for which we shall heartily pray we cannot but judge that such as are within our bounds and live as lawlesse persons contemning the commands of God and so out of their rank and order and of which sort you deny not but that there may be some among us however they be subject to Law and the punishment of the Civil Sword as needs they must be yet being such as are justly censurable according to the rules of our Government we do not think they are thereby exempted from being reached by that Ecclesiastical Sword as you phrase it which both God and the Civil Authority hath intrusted us with And as we are farre from contemning the Authority of the Civil Magistrate and shall therefore out of due respect unto it and that the lawlesse might be curbed be ready not onely our selves as we have a call but also warn others as there may be occasion to make complaint to the Civil Power that so such offenders may be punished by corporal and pecuniary mulcts to the suppression of wickednesse and licentiousnesse and the Reformation of mens lives and manners Yet we do not apprehend why this should hinder us from warning the Members of our several Congregations to make complaint to the Eldership of those that walk disorderly and will not be reclaimed to the end they may be further dealt with as the nature of their offence may deserve We being fully assured from the word of truth That Excommunication is Gods ordinance appointed for the reformation of the scandalous and as you your selves acknowledged in the beginning of your Paper and being a spiritual punishment for the nature and kind of it through the blessing of God may be more available for the destruction of the flesh and the thorough humiliation of the offender then any corporal or pecuniary mulct that reaches but the outward man can be And as it was blessed with great successe for this end for many years together whilest the Church was destitute of Christian Magistrates Although in a Christian State we see not why we should divide what God hath joyned together We having not yet learned either from the Scriptures or sound reason that the conjunction of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Sword is not more likely through the same blessing of God to work a greater reformation in mens lives then either of them alone remembring that old Maxime Vis unita fortior And as touching our selves and the power we are intrusted to exercise we shall commit our endeavours unto his blessing in the use of his own appointed means who is able and we doubt not but he will make the same effectual for the ends for which he hath appointed them SECT VIII BUt you say There are other parts of our Paper that do likewise remain dark which you desire to be made plain Although we conceive not so of them yet we shall as willingly go along with you to give you further answer as you to desire the same of us And therefore whereas we having said in our Paper That there are many persons of all sorts that will not submit themselves to the present Government of the Church Your first Quaere thereupon is Why Government in singulari We answer because it is the onely Government that at present is established in this Church by Civil Authority The Prelatical being put down and cautioned against in the humble Advice in regard of any liberty to be extended to it for the exercise thereof And there being no other Government but the Presbyterian which is our Government that is owned as the Church-Government for the whole Nation by the Civil Authority And as it is that which we judge to be most agreeable to the will of God so also we conceive that whatever is of Christs prescribing in any other different Government whether Episcopal or Congregational is to be found here As we do apprehend the redundancies of them both to be taken away in this and the defects of them both to be here supplyed And however there may be differences amongst godly men concerning Church-Government which it is that Christ in particulari hath prescribed in his Word yet we judge that the Government which Christ hath prescribed in his Word is but one As all those must say so too that not being Erastians do hold That one Church-Government or other is of divine Right But whereas you bring in Calvin saying Seimus enim unicuique Ecclesiae c. To this we say The circumstantials of Government that are but matters of order onely and which must be suited to the time or place or persons for whom they are made and concerning which if you had quoted the place where Calvin useth these words we believe it would appear he speaks these being variable and so but the accidentals of Government may not be one and the same in all Churches But if Christ have prescribed a Government in his word for the substantials of it it must needs be de jure one and the same in every Church And that the Presbyterian Government is that in particular which is there prescribed in Calvins Judgement is so manifest by his works to the whole Christian world that it needs no proof But if the Government which Christ hath prescribed for the substantials of it be onely one then that alone is good and all other Governments differing substantially from it must needs be bad and this onely jure divino and Christs own Government and the rest not And therefore whereas in the next place you suppose We may assert that our Government is the Government by way of Eminency as Christs own Government more immediately and jure divino To this and to what you further hereupon do inquire we say we have declared already That we call'd it the present Government because it is the onely Government settled in the Church by the Civil Power But whether it be the Government by way of Eminency and jure divino that was not the thing referred unto in the phrase we used And as to the resolving of your doubts and scruples we conceive it is not here material for us to go about the proving of the Jus divinum of it we having proved That it is the Government that is established by the Civil Magisttate and which doth lay as good a foundation to evidence the lawfulnesse of your submission to it as for the lawfulnesse of your submission to the former Government and touching which we suppose you were satisfied your exceptions lying as much against the High-Commissioners Chancellors and Commissaries then as they can do now against the office of Ruling Elders and which is the chief thing we apprehend is stumbled at in our Government But yet if you desire to have satisfaction given you touching that which we are not ashamed to professe viz. the Jus divinum of the Presbyterian Government we referee you to what is so fully spoken touching this point by sundry learned Divines both of our own Church
appoints fofeitures in case of prophanation of the Lords day by Carriers c. that travel on the Lords day or by Butchers that sell or kill victuass on that day By all which you may plainly see if you will not shut your eyes that it is not against Law that a man may come to be punished twice for one offence Nay what hath been heretofore more ordinary then the High-Commissioners imprisoning fining and excommunicating for one and the same offence But yet you will have the latter Acts and Ordinances against drunkenness swearing prophanation of the Sabbath c. enjoyning punishment by the Civil Magistrate onely though they do not speak one word that tends to the repealing of the Ordinance for Church Government to have utterly taken off all power of Excommunication But this we must not so easily grant and yet we shall not be unready as there may be occasion to complain to the civil Magistrate of any lawless persons that are justly censurable with the censure of Excommunication the conjunction of the Civil and Ecclesiasticall Sword being sharper and longer then either of them alone The Gentlemens Paper Sect. VIII And you further proceed to make answer to our severall ensuing Quaeries but how fully and satisfactorily all may judge that have perused what hath formerly been said touching the civil sanction of your Government Our first Quaerie is Why Government in singulari Your answer is Because it is the onely Government that is established in this Church by Civill Authority This Answer hath been confuted before we shall say no more here to that But we are unsatisfied what you mean by this Church whether you mean this Church at Manehester where your Classis is or you mean the Church of England If you mean this Church of Manchester of your association it is establisht not so much by Ordinance of Lords and Commons in Parliament as by later Acts grauting the free exercise of Religion in Doctrine and Worship to all Churches and Congregations in their own way to all and all alike but such as are particularly cautioned against And so you in your Presbytery in your Church at Manchester are protected because you have possessed your selves of that Church But then others in other Churches and Congregations to wit Prestwich Burie Middleton and the like may say of their way of worship it is the onely Government which is establisht in this Church But if your meaning be of the Church of England and so we conceive by the subsequent words viz. That there is no other Government but yours owned as the Church Government throughout the whole Nation You are certainly mistaken and dare not maintain it that his Highness or his Council owns Presbytery and none but that Government But leaving the Civill Sanction you come to the divine right of Presbytery and prove it to be the onely Government in singulari because it is that onely Government which Christ hath prescribed in his word and what Christ hath thus prescribed must needs be de jure one and the same in every Church And Calvins judgement you say in this particular is so manifest by his works to the whole world that it needs no proof We have told you before of the form and order of Church Government appointed by the Council of Nice by Patriarch Arch-Bishop Bishop c. How this Government which we suppose you will not say is Presbyterian is in Calvins judgement not differing from that which Christ hath prescribed in his word And in his first Section of this Chapter he tells us of Bishops not one word of Elders chosen out of the people who should rule in the Church but Bishops that did all viz. make and publish Canons a note certainly of rule and jurisdiction in the Church in which saith he they so ordered all things after the rule of Gods word that a man may see they had in a manner nothing differing from the word of God And this form of Government did represent a certain Image of divine Institution Can Calvin say more for your Presbytery nay can he say so much then how manifest is his judgement for the jus divinum of your Presbytery that it is that Government in particular which Christ hath prescribed in his word Thus have we taken off your Calvin and Beza as above your modern Doctors for Fathers you have none and now you descend to the Assembly of Divines The jus divinum by London Ministers the provincial Synod at London Rutherford Gyllaspie to prove your divine right of Presbytery modern Authors of yesterday with whom you paint your Margent in abundance and may serve your turn amongst the ignorant and vulgar sort who measure all by tale and not by weight when others that know what and who many of them are will conclude you draw very near the dregs As for such as are lawless persons and who those be whether drunkards swearers unclean persons prophaners of the Sabbath such as will not subject themselves to the present Government c. all together or a part conjunctim seu divisim whether you will they are onely punishable by the Civil Magistrate you cannot exclude them the Church by any of your censures as we have said before The Animadversions of the Class upon it 1. WE did indeed proceed to make answer to your several Queries and desire the Reader to peruse the Queries you propounded to us in your first Paper and the answer we gave unto them and then to judge how satisfactorily we did it after he had fully weighed our answer and what you have said to take off the establishing of our Government by the civil Sanction But whereas your first Query was why Government in singulari and our answer given thereunto was because it is the only Government that is established in this Church by civil Authority you say this answer hath been confuted before but how strongly we shall leave it to the Reader for to judge But it seems this answer hath raised another scruple in your mindes for you are unsatisfied what we mean by this Church although in our answer we had sufficiently explained it it being that Church wherein the Prelatical Government formerly had been set up and wherein that being put down the Presbyterian was set up in its stead as the only Government that was owned as the Church Government for the whole Nation as we had told you and which words did sufficiently declare that by this Church we meant the Church of England This you confess is that which you conceive to be our meaning yet you quarrell at the word that so upon supposal that the Church of Manchester of our Association and where our Classis meets might thereby be understood you might take the liberty to tell us that our Church Government is not so much established by the Ordinance of the Lords and Commons in Parliament as by later Acts granting as you say the free exercise of Religion in doctrine and worship to
