member must yeeld to the voice of the multitude in every thing they lyst If so then Aaron had been blamelesse for making the golden calf because it was the peoples lyst and they importuned him thereto Exod. 32. 1. 22. 23. But M. S. proceedeth saying nor that the Eldership hath in their hands the power of Christ to rule contrarie to their liking I answer the Elders are to teach and rule the Church by Christs own word and lawes as I have expressed And herein I presuppose that both the Elders wil teach and rule according unto godlynes the people wil obey the godly doctrines directions of their Elders without mislike or discontentment For Christs sheep wil hear his voice his kingdom is peaceable his subjects loyal and obedient Now whiles I speak of the ordinary power that the Elders have to teach and rule the Church as Christ hath constituted it in peace it is but from a contentious humour to obiect that they have not power to rule contrary to the peoples liking as if there could be no rule but when the Elders and brethren are at warr one with another Of the Church it is written the multitude of them that beleeved were of one hart and of one sowl yet none I think doubteth but ther was rule goverment amōg them And of such quiet rule spake I though M. Sm. would disturb it with his exception which he mought also have alledged against the Presbyteries authoritie to pray preach and administer the sacraments seing these ar no more to be done contrary to the peoples liking then rule and goverment for God hath caled us in peace So for ought that is yet sayd the government by Elders standeth fast The last battry foloweth But sayth M. S. the intent of the Apostle is to show that all the particular members in all their affaires must submit themselves to the instruction and guidance of the Elders For although Christ hath placed the Elders as stewards over the servants yet he hath not appointed them as Lords over his spowse wife Your argument therfore sayth he is a fallacian a coniunctione divisione thus Al the particular members must obey the elders in their lawful instructions and their wholsome admonitions severally Ergo the whole body must ioyntly obey the voyce of the Elders Here M. Sm. running himself into a fallacie by dividing those that are joyned togither of the Lord would bear himself out in his evil by blaming an other first but without al equitie as the judicious reader may easily perceiv For his reason is to this effect Jf Elders be stewards over the servants and not Lords over the wife the church then is not the church to obey or submit unto them Where learned the man this logik Is there no obedience or submission thinks he but unto Lords Then is there no obedience ecclesiastical which the church may yeeld to any save unto Christ for he is the onely Lord. But this man is blinded with his erroneous conceipt For as in civil goverment we are to obey and submit not onely to the King as unto the superior but also to the governours that are sent of him so in goverment ecclesiastical we are to obey and submit not onely to the King Christ but to the Elders his ministers sent of him to the one we submit as to the Lord and King to the other as to servants and ministers set over us by the Lord. Agayn I would fayn know whither Mr. Sm. thinketh the Elders to be Lords over the particular members If he say yea I abhor his pride for it is injurious to Christ the sole Lord of al every one in the church if nay then I detest his sophistrie for by the same reason that he disswadeth the whol flock from obedience he mought also disswade each particular member which yet he dooth not but yeeldeth the contrary Now that the Apostle intendeth not onely the particular mēbers but the general flock also is apparant First by his reason which he annexeth for they watch for your soules as they that must give accounts Al good Elders I ween do watch as well for the publik church as for the private members and shal give account for the whol If then the Apostles reason be of weight the vvhol flock as vvel as the particular sheep must obey and submit to such as vvatch over them Secondly the Apostle sayth elsvvhere to the Elders of an other church take heed to al the flock wherof the holy ghost hath made you overseers poimainein that is to feed rule govern guid direct and doe al other duties of good shepheards unto the church of God Novv these vvords flock church mean not particular members but the general company under charge guidance And if the holy Ghost have set Elders and shepherds over the whole flock can any man doubt but they must teach rule and direct the whol if they must doe this by authoritie from God is not the whol flock bound to be taught ruled directed by them in the Lord What perverting of the scripture then is this that when the Apostle writing to a whol church to obey and submit unto their guides it should be restreyned unto particular members for to obey Such doctrines fitt rather the confusion of Babylon then the holy order goverment of Sion But it seemeth the stinch of this restreynt went up into the nose of the man himself as he wrote it for presently he seeketh to sweeten the yll savor with these flowers that Al the