direction they will be able to discern aright in choosing other Officers 2. A godly people or church rightly constituted for the matter will be able to discern of wholesome and powerfull Doctrine and if they want skill to judge of humane learning they may with little ado be informed 3. If your meaning be that upon this ground the people may choose Deacons but not other Officers you might have done well to have limited what you before granted and in stead of saying We hold it the priviledge of the people to choose their own Officers you would have said We hold it the priviledge of the people to choase their own Deacons but no Officers else And their liberty of choosing was a good means at that time to abate their discontentments because of former neglect Answer 1. Then it was granted to them of courtesie Reply and out of policie and it did no way belong unto them why then did you say before We hold it the priviledge of the people 2. Doth any thing appear to make this a reason that this liberty was granted to them Would not they have been as well pleased if the Apostles had done it if it belonged to the Apostles and not to them they all knew the Apostles were more able to choose then they and what the Apostles did gave better content for all magnified the Apostles besides is it likely that the Apostles would nourish a sinfull humor of discontent in the people by giving them a priviledge that belonged not to them Good brother take heed how you attempt to evade the strength of plain Scripturall proofes by such dangerous glosses as these Yet at their election Answer there were all the Churches and Elders in the world The meaning is Reply there was but one Church and the Elders thereof at that time in the world and they were there It is true the members were there for the Brethren were they that elected and the Apostles were there which were extraordinary Elders for they were the persons that directed but what did they act further Did they interpose their authority in election Did they take it out of the Brethrens hards Did they not manifestly put it into their hands in commanding them to look out seven men c. Acts 6.3 Answer Your selves acknowledge Synods an Ordinance of Christ in sundry cases Reply Not the Authority of Synods by way of jurisdiction in any case Answer Paul and Barnabas ordained Eders by suffrages given by lifting up and stretching out of hands for so the Greek word signifies but that the people did ordain Elders by election without the Apostles it saith not but rather the contrary viz. that they stayed from election and ordination of Elders till the Apostles came to advise and assist them therein the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather to give then to gather saffrages as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth imply the election of more Churches then one and yet it imports the election of no more Churches then those there spoken of so the phrase Paul and Barnabas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not imply that any Church or other person besides Paul and Barnabas did elect these Presbyters 1. We do not affirm that the people did it without the Apostles Reply For we conceive the Apostles guided them as at other times they had done other Churches 2. Concerning their staying from election and ordination we reade not of it and therefore dare conclude nothing about it concerning their advising we grant it but what other assistance they assorded we understand not unlesse it be said that they led the people by their own suffrage and so they might give their suffrage as you say the word signifies and yet gather the peoples also But that they should give their own suffrage by lifting up their own hands without the peoples seems unreasonable For when hath it ever been known that two persons alone in the presence of many others have gone to voting by lifting up of hands the one must gather the vote and the other must give it that is the one must say to the other Paul to Barnabas If thou be for such a man to be Elder in this Church manifest it
the old Testament for patterns for it if you can but produce one instance from the new Testament that ever Elders of one Church ordained Officers in another or any good reason for it grounded thence the controversie about ordination shall be ended betwixt us and the pattern of Numb 8. shall be waved You tell us that it is a pillar of Popery to proportion the Church now Answer to the outward policy of Israel It is notoriously known Reply that the foundation of the Antichristian Hierarchy is laid in the proportion which some would have betwixt the Jewish policy and the policie of the Christian Church yet this debarres not but that use may be made of the old Testament where the new is silent Do not you rest upon the new Testament for the change of the Seal of the Covenant and conclude Baptisme is to be imbraced in stead of Circumcision because the new is cleer in that matter and yet run to the old to finde out the latitude and extent in the application of it to the subject and conclude Infants must be baptized not because the new expressly saith so but because you finde it in the old The Jewes children were circumcised therefore Christians children must be baptized You tell us that Christs faithfulnesse above Moses Answer consists in as full determination of Gods worship in the new Testament and that we are as strictly tied to the Gospel-pattern as the Jewes were to the old Testament Why then should we in ordination of Officers be guided by the old Testament and not by the new It is our Argument against those that hold that there is no platform of discipline laid down in the new Testament Reply but that any is lawfull that the State will authorize but it was never asserted by us that all things without limitation are directly determined for we have alwayes restrained it to substantialls neither have we ever said that we have had a perfect knowledge of all things that are revealed And why should we follow the ordination of Levites rather then of Priests for a pattern for the ordination of Elders Answer except to gratifie you You cannot gratifie us by following the one or the other Reply because ye cannot advantage your selves whether of them soever ye betake your selves unto For 1. If the people laid their hands upon the Levites there were no hands at all laid upon the Priests they were anointed and consecrated and holy vestments put upon them but ordained by the imposition of hands they were not but you would not have ordination of Elders turn'd into a consecration after the manner of the Priests 2. What was done to the Priests was not performed by any Ecclesiasticall person but by Moses the chief Magistrate of the people but you are not so weary of ordination as to transferre it from the Presbyterie to the Magistracie 3. The Elders of the new Testament are rather the successors of the Levites then of the Priests because there is no Hierarchie amongst them and therefore the pattern of their ordination is rather to be followed then the ordination of the Priests and yet not to gratifie us Consult better the next time with Scripture before you proceed to such triumphing POSITION XI When the Apostles were sent out by Christ The words of the Answer to 32. q. p. 71. there was no mention of Ordination in that Commission of theirs but only of teaching and baptizing Mark 16.15 Matth. 18.19 20. If Ordination of Ministers had been such a speciall work there would be like have been some mention of it in their Commission Neither is there mention of the celebration of the Eucharist Answer The Eucharist is an ordinance Reply sealing the same Covenant that Baptisme sealeth therefore the Apostles having Commission for the one could not want it for the other though it be not mentioned Preaching and Baptizing were first to be done to the Nations Answer therefore they are there mentioned That is not the sole reason Reply but because they were principall works and in reference to the subject persons about which they were exercised more Apostolicall for they might preach and baptize in all the world whereas ordinary Officers in an ordinary way may not do such works in all the world but only in the Church We find the Apostles did practise ordination Answer and yet we suppose they went not beyond their Commission Acts 6. c. 13. 14. and a Commission to Elders we reade 1 Tim. 5. The Position saith not Reply that ordination was not within their Commission but saith That there is no mention thereof when they first received their Commission and the page out of which the Position is exerted makes mention of some other works within their Commission not mentioned viz. Prayer and Acts 6.4 is quoted for it But indeed Brother you are injurious to the Authors of those words of the Answer to 32. q. p. 71. for Ordination is not denied to be within the Commission of the Apostles but those Reverend men do grapple with Hierarchicall persons in that place and we see no reason why you should take offence thereat if you would not have your self judged to be one of them their words are these Some indeed have so highly advanced ordination that they have preferred it above preaching ministring of Sacraments Prayer making it and the power of excommunication the two incommunicable prerogatieves of a Bishop above an ordinary Minister who are these sons Prelaticall mens against them the Authors of the Position fight And first would beat them with the words of the Apostles first Commission which was to preach and to baptize and afterwards they do shew that preaching was the great work that they were to attend upon and do alledge 1 Cor. 1.17 for it and next after preaching they mention prayer and alledge Acts 6.4 and then they speak of the Sacraments not of Baptisme alone but of the Lords Supper So that Brother you had no reason to take such offence because of the Eucharist for they gave it its due place in the Apostles Commission after this they render another reason why preaching was a greater work then ordaining because Paul went about the work of preaching and left Titus an inferiour Officer to himself to the work of ordaining Indeed afterwards when those Reverend men had proved that ordination was not superiour to Preaching Baptisme c. they then indevour to shew that it is not equall to those works so as that none but those which may perform those works may ordain and they bring this Argument Ordination being nothing else but the accomplishment of Election it may be performed by the people of God who yet have no office even as Election may upon whom it depends and they bring the testimonies of many Protestant Writers among the rest D. Whitakers Answer to Bellarmine If Bellarmine grant the calling of those Bishops to be lawfull there is lesse cause why we should doubt of Ordination For those who
