to the Apostles their Successors the L.Bbs. neither can you with any good conscience say that they clayme Christs Kingly powre but only they are Antichrists as the Pope is for two causes 1. For clayming that powre Ministeriall which Christ hath given to the body of the Church 2. For enlarging that ministerial powre beyond that compasse which Christ in his word hath determined Thirdly you say Neither that ruling powre of Christ which the Puritanes say is in the presbytery do we say is in the multitude For we acknowledg Christ to have ordeyned a presbytery or Eldership that in every Church for to teach rule them by his owne word lawes vnto whome al the multitude the members the Saints ought to obey submit themselves as the Scriptures teach confut of Mr. Bern. pag. 176. VVee say Christs ruling powre is originally fundamentally in the body of the Church the multitude we acknowledg further that the Elders receave by delegation powre from the body of the Church which powre ministerial in the hands of the Elders is not so large as that which is in the body but it is rather a leading powre then a ruling powre neither are the Elders in al the new testament to my knowledg called Rulers archontes but overseers leaders Elders prohistamenoi wherby the holy Ghost would teach that their powre is not to rule but to leade direct I do therefore vtterly disclaime this your error Mr. Ains as one part of Antichristianisme in your Church but you had need expound it wel for the satisfaction of the brethren of the Seperation least you here in destroy your constitution before you be aware VVhat we hold concerning the Presbytery I have delivered partly in that which before I have written in answer to Mr. Bern. partly in that which I lately published concerning the differences of the Churches of the Seperation in the second part the first Section Chap. 5. 6. wherfor if you hold that Lordly vsurped Antichristian powre of your Eldership to be that ruling powre which the word of God warranteth it shal be your part to justifie it to rebuke al that gainst and it for herein wee vtterly disclayme your judgment practise we maintaine that the powre of the Eldership is a leading directing overseeing powre ministery or service both in the Kingdom Preisthood of the Church that the negative voice the last definitive determining sentence is in the body of the Church wherto the Eldership is bound to yeeld that the Church may do any lawful act without the Elders but the Elders can do nothing without the approbation of the body or contrary to the body The eighth Section In the next place followeth your second position which is this in your copie In holding that one sinne of one man publiquely obstinately stood in not reformed by a true constituted Church doth so pollute it that none may communicate with it in the holy things of God til the partie offending be by the Church put out after lawful conviction you say is error I say it is the most comfortable holy truth wee hold in our walking one with another in communion of Gods ordinances This truth ariseth from the former ground that al the members of the Church have powre to the censures of admonition excommunication to bind lose For observe I pray you that every brother is bound to admonish his brother for a fault he observeth in him if he reforme not he must take one or two witnesses admonish him if he reforme not yet he must bring the matter before the Church suppose the Church consist of 12. persons as at Ephesus Act. 19.7 The matter being before the Church the eleven deale with the twelvth discover his sin convince it to his conscience he refuseth to â—eer them but despiseth the admonitions I say if they retaine him stil in communion they consent to his sinne For as the civill Magistrate in pardoning willfull murther consenteth to it bicause the murtherer should die Even so the Church suffering the vnrepentaunt persone among them consent to his sinne and are polluted with it and consent to all the profanation and violation of the Holy things committed by that vnrepentaÌ„t person For God hath commaunded the church to watch over their brethren if they do not they hate their brother in suffering sinne to rest vppon him God hath commaunded that no vncleane person should medle with the Holy things if they doe they profane polute the Holy things offering violence to the Lords ordinances But it may be you wil say that by this meanes we assume to our selves a kind of perfection puritie in that we wil have no sinners among vs I answer that you must distinguish betwixt our persons our communion we confesse our persons severally every one of vs to be subject to sinne that we doe sinne dayly bicause of our sinning nature the Lord hath appointed the ordinances of the visible Church as helps meanes to subdue this sinning nature of ours especially these ordinances of admonition excommunication which are