all Churches Congregations in their own way to all and all alike though you might have observed that the way of Prelacy was ever in the number of those wayes particularly cautioned against and that those of the Presbyterian way have that prerogative above all those of other wayes to whom any indulgence is granted that their way of Government is owned and established by the Parliament as the Government of the Nation which is not to be said for any of the other And therefore neither the Church at Manchester nor our Classical Presbytery meeting there are protected meerly upon the account of possession of that place as you imagine but because being awarranted thereunto by Authority of Parliament they set up that Government which the Parliament appointed and established as the Government of the Nation and who also in their approval of the division of this County into nine Classical Presbyteryes appointed Prestwich wherein the Government was set up and exercised for along while although since Mr. Allen's return thither the Eldership of that Congregation could do little to be within the bounds of this Classical Association and Middleton and Burie in the latter of which Congregations the Presbyterian Government according to Ordinance of Parliament was also set up though the present Minister joyn not in it are appointed to be within the bounds of the second Class And so these Congregations that you would suggest have a liberty for some way of worship and different Government from the Presbyterian granted unto them and exercised by them though they are not any of them under any character of indulgence granted to others other wayes are all of them under the power of the Provincial Assembly of this County and one of them under the power of this and two of them under the power of the neighbour Classical Association And hereupon we are certain we are not mistaken when we say that there is no other Government but the Presbyterian that was owned by the Parliament they establishing this Government only as the Government of the Nation and which we do not see but is also acknowledged by the humble Advice assented unto by his Late Highness as we have said before 2. But now you say leaving the civil Sanction we come to the divine right of Pres ytery and prove it to be the only Government in singulari because it is that only Government which Christ hath preser bed in his Word But here we have cause to complain you do us manifest wrong in that you would represent us either absurdly proving idem per idem or that Presbytery is of divine right because it is so or to argue very weakly in saying it is of divine right because it is prescribed by Christ in his Word and so leave the matter without any further proof nothing whereof at all is any where to be found in our answer only we find the same in that chimerical fancy which you had first conceivd your selves and then were pleased to impute unto us Then you adde and what Christ hath thus prescribed must needs be de jure one and the same in every Church which words did not here follow whereby you render what we had plainly expressed not intelligible to what purpose it was uttered But because we desire the matter might be judged of neither according to your representation of it or what we say of it we shall give the Reader a full account of all that was here expressed by us and which he will find upon the perusal of our answer whereby he will perceive that we were not at all reasoning as you represent us but only declaring our judgement and that in plain expressions without any ambiguity Our words speaking of the Presbyterian Government were these And as it is that which we judge to be most agreeable to the will of God so also we conceive that whatever is of Christs prescribing in any other different Government whether Episeopal or Congregational is to be found here as we do apprehend the redundancies of them both to be taken away in this and the defects of them both to be bere supplied and however there may be differences amongst godly ment concerning Church Government which it is in particular that Christ hath prescribed in his Word yet we judg that the Government which Christ hath prescribed in his Word is but one as all those must say so too that not being Erastians do bold that one Church Government or other is of divine right The Reader will hereby perceive that we did without any manner of reasoning at all only declare our judgements but you represent us as arguing and that absurdly and then you mangle our words breaking them off from what they had immediate and necessary dependance on and reference to for having thus farre declared our selves we came to answer to what you had urged in your first Paper out of Calvin saying Scimusenim unicuique Ecclesiae c. to which we said the circumstantials of Government of which we told you we did believe if you had quoted the place where Calvin used those words it would appear he speakes being variable and so but the accidentals of Government may not be one and the same in all Churches And then we added the words you in part mention but if Christ have prescribed a Government in his Word for the substantials of it it must be de jure one and the same in every Church And then further said and that the Presbyterian Government is that in particular which is there prescribed in Calvin ' s judgement is so manifest by his workes to the whole Christian world that it needs no proof Whereby it is very manifest to any ordinary understanding that the expressions we here use and which you mention have reference to what you had cited out of Calvin in your first Paper shewing that however he might say that every Church might have their different formes of Government in regard of the circumstantials of it yet seeing the Government prescribed by Christ in his Word for the substantials of it is but one and in Calvin's judgement the Presbyterian Government is that Government when Calvin saith Scimus enim unieuique Ecclesiae c. he was to be understood to speak concerning the circumstantials of Government only and not of the substantials thereof Hence also it is clear that we were not here neither arguing for the divine right of Presbytery but only declaring and proving how Calvin was to be understood in the expressions you quoted But as we have said you mangle our words and break them off from what immediately went before whereby from your representation it is not conceivable to what they referred but then you joyning them to other words going before to which they had no reference represent them to have been used by us to have patched up such a poor argument for the Jus divinum of the Presbyterian Government as before hath been declared but whether
this be either sincere or ingenuous dealing we leave it to the Reader to judge 3. But as touching Calvin's being in his judgement for the Presbyterian Government as that which Christ hath in particular prescribed in his Word though here again you would make him a patronizer of the Government by Patriareh Archbishop Bishop c. in our answer we said was manifest from his works to the whole Christian world And is not this clear to any that will but consult what he hath written touching this matter Consult his Expositions and Commentaries Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. and you will find him there to be downright for the Jus divinum of the ruling Elders Office Consult his Institutions you will there find Lib. 4. Chap. 3. Sect. 8. expresly that he takes Bishops Presbyters and Pastors for one and the same and that according to the use of Scripture as he there speakes and argues for that purpose Tit. 1. 5. Phil. 1. 1. Act. 20. 17. and having reckoned up the preaching Officers he then comes in the very same Section and mentions the ruling Elders shewing that they are mentioned by Paul Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Cor. 12. 28. We will but cite only one passage that he here hath concerning his quoting these Texts Guhernatores fuisse existimo seniores de plebe electos qui censurae morum exercendae disciplinae unà cum Episcopis praeessent Neque enim secus interpretari queas quod dicit qui praeejt id faciat in solicitudine Habuit igitur ab initio unaquaeque Ecclesia suum Senatum conscriptum ex viris piis gravibus sanctis penes quem er at illa de quâ posteà loquemur jurisdictio in corrigendis vitiis Porro eâ—usmodi ordinem non unius saeculi fuisse experientia ipsa declarat Est igitur hoc gubernationis munus saecuâ—is omnibus necessarium Whence it is very clear that Calvin's judgement is so full for the Office of the ruling Elders that otherwise he saith we shall not be able to interpret that of the Apostle He that ruleth let him do it with diligence And hence he concludes that every Church had from the beginning its Senate or Consistory that consisted of men that were godly grave and holy to whom did belong the jurisdiction in correcting of vices of which after he saith he will speak Further he saith that experience it self declares that this was not an order of one age and thence inferres that therefore the ruling Elders Office whom he undestands by the Office of Government is necessary for all ages Is it possible for any man to declare himself more fully and plainly for the Presbyterian Government then Calvin here doth We forbear to cite any other parts of his works we doubt not but the Reader by this will be sufficiently satisfied and will presently hereupon conclude that you but gather out of Calvin what you think makes for your purpose and when we cite him for that which he is so full for matter not much how you misrepresent him to the world that so you might make him to appear otherwise But we wish you to consider that it is not safe for any to make lies their refuge But you have notwithstanding all this the boldness to alleadge Calvin as a Patronizer of Episcopal Government as you did before And because you come over again with the same thing we shall be forced for his vindication to make some repetition of what we have in part already said That in Calvin which you here referre us to is the place in his Institutions which was before quoted sc Lib. 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 1. But in the Chapter immediately going before we have even now shewed that he declares himself fully for the Presbyterian Government but this you wholly conceal in which you deal not honestly with him Nay in the very first words of this Section which you cite he tells you he had been hitherto speaking of that order of governing the Church as it is delivered to us out of the pure word of God and concerning the Ministeryes as they were instituted of Christ And then he addes now that all these things might appear more clearly and familiarly it will be profitable in those things to take a view of the forme of the ancient Church which as he there saith will represent unto us a certain image of divine institution which are part of the words that you cite But hence it is clear that seeing it is Calvin's scope in this Chapter to compare the forme of Government in the ancient Church with that forme of Government that he had held forth in the Chapter going before from the Scriptures he judged whatever construction you put upon him to the contrary that that very Government in the substance of it which he had before proved was held forth in the Scriptures and which as we have already shewed from what we have cited out of him out of the third Chapter goin gbefore was the Presbyterian was to be found in the ancient Church in the purer times of it But in the next place he comes to prevent an Objection in these words Tametsi enim multos Canones ediderunt illorum temporum Episcopi quibusplus viderentur exprimere quam sacris literis expressum esset eâ tamen cautione totam suam Oeconomiam composuerunt ad unicom illom verbi Dei normami ut facile videas nihil fere hâc parte habuisse à verbo Dei alienum Hence it is yet further plain that however he confess that the Bishops of those times did seem to express in many of their Canons something more then was expressed in Scripture yet that he saith they did compose their whole Oeconomy unto the only rule of Gods word that one might easily see they had in this particular nothing almost differing from the word he hereby declares his judgement yet further that for the substance the Government of these times was the same with the Government he had held forth from the Scriptures in the former Chapter But hence it is also clear that as we observed before he did not approve of every thing in those Canons as also he presently after confesseth there was something deficient and wanting in them For however he excuse them in regard they endeavoured to keep the institution of God with a sincere endeavour yet he acknowledges that in something they erred although he saith not much as is clear from his own words which are as followes Verumetiam si quid posset in ipsorum institutis desiderari quia tamen sincero studio conati sunt Dei institutionem conservare ab ea non multum aberraverunt plurimum conducet hic breviter colligere qualem observationem habuerint And then he shewes what the Ministers of the ancient Church were Thus we have given a full and particular account of what Calvin hath in this Section and that in the very order which he himself observes
we believe any indifferent Reader will discern are distinct things as the Parliament also in passing them distinguished them and therefore you should not have dealt so disingeniously with us as to have accounted the discourse impertinent which was necessary for your information if you were ignorant If you knowing these Orders and Ordinances would yet have this discourse impertinent notwithstanding your jerking us for calling our selves the first Classis within the Province of Lancaster which terms we told you we gave not to our selves till the Parliament had first given them us we leave it to the Reader what to judge of it Ninthly Here is also another strange assertion when you say it was no question of yours whether our Government be established by the Law of the Land when as in your first paper in the words thereof recited even now you told us of our making Laws and Edicts and publishing them contrary to the Laws in force and questioning whether we had not run our selves into a praemunire Doubtless if our Government be established by Ordinance of Parliament and that Ordinance awarrant us for whatever was published by us in the paper and yet that be asserted by you to be contrary to the Laws in force it must needs be a question of yours whether our Government be established by the Law of the Land as it is that which afterward you go about to prove that it wants the establishment of Authority and so however you dare not tell the Justices of the Peace that have acted on other Ordinances of Parliament that yet are also null and void if that we have acted on be that they are not thereby sufficiently secured against the danger of a praemunire yet you dare tell us of this once and again and yet also it be no question of yours whether our Church-Government be established by the Law of the Land but how contradictory these things are one unto another we leave it to be judged of As touching our starting more doubts then as you say we can assoyl we shall have leisure hereafter to examine in the place where you have a mind to encounter us and now shall follow you in the way you have chosen to go in And so we come unto the next The Gentlemens Paper Sect. II. To that mistake you charge us withall in the Preface of our Paper concerning the Title of yours we answer We finde in the close of that your â—aper these words This presentation is approved by this Provincial Assembly Tho. Johnson Moderator Edw. Gee Scribe So it is approved by the Provincial Assembly under that title of a presentation as we call it in all the Copies we have seen But this as you say might be the mistake of your Scribe and not to be insisted on It is of greater weight and moment you say to take notice of what we publish as our sense and apprehension of it viz. The matter contained in your Paper Not resting in the judgement or determination of any general Council contrary thereto If any such should be much less to one of your Provincial Assemblies c. And here you tell us of a publique and authoritative Judgement that is in Councils concerning