saincts shal yeeld obedience to the Elders in things commanded by God and the Elders shal al of them obey the voyce of the church in things commanded of God He might also have added that both Elders and people should obey the voyce of any particular person in things commanded by God For if the whol church doe syn and any one make it known unto them and shew them the law of God they are bound to obey him submit to his good coūsel in the Lord. But what is this to the purpose The question is into whose hands Christ hath committed the ordinarie teaching guiding governing and ruling of his saincts here on earth The scriptures teach and we accordingly have long since professed that it is into the hands of the Bishops or Elders This is that which I defend in my answer to M. Bernard for this if for any thing M. S. also inveigheth against me being indeed against himself also herein For besides the testimonies fore alleged out of his book he hath further in the same book written thus Christ is not their king seing he onely ruleth by his own lawes and officers and not by Antichristian Lords and lawes c. And agayn You refuse Christs testament and his kingdome and will not have him to reign over you in his own offices and lawes which is contrarie to these places Luk.
times easier for a translator to do his duty to the ful then for the expositor yea this latter is utterly unpossible I say not onely for one man but for all the men in the vvorld Though the translator cannot expresse to the full every vvord and sentence in the Bible yet the most part he may vvheras the expositor cannot do any at all but is still to seek all dayes of his life and they that come after him also Hebraismes cannot alwayes be expressed through defect of the language yet translation is needful and the translator is blamelesse For example this name God called in Hebrue Aelohim Gen. 1. 1. is in Greek translated Theos and that by the Apostles often in the new Testament Here is a vvant in the language for Aelohim is in form the plural number signifying the Trinitie yet joyned with a word of the singular number bara he created signifying the vnitie of the persons in the Godhed Such a phrase the Geek tongue vvanted therefore the Apostles admit of the Greek propriety doing the ful dutie of translators the defect resteth in the language of which they were not Lords And that the Lord respecteth not so much the words and phrases as the matter meant by them infinite examples in the scriptures do manifest But whereunto leadeth this cavil what if all cannot be expressed in the translation shall we therefore have none in the Church then neyther may we have any preaching by the voice of man for none can fully expresse in his sermon all things that God intendeth by a place of scripture or any ground of religion And if preaching must be vsed though many humane infirmities be mixed with it then also reading the scriptures and consequently the translations to them that know not the originals must be used though fewer humane infirmities be mixed therewithall seing these both are the ordinances of God as before hath bene proved But then M. Sm. wil draw commentaries and homilies into the Church also But that is denyed to be Gods ordinance He hath appointed the lively voice of his graces in the mouthes of his servants to be heard in the Church for the opening and applying of the word vnto them but not their writings to be read And because of some infirmities in translations to disgrace them as this man dooth and match them with commentaries it is capeleâ—â—in as the Apostle speaketh to play the false vintner with the wine of Gods word For as such a falser to make sale of his mixture wherein some wine much water yea perhaps some puddle water is brewed togither mought say you can have no wine but such as is turned out of the first vessel and it cannot be in the turning of it out but some of the spirit and strength of the wine vvill vapour avvay some tast it wil have of the nevv cask therefore you may as well drink of this liquor for in respect of the vessell they are both alike changed in respect of the matter they are both alike wine Let M. Sm. therefore cease his odious comparisons of the translation with the comment or else let him shew us some comment or sermon written upon any text wherin at the least there is not water and wine and perhaps death in the pot OF THE LXXII INTERPRETERS HEre M. Smyth before he proceed further takes up an accusation against the Church of Israel who in the dayes of Ptolomee Philadelphus King of Egypt and at his request sent 72. learned Iewes to translate the Hebrue Bible into Greek before the Apostles time almost 300. yeares This their translation sayth M. Smyth was a grevous syn 1. For that the covenant of grace ought not to have been preached vnto the gentiles til the fulnes of time Mat. 10. 5. 6. 1 Tim. 3. 16. Rom. 16. 25. 26. with Mat. 10. 5. 6. 28. 19. and therefore that the Lxx. by their translation did communicate it to the Graecians before the fulnes of the time was their greevous syn I answer in the behalf of Israel First by M. Smythes divinity the Church of Israel was a carnal people had a carnal covenant or promise of carnal things c. how is it then that he chargeth them here with profaning the covenant of grace and how wil this agree with his grounds of Anabaptisme Secondly by his divinity also the scriptures and reading of them is the mimistration of the letter 2 Cor. 3. 