to be vsed administred vppon al by al as occasion is offered Now this is the perfection puritie of our communion that we suffer no vnrepented sinne no vnrepentant sinner among vs but either we cast out the sinne by repentance or the sinner vnrepentant by excommunication that our coÌ„munion may be pure holy the church without spot or wrinckle that we may be a new lump dayly vnleavened the leaven being purged out of vs continually oh Mr. Ber. if you knew but the comfort powre of the L. ordinances of admonition excommunication as we do blessed be our good God in some measure that growth reformation which is in some of vs thereby you would be so wonderfully ravished with the powre of Gods ordinances that you would acknowledg the Church to be terrible as an armie with banners yet amyable lovely comely beauteful in so much as Christ himself saith that the love of the church is faire that she woundeth his hart with one of her eyes in regard of the beautyful holy communion which is dayly maintayned in her by vertue of the censures but your confused assemblies al the members of them not only omit but reject yea oppose al these holy ordinances which Christ hath given to his Church therby you proclaime to all the world that you are of Belial that is without the yoke of Christs ordinances you cast away from you these cordes bandes wherwith wee are bound one to another knit faster faster vnto Christ our head therfor you living thus without the yoke out of the Lords Holy order having broken these bandes cast the cordes froÌ„ you mingling your selves vnto joyning with al manner of profane persons that violate al Gods ordinances how can we have any
faith are the members of the Church of England baptized which the Law establisheth which the Prelates Ministers teach which the Church of England professeth which the minister baptising intendeth wherto the parents witnesses or Susceptors consent which the Service-book expresly mentioneth But the law doth not establish the Prelates ministers do not teach the Church of England doth not professe the baptizer doth not intend the parents Susceptors doe not consent to the Servicebook doth not mention the Faith of Christ simply but the Faith of Bbs. or Church of England Ergo The members of the Church of England are not baptized into the Faith of Christ simply but into the Fayth of the Bbs. or Church of England which is the false Fayth of the baptizer of the Suertyes or parents and so the Faith of the baptisme For the second point let vs consider the faith repentance of the Church of Englād I meane of the faith that is visibly professed expressed in the fruites of repētance amōg them therby we shal know the tree The faith of that Church is not a true faith which teach professe a false mediator the repentance of that Church is not a true repentance which practise according to that false doctryne But the assemblies Ecclesiastical of England with the teachers professors of them teach and professe a false Mediator For they teach that Christ is a Mediator of all that false Church Ministery VVorship and Government established in the Land Sacrificing and making intercession for them in the dayly practise al those abhominations Ruling and Governing them by all the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy and by the courts canons Ecclesiastical which are the inventions of the man of sinne Teaching Prophesying vnto them by those Antichristian Prelates Preists Deacons which raigne in the Land so practising according to this false Faith practise a false repentance Ergo the Faith of the Church of England of the teachers professors therof the repentance of them is not true but false But it wil be objected against both these assertions that although one thing be intended in baptisme yet the Lord may admit of accept another though they professe preach falsely yet the Lord he can doth no doubt work mervaylously besides al that we can think or speak Truth I yeeld it most willingly blessed be the Lord for his infinite vnspeakeable mercy therein but we dispute not what God can do of his powre or wil do of his mercy things vnknowne vnto vs but we speake of things revealed and manifested vnto vs according whervnto we must walk judg of matters according to that which we see according as the word judgeth according as the Church members of the Church of England teach professe practise visibly which is seen discerned of vs we are to passe our censure but we judg no man before the tyme we doe not clyme vp into Gods judgment seate our Faith is visible our repentance is visible our charity visible our Spirit visible our baptisme visible our preaching visible our covenant visible our Church visible our judgment visible things that are revealed aperteyne to vs our Children that say we is false in the assemblies Ecclesiastical Secreat things aperteyne to the Lord these we leave to the Lord we