matters of Doctrine and Discipline though tied to the rule of Gods Word in such proceedings as Judges to the Law to which we ought to be subject And how far is that viz. They have the power of expounding and explaining the difficult places of Scripture as the Judges have of the exposition of the Law And in this sense we ought to subject to the sense and determination of a general Council And therefore you say Questionless if in the time of S. Augustine who was no conâ—emner of Synods and Councils any in this sense had declared That they would not have submitted their apprehensions to their Judgement he would have cried out against them as well as against the Donatists O Impudentem Vocem And you hope when we have weighed the matter better we will not in this sense see any reason to refuse to submit either our sense and apprehension of your Paper or what we may publish as our own private judgements in other matters about Religion to the judgement of a generall Council supposing it might be had God forbid but we should submit neither need we for this to weigh the matter better for in this sense we have done and yet shall submit to any shall come hereafter Neither had you any reason so to judge your selves or induce others to that perswasion of us that we should in this sense refuse to submit our Judgements to the Judgement of any general Council Our words are plain We publish this our sense and apprehension of it as far as it is plain to us Which words you omitting deale not fairely with us and which words carry another sense with them For so far as the matter conteined in your Paper is plain to us we close and joyn with you Being as we explain our selves afterwards so fully warranted thereto by the Word of God and constant practise of the Catholique Church that therein so far as it is made thus plain unto us we shall not submit our Apprehensions to the Judgement of a general Council But by this Aposiopesis of yours you would make the World believe we refuse to submit our Judgements to the Judgement of a general Council not onely touching matters of faith and such Articles of Religion which are plainly warranted by Gods Word and constant practice of the Catholique Church But also touching matters which are not so plainly set forth in the word of God Touching which last we prosess our willing submission to the Judgement of a general Council and are glad to hear you of the same minde though we fear as we shall hear you declaring anon you will hardly grant that to a general Council which you seem to grant to your Provincial In which we dissent from you as we have said The Animadversions of the Class upon it FIrst We perceive you are resolved to stick to what you have once said though it be only the taking advantage of some litteral mistake and which in our answer we had told you was none of ours when you called our paper by the title of a presentation but imputed it to the Scribe speaking indefinitely which might be yours as well as ours though in your printed Copy you will have us to say what we did not that it was the mistake of our Scribe and however you say now that in all the Copies which you have seen which implies many you find in the close of that our paper these words this presentation is approved by this Provincial Assembly Thomas Johnson Moderator Edward Gee Scribe Yet we believe that if you be put upon the proof it will be hard for you to produce one Copy that was given forth by the Class and written by our Scribe where you find our paper approved by the Provincial
to the Sacrament The course by you published provided it be in publique little differeth from the order prescribed by the Church of England and other reformed Churches abroad before any be admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper 2. For those who erre so grossely whether in Doctrinals or points of disciplin thereby renting from a true constituted Church Though you speak nothing either of their sin or punishment yet we hope you with us do hold That the Churches lawful Pastors have the power of the Keyes committed to them to excommunicate such offenders 3. For such as are scandalous and wicked in their lives Admonition private and publique is to be observed according to Christs rule Mat. 18 but if they still continue and will not reform the Churches lawfull Pastors have power to excommunicate such Thus far we accord in judgement touching the way of informing the ignorant and reforming wicked persons and schismaticall which course is so fully warranted by the Word of God and the constant practice of the Catholique Church that we are not so wavering and unsetled in our apprehensions of the case as to submit either it or them either wholly or in part to the contrary judgement and determination of a Generall Council of the Eastern or Western Churches much lesse to a new termed Provincial Assembly at Preston wherein we not little differ from you Other parts of your Paper are full of darknesse to which we cannot so fully assent till further explicated and unfolded by you For 1. Whereas you say That in the several congregations if not in all belonging to this Association there are many persons of all sorts that are members of Congregations c. you seeme to hint that though your grief may be general as ours for all offenders yet your censures extend onely to those who have admitted themselves members of some Congregation within your Association and yet live inordinately and will not be admonished If so then we who never were any members or associates of yours are not within the verge and compasse of your Presbyterian discipline for what have you to do to judge those that are without 2. But whereas your complaint and offence taken is That many there are of all sorts who will not submit themselves to the present Government of the Church but live like lawless persons out of their rank and order If by the present Government of the Church you mean your own as may strongly be conjectured you do then are we also comprehended therein and must fall within your censure and not onely we but all Papists Anabaptists and all other of what Profession and Religion soever who live within the Parish must be taken for members of some one Congregation within your Association and so driven into the common fold of Presbytery and be subject to your Government And this as we suppose is the chief design of you in this as in other transactions of yours to subject all to your Government which you garnish over with the specious title of Christs Government Throne and Scepter Presbytery is the main thing driven at here and however she cometh ushered in with a Godly pretence of sorrow for the sins and ignorance of the times and a duty incumbent upon you to exercise the power which Christ hath committed to you for edification and not for destruction yet these are but as so many waste papers wherein Presbytery is wrapped to make it look more handsomly and pass more currently but beware we must for latet anguis in Herbâ Object But you say For want of the vigorous exercise of this Ecclesiastical discipline ignorance Atheism and Licentiousness growes upon us and men live as lawlesse persons out of their rank and order because not subject to your present Governement Sol. We pray for the establishment of such Church Government throughout his Highness Dominions as is consonant to the will of God and Universall practice of primitive Churches that Ecclesiasticall discipline may be exercised in the hands of them to whom it was committed by Christ and left by him to be transferred from hand to hand to the end of the World and shall readily joyn with you in humble addresses to his Highnes and his great Council for the establishment of such a Church Government In the mean time though there may be such who as you say live as lawless persons out of their rank and order yet are they subject to law and therefore subject to punishment for though your Ecclesiastical sword cannot take hold on them the civill sword doth reach them Your Class may do well then not to contemn as in charity we hope you do not the authority of the civill Magistrate but in stead of warning all and every member belonging to them to complain to the Eldership of those that walke disorderly and will not be reclaimed to the end they may excommunicate them That they exhort them to complaine to the civill Magistrate whose sword of Justice is sharper and longer and likely to work a greater reformation in the lives and manners of men by a corporal and pecuniary Mulct then any sword of excommunication or other Church censure your Eldership can any way pretend unto There are other parts of your paper do remain likewise dark which we desire may be made plain unto us for whereas you say There are many persons of all sorts c. That will not submit themselves to the present Government of the Church but live as lawless persons out of their rank and order Our Quaeres there upon are 1. Why Government in singulari is there no Ecclesiasticall Government but yours may not another Church have its Government different from yours yet not different from that which Christ hath prescribed in his Word Calvin saith yea Scimus enim unicuique Ecclesiae c. And accordingly there are other Churches in England different in Government from yours and as good as yours But if you say yours is the Government 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of eminency as Christs own Government more immediatly and jure divino which you so much defend then why the present is there no present Government in any Church or Assembly of Saints but where your discipline is erected Are all the rest at present without Government or where hath yours been this 1500. years past till this present Hath Antichristianism so overspread the face of the Church that Christs own Goverment could never get footing till this present But now subjection is required thereto of all yet many of all sorts will not subject but live as lawless persons out of their rank and order Our next Quaere is What must all those that observe not your ranks and orders subject not themselves to your present Government be taken for lawless persons out of their rank and order Yea for so this close connexion of yours seems to import viz. many who do not subject but live c. In your paper you further proceed and
every lawful Minister to whom the Key of Doctrine is committed by himself singly or else it is Juridical and this belongs to Synods and Councils who having the Key of Discipline are invested with authority to inquire into try examine censure and judge of matters of Doctrine and Discipline authoritatively although they be tyed to the rule of Gods Word in such proceedings as Judges to the Law and likewise to censure offenders according to their merit when such cases are regularly and orderly brought before them And in this sense it was that we submitted our apprehensions in the Paper published to the Judgement of the Provincial Assembly And we believe when the Apostle tels us 1 Cor. 14. 32. That the spirits os the Prophets are subject to the Prophets And our Saviour Christ-saith Mat. 18. â—ell the Church And when we consider what was practised by Paul and Barnabas and certain others who upon occasion of a contest that arose in the Church at Antioch about a matter of Doctrine were sent up from that Church to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Elders about that question from these and other Scriptural grounds we had sufficient ground for so doing We are sure also That Whitaker de Conciliis quaestione quinta and Chamierus in his Panstratia de oecumenico Pontifice ubi de Authoritate Papae in Ecclesia cap. 13. cap. 14. And generally all our Protestant Divines against the Papists alledging the Texts above-mentioned and others do prove abundantly that in the sense declared the Pope is to be subject to a general Council wherein also sundry Papists do concur with them And questionless if in the time of Augustine who was no contemner of Synods and Councils any in this sense had declared that they would not have submitted their apprehensions to their judgement he would have cried out against them as well as against the Donatists O impudentem vocem And we hope when you have weighed the matter better you will not in this sense see any reason to refuse to submit either your sense and apprehensions of our Paper or what you may publish as your own private Judgements in other matters about Religion to the Judgement of a general Council supposing it might be had SECT III. WE have now done with your Preface and come to the matter it self wherein you professe 1. To joyn with us in a deep sense of the several grosse sins and errors of the times desiring earnestly to mourn first for your own sins next for the sixs of others c. And here we do heartily pray that neither we nor you may any of us condemn our selves either by professing our sorrow for what sins we may practise or by refusing to help forward the good that we professe to allow of but may testifie the truth of our sorrow for our own and other mens sins by suitable indeavors to reform what is amisse in our selves and helping forward every one in his place the reformation of others 2 In the next place you say You are also sensible with us that there are sundry persons grosly ignorant in the mainpoints of Christian Religion And if so we hope you will acknowledge that where after the injoying of plenty of Preaching and the publick Catechizing that hath been used for many years together and much more where there hath been lesse of this meanes many continue grosly ignorant in the main points of Religion it is at least not to be condemned in such Ministers as shall be willing to take the paines by private Catechizing to instruct such persons This course being to the Ministers a matter of paines onely and that hereupon where the publick Catechizing attaines not its desired end the private may be good and useful that so poor souls perish not for lack of knowledge 3. Lastly You hope That we with you are sensible and greived though you say we do not mention them for the grosse errors in judgement and damnable Doctrines of many who have rent themselves into as many several Heresies as they have into Sects and Schisms You may perceive by the title of our Paper that it was a representation of our apprehensions to the Provincial Assembly in the Case to us propounded by the said Provincial and what that was we shall particularly declare anon although by what we say had been complained of and represented unto us it might be gathered and therefore we were chiefly to apply our selves to that which was therein our main work and businesse That the grosse and damnable errors that the loosness of these times have brought forth are to be bewailed if it were possible with tears of bloud is most freely to be confessed And whether we lay them not to heart in some poor measure God the searcher of all hearts he knows as what complaints have been made of these by the members of this Classis both in their prayers and preaching men can witnesse and likewise what testimonies have been given to the truth of Jesus Christ and against the errors of the times subscribed with their hands and published to the world though therein but concurring with the rest of their Reverend Brethren in this Province in the Province of London and other Counties of the Land posterity may read when we are in our graves But as to the most of the Congregations belonging to this Classis the great business to be looked after was the use of our best indeavors for the informing of the ignorant and the reforming of the scandalous the numbers of these being great and of those that are so grosly erroneous as to maintain damnable doctrines and whereof you professe your selves to be so sensible very inconsiderable in comparison of the former and in sundry of our Congregations if not in most blessed be God for it not any at all that we know of And therefore there was not that reason to make any such expresse mention of these as of the former although in our Paper we were not herein neither altogether silent as will after appear Having professed your agreement with us thus farre you go on to declare your selves That touching the way of informing the ignorant and reforming the wicked and erroneous you shall not much dissent And 1. You say For the Information and instruction of the ignorant by way of Catechizing before they be admitted to the Sacrament the course by us published provided you say it be in publick little differeth from the Order prescribed by the Church of England and other Reformed Churches abroad before any be admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Sapper That all Children and others so many as it is fit to instruct after that manner be publickly catechized is that which we heartily wish had been and were more generally practised in our own Church at home as it is practised by the Reformed Churches abroad And certainly had the publick catechizing of Children and others been more generally and constantly practised there had not been that cause
