above all things plead the necessity and alone sufficiency of the Righteousness of Jesus Christ for our Justification But to restore your words to their own channell you say that since all must be condemned if God enter into judgement therefore God gave his Son unto the death for us that thereby we might obtain Salvation And though by this passage it be clearly enough imported that it is before God and by the sentence of his Law that all men stand condemned and that therefore he hath given his Son whose Death and Bloud is the Propitiation and in whom he is well pleased to be a ransome for liberation and acceptation to all that believe on him whereby Justification by faith in Jesus Christ without the deeds of the Law is in substance granted yet for ushering in your good works to share with faith in Justification by a strange connexion you subjoin And all judgement is committed by the Father to the Son and Iesus Christ hath proposed life through his death to as many as receive his Gospell and live according to it But I must take notice 1. That by laying down the commission of judgement given to the Son as a ground to his proposing of the Gospel offer you manifestly repugne to our Lords own words and testimony expressly distinguishing the character of his first coming which was in the form of a servant to minister not to be ministered unto and by performing the Fathers commandment to save the World and not to judge it from that of his second coming which shall be with power and great glory to the Salvation of all that look for him and to judge and to execute judgement upon all that are ungodly 2. By making our Lords commission to judge antecedent to his ministration of the Gospel you invert Truth and plain Scripture-evidence whereby it is clear that our Lord was first sent into the World to preach the Gospel and lay down his life for sinners that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life And then because of his compleat and perfect obedience is exalted to be the Head of all things unto the Church and hath Authority also to execute judgement committed to him because he is the Son of Man But. 3. By this your doctrine you in effect subvert the grace of the Gospel in as much as in the place of the Gospel-covenant offering pardon and peace to poor lost sinners through Christ Jesus and with and in him all grace and glory you introduce our Lord as having by his death indeed merited the privilege of a new offer of life unto sinners but making and renewing the same in no better termes then these of the Law-covenant for as the Law sayeth that the man that doth these things shall live by them so you tell us that the termes of the Gospel-tender are to receive the same and live according to it Now if the Law doth offer life to such as receive and live according to it and our Lords proposal stand in the like termes admit the proposers not to be the same yet the proposals are certainly coincident and therefore although the eternal transaction betwixt the Father and the Son may be of Grace yet it is undeniable that in your opinion the tenders of the Law and Gospel as to us-ward do rune in the same tenor and the condescendence of both prerequiring our works is equally to be reckoned of debt These being the consequences of that Gospel-method by you here contrived and its designe no less evident to make works with saith the condition and procuring cause of our Iustification at least in the sight of Christ as the Judge appointed I add 1. That your attributing of Iustification to Christ as judge ordained over all in the last judgement is contrary to the Scripture that telleth us that it is one God that justifieth it is Christ that died marke the distinction made and no doubt reason it self informing us that it is the Law and Law-giver and not the Judge which define dutie determine paines and condemne the transgressors poenae enim persecution non Iudicis voluntati mandatur sed legis authoritati reservatur It doth also confirm that it appertaines unto God only as the Law-giver to remit the punishment incurred and accept and justify sinners upon an aequipollent satisfaction 2. The Authority to execute judgement being given to our Lord as the Mediator and because he is the Son of Man in which respect he is not the principal Author and efficient but only the meritorious cause of our Iustification not the very act but only the solemn declaration thereof can be ascrived to him in this capacity unless you can conceive that our Lord is not only both the Ransome and the accepter thereof but that by becoming the Propitiation he also becometh the partie to be appeased which are palpably inconsistent 3. The plain Scripture-truth in this point is that our Lord having compleatly obeyed the will of God and being made perfect through suffering is therefore highly exalted above every name and hath all power and judgement committed to him whereby as he doth here in time enrich with all Grace guid support and preserve all that beleeve in him and also over-rule restrain and punish all his and their Adversaries so shal he in the last day appear first to receive and welcome all his redeemed ones formerly justified by his Righteousnesse and sanctified by his Grace unto his Fathers joy And then with them to judge the reprobate and take vengeance on all that know not God and obey not the Gospel by which it is evident that Justification proceeding from God for Christs sake and necessarily preceeding both our Sanctification here and Glorification in the last day cannot be referred unto that judgement which is only declarative and executive according to these words Come ye blessed of my Father nor explicate according to its scheme And therefore although our Lord do therein for our encouragement in well doing and the commendation of the riches of his bountie make mention of our good works and shall certainly in that day also crown his own free grace in us with a reward yet thence to inferre that our Justification before God and in order to his holy justice having for its alone cause the Righteousnes of Jesus Christ and imported in the compellation ye blessed of my Father is founded on our weak love and scant charity which even the Righteous in that day seeme ashamed to owne is both a groundless error and high presumption But I proceed to your next words viz. That Christ Iesus hath proposed life through his death to as many as receive his Gospel and live according to it That this is a manifest perversion of the free Grace of God whereby our Lord Jesus doth freely hold out himself unto us not only for to be our Righteousnesse for Justification but also our Sanctification through his Spirit unto the glory of God and therefore