medle not with them this I desire may once for al be remembred pondered so I end this matter The Fiftenth Section The next point is your Fourth wherin you do vs open injury viz. 4. In holding that Princes have no more to do in ecclesiastical causes then one of you in a particular congregation these are your wordes Mr. Ber. I challeng you in this particular imputation to be either a malicious or an ignorant slaunderer For eyther you know not what we teach concerning Princes Authorityes so slaunder vs ignorantly or if you know our judgmēt in that matter you slaunder vs malitiously Remember that the Prophet in the Psalmes complayneth that his enemyes digd pits for him laid snares grinnes nets in his way to catch him ynawares to bring evil vppon him are you now become such an enemy vnto vs doe you think by calling into question the Supremacy of Princes imputing therin treason to vs to catch vs in a snare cause vs to fal into the pit if this be your course thus to hunt the Soules of men look vnto your self therin you manifest litle grace to me but let vs heer the cause you impute to vs. you say we hold that princes have no more to do in ecclesiastical causes then one of vs in a particular congregaciō I say for myne owne part I think I may say it for al the brethren of our Church that herin you do shamefully belie vs I wil therfor manifest what we hold teach concerning Princes Supremacy 1. First wee teach hold according to the Scriptures that Princes civil Estates are the Lords blessed ordinance Rom. 13.2 2. Secondly that every Soule ought to be subject vnto the civil Magistrates of what estate condition soever they be Rom. 13.1 Tit. 3.1 1. Pet. 2.13 3. Thirdly that we must absolutely submit vnto the civil Magistrate eyther to do his lawful commaundements or to suffer his vnlawful punishments by consequence from the former places 4. Fourthly that it is vnlawful for any subject to make insurrection or rebellion against the civil Magistrates by consequence from the former places 5. Fifthly that it is the Magistrates office to be the keeper of both the tables of the cōmaundemēts both to abolish Idolatry al false wayes also to forbid punish al vnrighteousnes as also to commaund cause al men within there Dominions to walk in the wayes of God being fitted prepared therevnto and that by the examples of David Iosaphat Hezechiah Iosiah Nehemiah Roman 13.4.5 Psalm 101. toto and 132. 2-5 6. That a Prince hath powre in a particular visible Church to punish any wickednes any one committeth and to cause that visible Church to assume practise any truth Gods word teacheth ex praecedentibus now this is more authority then any one particular member hath 7. VVee teach notwithstanding that Princes if they wil be saved must bee members of a true visible Church must walk ther in the obedience of Gods Commaundements ordinances submitting to the censures for the reformation salvation of his soule as well as to the preaching to the VVord administration of the Seales of the covenant prayers c. bicause God hath appointed but one way to save the Soules of Princes and Subjects 8. If civil Magistrates be by censures cast out of the true visible Church yet they are stil to be accounted Gods ordinance stil to bee obeyed in the L. stil to be submitted to in regard of their punishment no rebellion or insurrection to be made against them by any of the Church whatsoever but prayer
though it occupie the place or a natural part So an Hypocrite or one that continueth not to the end possesseth only a rome in the visible Church is not indeed a true member You wil demaund then why we receave Hypocrites among vs wherto I answer we cannot discerne an hypocrite therfor we are to judg of men according to that we see measuring them by the word of God That which is concealed from vs wee are not to prie into VVherfor our judgment must alter chang as occasions varie so the Scripture speaketh of a righteous man forsaking his righteousnes Ezech. 18.24 VVhereas in truth the gifts calling of God are without repentance Rom. 11.29 Breely therfor to deliver vnto you the truth I hold concerning this point 1. The visible Church consisteth of an outward inward communion 2. The inward communion is knowne only to God So are the members therof 3. The outward visible communion is 〈◊〉 discerned by men So are the members thereof 4. VVee aâ—â— to judg men for the present to be both of the inward outward communion if they manifest to vs an ourward 〈◊〉 faith ◠〈◊〉 afterward men Apostate finaly then wee chandg our mynd say they were â—ever of vs for had they been of vs they would have continued with vs. Now Mr. Bern. I pray you answer vs this which wee thus justifie out of the word if you can if you cannot yeeld to the truth embrace the faith wee shal rejoyce 〈◊〉 you with you Paralleles Censures Observations aperteyning to the sixth Section Mr. Bern. in his book intitâ—led the