have the authority of calling they have also the authority of ordaining if a right ordination cannot be obtained for Ordination follows Vocation he that is called by calling he means election is as it were sent into the possession of his function You intimate that speciall works which the people might not do Answer are mentioned in that Commission which if you stand to you must deny the people power either to baptize or to preach if these words be not a Commission to the Apostles and Elders to ordain I am sure they are no commission to un-officed men to preach or to ordain We conceive we differ not much from you in this matter Reply we are utterly against un-officed mens baptizing and against their preaching in ordinary except when they have been trained up to learning and to the knowledge of the Scriptures and are expectants of a call to execute the Ministery and your selves in this case grant it and you put difference betwixt preaching and baptizing though they be joyned together in the Apostles Commission for in no case will you let an un-officed man baptize and yet for triall of gifts you think it fit to suffer an un-officed man to preach from 1 Tim. 3.10 POSITION XII If that need so require she may admonish her Officers and excomunicate c. T. W. to W. R. p. 39. The Church hath power to censure her Officers if she see just occasion Col. 4.17 The Church at Coloss had other Elders besides Archippus Answer which might joyn with the people in admonition 1. Reply What Officers there were in that Church or with that Church at that time appeares not 2. The command is directed to the Church without expresse consideration of any Officers amongst them and though there should be Officers yet the Brethren are not thereby excluded from joyning with the Officers in that which is commanded Col. 4.17 Paul bids Timothy fulfill his Ministery Answer 2 Tim. 4.5 this doth not suppose Timothy to be faulty or to be under censure And it may be Archippus Pauls fellow-labourer Philemon vers 2. was not faulty and then this admonition was no censure and therefore it is alledged to no purpose 1. Reply Expositors do judge him faulty see Zanchy upon that place 2. The Apostle saith to Timothy make full proof of thy ministery but bids them say to Archippus fulfill it Now there is difference betwixt these two the former respects persons himself and others whom he should assure of it the latter respects the work it self in duties of it and the one of these may also be without the other 3. It is one thing when the Apostle a superior writing to a perso and inferiour and one who did depend upon him gives him much good counsell and amongst other things injoynes him to make full proof of his ministery and another thing when the Apostle writing to a people without any occasion of such an exhortation and without mingling the injunction of this duty with other exhortations of like nature doth excite them in an abrupt manner to say to Archippus see to the Ministery c. For the former we have many patterns which yet imply not faultinesse 1 Pet. 5.1 2 3. Tit. 2. ult For the latter where is there any parallel place Though therefore Timothy whom the Apostle exhorts may be without fault yet there is strong presumption that Archippus whom the people ordinarily must heare in silence but now are put upon it to admonish him was not Neither doth admonition alwayes suppose authority Answer for this may be an act of charity as well as of authority Church-admonition is some degree of censure Reply for it is a leading step to higher censure till at last it come to excommunication call it what you will liberty power or authority yet censure it is and that is all the Position doth assert Private members cannot censure judiciously Answer or unchurch the Congregation though they be hidden Plead with their mother plead Hosea 2.2 If they may plead then they may withdraw when the Congregation is obstinate and so from their Officers Reply when they will no be reclaimed which though it be not judiciall and positive censure yet must be granted to be negative The Colossians were as well to cause that Epistle to be read in the Church of Laodicea as to say to Archippus c. yea Answer the word cause seems more authoritative then say ye yet our Brethren hold not that one Church hath power to cause any thing to be done in another Church if it had been said Cause Archippus c. and say to Laodicea you could have made notable use of it Cause in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not command yee but work yee Reply effect yee indeavour yee that it be read and so interpreted it is not so authoritative as say yee for say ye take heed seems to be more imperative if it had been said Say yee to Laodicea see that you read this Epistle and of Archippus indeavour yee that Archippus fulfill his ministery for the Greek word translated cause imports no more we could have made lesse use of it Finally Answer the Church cannot excommunicate their whole Presbyterie no more then the Presbytery excommunicate the whole Church Cottons Keys pag. 16. only she may withdraw from them c. This withdrawing is a negative excommunication Reply which is some kinde of censure though not so authoritative as the positive and more then this we plead not for POSITION XIII This Text is much insisted on and weekly contributions for the Minister grounded upon it These Officers are to be maintained by contribution every Lords day 1 Cor. 16.1 You do not maintain all your Officers Answer not your Ruling Elders though the Text 1 Tim. 5.17 doth as cleerly hold out the maintenance as the lawfulnesse The Apostles rule was not generall but only in the Churches of Galatia and Achaia vers 1. nor perpetuall for those gatherings were to cease when Paul came nor for any Officers qua Officers but for the poor not their own Church neither but of the church of Jerusalem which was a singular and extraordinary case c. We conceive you meet not with this Position as you do not with some other in scriptis Reply in our writings for we should then have been sent to the Author in the margent but in stead thereof you salute us with these words This text is much insisted on c. in discourse we suppose betwixt some one and your self you should have done well to have named the person because some of us have had conference with you about this matter and it may be thought you intend us but then you deal not fairly for that Text hath been alledged by us and more Texts with it to prove another thing viz. the raising and maintaining of a stock of money in the Church out of which may be taken proportions for every good purpose and so for the Ministers
these Churches by an every Sabbaths contribution But it will be said still that this respecteth the poor Saints at Jerusalem only But every Church hath or may have poor Saints of her own which way must they be relieved must not they be provided for the same way as the poor Saints of other Churches What reason can be shewed that the poor of other Churches must be provided for by one way or rule and the poor of their own Church by another way or rule or if there be any difference do not a Churches own poor rather require a weekly contribution for their reliefe then the poor abroad of other Churches therefore we said at the beginning that we conceived the Apostle to have a further meaning then the occasion did import Besides seeing there are Lords Dayes contributions throughout the yeer in all the Belgick churches for the poor upon what Scriptures do they bottome them if not upon this there is par ratio like reason without all doubt that look how the Apostle would have reliefe come in to the Saints of Jerusalem so he would have it come in to the Saints of every Church that wants it and that is by raising a stock in the Church for all good uses by first dayes contributions But wherein doth this Stock or Treasury of the Church respect Ministers The stock raised by selling of estates and laying them down at the Apostles feet respecteth not the Saints alone but the very Apostles why then should not the stock raised by an every Sabbaths contribution respect Ministers If we will take Chemnitius his opinion whose harmony upon the Gospel is not a litle set by (a) Chem. har p. 182 period hist de anno Christ 12. he tells us the Doctors in Christs time that preached were maintained by contribution he saith the treasury into which Christ beheld many rich ones casting in much and the poor widow all her substance was to maintain the Doctors he also joynes the poor with the Doctors and saith that the Treasury was for both uses see John 8.20 and compare it with Mark 12.41 Having given an account of our tenent and grounds whereupon built and our conceptions upon 1 Cor. 16.1 2. we need not frame any other Reply unto your Answer Brother for the intelligent Reader will discern what little truth in some things and little substance in other things there is in what you have presented in that matter only because you charge us with unrighteousnesse and partiality in point of our not maintaining our Ruling Elders we shall clear our selves in a few words 1. We conceive all Officers are to have some maintenance the labourer is worthy of his hire provided that he either require it or the Church be able to give it 2. We conceive that there is a difference in the works of Officers some are greater taking up the whole time and strength of the Officers double work being put upon them ruling and labouring in the Word and Doctrine so there should be difference in the maintenance of Officers some ought to have more then others 3. When the Church is not able to maintain her teaching Officers with an honourable maintenance then if the ruling Officers and the Deacons will remit what ever reward from the Church their work calls for 't is no unrighteousnesse nor partiality in the Church to maintain the teaching Officers and not the rest because their works do not so require the whole man but that they may have other Callings to help themselves by which means they may spare the Church in her poverty in point of maintenance 4. Your self may do well to consider whether the ruling Elders and the Deacons be maintained