contradiction which you alledge it is for fallible men to say it seems good to the Holy Ghost is abundantly salved both by the infallible rule of the word to which they are astricted and by the never-failing promise of him who is the Truth and will be with his own to the end of the world And your lapse in this objection is but the same with your former against Ministers their calling their Preaching the Word of God which I have already fully confuted And thus I hope all impartial Men may see that the jus divinum being in this matter our rule the Independants have not the better of us as you groundlesly give out Next you proceed to challenge our Discipline and what warrant we have for it but seing as to the substance you are satisfyed by your N. C. Answere from the Excommunicating the Incestuous Person and the noteing these that walk disorderly together with his caetera which you may finde very clearly amplifyed by many able Men and do only fall a nibling at the circumstances of publick Repentance Why so many dayes which might be questioned of any number And why in a place of repentance And Why sometimes the use of Sack-cloath all well enough answered by your N. C. his telling you of the power of order in external Circumstances given to the Church for Edification I come to weigh the stollen advantage that you flatter your self to have gained over your poor Adversarie which you carry onâ— with the like questions As 1. Why may the Church impose such days of penitence and not as well order to all for the sins of the year the penitence of Lent 2. Why is a part separate for Penitents and not for communicating and thirdly Why may not a Church-man officiat in a Surplice as-well as a penitent put on Sack-cloth and that the simple may fancie a pungencie in these empty conceits you make your N. C. confess a surprisall and refuge himself in a childish implicite belief of his Ministers ability above his own whereupon you so vainly triumphe that I am ashamed to represent such a mean piece of pageantrie but to the matter dayes are assigned to Penitents because time being a necessary requisite and its lengthening or shortening very conducible for the end of publick Penitence the edification of the Church the deterring of others and the through convincing and gaining of the person according to either the quality of the offence or condition of the Offender its prudent regulation as of a matter therefore left undefined can no more be denyed to the Church then the exacting of Penitence it self but as for your expiatory quarantam of Lent as it bears no parity to the reason by me adduced so it imports such a delay of repentance hardening in sin encrease of Superstition and relaxing again to Licentiousness that it is hard to say whether its appointment be more groundless or its effects pernicious If you object its first rise and occasion from the wel-meaning observance of pious Men I will not tell you that the samine flowed from their mistake of our Lords total and Miraculous abstinence by the space of 40 dayes neither by himself repeated nor by his Apostles imitated Nor what a superstructure of vanity may be built on such foundations but when you consider its great depravation and bad fruits I hope you will easily incline to say What is the chaff to the wheat The invention of Man to the Ordinance of God 2. A place is separate for Penitents that they may be Noted Rebuked and Ashamed that others may fear but to separate a place for Communicating more then is done by us in the time of the Administration what shadow of reason can be adduced for it Specially after the Idolatrous superstition whereunto it hath been abused and from which unto this day mens mindes are not throughly purged Witnes these Superstitious Bowings Cringins and Kneelings which your English Prelatick-Church doth still retain As to the third point I will not say that where the Surplice in tâ—ken of Innocencie is most used the Sack-cloth of Penitence would be more agreeable Nor may I stand to shew you the Usurpation and evils of Mens imposing Significant Ceremonies others have done this already unanswerably but the Disparity which I finde in your inference is that Sack-cloth in Penitence for Grosser sins was by us appointed though not universally and constantly practised not as properly Significant either of the Penitents guilt or remorse seeing it hath to neither any suitable report but as that which being at first the squallid neglect flowing from and thence becoming the customable effect of deep and bitter mourning might be both a humbliâ—ng badge to the delinquent and a mean of fear to others whereas your Surplice is arbitrarily institute and imposed to signify Innocencie without either reall foundation or sufficient warrant wherein whether you do more usurp against God's Prerogative to appoint Sacred and mysterious Signes and that simplicitie in which he hath set forth his Gospel or be more grosly mistaken in the event and fruit of your application is a great question I grant that Necessity or Decence have introduced many things circumstanâ—ial that are rational and consequently upon some real antecâ—dent