Seperatists Schisme pa. 83. hath these wordes viz Their fifth error is that only Saynts that is a people forsaking al knowne sin of which they may be convinced doing al the knowne wil of God increasing abiding ever therin are the only matter of a visible Church In this Section Mr. Bern. saith thus It is an error to teach That only Saynts as Mr. Smyth defineth them by 4 properties are the only matter of a visible Church Mr. Ainswortht confutation of Mr. Bern. pag. 174. Saith that he denyeth this position disclaymeth the errors which Mr. Bern. gathereth from them referring him to them that hold it then Mr. Ainsworth sheweth what he holdeth that Saynts by calling are the only matter of a true visible Church yet that many be called few chosen Let the reader consider the exposition that I have given to this position in this section of my lettre then let him give his verdict the exposition is summarily thus much viz that seing the visible Church consisteth of an ontward inward communion they that are only of the outward visible communion as hypocrites are no true members of the visible Church but only in reputation account before men Now I demaund of Maister Bernard againe with what face or good conscience he durst thus â—â—â—se the VVorld to publish this position barely without my expoâ—â—â—ion or not to answer that which I brought for the confirmation thereof but naâ—â—dly to set it downe then only to object against it Herein you bewray to mee a mynd willing to hyde the truth to deceave the VVorld to draw the Lords truth into detestation which whither it be not the quality of a false Prophettâ— I leave to the judgment of the Godly mynded And whither hereby you doe not verefie Christs speech that you come to rob kill to destroy that therfor you are a theef a robber Ioh. 10.1.10 But bicause you are so importunate with your objections reasons let vs heer what they are First you say my description of Saynts is a proper description of the invisible members of Christ Iesus that it excludeth Hypocrites from being true matter of the visible Church I answer two things namely 1. that an Hypocrite may performe al these 4. properties mentioned in the description of Saynts for he may 1 Forsake all knowne sinne 2. doe al the knowne wil of God 3. grow in knowledg grace 4. continue to the end yet be an Hypocrite to the Lord in secâ—eatâ— doe you think Mr. Bernard that all that die thus qualified in the estimation of men are indeed saved with the L I confesse to mee they are vndoubtedly saved but are they so to the Lord make a direct answer to this particular you shal be compelled to see confesse your 〈◊〉 Vâ—â— 2. I answer more properly thus when I define Saynts I must define them not as they are in shew for the present but as they are indeed truth Now truth is so eyther before men or before God before men that is true somtyme which is false before God before God that is true somtyme which is false before men That is true before men which is proved by two or three witnesses Mat. 18.16 He therfor is a Saynt before men in truth that continueth to the end in faith repentance the fruites thereof He is a Saynt before men in â—hew appearance for the present that for the present bringeth forth fruites worthy amendement of life For a righteous man may forsake his righteousnes Ezech. 18.14 I am not therefore to define a Saynt as he is in shew for the present but as he is indeed for ever in the judgment of men neither do I define a Saynt as he is in the Lords knowledg which is not revealed to men but as he is revealed to be judged by the word of God I wil declare this by instances for your further information satisfactioÌ„ Stephen Damas Tertullus Stephen continued to the end Demas embraced the world fel back from the truth Tertullus never came to the truth for ought that is revealed I say Stephen was a true member of the visible Church who continued to the end Demas was no Saynt nor no true member of the visible Church indeed but only in shew Tertullus was no Saynt nor true member of the visible church so much as in shew or appearance what Tertullus was in secreat to the Lord I dispute not nor regard not what Demas was what Stephen was in the Lords counsel it doth not aperteyne vnto vs we must judg according to that we see know I say still with the Apostle continuance is a true propertie of a Saynt member of the visible Church indeed truth of the ful compleat communion thereof 1. Ioh. 2.19 Your second Objection reason is that by this my definition of Saynts or the matter of the visible Church so determined I exclude the members of the visible Church of the old Testament as Hezechiah David Ichosaphat Moses c. VVho committed suffered knowne sinne yea the Corinthians 2. Cor. 12.21 Also the Churches of Asia Revel 2 20.21 VVho did not amend yet were Saynts true matter of the visible Church I answer First to that of the old Testament objected by you I say your