in the Presbyterian Churches and if it be an error not to do it it is good to pull out that beam out of your own eye and then you may see the better to take it out of your brothers eye POSITION XIV The great Mountain burning with fire cast into the Sea upon the sounding of the second Trumpet Rev. 8.8 9. is applied by some good Writers to those times in which Constantine brought settled endowments into the Church If it be so applyed by some good Writers Answer who possibly bad in their eyes the Lordly and almost regall riches and pomp of Prelates it is by as many and as good writers applyed otherwise Our brethren speak modestly and moderately Reply they tell us it is applied so by some good Writers It is not therefore their own novell exposition they present it as probable they force the interpretation upon no man But what are your exceptions against it For my part Answer as I sinde that Constantines donation the foundation of this exposition is but a fiction accounted by Gratian himself to be but palea and what is the chaffe to the wheat So I finde in the Prophecies that Kings and States are called Mountains Zach. 4.7 Casting of Mountains into the Sea implyeth great commotions Psal 46.2 Their burning with sire signifieth their opposition and fiercenesse whereby they become destroying Mountains Jer. 51.25 1. Reply We are not at a little want of books and therefore are not able to make an exact search either after the truth or falshood of this matter But let Constantines donation of the Popes patrimony be a Fiction and Palea yet we suppose it may be cleerly evidenced from credible Authors that Constantine brought in great riches and pomp setled endowments to the Clergie of the Church and that is all that is affirmed in the Position 2. If Kings and States be called Mountains so is prosperity in riches and honours Psal 30. Thou hast made my Mountain so strong that is my condition so prosperous And Sea in Scripture is the Church sometimes or the Religion of the Church Rev. 13.1 15.2 therefore casting of a Mountain into the sea may be bringing prosperity and casting riches and honours upon the Church and though Mountains should be taken in your sense for Kings when almost regall riches and honours were cast upon Prelates of the Church may it not be said a mountain was cast into the Sea And may it not well be said to be a burning Mountain when the ambition of Prelates after Church indowments and honours almost set the Christian world on fire and the hot contestations of Ecclesiasticall persons for Church-livings do testifie that if prosperity in wealth and honour be a mountain then it was a burning mountain and had such effects following it as the Prophecies in the Revelations speak of But you go on and say I finde not that it is unlawfull either for a yeer as in New-England Answer (u) 〈◊〉 to ◠R. p. 19. Reply or for certain yeers or for term of life much lesse do I finde that it is lawfull for one and not for a yeer a quarter or two or three or four yeers Though T. W. speak of maintenance from yeer to yeer yet it is not to be understood that
are said to be come to one mount Sion If so then the Congregations of the Christian Gentiles may well be another mount Sion And if the Nationall church of the Jewes with the assemblies thereof were mount Sion why may not every Nationall-church of Christians with the assemblies thereof we speak now in your language be Sion also and then there being many Nationall churches as you say there are many Sions And what greater absurdity is it to say there are an hundred or a thousand Sions then to say there are an hundred or a thousand Churches Seeing Sion and Church are all one Now you know there were many visible churches in Judea Galatia Macedonia Asia and many other places and if then so many how many more now therefore many Sions and because those many churches then and these now we believe to have been and still to be Congregationall therefore every Congregationall Church we hold to be Sion But you ask an odde strange needlesse to say no worse of it question with a great deal of vehemency Answer viz. Have you not found God present in our Assemblies Have you not by faith closed with the promises in the use of the Ordinances among us Speak out I know you dare not belie your selves us and God himself c. Reply Your question is bottomed upon a mistake when we say that God hath promised to be present in Sion you give this glosse upon it that we deny all your Assemblies to be Sion and will not grant Gods presence at all to be with you and that we appropriate Sion and Gods presence to our selves which is a great injury to us You also put this sense upon our words that God is so present in Sion that he is present no where else and so not present with holy men and women which are out of Church-fellowship nor present with members of many churches meeting together which either is a foul mistake or a slander For we think God to be present with his people when they meet in his feare whether they be Church-members or not Church-members whether they be of one or many churches whether they be in our assemblies or yours provided that his Ordinances be carried according to his minde yea though there should be some error yet he might give his presence (a) Rev. 2.1 with Rev. 2.14.20 Much rather do we think God will be present with persons whom he sets on work to exalt him in the execution of some office as he did the Apostles and now doth ordinary Elders Neverthelesse we conceive God to be most present with his people gathered into a body and compacted together in an instituted Church which we hold to be Congregationall and the reason is because the more any people do fall into the order of the Gospel and come into the way of Christ which he hath appointed for Saints to walk in the more Christ is ingaged to be present with them Now to joyn to some instituted Church of Christ is that way and order which Christ hath directed to therefore with them in such a way as so united and joyned Christ will more especially be present for he vouchsafeth a speciall presence amongst such Churches Rev. 2.1 he styles himself one that walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks he walks in other places and people but he would intimate thus much that his especiall delightsome walk is among them and the more golden the candlesticks are the more pure they be the more delight he takes to walke in the midst of them But Matth. 18. you say is mis-interpeted Your words are these Answer Christ in Matth. 18. promiseth his presence to those that are not a Church for two or three will not make a Church they vers 17 were to give the second admonition the Church the third There is a figure in the number Reply there is a certain number put for an uncertain two or three are put for a few the paucity that may be in a Church shall be no obstacle of Christs presence Pareus upon this Text hath these words It is an argument that the judgement of the Church shall be ratified because Christ himself will be present in the Church as supreme Judge to ratifie it it is also a generall promise of the presence of the grace of Christ in his Church be it great or small Now surely we shall lesse doubt our exposition having so learned a Commentator so well approved of to stand by us in the same POSITION XVII So long as a Believer doth not joyn himself to some particular Congregation he is without in the Apostles sense 1 Cor. 5.12 Those without Answer of whom the Apostle speaketh were unbelievers Pagans and Heathen without Christ as well as without the visible Church Let it be granted that those whom the Apostle speaks of were both without Christ Reply and without the visible Church yet it may be securely affirmed that the Apostle speaks of them under the notion of such as were without the visible church and not of those that were without Christ 1. Singuli de suâ familia judicant non immittunt consuram in alienam samiliam Ergo in Ecclesia similis servetur ratio ut singulae desuit membris judicent Aretius in 1 Cor. 5. Because those without whom the Apostle had not to do to judge stand in opposition to those within vers 12. the latter part whom the Church of Corinth had to do to judge and consequently if this exposition of yours be true the judgement of the Church of Corinth extended as far as the ultima Thule the lands end of Christianity and only ceased when it came to the consines of Paganisme and consequently any one Church hath power to judge any one Believer in all the world because say you he is not without in the Apostles sense that is to say he is not a Pagan Heathen or unbeliever 2. Suppose the Apostle had known a member of the Church of Corinth what ever he appeared outwardly in the frame of his conversation to be indeed without Christ and in a state of enmity with God if this man had committed a grosse sin might not the Apostle have judged such a one to be excommunicated We suppose you will say he might and if so we demand why should a Church-unbeliever be subject to the Apostles judgement and an Heathenish unbeliever be exempted from the Apostles judgement If Church-membership did not make the one obnoxious to that spirituall judgement more then the other For in the notion of unbelievers and without Christ they both agree and therefore if a Heathen were exempted from judgement because without Christ and not for this reason because without the visible Church why should not a Church-unbeliever be exempted as well as a Heathen 2. If we mistake not a Believer not joyned to any particular congregation is without in reference to Church-judgement and we suppose by vertue of this Text in your Presbyterian