ground expressive of their use and end as grave apparel in Pastors a becoming covering of Pulpits Tables in sacred use regulation of time postures gestures and the like without which woâ—ship cannot be performed but to ascribe a liberty to the Church of appointing Ceremonies having for reason of their signification the will of the Instituter and their use only in the representation is so manifest an impingement upon Divine Authority and the Sacraments thereby oâ—dained and hath already produced such a mass of Superstitious superfluity in the Romish-Church that I much admire to finde a serious Person pleading for such fopperies specially seing that this once granted and common Resemblances sustained for good warrants not only all Christians might be put to yearâ— at least to assemble alwayes in their whites but all the Allâ—gories in Scripture as the drinking in of the sincere milk of the word stand thereforâ— having your loins girt c. And hundreds more may be turned unto such vain shows yea all Imagerie more probably allowed where you say that both Surplice and sack-cloth were equally practised under the Law I must by the waâ— tell you that I finde not Sack-cloth therein commanded as a solemn significant Ceremonie I say commanded as a solemne Ceremonie for that you finde it not only mentionâ—d as the ordinary concomitant of more grievous mournings nay by the Prophets even literally commanded as also baldnes sitting in the dust â—owling and wallowing in ashes the better to express that serious mourning whereunto the Loâ—d did call is plainly obvious and can only inferre that therefore and after this manner it is the more capable to be still contained And for the Surplice or rather the white linen and the Ephods
it is that as our Lords posture in eating the Passe-over whatever it was was not contrary to the Divine prescription so the Iews their practice acknowledged by you to have been the same can be no ground for your Superstitious innovation of Kneeling introduced contrary to our Lords example the Rule of the institution and both introductive of and tending to plain Idolatrie As for that greater liberty allowed to Christians which you here plead as we have already heard that you only alledge our liberty from the former rigor to the effect you may impose your new yoke of a more iâ—rational bondage so it is evident that in this plaâ—e you mention our freedome of Gesture on purpose 〈◊〉 you may enslave us to the imposition of your Superstitious Kneeling but he truely walketh at liberty who keepeth the Lords Commandments You shut up this Article with a perhaps that more veneration is due to this action now that our Saviour is exalted then he could have allowed of in his humiliation But. 1. the veneration that you here speak of to the action sufficiently intimateth that for all the pretenses made in the contraire the Kneeling which you plead for is in some sort relative to the Elements therein used and therefore Idolatrous 2. your perhaps unsoundly insinuats that our Lord could not have allowed of the same adoration now due to him in Exaltation in the state of his Humiliation which you know to be false 3. at best it is a conjectural intruding into these things which you have nor seen and so not meriting any regard In the last place you treat of the Article anent the observing of dayes and denying that you pretend to make them holy dayes you tell us that it is another thing to keep peculiar dayes of thanksgiving for the great and signal mercies of the Gospel-dispensation and in such customes you can apprehend no evill and really Sir I am confident you have seen as little good but to be short remitting what may be said against this Article to the pious and learned Labours of these Authors which I have already commended I only add that although the construction which you put upon this observation of dayes is certainly the most plausible that can be made yet you know so well how grossly these dayes have in the Roman Church been abused to superstition and profanity both in their dedication and observation And it is so obvious to any how to this day the generality in these Reformed Churches where they are observed do in the persvasion as well as practice continue the same abuse that I think since they are only an humane invention not good in itself your own rule p. 70. that when such things are grossly abused then there is ground to change their use may fully satisfy you as to the justice and reason of our dissent But you affirme confidently that in all Ages of the Church Christians have had a peculiar veneration for these dayes 'T is answered a veneration for these dayes how doth this language agree with the above mentioned interpretation whereby reducing these dayes to the condition of a meere circumstance of a constant Anniversary thanksgiving you go about to purge them of all further Superstition But this wind of your vanity can not he hid it is as the ointment of the right hand which bewrayeth it self 2. These dayes were not in veneration in the first and purest Age of the Church whereby both the generality of your assertion and your argument from Antiquity are subverted you tell us that the observation of Easter and Pentecost are clearly derived from Apostolical practices what you understand by Apostolical practices concernes me not seing that the Apostles and Church in their times knew no such thing And this Negative proving it self cannot be controlled I grant the succeding Ages became soon fond of these vanities but what were the bitter fruites of contention and schisme which the Lord in his justice did suffer this earely corruption to produce is notourly known and certainly such as alone might have taught the whole ensuing generations to be more tender of Gospel purity and simplicity Shall we then also refuse instruction But you say Paul hasted to be at Jerusalem to keep the feast of Pentecost Pray Sir be more sincere all