of our Presbyterian discipline c. Unto which we say That we have constantly professed against those of the separation That the several Assemblies or Congregations within this Land that make a profession of the true Christian and Apostolique Faith are true Churches of Jesus Christ That the several members of these Congregations are by their birth members as those that were born in the Jewish Church are said to be by the Apostle Jewes by nature Gal. 2. That this their membership was sealed to them in their Baptism that did solemnly admit them as into the universal Church so into the particular wherein they were born We have also constantly maintained against the afore-mentioned Persons That the Ministers of these Churches are true Ministers notwithstanding that exception of theirs against them that they were ordained by Bishops who also themselves were true Ministers in our Judgement though we cannot acknowledge that by divine right they were superiour to their fellow brethren either in regard of order or jurisdiction And that therefore the Word and Sacraments the most essential marks of a true visible Church according to the professed Judgement of our Divines against the Papists on the one hand and those of the separation on the other dispensed by these Vinisters were and are the true Ordinances of Jesus Christ And that hereupon our work was not when the Presbyterian Government was appointed to constitute Churches but to reform them onely And that therefore none within our bounds except they shall renounce Christianity and their Baptisme can be deemed by us to be without in the Apostles sense and so therefore not within the compass and verge of our Presbyterian Government Neither is it their not associating with us in regard of Government that doth exempt them from censure by it if they should be such offenders as by the rules thereof were justly censurable It not being a matter arbitrary for private Persons at their own will and pleasure to exempt themselves from under that Ecclesiastical Government that is settled by Authority And as you know it would not have been allowed of under the former Government 2 And therefore whether you and all others within our bounds be not comprehended within our Government according to the rules laid down in the Ordinance of Parliament above mentioned appointing the form of Church Government to be used in the Church of England and Ireland and therein ordaining as hath been recited before in the first page thereof and to which we referre you Especially considering that all within the bounds of our several Parishes that are no other now then formerly even Papists and Anabaptists and other Sectaries were under the late Prelatical Government we leave it to you to judge Onely if so we wish you to consider that then you are brought under the Government of Presbytery not so much by us as by the Parliament appointing this Government And then we think you who warn us not to contemn civil power might well out of respect to the Authority ordaining it but especially considering the word Presbytery is a known Scripture expression 1 Tim. 4 and interpreted by sundry of the Fathers as we do as hath been declared before have used a more civil expression then to have called it a common fold into which it should seem your complains it that you should be driven Although Presbytery layes restraint on none but such as being scandalous in their lives and so contemning the Laws of God are therefore truly and indeed the lawless Persons that we speak of But whereas as you suppose This is our chief design in this as in other transactions of ours to subject all to our Government We doe refer our selves to our course of life past and hope it will witnesse with us to all that will judge impartially what our designes have been in our other transactions And as touching our design in the Paper published whether it hath been ought but the information of the ignorant and reformation of the scandalous to the Glory of God and their salvation we leave it to be judged by those that will judge of mens intentions by what is expressed in their words and actions We know very well we are charged by some that we affect Dominion to Lord it over the People and to have all sorts of Persons of what rank soever to stoop to us But we do openly professe that the Government of the Church that is committed unto men is not Despotical but Ministerial That it is no Dominion but a Ministery onely And that the Officers that are intrusted with it are themselves to be subject both in regard of their bodies and estates to the Civil power That by the Ordinance of God they are appointed to be under and that in their Government they have nothing to do with the bodies and estates of any Persons but with their Souls onely Although here we desire to enquire of you whether if you be indeed for the settling of any Government at all in the Church as you professe to be you do not think that all should be subject to it We cannot judge you to be so irrational as to be for a Government and that yet subiection to it must be denyed And if the late Government of the Prelacy was not blamed by you because it required subjection to it we wish you to consider whether upon this account you have reason to censure us But further whereas you tell us That we garnish over our Government with the specious title of Christs Government Throne and Scepter We wish you to consider what in your Answer to an objection that you frame out of our Paper your selves doe say You there tell us You pray for the establishment of such Church Government as is consonant to the will of God and universal practice of primitive Churches that Ecclesiastical Discipline may be exercised in the hands of them to whom it was committed by Christ and left by him to be transferred from hand to hand to the end of the World The expressions you here use are as high touching that Government you would have established as any have been that ever we have used of ours For your prayer is That Ecclesiastical Discipline may be exercised in the hands of them to whom it was committed by Christ and left by him to be transferred from hand to hand to the end of the world The Government then that you are for must be with you Christs Government Throne and Scepter And why do you then condemn us if we have used such expressions concerning our Government till you have convinced us that it is not such When yet you take to your selves the liberty to use the like language concerning the Government you pray may be established But where as you say Presbytery is the main thing driven at here and that however she comes ushered in with a Godly pretence of sorrow for the sins and the ignorance of the times and the duty incumbent upon us
Government continued such during the time of the late Prelacy which yet was taken away in other reformed Churches that the Pastors were deprived of that power of rule that our Church acknowledgeth did belong to them of right and which did anciently belong to them however the exercise thereof did after grow into a long disuse as hath been shewed before And therefore when we consider on the one hand that the superiority which the Bishop obtained at the first above the Presbyter in the ancient Church and which was rather obtained consueâ—udine Ecclesiae then by Divine right did at the length grow to that height that the Pastors were spoiled of all power of rule so we cannot much wonder on the other hand that the ruling Elder was quite turned out of doors For the proof of the being and exercise of whose office in the purer times there are notwithstanding produced testimonies of the ancients by Divines both at home and abroad that have written about that subject and to which we do therein refer you As there doe remain some footsteps and shadow of their office in the Church-wardens and Sides-men even to this day And so upon the whole the premisses considered and that we are commanded not to follow a multitude to do evil though it were of the best of men and that therefore the examples and practises though it were of whole Churches are to be no further a rule for us then they follow Christ and as their examples be approved of in the Word of Christ notwithstanding the univerfality and long continuednesse of such practises Whereas you say that you pray for the establishment of such Church Government as is consonant to the will of God and universal practise of primitive Churches we believe you might cut the matter a great deal shorter and say That you are for the establishing of that Government that is most consonant to the will of God revealed in the Scriptures and that the Word of God alone and on which onely Faith must be built and into which at last be resolved when other records of Antiquity that yet are not so ancient as it is have been searcht into never so much shall determine what that is and so those wearisome and endlesse disputes about what is the universal and constant practise of primitive Churches and which if it could be found out in any good measure of probability for the first 300. years after Christ could never yet be so farre issued as to be a sure bottom whereon our faith may safely rest may be cut off It being a most certain rule and especially in matters of faith that the Factum is not to prescribe against the Jus The Practice against the Right or what ought to be done And it being out of all question the safest course for all to bring all doctrines and practices to the sure and infallible Standard and Touchstone the Word of God alone And after you have more seriously weighed the matter and remember how you professe that in the matters you propose in your Pâ—per You rest not in the Judgement or determination of any general Council of the Eastern or Western Churches determining contrary to what you are perswaded is so fully warranted by the Word of God as well as by the constant practice of the Catholick Church although what that was were more likely to be resolved by a general Council then by your selves the proposal of having the Word of God alone to be the Judge of the Controversie about Church Government cannot we think in reason be deny'd by you And we with you shall heartily pray That that Church-Government which is most consonant to the will of God revealed in Scriptures might be established in these Lands Although we must also professe that we believe that that Government which is established by Authority and which we exercise is for the substantials of it this Government and which we judge also to be most consonant to the practice of the primitive Churches in the purest times And therefore as there was some entrance made by the late Parliament in regard of establishing this Government by ordinances as the Church Government of these Nations And as to the putting those Ordinances in execution there hath been some beginning in the Province of London the Province of this County and in some other places throughout the Land So when there shall be the opportunity offered we shall not be wanting by petitioning or otherwayes to use our best endeavours that it may be fully settled throughout these Lands that so we may not as to Government in the Church any longer continue as a City without wals and a Vineyard without an hedge and so to the undoing of our posterity endanger Religion to be quite lost And upon which consideration we do earnestly desire that all conscientious and moderate spirited men throughout the Land though of different principles whether of the Episcopal or Congregational way would bend themselves so far as possibly they can to accommodate with us in point of practice In which there was so good a progresse made by the late Assembly as to those that were for the Congregational way And as we think also all those that were for the lawfulnesse of submission to the Government of the late Prelacy as it was then exercised and that are of the Judgement of the late Primate of Ireland in his reduction of Episcopacy unto the form of Synodical Government mentioned before might doe if they would come up towards us so far as we judge their principles would allow them As we do also professe that however we cannot consent to part with the Ruling Elder unlesse we should betray the truth of Christ Rom. 12. 1 Cor. 12. 1 Tim. 5. as we judge and dare not give any like consent to admit of a moderate Episcopacy for fear of encroachments upon the Pastors right and whereof late sad experience lessons us to beware as we judge also that the superiority of a Bishop above a Presbyter in degree which some maintain is no Apostolical institution and so have the greater reason in that respect to caution against it Yet we do here professe we should so farre as will consist with our principles and the peace of our own consciences be ready to abate or tolerate much for peace sake That so at the length all parties throughout the Land that have any soundness in them in matters of faith and that are sober and godly though of different judgements in lesser matters being weary of their divisions might fall in the necks one of another with mutual embraces and kisses and so at last through the tender mercy of our God there might be an happy closure of breaches and restoring of peace and union in this poor unsettled rent and distracted Church to the glory of God throughout all the Churches SECT VII BUt now as to you and what follows in your Paper and in the mean season till this can be accomplished and