persons of the same blood Aud therefore if inequality of civill power be forbidden how much more inequality in power Ecclesiasticall which is the spawn and rise of Antichristian tyrannie (a) Pastor Prel p. 23. Answer to Mr. Down See pag. 81. 82. Mr. Pagets Defence part 2. p. 29 The learned Clergie in the dayes of Hen. 8. confessed there was no disparity of Ministers instituted by Christ Act. Mon. Diotrophes being but one was liker to a Prelate then a Prsbyterie c. These words are brought to vindicate 3 Joh. vers 9 Reply 10. from a supposed abuse by these words They viz. the Elders are not so many Bishops striving for preeminence as Diotrephes did We must confesse we had almost said we wonder that your ink did not blush to blot and blur such sweet humble-spirited holy and pertinent expressions as you do in this place Let your self once more and the Reader take a judgement of the passage as it lies in its perfect luster in the Answer to the 32 Quest The Question propounded by the Brethren of Old-Engand is this What authority or eminency have your Preaching-Elders above your Ruling-Elders To which the Elders of New-England frame this Answer It is not the manner of Elders amongst us whether ruling only or ruling and teaching also to strive for preeminence one above another as remembring what lesson our Saviour taught his Disciples when they were at strife among themselves which of them should be the greatest Luke 22.24 25. If Diotrephes strive for preeminence verily we abhor such striving and by the grace of God respect one another as Brethren Brother where lies the fault for which they lie under censure Is it a fault that the Elders in New-England strive not for preeminence If so we suppose it lies in this that their humble and brother-like walking each towards other condemnes the pride of those that will needs be striving for some kinde of preeminence and Prelacy above their Brethren (b) Juvtual Satyr Patriam tamen obruit olim Gloria paucorum laudis titulique cupido This formerly the countrey overthrew The lust for praise and titles and the glory of a few Or are they to blame to insinuate that the Apostles censure upon Diotrephes doth so frown upon those whether Prelates or Presbyters that strive for preeminence that it is a matter of abhorrency to them so to strive Hinc illae lacrymae hence it is that you say Diotrephes being but one is liker to be a Prelate then a Presbyterie Brother Reply a horse in the abstracted notion of unity being but one is liker a Prelate then a Presbytrie that are many But what of that Prelacy doth not consist in unity but in the usurpation of undue that is to say unscripturall spirituall power over their Brethren and in this capacity it is possible that a Classicall Presbyterie may be as like Diotrephes as a Prelate that is to say if they take upon them a preeminence over their Brethren as he did 'T is as truly Prelaticall when fourteen or fifteen exercise a jurisdictionall power over all their Brethren in a County as when one man shall take upon him to exercise the power aforesaid in two or three severall counties Perhaps the fourteen or fifteen being better principled then the other may do it with more gentlenesse and lesse offence but (a) More and lesse do not alter the kind magis minus non variant speciem and they may be both (b) Alike if not equally aequè if not aequaliter Prelaticall Yet John dod not blame him simply for acceping or having preeminence Answer or for taking upon him to answer in the behalf of the Church to which St John writ or for taking to him the power of commanding forbidding excommunicating but for loving preeminence as Mat. 23.6 7. for not receiving the Apostles and Brethren and prohibiting what he should have required and incouraged and excommunicating such as were the best members of the Church Reply You might more properly have said usurping or exercising preeminence for accepting presupposeth an offer made of the thing accepted Now it is more then probable that the Church never offered him preeminence both over the Apostle John and over her self that he should over-rule the Church and cast out her best members at his pleasure neither if she would had she any such power Let it be granted that Diotrephes was an Elder of the Church of Corinth Reply (c) Rom. 16.25 1 Cor. 1.14 and so had a preeminence by vertue of Office over the Body of the Church yet this is not the preeminence here spoken of but an exorbitant preeminence usurped over the whole both the Elders his equalls in power and the fraternity who though his inferiours yet have a share and interest in the passing of excommunication and other weighty affaires of the Church expressed as your self state it in taking upon him to answer in the behalfe of the Church commanding forbidding excommunicating Now say you he is not simply blamed for accepting or having but for loving preembrence and exercising it corruptly in regard of the things done and performed by him It is said of corrupt Princes Isaiah 1.23 Every one loveth gifts by the same reason that Diotrephes is excused from the guilt of solitary excommunication in regard of the materiality of the action by the same reason may these Princes be excused from their bribery and corruption And it may be said the Prophet doth not reprove them for the receiving but for the loving of gifts When the thing is evill there love how moderate soever is faulty in this regard that it is placed upon a wrong object But where the thing is lawfull a moderate and well tempered love of it is lawfull also As for the Scribes and Pharisees so far as they were men of chief rank and place Mat. 23.6 for them to possesse and love to possesse with a well bounded love the uppermost rooms at feasts and the chief seats in Synagogues would not be unlawfull but perhaps their ambition put them upon affectation of places undue to them and then their possessing them and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Matthew and Luke or as Christ speaks Luke 24 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they choose the chief rooms and this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be seen of men being added to their possessing Digito monstrari dicier hic est (a) To be shewed by the singer and to have it said This is such One is that which may justly be condemned by our Saviour But the case which respecteth Diotrephes may be this it is probable that John writ about something that did concern Discipline as the receiving of certain Brethren either to constant membership or by vertue of church communion now this was a businesse in which the fraternity had some interest as well as Diotrephes and the rest of the Elders and therefore
the Apostle writes not to Diotrephes or the Elders alone but to the whole Church also because Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet that which concerns all must be handled by all But Diotrephes riseth up and he alone commands forbids excommunicates and what can be more destructive of the power of the Presbyterie and liberty of the people then such a course and yet say you or else you say nothing to the purpose he is not blamed for it If Diotrephes were not to blame being but a particular Elder to take upon him the power of the whole Eldership yea and the whole Church why may not a particular brother take upon him the power to elect an Officer which belonge to the fraternity or one Elder to ordain an Officer which pertains to the whole Presbyterie Or in your Classick Way why may not a particular Elder a member of the Classis exercise the jurisdiction of the whole Classis why may not a Classis exercise the power of a Provinciall Synod that of a Nationall and the Nationall of the Oecumenicall Synod and yet be blamelesse the reason is the same proportion that an Elder hath to the whole Eldership the same or far greater have a brother to the whole fraternity an Elder to the Classick a Classick to the Provinciall a Provinciall to the Nationall and that to the Oecumenicall Synod But peradventure it was not unwittingly done by you to put in the word simply for a retreat in case you should be hotly charged for pleading the cause of Prelacie under the notion of Presbyterie and so you will say you affirm not that John doth not blame Diotrephes for having preeminence but he doth not simply blame him for having preeminence Now if this be your meaning and that you indeed grant that Diotrephes was blamed for striving for preeminence why do you blame the Elders of New-England for saying that the Elders are not i. ought not to be so many Bishops striving for preeminence as Diotrephes did But if it be said that the force that is offered to the Text lies not in this that the Elders of New-England say that if Diotrephes strive for preeminence verely they abhor such striving for these are their words but in this that it is said The Elders are not so many Bishops striving for preeminence as Diotrephes did which peradventure may have an oblique insinuation that Classick Presbyters are so many Bishops striving for preeminence and it may be said the text affords no such conclusion We answer those words so many Bishops are no expression of the Elders of New-England neither is the Text applied by them to prove that Classick Presbyters are so many Bishops striving for preeminence I but M. D. saith a Classick Presbyterie sets up many Bishops in stead of one Peccat Aemilius plectitur Rutilius M. D. offends if it be an offence and the Elders of New-England are beaten Or suppose that reverend learned and holy man M. D. have let fall words which reflect with some blemish upon the Presbyterie from the sense of what himself had suffered yet your professed businesse is not to vindicate Presbyterie but the Text. Now M. D. we conceive for we have not his book doth not urge 3 John vers 9 10. to prove that the Classicall Presbyterie sets up many Bishops in stead of one and therefore what thing soever he hath said which offends in reference to the Presbyterie yet he is not guilty of wrong-doing in reference to the Text. I will not tell you who said All the Church is holy Answer ye take too much upon you c. Our consciences are unto us a thousand witnesses Reply that we have and by the assistance of grace hope ever to carry it with all gentlenesse and meeknesse toward our godly Brethren that are guided by a different light in point of Government from us and therefore it is lesse grievous to us to be parallel'd with Corah Dathan and Abiram those grand incendiaries of the Congregation of Israel yet it is not unworthy your serious consideration whether it might not be with good cause said to you as sometimes Christ said to one of the twelve when he asked Master is it I and he answered Thou hast said POSITION XIX The Power of Government is expressly given to the Church where we are bidden Heare the Church which is a particular Congregation Matth. 