we find in Scripture is that he hasted to be at Ierusalem the day of Pentecost And I appeal to common ingenuity if that any rational man considering Paul to be a Iew and to hasten against one of their three great Feasts and Convocations then by the Iews still observed to his own Countrey and its Metropolis where the general and solemne confluence of his whole Nation was to meet can thence conclude that he went thither to keep the Feast of Pentecost in the meaning by you insinuate and requisite to your purpose In the last place you tell us that Paul sayeth of the legall holy dayes he that regardeth a day to the Lord he doth regard it Whence you inferre that if Moses his Feasts might have been kept holy to the Lord much more may these be which the Church hath institute Really I am so wearied with this poor stuff that civility forgetting it to be your own doth almost prompt me to demand your pardon for resuming it The Apostle Paul in that Chapter is most expressly declaring our Christian Liberty and its right use and in the case of a weak Brother esteeming one day above another belike from the difference made by Moses Law he only adviseth that he be fully perswaded in his own minde and seing he regardeth it unto the Lord he would not have him therefore judged Now tell me plainly is this either the case or the controversie betwixt us Are Bishops the weak Brethren from the abiding impress of a Divine dispensation fulfilled and evanishing but not expressly antiquat tenderly and conscientiously over-esteeming and regarding certain dayes and therefore only pleading a charitable forbearance Or lastly Seing the Bishops do not only without warrant keep up these superstitious observations but peremptorily enjoin and impose them upon others whereas the Apostle in the same place doth both declare our Liberty and with equal care prescribe that seing he that regardeth not the day to the Lord he doth not regard it that therefore he should not be judged Are they not by the very Text here alledged manifestly convicted But it is enough And whether our dislike of these Festivals and the other Articles of Perth be not well grounded and your observing and enjoyning of them both Superstitious and irrational I leave it to the judgement of all the Lovers of Truth The sixth DIALOGUE Answered SIR To this conference very visibly contrived for the commendation of your self and your way and wherein pretending by sublime speculations and the swelling words of a faire profession to elevat Souls to the solid hights and true liberty of Christianity you plainly go about to introduce a regardless indifferencie for all
God as the great Judge attempeâ—ing justice with mercie doth thereby accept of a Ransome and Surety offered and therefore absolve yea justify the Criminal and yet notwithstanding of the evident Scripture testimonies that shew the Lord our Righteousness to be in very deed this Ransome and Surety and faith only its instrumental application to join good works with it and state both as the condition of our Justification is not only reproved by the Papists their more consequent explication who because they admit of works in Justification do therefore hold it not to be a judicial act but rather a gracious work but by the common sense of all men in these similare instances from which the manner of explaining these things is borrowed If in our ordinarie Courts the Law being transgressed and the transgressor convicted the pronouncing of the doome of judgement and its execution were stopt by the interposition of a ransome and surety offered so fully satisfying and acceptable in the eyes of the judge that for his sake the poor Criminal were both pardoned and received to special favour would any rational man say that the person guilty were thus absolved and justifyed either for his act of laying claime to the price and pledge as a condition seing it is only the moral instrument whereby the true motive of the ransomers satisfaction is applyed or yet for the act it self together with the absolved person his consequent good behaviour which is the parallel of your interpretation which is yet more absurd And not rather affirme plainly that it is for the ransome and surety only that the man is acquit and accepted Certainly common ingenuity which must acknowledge all the defects of this similitude to be the manifest advantages of the point principally pressed will both cede to the conviction of its evidence aud transferre it plainly to the case in hand Having thus set down a Scriptural and easie account of this important truth which reflecting upon almost all Protestant Divines with whom in this we agree and wandering in your raveries after no better guid then Patrick the Pilgrim you say is by us handled with much niceness and subtilty for it s further clearing and the better discoverie of your vanity I shal now examine your discourse in its particulars and 1. you say Iustification and Condemnation are two opposite legal termes By legal I know you mean judicial and therefore in place of urging your mistake I seriously wish that the tenor of what ensues had been consistent to so true and solid a ground but you add That they relate to the judgement shall be given out at the last day a strange fetch to compasse a false designe I might remember you that the Scripture is express That being justifyed by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ and there is now therefore no condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus who by their assured partaking of his grace and in consequence of their true faith in him and Justification therethrough walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit and that thence it is evident that as it is God that judgeth so it is by an act of his free grace in Jesus Christ antecedent to the last judgement that we are reconciled unto him and justified in his sight But your own words viz. For though we are said