nothing for your purpose For you speak not of perfect knowledg but of sound knowledg that Epithete doth not argue the quantity or perfect measure but the quality or true condition of knowledg which I do avouch by the former groundes to be a true convertible signe of sanctification so of a Saynt Pure affection also is another true token of Sanctification Matt. 5.8 1. Tim. 1.5 Tit. 1.15 which pure hart or affection is not a hart voyde of sinn but of hipocrisy for that you object of Paul Rom. 7.18.21 it is nothing to overthrow his pure affection For though he had sinne yet he know nothing by himself whereof he had not repented Continuall practise of Holy dutyes also is a true signe of a Saynt or a Sanctified person Psal 119.101.102.106.112 And although Ecclesiastes saith that ther is no man without sinne vet that hindreth not but that some may continualy practise their dutyes sith this is the summe of al that by repentaÌ„ce faith which are the continual practise of the Saynts a man doth alwayes performe his duty the speech of Eclestastes is the sentence of the law not of the gospel But heerin is your monstrous fraud and abhominable dissembling manifested that vnder these doubtful termes of sound knowledg pure affection practise of duty allwayes you would bleare mens eyes that they should not see the truth VVhat doe you think that any of vs would be so absurd as to say that perfect knowledg love obedience without any imperfection or fault are the signes of Sanctification And yet wee say that sound knowledg a pure hart and continual practise of Holy dutyes are the most infallible tokens of true Saynts and men truly Sanctified But you are wholly transformed as I perceave into vayne jangling In the next place I doe acknowledg that your fix affirmatives are somthing to the purpose But neverthelesse you have mingled much chaffe with the wheate wherfore breefly in all that which you write page 85. 86. 87. 88 Concerning this matter I doe observe these particulars Namely 1. That although an outward calling profession and baptisme to the faith be part of the signes of Saynts Namely visible markes outwardly yet they must be thus qualified els they are nothing but pictures or images resembling shadowing Sanctification superficialy For they must be true inward also True calling profession baptisme inward calling profession baptisme are the infallible tokens of Sanctification and Saynts The inward must be discerned by the outward the truth must be judged by the word He that is so called so professeth is so baptised as the word teacheth that is to say He that is called and Seperated from the VVorld Antichristianisme all false wayes knowne vnto him he that professeth that true faith taught in the New Testament of Christ which is but one he that is baptised into that true faith after that true manner Christ hath prescribed I must needs say that he is truly called truly professeth is truly baptized and so he by reason of his outward true calling true profession of the true faith and true baptisme is discerned judged to be inwardly called inwardly to have faith to be inwardly baptized that truly A company of men thus called professing baptized are Saynts But if half ot but some of them only be thus the rest impenitent obstinate in sinne it cannot possibly be that they should joyntly together be a true Church being light darkenes righteousnes impenitency Christ and Belial or being joyned together those former called professing baptized doe forsake their righteousnes partake with the wicked in their sinnes and so shal receave of their plagues How then can that mixt company be called Saynts yea they are as accessary to fearful sinne before the Lord before men judging according to the rules of Gods word which is the touchstone of al truth according wherevnto all our judgments must be squared as by a canon rule of direction 2. The better part visible signes of Gods favour and presence Gods good pleasure acceptation are excellent respects in the Church But they are not demonstrative proper adjuncts of saynts sufficieÌ„t to cause a mixt company to be al saynts in definition But you speak of a mixt company one way wee vnderstand a mixt company another way You define a mixt company to be of men that are truly Sanctified and men openly wicked profane I for my part doe abhorre to call such a Company Saynts Nay I should rather and that truly call such a mixt Company a false Church and all of them visiblie Antichristians Neyther doe I any whitt quayle that you say all divines say-so I know ther is oâ—â— namely Iohn the divine the rest of the Apostles that teach the contrary if the divinity of your divines be contrary to the divinity of the Apostles Iohn that worthy divine I reject it I abhorre it I wish it cast to the bottomlesse pit from whence it came For know you Mr. Bern. that the worser part somtyme