18. Brother we could wish you had signified the Author by whom Reply and the place where this wrong at least as you suppose is done to the Text as you have done in other Sections who those be that presume that Christ did no more respect the Jewish then they do the Church of England As your margent doth not inform us so in searching those few books we have we cannot finde among all the Congregationall men therefore we take it as an unjust aspersion thrown upon them The Church in the first and primary intent of these words Answer was a Church then in being which did abominate the Gentiles for Heathens and Gentiles were all one viz. the Jewish church which was not aparticular Congregation but a Nationall-church having graduall judicatories and appeales of which the Apostles were at that time and Christ lived and died an actuall member c. Whilest you your self say Reply that the Church in the primarie intent of these words was a Nationall church then in being do you not imply that these words tell the Church have reference to a Church or churches that were not yet in being which should afterward be invested with power of judging and therefore giving it for granted that Christ saying Tell the Church sends them to the Jewish Synagogues or Sanhedrin whilest their authority did continue and so Peter needs not stay three yeeres before he can acquaint the Church with his offence yet still the Congregationall church may be competitresse with Classicall Provinciall Nationall and Oecumenicall churches for the power of judging and if she should come off victricious then the guilt of wresting this place for you urge it to prove the power of your judging church would rest among your selves and the Congregationall men and their Way be guiltlesse Now for our parts we cannot see the title of Congregationall churches any way invalidated by what hath been hitherto said by your self or others 2. Whilest you say that the Church in the first and primarie c. I suppose your inference must be this Ergo those words Matth. 18. Tell the Church cannot be rightly applied to a Congregationall Church which hath no such graduall judicatories and appeals but Classicall Provinciall and Nationall Churches for amongst these are found such graduall judicatories and appeals The sinew and strength of this reason is this It is necessary that the judging Church in the times of the Gospel should answer in the manner of its judicature the judging Church in the time of the Law and ergo if that Church which was to judge then had graduall
censures So that reclamante Ecclesiâ there can be no excommunication So then though it be not understood of the people only no nor chiefly as they stand in opposition to their Guides yet this place may lawfully be understood of the Congregationall Church as it is contradistinct to Classicall Provinciall Nationall and Oecumenicall Churches The reason is we have presidents in the Word of God for the one as in the Churches of Jerusalem Corinth Cenchrea c. and rules prescribed to such a Church Acts 6.3 1 Cor. 5.4 chap. 11. chap. 12. chap. 1.4 chap. 16. but of any stated Classicall Provinciall Nationall Oecumenicall Churches there is a deep silence in the Scriptures of the new Testament no precept for the erecting of such and no lawes nor Officers provided for such Churches Now Christ Matth. 18. sends the people of God to such a Church as should be in strength by vertue of a Charter from heaven to redresse grievances and heal offences and therefore he sends us to the Congregationall Church as it opposeth those churches I spoke of before for these can shew no such charter I read that the promise of binding and loosing is not given to a particular Congregation when leavened with error and variance Answer But then a Synod of Churches or of their Messengers may judicially convince and condemn errors search out truth c. All that we have to say to that Reply is this If you will acknowledge the power of binding and loosing to be seated in the particular Congregation we shall not contend against it though we cannot say that the Scriptures and reasons brought are convincing to each of us to inforce our grant but that in ease of error or scandall that cannot be healed in the Congregation A Synod of neighbour churches or their Messengers may judicially condemn those errours and schismes c. and impose wayes of peace and truth but yet not assume authority of censuring the delinquents but leave that to particular Churches to be performed Cotton Keys pag. 28. POSITION XX. Matth. 16.19 Christ directeth his Speech not to Peter alone This seems to be taken out of Answer to 32 q p 44. but to all the Disciples also for to them all was the Question propounded by Christ vers 15. Nor to them as generall Officers of the Churches for that Commission was not yet given them but as Disciples and Believers In laying down this Position Reply and making your battery upon it as you do fall short of that ingenuity you professe in your Preface when you say If any of the Brethren amongst whom Mr. Cotton is deservedly the chief seem in my apprehension to come neerer the truth then other Cotton Keys pag. 4. I willingly take notice of it c. Now Mr. Cotton must needs in your judgement come neerer the truth then the Elders for he doth acknowledge that Peter was considered in the severall capacitles of an Apostle an Elder a Brother and so the power of the Keys was promised in him to Apostles Elders and Brethren according to their severall proportions of that dispersed spirituall power Now had you dealt with this doctrine with which we concurre and told us your thoughts of it in reference to the place we should have acknowledged your answerablenesse therein to your profession Now though you cite Mr. Cotton in the margent yet so as that the ordinary sort of readers can hardly guesse what his judgement is and the whole frame of your Discourse is such that may well leave the Reader in this apprehension That the Elders of New-England place all power of the Keys in Believers as such which is contrary to the very expressions of the Elders of New-England and to the judgement of the Congregationall men in generall For the Elders say The ministeriall power of government is given to the Church and consequently not to Believers unlesse they become a Church yea they say expresly That the Keys are committed to all Believers that shall joyn together in the same confession according to the order and ordinance of Christ and consequently except Believers joyn into Church-societies which is the Ordinance of Christ they have no share of the power of the Keys much-lesse do they assert any such power in women who though Believers yet are excluded from any share in Church-government by a positive law 1 Cor. 14.34 35. Peter was an Apostle in Office and Commission Answer though not yet sent out into all the world and an Elder Matth. 10.1 2 c. and doubtlesse the Key of Authority and Rule when it was promised to Peter and given to him with the rest of the Apostles Joh. 20.23 is the same authority which is given to their successors whereby they are called to feed and rule the Church of God as the Apostles had done before c. Let it be granted that the twelve Disciples so called Mat. 10.1 are not called Apostles vers 2. by way of anticipation Reply Mar. 3.13 14. but in reference to their present state and condition yet it will be necessary still to distinguish the equivocall term of Apostle as noting 1. One authorized to dispence doctrine and discipline amongst all nations Matth. 28.19 and in this sense Peter was no Apostle in Office and Commission as your self confesse And what the Elders affirm is true That the Keys were not given to Peter in this capacity i.e. not as to one that was actually in that estate and condition or was hereby put into that estate and condition 2. As one sent forth by a temporary Commission to preach and work miracles amongst the Jews only (a) Mat. 10.23 Now the Promise of the Keys was not made to Peter under this capacity neither was he an Elder invested with authoritative power of government at this time he could neither vote in Synagogues nor in the Sanhedrin but only preach authoritatively and work miracles to confirm his Doctrine and in case that they did not receive him he could not excommunicate them by himself or with all the rest of the twelve with him but must shake (a) Mat. 10 14 15. off the dust of his feet against them and leave them to the great day of Gods immediate judgement for so runs the tenour of his Commission and there is deep silence of any other then meerly a doctrinall power of the Keyes So that the issue is this that though what you say be true in the sense expressed yet it is nothing to the purpose for which it is brought for still the assertion of the Elders may be true that Christ speake not to them as Apostles in Office and Commission whether limited to the Jewes as you would insinuate or extended to all Nations but as Disciples or Believers 2. Neither will it follow the Key of authority promised to Peter and given to him with the rest of the Apostles Joh. 20.23 is the same which is given to their successors therefore Christ directeth his Speech to
text that women have a power in Church-censures because women are reproved in this place as being part of the Church We answer when an Epistle is writ to a whole Church it doth respect particular persons according to their severall capacities 1 Cor. 14.34 35. Now women are not in a capacity of dispensing Church-censures therefore the reproof is not extended unto them If things indefinitly spoken to a whole Church because they cannot be verified of one who is not in a capacity to receive them may not therefore be affirmed of another then because a liberty in cutting off offenders by vertue of Gal. 5.9.12.13 doth not belong to women neither doth it belong to Elders or Brethren for the Apostle speaketh to all Likewise because the Holy Ghost writes to the whole Church of Pergamus females as well as males and blames them for not casting out the Balaamites and the Nicolaitans which women have no power to do therefore neither doth the reproof import any such power either in Elders or Brethren This it may be you intended but as a light velitation with these lusorious expressions Sed remove ista luforia decretoriis opus est i. remove these Toyes there is need of Decrees Paul himself say you did excommunicate Alexander Answer and Hymeneus 1 Tim. 1.20 and it is not mentioned that he took the consent of the Church or Presbyterie That Paul alone did excommunicate Alexander and Hymeneus is not so cleare Reply but if we should deny it we could argue probably for the Negative Paul saith to Timothy 2 Tim. 1.6 Stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of my hands and yet Paul did but lay on hands with the Presbyterie 1 Tim. 4.14 Now if the Apostle did not act in ordination how much lesse in excommunication without the concurrence of the Church the rather because Apostles concurrence with the Church seems to make more 1. For Gods glory in the universall humiliation of the whole Church 2. For the Churches peace who are more likely to subscribe to the equity of those proceedings of which themselves have the cognizance then if they were carried on by a transcendent and superiour motion of Apostolicall power 3. For the edification of the Church in seeing and hearing and concurring in the whole businesse 4. For the attainment of the end of excommunication both the more immediate viz. Non-communion with the party and the more nemote noble end viz. the healing of the party and of the offence 2. Let what is assumed be granted yet we suppose you will make no gain of it For 1. It will not necessarily follow Paul did excommunicate Hymeneus and Alexander himself therefore Paul did without the consent of the Church of Corinth excommunicate the incestuous person For it was but sutable to the holy and self denying frame of the Apostles spirit Jure suo cedere to remit something of his own right 2. Neither is it so much as probablely convincing if we consider that the Holy Ghost makes the subject excommunicating to be the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 5.4 5. 