to be now justified as the unbeleeving are said to be condemned already this is only that we are now in the state of such as shall be solemnly justified or condemned do sufficiently reprove you because 1. It is certain that the unbelieving are not improperly and with respect only to that future judgement said to be condemned already but as by reason of sin judgement is already come upon all unto condemnation and he that beleeveth not the Son shall not see life is under the curse and the wrath of God abideth on him so it is manifest that now it is that they stand truely under the condemning power and sentence of Gods holy Law from which it is most unquestionable that condemnation doth directly proceed against all transgressours however in the forbearance of God they are not only for a time reprived but place left for a ransome 2. To be justified freely through grace doth plainly import the person justified to be antecedently under condemnation if by the offence judgement had not come upon all to condemnation there had been no need of the Righteousnes of Christ to the Iustification of life How then can the opposite instance of Condemnation be by your referred unto the last day Far less made an argument to deferre untill that judgement our Iustification which of necessity doth presuppose it Certainly you cannot but grant it to be most absurd to think that Believers shall in that day be first condemned and thereafter justified 3. When you say That it is in that day that men shall be solemnly justified or condemned you clearly resolve the matter viz. that as the solemnity of the judgement of that day shall be only declarative and finally executive so it evidently concludes that the judgement then to be pronounced was given and established of before Pray Sir do you think the Spirits of just men made perfect are not as yet justified But 4. you grant that we are now in the state of such as shall be solemnily justified or condemned which clearly shews your insinuation premised to be only a designe to obscure by words without knowledge in as much as the question remains the same anent this state and how we now attaine to it as anent the justification which you would deferre And 1. What is the state of Iustification Is it not that we who were under the Curse and aliens are accepted unto favour pardoned and brought near Wherein doth it then differ from actual Iustification 2. How is it that we attain to this state Sure not by works either alone or in conjunction with faith as we have heard from Scripture and shall be further evinced But if it be by faith alone as the instrument laying hold on the sole meritorious Righteousnes of Christ our difference is only verbal wherein you foolishly resile from Scripture phrase If you shall further add that by faith we do indeed attain to this state but only inchoatly or unfixedly and changeably then you evidently impinge both upon the perfection of Christs Righteousnes and the faire and certain grounds of the Saints their perseverance It followeth in your discourse Now at the great day we must give an account of our actions and we must be judged accordingly And I note in your ensuing words That since all must be condemned if God enter into judgement with them and that not only if he should charge us with our transgressions but even if he should only reckon with us upon our good works and for that imperfection and weakness wherewith as they are from us they are tainted doth not the certainty of this judgement
this point of more knowledge then your self who proving it by the point ordinarily set after the figures of the year of God would have the following restriction only to concerne the Acts and Lawes generally annulled But as it is evident that the point maketh no period and protestant Religion contained in that Act. 1592. Should be vacated and annulled so the obvious tenor of the words together with the sense of the Parl. Anno. 1662. Who in the new establishment of your Prelacy did judge it convenient to the grounds therein laid down to rescind de novo that old Act in all its heads clauses and Articles whatever might be the consequence do abundantly elide this conceit However I do again tell you that our consciences in this matter are better founded and not squared to such mutable rules And therefore seeing our grounds are firme and stable let me in the words of your own exhortation obtest you and your party to consider your way better cease from your persecution repent of your apostasy and usurpation and return into favour with God and union with us Now follows a childish quarrel between you and your N. C. anent the tenderness of your love and prayers in our behalf above that measure which we use towards you and 1. You say wo should be to you and you N. C. If the love of God to you did appear in such effects as the love of some of ours doth the invidious strain of their prayers being universally that God would bring you down destroy the incorrigible and shew the rest the evill of there defection but you say how would we take it if you should pray that God would destroy our party and shew us the evill of our Rebellion and other wicked courses 'T is answered 1. Seeing that wo shall certainly be unto all such and they are far from the love of God who are incorrigible that God by making manifest his righteous judgments would glorify his own Name and deliver his Church from such adversaries is a prayer clearly warranted both from the word and the practice of the Saints nor is it in the least discordant from that Christian charity whereby I am really moved earnestly to desire the Lord to deliver you and all both from the thing and its punishment 2. That God would bring down the proud that exalt themselves against Jesus Christ and give repentance to backsliders is a prayer so agreeable to the will of God and full of love to the persons prayed for that I am certain whatever may be said against our