though we do not deny But that if upon the first exhortation they do not present themselves to the Eldership it being in order to their regular and orderly Admission to the Lords Supper the Minister may exhort and exhort them again because they continue in the neglect of that which is their duty yet there was no such thing said by us But then to make the ground of your charge something more colourable you added another word which was not at all used by us We said the Minister was to exhort and that was all But you adde and say He shall exhort and admonish But we have told you before to exhort and admonish are different things And we leave it to indifferent Judges to consider whether this be a candid and fair waâ— of arguing even in the Schools much lesse should it have been made use of when it is brought in to bear up the weight of so heavy a charge as you here put up against us And this is the main foundation whereupon all the rest is built But your ground work being so unsure what you built thereon must needs fall Yet you go on to make it good as far as you can and therefore do further add and say But what if they still refuse Their names say you shall be published c. But what 's your proof for this That 's say you the fifth Order But here you quite mistake your mark and therefore when you have considered it your selves will not wonder you should shoot so wide For the fifth Order speaks only of Persons that have been privately admonished and also admonished by the Eldership Of which the former branch of the fourth order speaks And what sort of Persons that refers to is manifest from our Paper and hath been by us shewed before that it cannot by any good Rules of construction be referred to the Persons that the Minister is to exhort and which is the latter branch of the fourth Order And this link of your chain being thus broken the rest of it which follows must needs of it self fall in sunder So that we need to add no more And so we have done with the examination of what you have presented to us in your Paper But we do not finde that you have discovered to us any thing in ours that is not sound and orthodox and for which therefore there is any just reason why any thing in it should lye sadly on your spirits and consciences But do hope after you have seriously weighed what is here presented you may receive so much satisfaction as to see you have no just cause to forbear joyning with us upon any grounds you have here made known We have been willing to put our selves upon some pains in this our large Answer And if it attain the desired end we shall not account it ill bestowed If yet you should rest unsatisfied we desire you to let us know what it is you stumble at And though in regard of sundry other imployments that lye upon us it cannot be expected that we who meet but once a moneth in ordinary and about other matters should hold on a course of Answering you still by writing Yet we shall be ready to appoint some other way that may be far more speedy and we trust as effectual to give you that further satisfaction that is meet and just And now we shall intreat that as our only aime in this Anser hath not been victory but the clearing up of the Truth the satisfying your scruples and giving you a right understanding in what you were mistaken and the vindication of the Government and our selves and hereby the setling of Peace and Unity in our Congregations to the glory of God and edification of the Church So you would shew forth that Candor as not to put any other construction upon what is here offered to you And as you subscribe your selves our brethren desirous of Truth Unity and Peace in the Church So we shall heartily begge of the God of Truth and Peace that both you and we may all of us in all our transactions make it to appear that we are cordial and real in our professions of such desires and that he would bless these and all other our sincere endevours that they may be effectual for the attaining those ends Subscribed in the Name and by the appointment of the Class by John Angier Moderator THE GENTLEMENS Second Paper To the first Classis at Manchester within the Province of Lancaster These Dear Friends nay more Brethren dearly beloved to us in the Lord WE return you hearty thanks for your Answer wherein we finde your much Civility towards us but with too much prolixity We deny not but there may be some errours and mistakes and some sharp reflections upon you and your Government in our Paper which you charge upon us In yours also and that not improbably in one of that bulk might be discovered so me Impertinencies errours and mistakes which we forbear to minde you of but silently pass over hoping all will be buried or covered in that true love and Charity of Brethren of one and the same Church and fellowship In that true love we say which covereth a multitude of faults We shall make no further Replication to the several particulars in your Paper at this time but only to one Branch wherein you refer us to Dr. Bernard In the close of whose Book we meet with one intituled The Reduction of Episcopacy unto the form of Synodical Government received in the Ancient Church By the most Reverend and Learned Father of our Church Dr. James Vsher late Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of all Ireland proposed in the year 1641. as an expedient for the prevention of those troubles which afterwards did arise about the matter of Church Government which you say is the same in substance with yours Your words are these But if the Antiquity of such Assemblies be that you Question Then we refer you to what Dr. Bernard in the Book of his above quoted shews was the judgement of Dr. Usher who is acknowledged by all that knew him or are acquainted with his works to have been a great Antiquary however we alleadge him not that you should build your faith on his Testimony And which we think may be sufficient to vindicate Provinciall Assemblies in your thoughts from the Suspicion of Novelty In that Book you have in the close of it proposals touching the Reduction of Episcopacy unto the form of Synodical Government received in the Ancient Church And it thus begins By the order of the Church of England c. And so you go on quoting several Testimonies of Fathers and Councils there alleadged In which you further proceed and say There are Proposals of Assemblies of Pastors within certain limited bounds which saving that they are somewhat larger then ours which is but a circumstantial difference do hold proportion with the Classical Provincial and National Assemblies mentioned
Assembly under the title of a presentation but of a representation only as we said in our answer But as in the Preface to these papers that you printed you insinuate that we are men of low and cheap abilities and in this paper do afterwards jeer and scoff at us as persons destitute of all learning as if you would monopolize as all power and jurisdiction so all learning and make the same proper to your selves and your own party though we hope we have so much as to fathom the depth of that which you would make some shew of so here we have cause to fear you had a mind to represent us and which is worse the Provincial Assembly too and those reverend and learned brethren the Moderator and Scribe of it also to be such poor illiterate persons as did not well know how how to write good English Secondly In your representing what we said touching submitting to Synods and Councils you do it but by the halfes and so deal unfaithfully never so much as mentioning what we had in our answer in the first place declared viz. that our faith was not to be resolved into the determination of any company of men on earth whatsoever or to be built on the judgement of Synods and Councills c. for which we gave our reasons And further we there said that when you had said in your first paper that as touching what you therein declare as your sense and apprehensions of ours that we published you did not rest in the judgement and determination of any general Concil contrary thereunto if your meaning therein was the same with what we had declared ours to be you had not us differing from you After we came to declare in what respects they were to be reverenced viz. as they were the ordinances of God and in respect of their authoritative judgement and that in that respect they were to be submitted to in which respect we said we submitted our apprehensions in the case propounded to the judgement of the Provincial Assembly But to make this more plain we proceeded to distinguish betwixt a private and publick judgement in matters of Religion allowing the private to our selves and others who we said were all of us to see with our own eyes and judge concerning what is to be believed in matters of this nature Again we distinguished the publick and authoritative judgement into a concional which belonged we said to every Minister to whom the key of Doctrine was committed by himself singly and juridical which we said belonged to Synods and Councils who having the key of Discipline committed to them were to enquire into try examine censure and judge of matters of Doctrine and Discipline authoritatively though tyed to the Word in such proceedings and likewise to censure offenders and then we applyed this to our purpose and said that it was in this sense that we submitted our apprehensions in the paper we published to the judgement of the Provincial Assembly and for which we urged our grounds all which will be clear to the Reader upon the perusal of the second Section of our answer But you only mention this last branch and say we tell you of an authoritative judgement of Synods and Councills and how we hoped when you had weigbed the matter better you would not in this respect see cause to submit what you may publish as your own private judgements about matters of Religion to the judgement of a general Council suppose it might be had But seeing towards the close of this Section you profess you are glad to hear us of the same mind with you touching this submission to Synods and Councills you should not thus maimedly have represented out opinion considering how vastly different ours and yours is in this matter as will appear from what hath been declared to be ours and what you declare to be yours in this Section and which we shall manifest anon to the Reader Thirdly You seem here to abhorre the refusal to submit what you have published or may publish as your own private judgement in matters of Religion to the judgement of a general Council that hath been or any that may be hereafter and do complain that we should either our selves judge or induce others to the perswasion of you that you should refuse to submit your judgement in the sense declared But here we must mind you that the sense we declared was that there was to be a submission to them in regard of their juridical authority not that faith was to be built on their judgement And in this latter you will be found to submit too much as if they should determine against you we fear in the former you would be found to submit too little We shall give the Reader our Reasons for both that we may not seem to wrong you in fastening upon you without ground what perhaps as we have expressed the matter you may be ready to disclaim For the first You do in this very Section profess as touching matters which are not so plainly set forth in the word of God your willing submission to the judgement of a general Council and hereafter in the sixth Section of this Paper you say where there is a doubt or difficulty the Church may expound the Scripture although you grant what we said soil that it is tyed to the rule of Gods words in such proceedings as Judges to the Law though we do not see it is lawfull for any private persons to examine whether in case of such a doubt or difficulty the Church hath given the right sense of Scripture but must notwithstanding any grounds they may have from that Text which the Church may expound or other Texts of Scripture to the contrary submit their faith and belief in the case to the Churches determination For you there add and say we are bâ—und up by that speaking of the Churches exposition as you say we are to those cases in the Law which are the judgement and exposition of the Judges upon the dark places of the same the Churches exposition and practice as you there further say is our rule in such cases and the best rule too and when there is a difference about interpretation of Scripture it is to give way to private interpretation and dominari fidei to lord it over the faith of others to utter any other sense of Scripture which you there call the uttering of mens own fancies then hath been delivered by our Forefathers as you do more fully declare your selves in that place From all which it follows that however in this Section you say in matters of faith and such articles as are plainly warranted by Gods word and constant practice of the Catholique Church you refuse to submit your judgement to the judgement of a general Council yet in matters of Religion that are not so plainly set forth you do and to the Churches exposition where there is a doubt and difficulty which is your rule