'T is the Church of Corinth whom the Apostle requires to purge out the old leaven vers 7. 'T is the Church of Corinth in which the Apostle states the power of judging vers 12. do not ye judge them that are within The Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Answer I have judged as though I were c. which imports rather that Paul himself would deliver him to Satan then that he exhorts them to do it Indeed he commands them to put him away as he writes to them to restore him again to see if they would be obedient in all things 2 Cor. 2.9 Brother we cannot but observe Reply that you manage this argument something tenderly as if you did suspect the ground you tread on for you say not that the words import that Paul would deliver him to Satan himself and not that he exhorts the Corinthians to do it but you say that they import rather the one then the other and this amounts to as much as nothing to the purpose For in regard of the affinity the words may have with the one importment more then the other they may be said to import the one rather then the other and yet in their proper sense import neither Luke 18.14 The Publican is said to go away justified rather then the Pharisee and yet the words do not positively import that either of them were justified And yet you have a good minde to make your Reader believe that Paul himself delivers him to Satan and not the Corinthian Church by their authority and this you prove From the Gammaticall Syntax of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Answ Doubtlesse there must be an Accusative case importing the subject delivering understood and this must be either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with reference to the Apostle or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with relation to the Church Not the first as we conceive 1. For if so it is probable the Apostle would have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have delivered him that hath so done this thing to Satan and have commanded the Church only to take notice of it and to abstain from communion with him 2. The Apostles judgment was such a judgement as was passed at the writing of the Epistle and therefore the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have judged or I have judged already him that hath done this thing and therefore his judgement of the man was not the actuall casting out of him but only a judgement that the Church should passe the judgement of Excommunication against him assuring them that not only his spirit but the power of Christ should go along with them 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To deliver to Satan notes such a publike and solemn transaction of an Ordinance as Paul was in no possible capacity to do for he did nothing by proxie being absent For it notes 1. A publike binding of the person under the guilt of sin by the Key of Faith 2. An observable exemplary ejection of the person out of the fraternity of the Church and a shutting of the door of communion against him untill he repent by the Key of Church order Now must the whole come together and look one upon another in silence and upon the incestuous person imagining him to be thus excommunicate because Paul had judged to have him excommunicate and so after this dumb shew depart one from another Therefore we conceive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be understood as going before the Infinitive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the rule of Grammarians Si infinitivus Participium praecedens pertinent ad eandem persmam non additur accusativus personae sed subintelligitur But it may be you will say Objection that you affirm that the Church is commanded to do it and therefore
the world all the Churches in the world are guilty of it The reason is the same obligation that lies upon a Classicall Church to reform the severall Congregations in the Classis the same lies upon a Provinciall Church to reform the severall Classis in the Province and the same lies upon a Nationall Church to reform the severall Provinciall Churches in the Nation and the same lies upon the Oecumenicall Church to reform the severall Nationall Churches in the world and therefore though all the inferiour Churches should fail yet the Oecumenicall is bound to see it reformed and if the Oecumenicall fail all in the line of Oecumenicall communion that is to say all Churches in any Nation in the world are guilty POSITION XXIII The particular Congregation takes Christ for her only spirituall Prophet Priest and King Deut. 18.15 Acts 737. Psal 110.4 Heb. 5.4 Isai 9.6 7. Rev. 15.3 To make good this charge you say Answer Seven or eight you say are the fewest will make a Church but five or six yea any one particular Saint though out of Church-fellowship by excommunication may take Christ for his only spirituall Priest Prophet and King c. How comes it to passe Brother that your margent that hath in most places born witnesse to your Text reserves it self in deep silence Reply as if it were afraid to be accessary to this wrong offered to the Brethren of the Congregationall Way That the Congregationall Way eatenus in that it is Congregationall is conformed to the will and lawes of Christ appoined by him as King of the Church delivered by him in his Word as Prophet of the Church we constantly affirm and shall be ready to justifie before all the word till we be convinced of our errour in that particular That the stated Classicall Provinciall Nationall and Oecumenicall Way of Church-government importing a power of jurisdiction in point of Ordination Excommunication c. over particular Congregations is not sutable to the Will of God delivered by Christ as Prophet nor to the Laws of God delivered by Christ as King of the Church as it is sutable to our light So we shall endeavour pro virili nostro according to our power with all meeknesse and brotherlike affection to defend as God shall give opportunity But that ever we have read in the writings of any Congregationall man truly so called as they stand in opposition to others of a different judgement both upon the right hand and on the left with whom alone you professe in your Preface to have to do I say that ever we have read in the writings of any Congregationall man these places applyed to prove the Position as it is by you controverted that is to say that the particular Congregationall Church takes Christ for her only Prophet Priest and King as if in these his Offices he were so only hers that no five or six or one particular Saint though out of Church-fellowship no Classicall Presbyteriall or Nationall Church no not the Nationall Church of the Jewes it self doth or notwithstanding some failings in government may take Christ as their only spirituall Priest Prophet and King as we do not remember so in whose Sack soever this cup of abomination be found yea though it be in Benjamins let him suffer according to his demerits But if any of us have thus expressed our selves whereby we have made all particular Believers not joyned to some Congregationall Church the renowned Scotish and Belgick Churches and all other reformed Churches not Congregationall yea the Nationall Church of the Jews it self at least as you would insinuate strangers from the Common-wealth of Israel yet are we unjustly condemned by you we mean in that sense in which Salvian saith a L. 7. de Gub. Dec. p. 282. Socrates when he writ a book perswading that all mens wives should be common was unjustly condemned by the Judges Injustè damnatus dicitur à judicibus verum est Rectius vuim haec talia praedicantem genus damnaret humanum In like manner we say we should be unjustly condemned by you for all the Churches of God yea all the people of God might deservedly condemne us 2. But suppose it cannot be made out by you that ever any Congregationall man truly so called held the Position you speak of in the sense insinuated in your examination where then is your ingenuity that you professe in your Preface viz. If any of the Brethren seem in my apprehension to come neerer the truth then others I willingly take notice of it Is this your willing taking notice of our neerest approaches to the truth to fasten upon us an imputation of wresting so many Scriptures to the maintenance of an opinion that never entered as we verely believe into the hearts and we are confident is not to be found in the works of any Congregationall man which if it be said and that you cannot make out the contrary it is well for you that you lived not in that over rigorous age spoken of by Ludovicus Vives in Commentary upon Augustine Lud. Vives in August de Civit. Dei l. 2. c. 9. de Civitate Dei in which it was a capitall fault and punishable with death to write or act any thing derogatory to the good name of any man For you have indeavoured to cast the odium of the most detestable pride and censoriousnesse upon many thousands Ministers and People that are of a precious anointing for learning or piety or both and in particular of a singular eminency for that rich grace of humility yea such a blot have you laid upon them whilest you say that we cleerly him that Christ doth exercise his Kingly Priestly and Propheticall Office only in Churches meerly Congregationall yea that Christ did offer himself a sacrifice for all the members of a Congregationall Church and only for such a thing of the greatest abhorrency to our thoughts if it fall on this side blasphemy against the Holy Ghost such a blot I say you have laid upon them that you will not easily wipe off for Machiavels rule is too true Calumniate fortiter saltem aliquid adhaerebit Slander boldly at least somewhat will cleave POSITION XXIV Christ left but one way of Discipline for all Churches This is found in Answ to 32. q. p. 72.73 and the like is in R. M. and W. T. to C. H. pag. 8. which in the essentialls of it is unchangeable and to be kept till the appearing of Christ 1 Tim. 6.13 14. To prove that these words are injurious to the Text alledged you say It seems by the words Thou O man of God I give thee in charge Answer that thou keep this Commandement viz. which immediatly precedes concerning faith and holinesse in the Ministery of the Word to be directed to Timothy himself or if to his successours then it must be to the ordinary Elders for Euangelists that succeeded him wee know none not to the Churches for example not to the