principles which I remit to the impartial discerner yet our practice in this as being both tenderly Christian and fairly consequent cannot but be approven 3. Mistake not if you should pray for us in the same strain we might possibly and with great reason account it an aggravation of the evils of your other principles and practices but we are not so narrow as to construe it a particular breach of charity Nay for my part as I would think it rationally consequent so abstracting from the errors which it supposâ—th I would take it for the greatest testimony both of your zeal toward God and love toward us But if I may use a little freedome why do you please your self so much in vain talk though we hear not many of your prayers yet I am sure all know that we want not plenty of matter and instances for a retortion in what termes soever you please to frame your challenge are we so short in memory as not to remember how your pulpits sounded both in preaching and prayer after the late rising and that not only against these poor broken innocents but in such a manner against our whole party as by false and fierce accusing of all without distinction might almost have excused in them the like attempt to save from that fury that thundered every where If you would have any latter and more particular instances pray inquire after the B. of St. Andrew's Sermons specially that preached by him the 30 of Jan. 1669. and the other before the last Parliament you complain of the severe stile of our prayers he good man being ill satisfied with such soft and aâ—rie tooles and having passionately fumed out a most bitter invective against our Presbyterian Ministers not long since his brethren and benefactors did very agreeably close it in these words these are circumforaneous Demagogues acted by a spirit otherwise to be cast out then by fasting and prayer But what need I mention your prayers when indeed many of your practices have most visibly been such as may justly make your fairest words suspected of the deepest dissimulation I know some of you have a fashion of praying that God would unite this poor Church and heall our breaches But if that be all the evidence you can bring to shew the healing and peaceable spirit to be on your side Pray tell me why the Church of Rome that may boast as much of the same formula may not as justly pretend to it I might further adde that it appears to be no extraordinary merit for such as are countenanced by the Powers and do Idolize peace and ease to wish for an union with any whom they apprehend to be their opposits and that perhaps the more sober amongst you for all their compliance under the tentation yet are not so far abandoned as that they dare in Gods sight justifie there defection and pray against the party and courses which they know they did not desert from any conscientious conviction But I have insisted too long on so poor a subject and I can in your own words assure you that we are not only ready to unite with you but are extremly though not implicitly desirous of it and do therefore dayly pray that God would open your eyes reclaim you from your backslidings and grant unto us union and peace in truth to his glory This is the Accommodation that is only desireable if you pursue any other I am certain that however it may be consonant to your designes yet it is altogether dissonant from your proâ—ession and therefore if we be more rational and upright to hate all sinfull Accomodation and rather to wish that our differences may stand and be perpetuat in the behalf of truth then cemented by a sinful compliance wherein are we to be reprehended Now that this is all that we teach in this matter the same books which you referre to do testify and that it is none other then the very doctrine of the School of Christ the frequent Scripture-injunctions to the defence of and stedfastness in the truth with the commands of a just opposition to and avoiding of every false way and its promoters do sufficiently evince But you adde Let all men judge if there be not a bitterness in the Preface to Masâ—er Rutherfoords letters the Apologetical Narration and Naphtali unsampled in any satire let be grave and Christian writing Sir since you are pleased to
by their own interest to teach this doctrine of peace It is not many weeks since the chief of your Fathers as you terme them preaching before the King's Commissioner and many members of Parliament on that Text Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace told his hearers in the very entrie that the particular rules of mutual for bearance and tendernesse given in that Scripture by the Apostle were only convenient for the then state of that Church wanting a Christian Magistrate But now there being a Christian Magistrat his authoritie should quiet all scruples and might not be demurred by these pretenses and going on to show that the only way to peace is to allow to the King not only an outward coercive power but also an inward directive architecktonick uncontrollable power O fear the Lord all ye his Saints over conscience in the matters of Worship with much ado as eye and ear witnesses do attest he stammered through a part of the first chapter of a new Piece entituled a Discours of Ecclesiastical policie And thus he delivered to us the very same doctrine of peace which in several places of your Dialogues you do very plainly hold out Whether or not then it be in the same principle and for the same end that ye do here pray for peace love and charity let men judge For our part your power riches and dignities in themselves to say the truth the very meenest of these trifles are by us neither coveted nor envied Our souls desire and earnest prayer to God both in your and our own behalfe is that God would open our eyes turne back our hearts heal our backslidings and restore unto us his Gospel and blessed Ordinances in power and purity O turne us again Lord God of hosts cause