6. that is of death damnation as before hath been handled How then could the litteral translation reading therof be the ministerie or covenant of grace the ministration of death was fit ynough for the Gentiles that were to die Or did it kil them before the tyme Thirdly I deny his collection from those scriptures against this action for although the fulnes of time was not yet come that God would send preachers with the power of his spirit to convert all nations yet followeth it not herevpon that no gentile no nation no not though they desired it as King Ptolomee desired the Bible mought have the truth imparted unto them There is no such law made of God nay the coÌ„trarie is playne For 1. ther were many strangers Aegyptians others that went out with Israel to the Land of Canaan not forbidden nor debarred of grace with Israel Exod. 12. 38. nay the law admitted any stranger to circumcision the passeover so to the covenant of grace Exod. 12. 48. 49. 1 Cor. 5. 7. 2. The Gibeonites which were of the worst sort of hethens devote to destruction yet obteyned mercie with God to be in the covenant of his grace Josh. 9. 27. 2 Sam. 21. 1. 2. 5. c. 3. There were also in Solomons time 153. thowsand and 600. strangers none exempted from partaking with Israels mercy 4. God gave his law to be read even unto strangers also Deut. 31. 12. so far vvas he from vvithholding grace if any sought it 5. And solomoÌ„d dicating the teÌ„ple prayed even for straÌ„gers that dvvelt in far countries vvho mought vvhen they heard of Gods name come thither and pray in that house that they even all people of the earth mought know Gods name fear him as did his people Israel All vvhich do shevv the untruth of M. Sm. collection that it vvas a syn for Israel to impart the scriptures and covenant of grace to the gentiles Because all the Gentiles ought to have been Proselytes of the Iewes Church and to have come to Ierusalem to worship Exod. 12. 43. 49. Mat. 23. 15. Act 2. 10. and ought to have learned their tongue and worship which was prevented by the Lxx. translation First this reason enterfeireth vvith the former for if all ought to have beene proselytes hovv might not the covenant of grace be preached vnto them Could they be converted vvithout the vvord of the covenant Here the accuser of the Saincts hath rolled a stone which is returned unto
in such or such a chapter But the Apostle sayth he intendeth to teach the several offices of the Church Not so but rather he intendeth to shew how officers in generall should be qualified and setting downe things common to all it had been needlesse repetition to speak of the Pastor first and the same things of the teacher and againe the third time the same of the Elder he useth no such tautologies And Timothee needed not to be taught what offices belonged to the Church though he mought have need to be put in mind of their qualifications Yet even in the same Epistle upon other occasions he mentioneth the difference of the office some being to rule wel some to labour in the word and doctrine Of which we shall speak anon And in his other Epistles the like differences ar playn Rom. 12. 7. 8. 1 Cor. 12. 4. 5. 28. Moreover sayth he if th' Apostles had ordeyned three kind of ELDRS Actes 14. 23. they would have mentioned them with their several kinds of ordinations but that is not doon for in one phrase their election and ordination is mentioned go their ordination being one their office is one and not three A reason much like the former of like vanitie for to say such a thing is not mentioned in such a place therfore it was not doon is inconsequent And here the minding of his owne words mought have stayed him from so concluding for if Luke writing the action doth in one phrase yea even in one word summ up both the election the ordination which yet ar different and doon with many circumstances may he not also under the general name Elders imply differēt sorts Agayn where the holy Ghost expresseth not any one kind of ordination nor any one word spoken to the officers concerning their charge and office layd upon them which yet no doubt was doon Who would look for a severall kind of ordination to be mentioned in such a place Further if ther had been 3 kind of Elders at Ephesus then the Apostle at Miletum would haue given them severall charges as having several duties lying upon them hut th' Apostle Act. 20. 