giveth denomination to the thing If a peck of wheate be intermingled with an hundreth quartar of chaffe it is not a heape of wheate but of chaffe if a pint of wine be mingled with a gallon of lees it is the lees of wine not wine you know in Logick conclusio sequitur deteriorem partem Now a company of wicked men having some few Saynts known only to the Lord among theÌ„ for being mingled with the wicked in Spiritual communion they cannot be judged Saynts by the rule of Gods word to man particularly certaynly as your assemblies of England are cannot be al caled Saynts in any colour of truth For then al the men of England are Saynts seing they al are joyned together into one Ecclesiastical body which I suppose you cannot nor dare not say the Scripture ever intended so to give them denomination but you must vnderstand that we acknowledg the visible Church a mixt company in the Lords account estimation in our general comprehension For so wee learne that the visible Church consisteth of wheate tares Mat. 13. The Lord he knoweth that the Church hath Hypocrites in it we are informed so by the scriptures ther were but twelve Apostles one of them was a Devil but eight persons in the Arck cursed Cham was one but foure persons in the beginning Runagate Kain was one but stil we deny that open wicked impenitent persons can be called Saynts bicause of the communion presence of some elect ones who are only known vnto the Lord being of one ecclesiastical body with the wicked Neither can a wicked company be called Holy or Saints truly in respect of the visible signes of Gods favour or presence For then the Papists Anabaptists Familists Arrians among them Exod. 3.5 the ground was caled Holy Mat. 4.5 Ierusalem is caled the Holy cittie typicaly
dioceses Nay say the Presbyterians of England out of Mat. 18.17 The powre of binding losing is given to the Edership the poeple they are bound or losed by the Presbytery For by the Church they vnderstand the Presbytery Nay say we the powre of binding losing is given to the body of the Church even to two or thre faithful people joyned together in covenant this we prove evidently in this manner Vnto whome the covenant is given vnto them the powre of binding losing is given The covenant is given to the body of the Church that is to two or three faithful ones For God is their God they are his people Therfor the powre of binding losing is given to them Againe Vnto whom Christ is given for King vnto thē the powre of Christ the King is given as being his deputies lieftenants But Christ is given for King vnto the body of the Church even to two or three faithful people who are his Kingdome howse cittie Therfor vnto them is given his powre that is his powre to bind lose Finally Vnto whome the covenant Christ is given vnto them al the promises are given for al the promises are conteyned in the covenant in Christ as these places prove 2. Cor. 1.20 Psal 133.3 Act. 2.39 Gal. 3.14.15.16 the powre of binding losing is one of the promises is a part parcel of the covenant Mat. 16.19 Ioh. 20.23 Mat. 18 15-20 But the covenāt Christ al the promises are givē to the body of the church even to two or three faithful ones Therfor the powre of binding losing is given to them also But ther are certayne objections which must be answered in nomber three Ob. 1. One is that Christ speaketh only to Peter to his Apostles giveth the powre only to them therfor Mat. 16.19 Iohn 20.23 Mat. 18.17 For answer thus much The place Mat. 16. although it be directed to Peter personally yet it is intended vnto all the Disciples of Christ For vnto them is the powre given that have the saith and made the confession ther mentioned But the faith confession of faith is of al the Disciples spoken by Peter in behalf of them al therfor the powre is by promise given to al The place Ioh. 20.23 importeth plainly that Mary Magdalene divers other of the Disciples were present when Christ spake vnto them for they were assembled together in a howse the dore being shut it was the L. day not the Apostles only but the rest of the Disciples were assēbled in al likely-hood for the Sanctification of the L. day yea further Thomas was absent so the promise of binding losing could not be made to him at that present afterward it was not made to him so by consequent that one of the Ap. had not the powre givē him by ther reason which plead it to be given to the Apost only The place Mat. 18.17 doth not prove that this powre was given to the Presbyterie for that place importeth that it was given to the Church now the Eldership is not the Church but a part of the Church it must be proved that the word Church doth signifie the Eldership or els this place wil help nothing as I am sure cannot be showed out of the word besides the circumstances of the place teach that Christ intēdeth the powre of binding losing to be given to every brother for so he saith if thy