thy face to shine and we shall be saved then shall Glory dwell in our Land mercy and truth meet and righteousnesse and truth kisse each other then should the work of the Lord appear unto his servants and the beauty of the Lord our God even peace unity and love be upon us As for these Scriptures wherewith you second your wish for peace Were I not more tender in opposing Scripture to Scripture then you are in abusing it to your own designe it were easie for me to repay your admonition to love by a more seasonable exhortation to you of repentance But since the very consideration of the words by you cited may rectify your misapplication my single desire is that you had pondered or could yet ponder them If there be therefore any consolation in Christ if any comfort of love if any fellowship of the Spirit if any bowels and mercies let us fulfil the Lords joy that we be first of a sound minde then like minded having the same love being of one accord of one minde Let nothing be done through strife or vain glory a short discharge of all the pride persecution and pompe of your prelatick order but in lowlinesse of minde let each esteeme others better then themselves Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among us let him show out of a good conversation his◠works with meeknesse of wisdome But if you have bitter zeal or envying For seeing that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wanting this adjunct signifieth also envie without the least reflection upon that holy zeal of God's house which is said to eat up even the pattern of meekness Prince of peace your poor criticisme in altering the translation shewes more of your malice then your learning and strife in your hearts glory not and lye not against the truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be Zealous there fore and repent of your perjurie and Covenant breaking this wisdome descendeth not from above but is earthly sensual and devilish for where zeal or envying The word is indeed still the same and so is your folly in this remarke and strife is there is confusion and every evill work But the wisdome that is from above is first pure then peaceable not first peaceable and then impure as that of your partie is Gentle and easie to be entreated full of mercie and good fruits without partiality and without hypocrisie O desirable quality And the fruit of righteousnesse is sowen in peace of them that make peace Let us put on therefore as the elect of God holy and beloved bowels of mercies kindnesse humblenesse of minde meeknesse long-suffering forbearing one another and forgiving one another if any man have a quarrel against any even as Christ forgave us so let us do and above all things put on charity which is the bond of perfectness And let the peace of God rule in our hearts to the which also we are called in one body and let us be thankfull Let the word of Christ dwell in us richly in all wisdome teaching and admonishing one another in Psalmes and Hymns and Spiritual songs singing with grace in our hearts to the Lord and whatsoever we do in word or deed pray observe this fundamental direction Let us do all in the name of the Lord Iesus What shall we then say to these who in the Bond to the Publict Peace would not admit the name of the Lord to be mentioned Giving thanks to God and the Eather by him In all this I wish we were sincerily agreed And that these words were more deeply infixed in our mindes for I confesse I am wearie of vain janglings as much as you are and do long for truth and peace as much as you do for your much courted peace and indeed there is nothing that doth so much portend the Lords displeasure and imminent wrath as that not any pleadeth for truth they trust in vanity and speak lies they conceive mischief and bring forth iniquitie they hatch cockatrice eggs and weave the spiders web he that eateth of their eggs dieth and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper their works are works of iniquitie and the act of violence is in their hand they do much love outward peace but the way of peace they know not and there is no judgement in their goings they have made them crooked Pathes whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace Therefore is judgement far from us and justice doth not overtake us we waite for light but behold obscurity for brightness bot we walk in darkness for our transgressions are multiplied before thee and our sins testifie against us for our transgressions are with us and as for our iniquities we know them in transgressing and lying against the Lord and departing away from our God speaking oppression and revolt conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falshood and judgement is turned away backward and justice standeth afar off for truth is fallen in the street and equity cannot enter yea truth faileth and he that departeth from evill maketh himself a prey Whether you or your N. C. account these words to proceed from a fretted minde or not I know not sure I am
subordination of the parts unto the whole in matters pertaining and relating to the body and concerning its end are the inseparable propriâ—ties and privilege of a Society is evident aâ—ove exception which argument is the more confirmed that in the acts of the Apostles we finde the Church assembling and by Common Counsel managing its affaires and determining differences not by any speciall and expresse warrant or command but meerly in the exercise of this intrinsick power competâ—nt to the Church as gathered and erected in one Society This right then and power of meetings being undeniable to the whole by the same reason precedent they are confirmed to the parts the Subordination whereof to the whole cannot be drawn in doubt Thus you see how your own grant affirmeth what you dâ—ny but your N. C. answeres further That they at Antioch send up to them at Jerusalem And are not the Spirits of the Prophets subject to the