Church of Ephesus to whom Paul writes nothing (a) Do these words Eph. 4.11 12. nothing concern government of government though in his Epistles to Timothy he writ almost concerning nothing else and chargeth the Elders to take heed to the flock and look to Wolves Acts 20.28 But if you will need have the words this commandment extended to this whole Epistle you had need of good warrant for this exposition If you will acknowledge that the things written to Timothy concern Elders Reply Deacons and Believers out of Office according to their severall capacities respectively We shall easily grant that all the things contained in the whole Epistle are directed to Timothy himself but not for his own personall use but for the use of the Church also Now in this sense it will nothing befriend you in making good your charge For still the many rules contained in this Epistle in reference to the Church in generall to Bishops Deacons Widows and Members in particular may be in force yea by vertue of this Text to the appearing of Christ 2. If by these words to be directed to Timothy himself you mean that the Commandment immediatly preceding concerns none by way of obligation but only Timothy you heat upon a harsh string For must none flee these things fight the good fight of faith lay hold on eternall life by vertue of this Text but only Timothy Yea your self seem to be jealous of this interpretation when you say or if to his successours then it must be the ordinary Elders not the Church and yet you have not mended the matter For will you restrain these words That thou keep this Commandment vers 14. to those vers 11 12. Flee these things follow after righteousnesse c. and when you have done determine it to Elders only Then it will follow that only Elders must flee envie strifes railings evill surmisings perverse disputings covetousnesse That Elders only and not Believers at least by vertue of this Text must follow after godlinesse righteousnesse faith love patience meeknesse That Elders only and not ordinary Church-members must fight the good fight of faith lay hold on eternall life Now lest this as well it may should seem incredible to make it Testimonium side dignum you tell us that these words This Commandment relate only to that which immediately precedes and that which immediately precedes relates only to faith and holinesse in the ministery of the Word I answer 1. If you make these words Fight the good fight of faith lay hold on eternall life the commandment immediately preceding yet it is not necessary they should be understood only of faith and holinesse in the ministery of the Word which is but one part of the good fight of faith whereas the good fight of faith is fought in the universall conflict of an Euangelists conversation against the world the flesh and the devill as well as in the dispensation of his Euangelicall function 2. But with what good reason can these words Fight the good fight of faith c. be conceived to drink up the whole meaning and utmost extent of those words That thou keep this commandment without spot c. For though I do believe that your thoughts are ready to gratifie you with all pleasing accommodations for overthrow of one only stated discipline out of the word yet I cannot but think it would seem too grosse in your thoughts to teare by piece-meale the continued exhortation of the Apostle vers 11 12. but thou O man of God flee these things follow after righteousnesse godlinesse faith love patience meeknesse Fight the good fight of faith c. and to apply only this latter part of the exhortaion to those words That thou keep this commandment And therefore cannot but wonder that you should affirm that the Commandment Timothy is commanded to keep should concern only faith and holinesse in the ministery of the Word Therefore notwithstanding what hath been said we still affirm that these words relate to the rules concerning Church-government in the former part of the Epistle and this will further appear 1. If you consider the coherence of these words with the former The Apostle having in the former part of the Epistle insisted upon the severall duties of the Officers of the Church he commands them in the latter end of the second verse of this Chapter to teach and exhort these things 2. He arms him with instructions how he should carry himself toward those that should teach and exhort the contrary giving at once the character and censure of such men vers 3 4 5. and having made a digression vers 6 7 8 9 and 10th he falls on again to resume the former Argument and to exhort Timothy to flee the courses of these corrupt teachers and both as a Christian and Euangelist to approve himself to God in all holinesse of conversation vers 11 12. But thou O man of God flee these things c. q. d. Though some others may prove corrupt in doctrine and vicious in life yet do thou walk with God in the power of a holy conversation and particularly though others will spot this doctrine Bishops Deacons c. yet do thou keep it without spot and unrebukeable and cause it to be kept so by others for an Apostle Euangelist or Bishop never keeps the faith as an Apostle Euangelist or Bishop aright unlesse he cause it as much as in him lies to be kept so by others and so much is the import of the Apostles words 2 Tim. 4.7 I have kept the faith Now lest the Euangelist Demonstration of Discipline p. 5.7 or others to whom this Word of God might come should conceive that these things given in charge to Timothy were of a temporary nature and to cease with the Primitive times therefore he saith vers 13 14. I give thee charge in the sight of God who quickeneth all things c. that thou keep this commandment unrehukeable and without spot to the coming of Christ i. e. keep them thy self and deliver them in charge to the Church and principally to the Elders to be kept till Christ his second coming 2. That which Dr Whitakers against Duâ—aeus urgeth is not without strength That the Apostles have writ these Lawes speaking of Discipline not for a day or for the first age but to endure for all times to come and therefore hath ratified them with a most earnest obtestation saith he 1 Tim. 6.14 that these commandments should be kept unto the day of the Lord. That the Essentials of Discipline set down in Scripture are unchangeable Answer I grant but whether any Essentials be in controversie or how many and which they are you tell us not c. By Discipline Brother we mean the whole System Reply and comprehension of divine Rules Precepts or Precedents for the externall Eutaxie order of the Church which are not of a temporary but of a perpetuall use and equity till the appearing of Christ and
universall for sometimes God raised up extraordinarily from amongst the people Thus Amos was a Heardsman and yet chosen to be a Prophet And this hath been done in an ordinary way in the Churches that men that have made great proof in holinesse and knowledge have been called to publike Office Spyridion a Shepheard was called to be Bishop of Trimithous Socrates Eccl. Hist l. 1. c. 8. p. 232. a City of Cyprus Ambrose a Consul being yet but a Catechumenist came into the Church Assembly at Millain and spake much and very powerfully by way of exhortation to the dissenting Brethren and was by an unanimous vote chosen for their Bishop at that instant before he was Baptized Socrat. Eccles Hist l 4. c. 24 25. p. 335. So when God was pleased to make known his Will by immediate revelation he was pleased many times to make use of the sons of the Prophets The sons of the Prophets that were at Bethel 1 King 2.3 5. and Jericho could tell Elisha that his Master should be taken from him yet sometimes God was pleased to reveale his will to those that were not sons of the Prophets Thus though none were to be designed by the Church as one of these two or three that must prophesie in a Church-meeting but Prophets yet if any thing were revealed to him that sate by he had the liberty to expresse it so that it is well observed on the one hand by W. Musculus upon the place that the Apostle saith not Duo vel tres prophetent sed Prophetae duo vel tres prophetent that is he doth not say Let two or three prophesie but let two or three Prophets prophesie So on the other hand upon these words If any thing be revealed to him that sits by let the first hold his peace he hath these words Non dicit significet loquenti ut ille hoc Ecclesiae proponat sed dicit surgat ipse loquatur neque dicit servet sibiipsi sed prior taceat ne videlicet illicitum putetur ei loqui in Ecclesia qui non sit in ordine Prophetarum sed de numero sedentium auditorum i.e. He saith not Let him signifie it to him that is speaking that he may prophesie the thing to the Church but he saith Let himself also arise and let him speak neither saith he let him keep it to himself but let the first hold his peace viz. lest it should be thought unlawfull for him to speak in the Church who is not in the order of the Prophets but in the number of those that sit by Aretius in 1 Cor. 14.26 and are auditors In like manner Aretius Inde fieri potest ut quos Ecclesia deputavit ad munus interpretandi non habent revelationem loci propositi sed alius in turba sedens Hence it may come to passe that those whom the Church hath deputed to the Office of interpreting may not have the revelation of the place propounded but some other fitting among the multitude 4. That now that extraordinary