28. giveth them one general charge common to them al namely the dutie of feeding the work of the Pastor go they are all Pastors These reasons be al of a sute and the prayer of David seemeth to have prevailed against this man for when he shooteth arrowes they ar as broken or like unto strawes First we cannot say what several charges Paul gaue those Elders seing all his words in particular are hot recorded For there is no doubt but he spake many moe words then are set downe and it is usuall in the scriptures to summ up mens speeches Secondly suppose he gave no several charges but one general common to them all which was Poimainein to feed and govern the flock yet wil not this prove that they had all one undistinct office any more then that Peter had no other then a common Pastours office because Christ gave him but a general charge common to al Pastors poimaine feed my sheep The Preists and Levites had distinct offices as before is manifested yet Hezekiah speaking to them al generally as Paul dooth here to the Elders gives them not several charges according to their severall duties but useth one common exhortation to them al which if one would pervert as this man dooth Pauls speech he mought plead that all the Levits then were properly to burn incense as that al the Elders now should properly do the Pastors dutie See 2 Chro. 29. 4. 5. 11. The conclusion which he maketh that therefore al are Pastors if he mean it in the strict sense is deneyed as inconsequent If in the large sense it is from the question and deceiveth by ambiguitie for Christ is a Pastor the Apostles-were Pastors and so are all Bishops governours generally yet no man I think doubteth but these do differ Besides Eph. 4. 11. Pastors and Teachers are all one office For wheras the Apostle had spoken distributively before of Apostles Prophets Evangelists as intending them several offices he speaketh copulatively of Pastors and Teachers exegetically teaching that they are both one office First let it be observed how himselfe doth say Apostles Prophets Evengelists were several offices yet can he not deny but generally they were to poimaeinein that is doe the dutie of Pastors feeding and governing the Church of Christ so his former exception against Act. 20. is found of no weight Also his reasons from Isa 66. 21. Numbers 11. 25. for one sort of officers to be figured in the law are of as little valew unlesse we should think that the principal officers of the Christian Church were not figured or prophesied of at all Secondly the exposition which he giveth of Ephes. 4. 11. is against the Apostles purpose who distinctly and distributively setteth down the divers gifts and offices of the church and therfore cānot be thought to expresse one the same office by two names For though he speak copulatively pastors and teachers yet is ther no reason why these should be taken for one seeing this word and coupleth divers things divers officers as Apostles and Prophets Eph. 2. 20 and 3 5. Apostles and Elders Act. 15 2. Prophets Teachers Act 13 1. and a thowsand the like Neither needed he teach exegetically by way of exposition what the pastors office is seeing it was as wel if not better known then the Prophets office or Evangelists neyther is it an exposition when the latter is as dark and more then the former and the first more proper then the second For the proper name of the office as M. Sm. takes it is Pastor now to say Pastors that is teachers were to explayn the proper by the unproper or commune name which neither Paul nor any wise writer useth to doe But is ignorance or a worse thing that causeth M. Sm. to pervert so plain a place The Apostle particulating the several offices some Apostles some Prophets c. doth in the last branch according to the elegancie both of the Hebrue and Greek tongues omitt the word some putting and in the sted in the very same meaning An example of the Bebrue may be seen Hos. 3. 4. where the Prophet telleth how Israel should remayn without King and without Prince and without offring and without statue and without Ephod and Teraphim meaning and without Teraphim Here in the last place the word without is omitted and to be understood of the reader as our English translation dooth expresse for it were trifling to say as Mr. Smyth that the two last are one because and coupleth them or that exegetically one expoundeth an other when as it is but an elegancie in the language as al that have skil in it can tel The like is in the Greek tongue and in Pauls own writing Gal. 3. 28. There is neither
forbid not any unbaptised to come into our assemblies 1 Cor. 14. 23 25 Notwithstanding his I find amōg them that Solomon asked received outward things as timber for the temple of Huram King of Tyre king Darius gave of his owne revenues towards the tēple worship of God it was not refused In Israel I find not that any admitted into the publik place of the word and prayers was forbidden there if he would to contribute neither any such law made by Christ. Rather the ground layd by the Apostle sheweth the contrarie if the Gentiles sayth he be made partakers of their spiritual thinges their duetie is also to minister unto them in carnal things Rom. 15. 27. Vnbeleevers are admitted to the ministerie of the word in Christian assemblies so made partakers of our spiritual things if then there they wil give of their carnal things upon what ground may we refuse them It is alleged how 2 Cor. 8. 7. the communion of almose is called a grace and in Heb. 13. 16. a sacrifice I acknowledge it thus to be in the saincts whither they give it in publik or private For when he sayth to do good and to communicate forget not for with such sacrifices God is wel pleased he meaneth it not onely of publik contribution in the church but of private distribution to any at any time Paul brought almose and offrings to his nation Act. 24. 