Prophets To these Scriptures you reply beginning with the last That it is clear that in that place the Apostle is speaking of Pâ—râ—chial Churches which subjection none deny But Sir is not that which you call in question the Subordination of Sessions to Presbyteries Now if the Apostle tell us That the Spirit of the Prophets who in the dayes oâ— the Apostles had many of them charge pro indiviso jointly over the same Church but now a dayes have their distinct charges over Parochial Churches are subject to the Prophets gathered in one assembly may not the Subordination questioned be sufficiently thence concluded especially seing I can hardly suppose you so Anti-episcopal as to be Independant and still to doubt after the many irrefragable demonstrations given by the Presbyterians whether this Church of Corinth was a Presbyterial and not a meer Congregational or Parochial Church As for what else may be in your return I confesse I reach it not seeing that at the time of the Apostles writing we finde no divided Parishes and to fancie that the subjection spoken of waâ— of the Prophets in one Parochial Church such as at that time there was properly none and not rather of the many Prophets having the charge pro indiviso jointly over the whole company of the Beleevers in that Citie in which many parishes were virtually included is groundless and absurd To the first instance you say It is ridiculous to urge it seing they of Antioch sent not up to Jerusalem either as to a Church superior or as to an Oecumenick Councel but to men there who were immediatly inspired That they sent not up as to an Oecumenick Councel I cannot dissent from you seing I finde in the Text no suitable concurse for or vestige of such an Assembly but that they sent not up as to a Church superior is by you ill asserted and worse proved seing 1. The phrases in the letter sent from that meeting that certain which went out from us and it seemed good c. to lay upon you and that the same letter is termed a Decree do clearly prove a superior Authority in the writers 2. Because the example which ye adduce from the jews their high Priest for confirming your Gloss doth plainly redargue you in as much as the Jews consulted not the high Priest his Urim and Thummim without regard to his Authority but consulted him as the high Priest and the Person to whom God had therefore committed them Deut. 17. v. 10. 11. 12. putting them in the breast-plate termed of judgement and not of Responses But you may say supposing the matter was thus carried what makes it for your Assemblies I Answere yes very much for it sheweth 1. That if the Apostles who all of them severally were immediatly inspired and so might have determined this controversie did notwithstanding join with other ordinary Elders or Churchâ—officers and by common counsel give out their Decrees that common Councels their authority in the Church are juris Divini 2. That as the Church of Antioch in which the Apostle Paul Barnabas and several other Prophets wereâ— and the other Churches in Asia received and submitted to the decrees so it evidently intimats a subordination of these making as it were one Provincial Church to that great Assembly of the Apostles Elders conveened at Ierusalem You subjoin in this place That if that meeting at Jerusalem was a Councel then all Councels may speak in their stile it seems good to the Holy Ghost c. It 's answered 1. The connexion oâ— your proposition containeth an obvious non sequitur in as much as it is not from their being a Councel but from the certainty of these Scripture evidences whereupon their determination proceeds that their prefacing of the minde and sentencâ— of the holy Ghost doth flow 2. That that meeting was a Councel of the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem a conveened in one to Consulte Reason and exercise Authority which severally was not so satisfying â—or the very Apostles to do notwithstanding of their immediâ—â—e assistance is plain from the Text especially Pauls deference to them 3. If you imagine that Ecclesiastick Councels cannot be of Divine right unlesse they have the Spirits absolute and infallible assistance you erre as grossly as he who for want of this infallibility should deny to the Church a standing Minâ—strie by Divine institution 4. Though the infallible guidance of the Holy Ghost given to the Apostles aâ—d being to them in stead of the rule was indeed singular and extraordinary Yet as the Lord to all his Ordinances hath annexed the promise of an agreeable presence which doth not fail the sincere and faithfull improvers so Church Assemblies in matters of Faith to them committed and following the rule thereto prescribed are also thereby countenanced and in sound beleeving and upright walking may both attain to and profess their assurance of the Holy Ghosts assistance 5â— Seing that all Councel-acts and Canons anent matters of Faith ought to be guided by the Spirit and conform to the word of God and enacted and emitted in this persuasion these Meetings that truly keeping the rule and sincerely laying hold on the promise do proceed in their determinations may therein warrantably use the Apostles words and such as do otherwayes are only culpable in the presumptuous usurpation because they have not rightly followed and in effect attained unto the rule of the Word and the conduct of the Spirit which ought indeed to be their warrant 6. Having on these clear grounds declared the Authority of Ecclesiastick Meetings in Matters of Faith I freely grant that in other things which may be incident to their cognition and are not of Faith nor defined in Scripture they have neither the like warrant nor may they use the like expressions and therefore as in this case they cannot found upon the Lords Commandments so they are only to be respected as such who are intrusted to give their judgement and have obtained mercie of the Lord to be faithfull 7. The