and the best rule too and by which you are bound up which what is it else then to build your faith in such cases upon their judgement and so to submit to them as we said too much And seeing there is almost no point of faith but it is controverted if all such points must be judged such matters as about which there is doubt and difficulty and not plainly set forth in Gods word then in all such cases it must be the Churches exposition of the Scriptures and practice as you do insisinuate that must be the rule by which you must be guided and that on which in such cases your faith must be built and which when we come to the sixth Section we shall shâ—w to be very unsound and with the Papists in whole or in part to resolve your faith into the determinations of men the exposition of the Church or of Synods and Councils that are the Church representative The Reader by this account may perceive that in this respect you submitted too much to Synods and Councils and a great deal further then ever we submitted as is manifest from what we have shewed was in this our declared judgement in our answer to your first Paper But we shall now further proceed to give the Reader our Reason why if Synods and Councils and you say of these you shall submit to any that shall come hereafter should determine against you we feared in regard of their juridical authority you would submit too little There is betwixt you and us a controversie touching the superiority of Bishop above Presbyters we deny it you herein are for the affirmative You assert in the very next Section that Ae rius was condemned for heresie for asserting this parity of Church-Officers and it is Bishops and Presbyters only that are there spoken of There is also another controversie betwixt you and us touching ruling Elders whether they be by divine right or no you herein deny and we affirme In these matters then we shall take it for granted till you deny it that you yeild there is a doubt and difficulty and touching which you will not have the Scripture to be so plain but that Fathers and Councils must be consulted in these cases and which was the reason why in the case of the ruling Elder you sent us to them for to consult what exposition they gave of the Texts that we alleadged for the divine right of those Officers Now the Question is whether you will submit to the determination of Synods and Councils in regard of their juridical authority As touching the first of these matters in difference we shall in our Animadversions on your next Section shew that there are Fathers that determine against you As touching the other concerning ruling Elders we have in our Answer to your second Paper shewed there are several Fathers that do give in clear evidence touching the being of this Officer in their times But as touching this Officer vvhether he be an Officer of the Church by divine right vve have not read of any general Council before vvhom this case in controversie vvas brought much less that they determined against vvhat in this point vve hold but vve suppose that from vvhat you or vve may alledge out of Fathers or Councils of ancienter times these points vvill not be found to be determined but there vvill be a difference betvvixt us still What then is it that you vvill submit to To a general Council that shall come hereafter If so and that you vvill give that due respect to Synods and Councils that may be hereafter in regard of their juridical Authority Then untill a general Council may be had that may be regularly and duely called and rightly constituted seeing the matters in difference betvvixt you and us have been tryed and examined judged and determined against you and for us by a reverend and learned Synod and Assembly of Divines against vvhomâ— your exception against our Provincial Assembly in regard of the Elders being admitted there as members lyes not that was called by the Authority of the Civil power of this Nation under which we live you ought to testifie your submission to that Synod and not contrary to their resolution of the cases in difference and the Ordinances of Parliament for the Presbyterian-Government and against Episcopacy disturb the peace of the Church by publishing your own private judgments if their determinations had been against us and we had published ours in the cases in difference you would have called them our fancies and thereby testifie what little respect you have to their resolutions Upon this consideration we cannot but think that if a general Council should hereafter come and determine these cases against you you that now submit not would not submit then And so the upshot of the matter would be this that if in these or such like cases in controversie you were otherwise resolved in your judgements you would not submit to the determination of a general Council in regard of their juridical authority only if they determined according to your resolutions then you would submit wherein notwithstanding your great professions of submission you do not submit much Fourthly But now you find your selves agrieved because when you said you did publish this your sense and apprehension of our Paper as far as it was plain to you we leaving out the words as far as it was plain to you dealt not fairly with you for you say those words carry another sense with them then indeed we did understand them in that is as here you explain your selves so far as the matter contained in our Paper was plain to you you closed and joyned with us being as you say you explain your selves afterward so fully warranted thereunto by the word of God and constant practice of the Catholick Church that therein so far as it is thus made plain to you you shall not submit your apprehensions to the judgement of a general Council but now your complaint of us is that by leaving those words out which you thus explain we represent you as if where matters were not so plain but doubtfull you refused to submit The truth is we took these words referring to our Paper so far as it is plain to us in opposition to obscurity and darkness you after complaining that other parts of our Paper were full of darkness and then though we left those words out yet we could not conceive we wronged you therein being you could not profess your closure and joyning with us in any thing in our Paper any further then you understood our plain meaning But seeing you here otherwise explain your selves and say you did it before we will be more liberal to you then you are to us afterwards and shall allow you the liberty to explain your selves though we do not think that the sound and orthodox Reader will judge that your opinion thus explained and which you have here declared touching your
submission to Synods and Councils is any sounder then as we understood you to have meant those words and which we doubt not but he will discern from what hath been said concerning it in the Animadversion going before 5. But by this explication of your selves you have created to us a further scruple for it aâ—peats to us from thence seeing you joyn the word of God and constant practice of the Catholique Church together as that which must make those matters of faith and articles of Religion so plain to you that you thereupon will refuse to submit such matters so made plain and your apprehensions concerning them to a generall Council that except the plainest matters of faith and articles of Religion from Gods word be also made plain to have been the constant practice rather judgment as we think you should have expressed it of the Catholique Church they are not so plain to you as not to submit your apprehensions concerning them to a generall Council and so the word of God alone even in the matters of faith and articles of Religion that are therein most plainly contained shall not be a sufficient foundation to bottom your faith upon except it be also evident what was the constant and universall practice rather judgment of the Church in those points and so your faith even in the plainest articles of Religion must be resolved into the constant practice or rather declared judgment of the universal Church and which makes it a meer humane not a divine faith But touching this as the rule in any cases of matters of Religion we shall have further occasion to speak in our animadversions on the sixth Section of this paper 6. As touching our selves we have declared that we did not submit to Synods and Councils so as to build our faith on their dictates or resolve it into their determinations and in this we would be understood touching all matters of faith whatsoever not only those that are most plainly contained in Gods word but also such as about which there may be some doubt and difficulty although we reverence Synods as an Ordinance of God and in way of means judg it more likely in doubtfull cases that what is Gods mind should be boulted forth to our satisfaction by the learned debates of learned judicious and godly Divines in such Assemblies then by the discussion of one Bishop or some few Ministers But as touching the juridicall power of Synods we profess our selves to be ready to submit to their judgment and did so submit our Paper wholly to the judgment of our Provinciall which was a Synod actually in being and to whom we knowing our selves to be accountable and judging we ought so to be thought it not meet to publish the Paper that was read in our severall Congregations except it had first been approved of by them Now how farre we do in this declaration of our judgements touching our submission to Synods and Councils concur with what here you declare to be yours we leave it to your selves and the Reader to judg of but we are sure there is herein a great distance betwixt your declared judgment and ours though you shall not finde afterwards that we do hardly grant that to a generall Council rightly constituted and regularly called which we either in truth or any shew do grant to our Provinciall The Gentlemens Paper Sect. III. Having done with our Preface you come to the matter and as we said so we finde we much dissent not onely in the third and last concerning the Heresie and Schism of those who Erre so grossely whether in Doctrinals or points of discipline You give us the reason wherefore you did not so expresly mention them their sin and punishment as the grossely ignorant and scandalous Which is because they are very inconsiderable in comparison of the other and in sundry of your Congregations if not in most not any at all that you know of But if you will seriously consider the number of those that have rent themselves from a true constituted Church and of those who have severed themselves from those Bishops unto whom they had sworn Canonical obedience and therefore in the Judgement of that Learned and Rever end Bishop Vsher and others cannot possibly be excused from being Schismaticall we say if you consider this you will finde a considerable number even within the verge of your own Association What we said touching the way of Catechising for Information of the ignorant we are glad to hear you so heartily wish for a more generall practise thereof in your Churches at home at you say it is practised abroad It was enjoyned and practised in the Church of England before your separation And if you by your pretended Reformation have destroyed that practise the fault lies at your own doors You understand us aright in this That we hold it not fitting that Persons grossely ignotant should be admitted so the Sacrament of the Lords Supper But your conclusion thence is not good viz. That we cannot therefore in reason deny that there ought to be an Examination and tryall of all Persons de novo before they be admitted c Especially by your Eldership To whom you say the power of judgement and examination is committed and not to any one Minister before whom all must come for re-examination whatsoever their tryall and examination heretofore hath been Those Persons who have anciently been Catechized and have been a long time Commoners at the Lords Table and witnessed a good confession for parts and piety must these again yeild themselves to the examination of an Eldership before they can be admitted Pardon us if herein we pronounce a dissent from you Concerning the scandalous and wicked in their lives you say we fully come up to you and are glad there is an agreement in judgement betwixt us thus farre viz. That the Churches lawfull Pastors have power to Excommunicate such upon which you say you cannot see how we in reason can finde fault with your proceedings in such a way against such Persons though your ruling Elders which in our judgement aâ—e but meer lay-men do joyn in the Government with you Ther 's another non sequitur a conclusion as bad as the former and the reason of that conclusion as weak as the rest Because High-Commissioners Chancellors and Commissaries in the time of Episcopacy to which Government we submitted that were as much Lay-men as your ruling Elders had so great a share as to suspend Ministers c. and so farre as to decree the sentence of Excommunication against them and others as there was occasion for it For when you can prove that these Chancellors Commissaries c. did not officiate by deputation from and under a lawfull Pastor but in equall right with him and jure divino as your ruling Elders do Then your Comparison of them and your ruling Elders may hold good till then it is weak and frivolous Now whereas you desire to
new tearmed Assembly not for the words sake Assembly but first in regard of the word Provincial although that in the judgement of Dr. Usher who in his reduction of Episcopacy unto the forme of Synodical Government received in the ancient Church doth expresly mention among his proposals as we said also in our answer the Provincial Synod would not have been accused of novelty but that which you are here offended at is that this County of Lancaster should be tearmed the Province of Lancaster and the Synods and Assemblies therein convened should be tearmed Provincial for which yet you have little reason if you had considered all this was done by the authority of Parliament who had power to bound the Province and the Synod or Assembly to be held thereih for the ordering and regulating the affairs of the Church within the bounds set as they judged to be most convenient And seeing that a Synod within the bounds of a County may meet more frequently with conveniency for the regulating the affairs of the several Classical Presbyteries within those bounds then if the bounds had been larger especially if so large as to have comprehended within them several Counties as formerly the two Provinces of York and Canâ—erbury comprehended all the Counties within the Land and which doubtless the Parliament considered when they ordered Decemb. 21. 