revelations are ceased yet it may be lawfull for some members of the Church which are not Officers to preach or prophesie publikely and 1. To those that are not in Church-fellowship 2. To those that are in Church-fellowship and want Officers 3. To those that are in Church-fellowship and have all Officers compleat For the first First it may be lawfull for a Church having persons indowed with parts fit for the work to send them forth as Messengers to preach to Heathens for their conversion Reas 1. By the same reason that the Church of Antioch sent forth Paul and Barnabas to preach in Salamis Paphes Pergo Antiochia c. for the conversion both of Jewes and Gentiles by the same reason a true Church may send forth men of excellent parts to preach for the conversion of Heathens For Paul and Barnabas did not now go forth by vertue of their Apostolicall Commission by which they were inabled to preach to all Nations for so they should have had no need to have been separated by fasting prayer and imposition of the hands of the Eldership for that Commission they had long before this separation but they went as Messengers sent out of God by the Ministery of the Church of Antioch and when they returned they render an account to the Church of their service in the work to which they were recommended by the Church Acts 14.27 Now if Paul and Barnabas who without the recommendation of the Church of Antioch might have preached in all these places were sent forth by the Church what doth this but demonstrate unto us a power in the Churches to send forth Messengers though they be neither Apostles Pasters nor Teachers who shall preach as gifted men sent forth by the Church for that purpose For if Paul and Barnabas who were Apostles did preach as Messengers sent of God by the Ministery and recommendation of the Church to such a work by the same reason may persons gifted preach by vertue of such a recommendation Reas 2. God hath left a power to the Church to propagate the Gospel by using means for the conversion of those that are unconverted Now because all unconverted persons cannot come to heare in the Church-assemblies therefore Christ hath left power to the Churches to send out Messengers for this purpose to preach the Gospel to them otherwise there were no means left by Christ to be used by the Church for the conversion of those that lie in a state of Heathenisme and cannot or will not be at the charge and pains of repairing to Church-assemblies If it be said Let the Church send forth some of her teaching Officers Objection The work of the Officers is properly to attend the flock Answer and therefore though a Church in the want of other fit persons may send out one of her officers for a time yet if she have those that are not in office that are indowed with eminent abilities for the work they are never the lesse fit because not in Office For if they were Officers they should act amongst Heathens not as Officers to such a Congregation but as men sent out by such a Church in the name of Jesus Christ 2. Gifted persons not in the Ministery may preach to Churches wanting Officers That they may preach by way of probation in reference to a Call you your self will grant and there is the same reason in case the teaching Officers should die Suppose an eminent gifted member that hath been bred at School and Vniversity for many yeers should be desired by the Congregation to exercise his gifts amongst them till God would inable them to choose another Pastor and Teacher this gifted person though not in the Ministery nor intending it might exercise his gift amongst them upon this ground which shall appear in the confirmation of the third thing which is yet of a higher nature 3. Gifted persons not in the Ministery may preach in a
it in a definite latitude especially since no reason is or we suppose can be by you brought why we may not take it in a limited sense and yet deny it to be taken in an unlimited sense Is not this an ignorance of the Elench Can you ever inferre contradictorium propositionis negatae with this medium St John saith Christ hath made us Kings and Priests c. Because these words Rev. 1.6 Kings and Priests taken in their indefinite latitude will inferre that the people of God are temporall kings having Soveraign power over others and Priests to offer up corporall sacrifices to God as the Priests of the Law did Will it therefore follow that he that shall expound these words in a definite latitude as importing only that in Christ they have overcome the Law Death Sin the World and do triumph over them that they are Priests by a speciall sequestration of themselves from the world to offer up spirituall sacrifices to God the Father do pervert and abuse this Text Questionlesse there were Elders amongst them Answer it may be the Seventy Disciples were not quite out of Commission certainly Philip was amongst them who was an Euangelist c. Suppose that amongst those that were scattered and preached Reply some were Elders yea preaching Elders Suppose the Commission of the Seventie by vertue of which they were to carry neither purse nor scrip nor shoes neither were to salute any man by the way Luke 10.1 2. Nullos dum habes hic Apostolos sed Discipulos illorum Discipuloriâ— Discipulos sic quovis medio utiliter Deus uti potest Aretius in Acts 11. but to go before the face of Christ two and two into every city and place whither Christ himself would come were in full force at this time Lastly Suppose that Philip were an Euangelist amongst them Will it from hence follow that all that preached were Church-officers and that none of them were gifted persons out of Office and consequently that those that say that all were not Officers that went preaching do abuse the Text certainly this is a wide consequence But you say They were all filled with the Holy Ghost Answer Acts 2.4.10 and 4.31 which made them Doctors the first day and gave both ability and a call to speake the Word c. Reply But did their extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost make them all Officers yea or no for you suppose that all received the Holy Ghost If so then there was a Church of Officers and none over whom those Officers were set and that were under the authority of Office If the gifts did not make them Officers then we have what we assume viz. Gifted persons not in Office may preach yea if all the members of a Church had gifts fit for the work all might preach Numb 11.29 1 Cor. 14.12.31 If it be said Objection these were extraordinary gifts by immediate inspiration So were the gifts of the Officers in those times Answer Now by the same reason you deny Church-members though orderly called to the work we mean not to the Office because eminently gifted for it a liberty to exercise their gift because their gifts are not extraordinary as were those of the Primitive Christians By the same reason you may deny Officers though both orderly called and competently gifted a liberty to exercise their gift because their gifts are not extraordinary as were the gifts of the Primitive Officers Again if a Brother gifted by immediate inspiration might preach or prophesie publikly in those Churches where the Officers were gifted by immediate inspiration then a Brother eminently gifted by Gods blessing upon his labour and industry being orderly called thereunto may preach in those Churches where the Officers are gifted only by Gods blessing upon their labour and industry without any immediate inspiration That these did preach ordinarily Answer and usually to the Churches like to Pastors and receive maintenance for the same as some do in London and elsewhere is impossible to be proved That which is not affirmed by the Elders Reply need not be proved by them We have already proved that eminent gifted persons being orderly called thereunto may lawfully preach though not in Office and if by ordinarily and usually you mean that toties quoties as oft as the Church shall have need suppose by reason of the sicknesse death or just absence of the Pastor or any other lawfull ground and occasion and his calling and condition will permit we suppose the person eminently gifted may preach though for divers moneths together And if he do the work why may he not receive the wages not in the capacity of a Pastor but of one that hath done the work that deserves wages Suppose he hath spent his means in many yeers painfull study in the Vniversity may he lawfully preach and yet must he necessarily famish because he is not in the Pastorall relation May he lawfully dispence unto them his spirituall things and may he not lawfully receive of them a dispensation of their temporall things May he nay must he by a conflux and concentering of all things that make up his Call to such a work for such a time usually and ordinarily tread out the corn and yet his mouth be muzzled during all that space May he lawfully communicate unto them by teaching them in the Word and may he not lawfully communicate with them in receiving who are freely willing to communicate with him in giving all good things In the Church of Israel none besides the Priests and Levites Answer did ordinarily prophesie either in the Temple or in the Synagogues unlesse they were either furnished with extraordinary gifts of prophecy as the Prophets of Israel or were set apart and trained up to prepare for such a Calling c. In case that either those whose Office it is in an ordinary way to prophesie be unable many of them to the work Reply or the people grown bold in sinfull courses so that they sleight and contemn them If the King and certain choyce men of the Princes of the Realm be able and in parts no way inferiour to those able men whose Office it is to preach unto the people they may they ought to prophesie as well as Kings Princes Noble-men being gifted may sit in Ecclesiasticall Synods and declare what they conceive to be the minde of God therein And this Jehosaphat and his Princes did by vertue of that generall equity which is of perpetuall use whereby eminent gifts are to be put forth upon just occasion for the Publike good though by men not in Office Luther and the first Preachers in the beginning of Reformation were not Church-officers nor could be unlesse we will say that the Antichristian Hierarchie could institute a Christian Ministery and yet they preached lawfully as gifted persons stirred up by God in a time of defection and apostasie And so Jehosaphat and his Princes preached not meerly as King and Princes for then all Kings and