brother sin lett him be vnto the take two or three witnesses where two or three c. I am in the midst of them Finally It cannot be denyed but admonition aperteyneth to every brother why should not excommunication For their is powre to bind lose in two or thre witnesses toward a brother why not powre to bind lose in the body of the Church if the whole Church be but two or three or some smal nomber Now for the vtter over throwing of this conceipt of the powre given to the Presbyterie only consider that the twelve were not yet Apostles only they were nominated to be Apostles they were invested in their office at the descending of the Holy Ghost on the day fo Pentecost which I prove vnto you evidently Eph. 4.8.11 when Christ ascended he gave gifts vnto men viz the gifts of Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors Teachers For Christ receaved his Kingdom when he ascended Luk. 19.12 For Christ obteyned a Kingdome by his death he receaved his Kingdome when he went into that fane country Christ by his sufferings entred into his glory So that Christs Kingdome in regard of the outward regiment ordinances thereof beganne at the day of Pentecost when the Apostles were endued with powre from on high Luk. 24.49 Act 1.8 it shal end at the day of judgment 1. Cor. 15.24.25 Seing therfor that they were not yet Apostles but only Disciples the powre given to them was given to them as Disciples not as Apostles therfor all Christs Disciples may justly in al ages challendg that powre of binding losing For a conclusion therfor in a word the commaundement of binding and losing is given to every brother go the promise powre of binding losing is givē to them also as the forsaid places do evince as the charter of a corporatiō is frō the King al the offices have powre from the corporation so the Church hath powre frō Christ the Eldership from the church as the body hath powre from the head the parts of the body have their powre from the body So the church which is Christs body hath powre from Christ the Eldership a part of the body hath powre from the body Ob. 2. A second objection is this that if the powre of binding losing be givē to the body of the Church then powre of preaching administring the seales of the covenant truth we confesse it the church being a corporation committeth powre to administer to such officers as Christ hath apointed to his church viz to the Elders or Bishops stil reserving powre to correct her officers by the same powre of binding losing in admonition excommunication the benefit wherof doth as wel perteyne to the Elders as other of the brethren except it be said the Elders are to be exempted from censures so to want those meanes of Salvation which the brethren have which is a pitiful condition alamentable priviledg Ob. 3. A third ebjection is that the benefit of binding losing of the word seales of the covenant is given to the church al the members but not the powre of thē wherto thus much may be answered viz that the Church viz two or thre faithful ones have as is said the covenant Christ the promises not only in vse but in title possession the faithful have as good powre title or interest
of God polute defile the same But the L. avoucheth by the mouth of his holy Prophets that persons ceremonialy vncleane vnclensed entering vnto the Sanctuary or medling with holy flesh or pottage polute defile them Therfor the visible Church of the new testament morally poluted impenitent in sin dealing with the holy things do profane them therfor no man with good conscience can joyne with that profanation Finally as in the old testament the King Magistrates suffering sin vnpunished were poluted therwith by consent So in the new testament the visible church who are Kings Spiritualy have committed vnto them the judgments of the L. the ministerial powre of Christ suffering sinne vnreformed among them are polluted thereby But in the Old Testament the Kings and Magistrates by your owne confession Mr. Bernard pag. 94. were poluted with sinne vnreformed in the common wealth Therfor in the New Testament the visible Church who are Kings Spiritualy having committed vnto them the judgments of the L. the ministerial powre of Christ suffering sinne vnreformed among them are poluted therby so no communioÌ„ to be had with them least partaking with them in sinne by consent we receave of their plagues Now you se evidently proved by testimonies of Scriptures by direct consequents from the same that it is vnlawful for any man to joyne to a Church that was truly constituted now growne to profane violate the holy things of God by consenting to sin wicked obstinate convinced impenitent sinners that therfor much more is it vnlawful to joyne to your false churches which never were truly constituted since the defectioÌ„ of Antichrist but remaine in the gulfe of Antichristianisme vnto this day the first point therfor being