1646. That the several Classes in Luncashire should be one Province and of which we had before given you an account in our answer to your first Paper if you had acquiesced in the authority of Parliament as sufficient for the ordering of such a matter you would not have found fault with this for its novelty all Laws that are newly made though for the ease of the suâ—jâ—cts being as liable to exception in that respect as this Your next reason why you charge our Provincial Assembly with novelty is in regard of the place at Preston but this exception was prevented in our answer unto which here you make no reply when we said if Provincial Assemblies be warrantable and have been of ancient use in the Church that having been long in disuse they of late began to be held at Preston that could not justly incurre your censure and certainly the most famous Synods and Councils that have been or that may be hereafter must be all accused in regard of novelty if this be a sufficient ground of accusation even the first four general Councils of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon those being all as new in regard of their places where they were assembled at the time of their first meeting there having been never such Assemblies convened in those places before as our Provincial Assembly was or is that met and still ordinarily doth at Preston But perhaps there is more strength in the last reason why you charge it to be a new termed Provincial Assembly when you say it is new in respect of the persons constituting this Assembly lay-men presiding and ruleing and having decisive voyces in as ample a manner as the highest and chiefest in holy Orders nor doth Bishop Usher as you say or what we alleadge out of him make for such an Assembly But here 1. We must minde you that we did not cite Dr. Usher for to prove the antiquity of Provincial Assemblies in regard of these members constituting them Let our answer be perused it will be found to alleadge him for to prove the antiquity of the Assemblies of the Pastors of the Churches for the ordering Church affairs and having the power of ruleing them and because we did not know whether you were not so fond on Prelacy as not to allow of these Assemblies we quoted Dr. Usher for to prove their antiquity neither did we conceive that Dr. Usher would have judged these Assemblies where the Pastors of the Churches are members to have been wholly new or the Pastors to have lost their authority in them because the ruling Elders are admitted into them as members whatever his own thoughts might be concerning them 2. But as touching them we must further minde you of what we have said before that they are not meer lay-men but duely and orderly called to an Ecclesiastical Office although they never praeside in these Assemblies as moderatours And further that we have proved from antiquity in our answer to your second Paper the being of such an Officer in the Church in the time of Origen Ambrose Augustine Optatus and which is so clear that the adversaries of this Officer cannot deny it only they would have him to have been as an extraordinary Church-guardian or admitted on prudential grounds which yet is but gratis dictum as we have said 3. We shall now only further add what is well observed by the Provincial Assembly of London that Sutlivius a Prelatical Divine and otherwise an opposer of the Office of ruling Elders de concil lib. 1. cap. 8. saith that among the Jews Seniores Tribuum the Elders of the Tribes did sit with the Priests in judging controversies of the Law of God hence he argues against Bellarmine that so it ought to be in the Christian Church also because the priveledge of Christians is no less then the priveledge of the Jewes And it is not denyed by other Prelatica Divines but by them held and proved that men of abilities which are not Ministers are to be admitted into general Councils as they have been also anciently and which is too manifest to be denyed it appearing to have been so from the ancientest historians and subscriptions of Councils and to vote in them as members of these Assemblies And therefore however the ruling Elders be be admitted into our Provincial Assemblies as members whom you account to be but lay-men and have decisive votes there the Assembly should not by you have been accused of novelty in this respect for you see such as were no Ministers have been anciently admitted into Synods and Councils to vote there as members according to the old rule Quod tangit omnes debet tractari ab omnibus The Gentlemens Paper Sect. IV. Well! bâ—t you say we go on and tell you c. But had your professions and expressions for Peace and Unity been as reall and as cordiall as ours we had proceeded no further in this way of Rejoynder but closed hands and hearts together as in our last humble address appeareth Which certainly might have found a more ready compliance and merited a far more civil and satisfactory Answer from such cordiall wishers of Peace and Unity such godly and sober such moderate spirited men as you pretend to be But you have required we should go on and accordingly we go on to tell you that other parts of your Paper are full of darkness To which you thus Answer We cannot apprehend any such darkness in our Paper as you speak of but because you question what Authority we have from the civil Magistrate and the extent of it and your mistakes of our meaning may perhaps some
therefore you and all men may discern that when you say speaking of the humble Advice that in the eleventh Section all Ministers throughout the Land and their Assemblies professing the true Protestant Religion though of different judgments in worship and discipline are all of them equally protected in the liberty of their profession that proposition is a great deal larger then the humble Advice will allow of it expresly concluding even from that protection allowed to some others the way of Prelacy though it should be set up by some Ministers and others of the Protestant Religion and therefore all Ministers and their Assemblies though professing the Protestant Religion cannot equally lay claim to the protection there spoken of But for answer to all that you here urge out of this eleventh Section of the humble Advice we shall say two things 1. That as your selves speak only of protection allowed by it to some persons of different judgement in worship or discipline so whoever will peruse this Section shall not find that it saith one word touching the restraint of the exercise of Church-discipline towards any when it speaks of some that shall differ in other things sc that had been mentioned particularly before in doctrine worship or discipline from the publick profession held forth to whom it allows protection from injury as it grants them a freedom from mulcts and civil penalties and then after of such Ministers or publick Preachers who shall agree with the publick profession in matters of faith although in their judgement and practice they differ in matters of worship and discipline whom it makes capable being otherwise duely qualified and duely approved of some special grace and favour that the former sort are not capable of it is plain from those expressions that it owns a publique discipline which is not held forth any where but in the forme of Church Government established by Ordinance of Parliament for the Church of England and Ireland Aug. 29. 1648. that hath been often times mentioned But you will not find that the exercise of this publick discipline held forth is any where at all in this Section prohibited or that it is restrained in regard of its exercise towards any or limited only in that respect to the Ministers and Assemblies of this or the other perswasion And yet that this publick discipline held forth as aforesaid might be free from all suspition of any undue rigour or harshness towards any we shall here mention one rule which we recited with several other things in our answer to your first Paper touching the Order prescribed in the forme of Church Government of proceeding to excommunication which runs in these words But the persons who hold other errours in judgment about points wherein learned and godly men possibly may or do differ and which subvert not the faith nor are destructive to godliness or that be guilty of such sins of infirmity as are commonly found in the children of God or being otherwise sound in the faith and holy in life and so not falling under censure by the former rules endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace and do yet out of conscience not come up to the observation of all those rules which are or shall be established by authority for regulating the outward worship of God and government of his Church the sentence of excommunication for these causes shall not be denounced against them By this one rule it is very clear that as this discipline is not to be accused of undue severity so there is no repugnancy between the humble Advice and it 2. That which in the second place we have to say is that admitting your proposition were fully as large in the humble Advice in regard of the persons to whom you would have liberty to be extended as you have laid it down which yet we have shewed is not so yet how inconsequently do you argue when you will inferre an exemption of persons from Church censures authorized to be exercised by the forme of Church Government from the humble Advice because it affords them a protection against civil injuries As if this proposition were most certainly true All those that according to the humble Advice are to be protected against civil injuries are thereby exempted from Church censures and yet this must be proved or your consequence is never proved But to make that out we shall allow you time and in the mean season must deny it And so now all you have to the conclusion of this Section is but meer varnish although we are able to tell you as we have told you even now and often before what power is granted unto us who act by an unrepealed Ordinance of Parliament and yet in force that others have not although when you say are these within the bounds of our association subject to our Government unless they will renounce their Baptism and Christianity and which you would represent us to assert in that recital you make of our words in the beginning of the next Section you do therein manifestly offer violence to the words of our answer for if the Reader peruse the first part of the fifth Section of our answer he may there find that we declared our selves in the first place fully against those of the separation and concluded that discourse with these words that hereupon our work was not to constitute Churches but to reforme them only And that therefore none within our bounds except they shall renounce Christianity and their Baptisme can be deemed by us to be without in the Apostles sense this being our answer to what you had pressed us with in your first Paper pleading your exemption from under our Governement from the words of the Apostle and saying for what have you to do to judge those that are without The conclusion then that we inferd did answer that argument you urged from the Apostles words For its plain from our declaring our selves we judged none to be without in the Apostles sense but only Heathens of whom the Apostle spake or such as having formerly professed Christianity did renounce it and their Baptisme and that therefore none could be exempted by those words of the Apostle from being within the verge of our Presbyterian Governement which was the inference we thereupon made By all which it is very clear in what sense those words were to be taken that you here mention and that we did not say that except men did renounce Christianity and their Baptisme they were subject to our Government as you would have it to be but that they could not be judged by us to be without in the Apostles sense except they should make so great an apostacy and wherein we were more liberal and charitable toward you then you were toward your selves It is one thing that makes a member of the Catholick visible Church and another that makes a member of this or that particular Church as it is also true that
this and stand to nothing have you two hearts and not one forehead In our last Adress we offered to stand to Dr Vshers Judgement and you declined your own man We submit to the Interpretation of those Fathers there alledged by him touching the word Presbytery which you say is the same with yours Can you so cordially joyn your selves in Dr Bernards wish and heartily recommend it to others to close therein Can you thus tender the Judgement of Dr Vsher as an Umpire and composer of differences betwixt us and alleadge these Fathers on your behalf and when we would close with you upon your own Tearms run back and eat your own words Presbytery in their's and Scripture Expression we reverence but yours we still tearm a Common-fold and those godly pretences of yours as so many wast Papers wherein your Presbytery is wrapped to make it look more handsomely and pass more currently Whereat again you are no little offended and say We do earnestly desire that in the Examination of your Consciences you would seriously consider whether you have not both transgressed the rules of Charity in passing such hard censures upon us and also usurped that which belongs not to you in making your selves judges of what falls not under your cognizance To which we Answer those words are not our own they are borrowed of another if you would know the Author we must tell you it was the late King in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who is gone before and you must follow after And we leave it to the Tribunal at the great day to be determined whether he or you have more transgressed the rules of Charity in passing such hard censures upon one another and also usurped that which belongs not to you in making your selves judges of what falls not under your cognizance The things as you say men ioned belonging onely to be tried by your and our Master to whom we must all stand or fall The Animadversions of the Class upon it 1. ALthough we will neither flout at you nor triumph over you as you do over us as if you had quite taken away our claime to the civil Sanction and made all that we had said for it void yet we doubt not but the Reader will judg that what you attempted with great confidence you have performed but so and so weakly and no otherwise And as touching what you now recite out of our Answer we desire the Reader not to take it upon your representation but to peruse himself the whole fift Section thereof you having not dealt fairly with us your representation being neither full nor candid we not concluding as we have already shewed that except men will renounce Christianity and their Baptisme they are within the verge of our Presbyterian Government but that except they renounce Christianity and their Baptisme they are not without in the Apostles sense although because they are within our bounds we look upon all such as under our Government according to Ordinance of Parliament as we have said before 2. Neither shall we upon this assertion have any cause to fear the contempt and scorn of any other parties there being none but the Presbyterian party onely that can lay claim to the civil Sanction for the establishment of that Government which they exercise as you who would gladly croud your selves into the number of those to whom some indulgence is granted have no liberty granted you by any of the Acts that have been made since the Ordinance of Aug. 29. 1648. that established the Presbyterian Government you not being under the Character of the persons spoken of either in the Act of the 27. of Septemb. 