17. and himself received such a sacrifice from the Philippians Philip. 4. 18. And if any one Christian in private had sent him the like had it not been a sacrifice also Wherfore the Almose of the Saincts are sacrifices though one give to another in secret yea if a Christian releev an unbeleever in povertie and distresse it is a sacrifice and sweet odour to God If therfore upon this ground we may not receiv it of unbeleevers in the publik Church because it is in the saincts a communion of grace and sacrifice how may we receiv it of such in private But sayth M. Sm. they that are without if they give any thing must lay it apart several from the treasurie it must be imployed to common use Mat. 27. 6. 7. This position I wil not absolutely condemn neyther can I yet grant it for the proof is insufficient For wheras the Iewes Mat. 27 would not put Iudas wages into their treasurie it was not because he was one without for Iudas was a Iew no strāger unto them but because it was the price of blood therfore they mought not put it into the treasurie This teacheth us that goods gotten by violence extorsion murder theft or other like evil way may not be put into the treasurie though the members of the Church do offer them But this is no more for those without then for those within And for common use of al unbeleevers gifts I suppose this example wil not bear it out For if in the povertie and distresse of Christs church they which are not of the same minister releif thereunto which if they doe not it shal be one reason of their condemnation at the day of judgment hath not the church libertie to use injoy these benefits for themselves seing the earth is the Lords and the plentie thereof must they needs bestow it for the behoof of strangers as was Iudas hire I am otherwise minded for the reasons before rendred Howbeit concerning these things if any shall better inform us by the word of God we shal be willing to receiv it For the latter branch that it should be sanctified with blessing or thanks giving to God we do wel approve upō that general ground of thanks unto God for al his benefits and as any do give or send more special releef so more special thanks to be rendred therfore as we are directed 2 Cor. 9. 12 15. Albeit for the manner of performing this thing as whither a special prayer is to be made before the contributiō a special thanksgiving after or whither in the general prayers of the Church it is to be sanctified among other the publik actions there may be some question and I wil not contend let every one use herein the wisedom that God giveth them Onely I do observ how M. Sm. himself makes a quere at what time of the Lords day and after what manner the treasurie is to be collected which sheweth in him no certaintie for the form of this busines I doubt not but as he so we al may be to seek for the most covenient māner order of doing many things wherein if any lust to be contentious I say with the Apostle we have no such custome neither the churches of God A FEW OBSERVATIONS UPON SOME OF M. SMYTHES Censures in his answer to M. Bernard Mr Smyth in his late book caled Parallels censures c. seeks occasion to censure some things which I had written in answer to Mr. Bern. but cheifly insisteth upon the question of ecclesiastical goverment wherabout he chargeth me with antichristianisme If it were not for others that may stumble at this reproch I would bear it in silence minding my adversarie so fickle and unconstant as he holdeth almost to nothing that himself hath written and I would restin Gods work who as already he hath made this man like unto a wheel so if he repent not in due time will make him †like stubble before the wind For from the faith which he defended in that his book he presently after in great mesure fel away himself The constitutiō of our Church in which estate himself then professed to be with us he writeth of it thus I am bould to pronounce c. our true constitution to be the most honorable and bewtiful ornament of our Church more glorious then our true Ministerie worship and goverment Contrary to this a few dayes after he setts out The character of the Beast wherin having dissolved forsaking his former true and glorious constitution he exclaimeth against us as before I haue shewed as having a false Church falsly constituted and therfore no one ordinance of the Lord true among us Thus Wormwood fell from heaven Agayn in this answer to Mr. Bernard he acknowledgeth the apostate Church of the 10. tribes in the old Testament to be a Church falsly constituted and so the Churches of Antichrist in the N. Testament contraryweise in his Character of the Beast seking shifts for his anabaptisme he sayth Israels apostasie did not destroy the true constitution of the Church but Antichrists doeth c. I leave these and other like flowers of contradiction for others to gather that deal in that controversie Onely because his answer to Mr. Bern. seemeth to be written in defence of our cause and so may be taken of posteritie I would have the reader take notice that the silver there is mixt with drosse and the wine with the gal of