manifest the second foloweth to be enterprised which is to answer the objections cavils which you make against this comfortable truth of the L. I cal it a comfortable truth bicause herin consisteth the true comfort of churches Christians publiquely privately that they neither live in nor consent to any known sin in themselves or other For otherwise seing sinnes corruptions break out dayly in the best Churches Christians herin is our comfor that we give no allowance to them no not so much as by our presence in that communion wher open known sinne is suffered as it is most plentifully and abundantly in your false Churches and in other Churches that are of a true constitution In your objections against this truth the first thing that I reprove is that you do falsely interpret consent to sin for a man may consent to sin though he in judgment affection contenaÌ„ce action do declare his dislike of it as for exaÌ„ple Ely did al this to his sonnes that poluted the L. Sacrifices coÌ„mitted adultery with the weomen that came to sacrifice 1. SaÌ„ 2.22.23 for he should have proceded to the vtmost that the word of God had required at his haÌ„ds viz to have put his soÌ„nes to death which bicause he did not he was poluted with their sinnes by conseÌ„t therfor the fearful judgmeÌ„t of God befel him which whsooever heard both their eares tingled 1. Sa. 3.11 so except a maÌ„ do by al meÌ„ anes save himself from the froward generation by Seperating himself as the Apostle practised counselleth Act. 2.4 19.9 2. cor 6.17 he cannot be fre fro the contagion of their sin 〈◊〉 the profanation of al the Holy things of God For these places doe evidently declare thâ—â— Paul the Apostles not only commaund to seperate from the Gentils but froÌ„ the Iewes who were the true Church of God now growing obstinate in sinne so practised themselves commaunding the Disciples training them vp by his example so to do so teaching vs to follow his example herein In the next place you proceed to declare by divers reasons such as they are that to joyne to the holy things when obstinate impenitent sinners partake in them is no sinne your first reason is For that in the old Testament ther was no Sacrifice appointed for this Ergo it is no sinne I deny the antecedent I declare the contrary by the examples of the tribe of Bemjamin consenting to the sinne of adultery committed vppon the Levites concubine Iudg. 19. 20. of the tribes of Israel fearing lest wrath should fal vppon them for suffering their brethren to make another altar to forsake the true worship of God as they suspected Iosh. 22. of Achans sin which brought wrath vppon the whole congregation VVherefore in the law the Lord did appoint a Sacrifice for the whole congregation aswell as for any particular person Levitt 4.13 A Second reason of yours is For that in the Old Testament the Godly are never reproved for being present at the ministration of holy things though wicked men were present but the Prophets reprove the Preists only for not Seperating the cleane from the vncleane wherto I answer that their communion was typical therfor persons typically cleane though wicked in their lives might come to Sacrifice yet not pollute others as I have already sufficiently declared in the former Section besides whereas the Prophets reprove the Preists the Saints in the new Testament succeed the carnal Preists as Spiritual Preists therby it followeth that the Saints in the new Testament are polluted by not distinguishing seperating the cleane from the vncleane see these places of Scripture Ezech. 22.26 compared with Revel 1.6 11.1 Iude vs 23.2 Cor. 6.17 But stil some may object that in the old Testament they did pray preach praise God yet notwithstaÌ„ding the faithful herein were not defiled if the wicked did joyne with them in communion thereof therfor now vnder the new Testament though meÌ„ do joyne in communion with open known sinne suffer known sinne yet may be saynts vnpolluted in communion this is the very pith warrow of your second abjection Mr. Bern. wherto I make answer many waies First I deny him to be a Saynt or that he ought to be esteemed a Saynt of vs that is impenâ—tent in any knowne sinne Knowne I say to him For I may know it to be a sinne yet bicause he knoweth it not so to be he cannot be accounted impenitent though he live in it sith ignorance is a sinne whereof a man repenteth generaly so in his generall repentance of sinnes done of ignorance that particular sinne is included Secondly I am to judg of another according to that which I know according to the rule of the word therin wherfor if i know any of my brethren to live in any sinne knowne to me I must admonish him prove it to him to be sinne require his repentance if he repent not to take withnesses theÌ„ to admonish him before withnesses so to convince it againe to his conscience if he repent not then to tel it to the Church wher