1650 or the humble Advice or any other you being for Prelacy that is excluded from that indulgence granted unto others Nay you might have known that for reading the Common Prayer book such persons are punishable by the Act for ejecting of scandalous Ministers and therefore if you or any of you who are members of our severall Congregations and within the bounds of our Association shall be found at any time justly censurable by the rules of our Government it will be no great boldness for us to proceed to censure you we being backed with an Ordinance of Parliament that still stands in force against any thing you have alledged to the contrary and therefore do not fear your threatning us again with a Premunire 3. We were offended at you for calling Presbytery aâ—common fold and instead of removing that offence given you encrease it But you first represent in your paraphrase upon our words after your own manner the ground of the offence taken and then return your answer in which we observe that you might with more freedom lash at Presbytery and us you are here pleased to enlarge your selves upon a very few words of ours brought in by way of a Parenthesis onely though in other parts of your Reply you leave whole leaves untoucht and often say nothing at all to severall considerable things in our Answer to which you should have spoken yea in the fifth Section of this your Reply you pass over in silence all that we had said in the beginning of the fifth Section of our Answer wherein we had declared our selves against those of the Separation in severall positions thereby making way to the answer we gave how we understood the Apostle when he spake concerning such as were without which you took no notice of but rent part of our words from what went before and wrested them from their proper sense as we have shewd before And not only this but when in your first Paper you had upbraided us with the garnishing of our Government with the specious title of Christs Government Throne and Scepter and we had answered you out of your own Paper and shewed from the expressions you had therein used concerning the Government that you are for that that with you must be Christs Government Throne and Scepter and that therefore we were not to be condemned if we had used such expressions concerning our Government till you had convinced us that it was not such yet all this is passed over without so much as mentioning what we had said or returning any answer to it as if it were nothing for you to upbraid us with what if it were a transgression you your selves were found guilty of and when we had so answered it to say nothing to it the like whereunto you do also here practice in saying nothing to what we had answered when you had told us that it was the chief design of the Paper we published in our Congregations to subject all to our Government For in our Answer we first apologized for our selvs professing that though we were charged by some to affect dominion c. yet the Government of the Church was but Ministeriall and that we acknowledged all subjection to the civil Magistrate and then we retorted upon you thus and said that you being for the
expensis diversum sensum non malé quadrare fateor ut sit nomen officij Ceremoniam pro ipso â—actu posuit and which is the sense that in his Institutions he doth adhere to But Calvin must not have leave from you first to alledg one interpretation as that which in his judgement was probably true and so to approve of it and afterward upon consideration of all things he thought were to be weighed to conclude with another if he do and thus deliver himself in his Comment uâ—on this place he is flat opposite to himself in his institutions as you judge though we believe all equall judges will be more candid toward him then to approve of your censure of him in this particular 3. But it may be this of Calvin was mentioned by you that thence you might take the occasion to have a fling at us For after you had aspersed him you say you fear you shall find us as wavering and unsetled in our judgments when it comes to scanning But wherein For that we said divers of the Fathers did interpret this word Presbytery as we did and as we said had been declared before That which in our answer we said had been declared before referd to what we had before sc in the latter part of the third Section of it alledged out of Dr. Usher in his reduction of Episcopacy unto the forme of Synodicall Government where he proves from several of the Fathers and from the 4th Council of Carthage that Presbyters had a hand in the administration of the Discipline of Christ We produced him alledging the Fathers you here make mention of and you your selves even now alledged many more interpreting the word Presbytery used 1 Tim. 4. in the same sense that we concurre with and which concurrent sense of ours with the Fathers we declared in that short Parenthesis on which you do thus enlarge when we said the Fathers did understand the word Presbytery as we do But now what is it that you lay to our charge or what is it that is our offence with which you here upbraid us You tell us it is because we said the Fathers understood the word Presbytery as we did and because we produce Dr. Usher speaking in this sense But as to the preaching Presbyters and which was all that in the place above-mentioned in our answer we alleadged him to bring in the Fathers to speak for is not this clear and manifest to him that will either peruse what he hath or what you acknowledg we alleadge out of him or shall but consider what Fathers you your selves do say do expound 1 Tim. 4. touching the company of Presbyters i. e. the Bishops that lay on hands And therefore if you press us herein to stand to their sense and interpretation by us alleadged out of Dr. Usher we shall not run back nor have any cause to be ashamed when we assert that their interpretation of the word Presbytery is the same with ours Yes say you we may be ashamed to say so For that Presbytery which we say is established by Ordinance of Parliament and is that which we stand for and which when we speak of the Government of the Church by Presbytery do mean by that word is not the same with that Presbytery which the Fathers understand And this we suppose you say because you judge the Fathers do not comprehend the ruling Elders under the word Presbytery mentioned 1 Tim. 4. To which we answer that where we alledged the Fathers out of Dr. Usher we never produced them for any such purpose as to prove that the ruling Elders were comprehended under the word Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. only we thought to gain upon you by steps and from what Dr. Usher alledged the Fathers for thence to inferre the antiquity of Assemblies where the Pastors of the Church are members have decisive votes and a right to rule and unto which if you assented we judged then we were so farre agreed and which was the reason why mentioning his proposal of Assemblies we said they were the same in substance with ours and for the reason of which expression we have in this our answer to this your Paper given a full account before and to prevent repetition do referre the Reader thither however the ruling Elders be admitted into them as members although we desire the Reader to take notice and do mind you thereof that we have shewed that it is no novel thing for to admit such to have decisive votes in Synods and Councils that were never ordained to preach and administer the Sacraments and that we have alleadged testimonies of the Ancients for to prove the being of such an Officer as the ruling Elder in their times and consequently that he was a member of the Ecclesiastical consistory But we have thus shewed for what sense of the word Presbytery we alleadged the Fathers out of Dr. Usher as it will be manifest to him that will peruse our answer in that place where we cite them And now we leave it to the Reader to judge whether we have for this merited such language from you as here you give us Do we confidently assert that the Fathers give the same interpretation of the word Presbytery as we dâ— and yet stand to nothing Do we not still own that very sense of the word Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. which you your selves produce sundry of them to give Where then is our wavering or unsetledness in our judgements that you charge us with Or in what do we run back eating our own words as you here say we do But this is but a little matter in comparison for you will have us hereupon to have two hearts and not one ferehead But what were we in your second Paper your dear friends nay more brethren dearly beloved to you in the Lord and are we now become monsters in Christianity having two hearts and have not that common shamefastness that might be found even amongst Heathens having not one forehead We leave it to the Reader to judge how cordial you were in those sugared words you gave us there when you do here thus vent the rancor that was in your hearts and that upon so sseight an occasion doubtless the answer we gave in words to your second Paper could give no just cause for such unchristian and uncivil censures to pass upon us neither was there any thing in that part of our answer to your first Paper which your selves acknowledge was full of civillity towards you unto which you here reply that gave any such occasion the Fathers we quoted out of Dr. Usher being for such a sense of the word Presbytery as we cited them for But your uncharitableness in passing such hard censures upon us is not all for you do also here charge us with sundry manifest untruths For we never quoted Dr. Usher who in his proposals is expresly for moderate Episcopacy which we as expresly cautioned against as our own man whom we declined
Scriptures and that the Word of God alone should determine this controversie c. Who can forbear laughter to see Scripturists under the Gospel as these under the Law Templum Domini Templum Domini crie Verbum Domini Verbum Domiui nothing but Scripture the Word of God being there the onely rule of faith and manners Take to your Bibles then and burn all other Books as the Anabaptists of old did who when they and their Bibles were left together what strange and Phantastical opinion soever came into their brain Their usual manner was to say The spirit taught it them as Mr Hooker in his preface to his Eccles Pol. The determination of Councils and Fathers and the Churches Universal practise for matters of Church Government must all be abandoned and then to that old Question of the Papists Where was your Church before Lutber or that of ours to you Where was your Church before Calvin Just like the Arguing of the Samaritanes with the Jeâ—â—s about the Antiquity of their Church on Mount Gerizim recorded by Joseplus per Saltum by a high Jump over all the Universal practise and successions of the Church you can make your Church and Church Government as ancient as you list by saying it is to be found in the Scriptures referring it to Christ and the Apostles nay higher yet if you please to the Jewish Sanhedrim 1500. years at least before Christ Mr Henderson will assist you much in thâ—s who in his dispute with his Majesty averring that Presbyterian Government was never practised before Calvins time replyeth Your Majesty knows the Cammon Objection of the Papists against the Reformed Churches Where was your Church your Reformation your Doctrine before Luthers time One part of the Common Answer is it is to be sound in the Scriptures the same I affirm of Presbyterian Government Thus he Make you such defence in behalf of your Church but thanks be to God the Protestant cause hath not doth not nor we hope will ever want far abler Disputants and Champions in her defence against her adversaries then he or you be For though we grant and shall ever pay that reverence to the sacred Scriptures that it is an unsallible unerring rule yet may we not crie up Scripture to the contempt and neglect of the Church which the Scripture it self teacheth men both to honour and obey We will indeavour therefore to give either their due according to Christs institution that the Scripture where it is plain should guide the Church and the Church where there 's doubt or difficulty should expound the Scriptures as saith a Bishop And you your selves may remember what you affirm of General Councils the Churches Representative nay more of your Provincial Assemblies even in your Answer to that you call the preface to our Paper That there is in them invested an Authoritative juridicall power to whose Authority you profess your selves to be subject and to which all ought to submit alledging 1 Cor. 14. 32. Matth. 18. and Acts 15. for proof hereof to Inquire into Trie Examine Censure and judge of Matters of Doctrine as well as of Discipline And tax us as if we refused to submit in such matters to the Judgement of a General Council Though here you retract and eat your own words casting it out as unsound and Hetrodox what was before a Christians duty to practise You still own subjection in matters of Doctrine and discipline to the Judgement and determination of your Provincial Assemblies though you deny the Authority of General Councils and the Catholique Church That those should be our guide and rule and comment upon the Word of God to tell us what is his will revealed there touching Church Government and discipline Said we not truely that you seem to submit to your Provincial what you will hardly grant to a General Council But the Church as we have said where there 's doubt or difficulty may expound the Scripture though it be tied as you have said to the rule of Gods Words in such proceedings as Judges to the Law and we are concluded and bound up by that as we are to those cases in the Law which are the Judgement and Exposition of the Judges upon the dark places of the same The Churches exposition and practise is our rule in such cases and the best rule too As our late King affirmeth viz. Where the Scripture is not so clear and punctuall in precepts there the constant and Vniversal practise of the Church in things not contrary to reason faith good manners or any positive command is the best rule that Christians can follow So when there is a difference about â—nterpretation of Scripture that we may not seem to abound in our own sense or give way to private interpretation Dominari fidei to Lord it over the faith of others we are not to utter our own phansies or desires to be believed upon our bare word but to deliver that sense which hath been a foretime given by our fore-Fathers and fore-runners in the Christian saith and so we necessarily make another Judge and rule for interpretation of Scripture or else we prove nothing Thus have the best and ablest defenders of our Protestant Religion defended it against the Papists out of the Word of God too but not according to their own but the sense which the Fathers unanimously in the primitive Church and Councils gave See Mr Philpot that glorious Martyr in Queen Maries dayes to the like Question propounded viz. How long hath your Church stood Answereth from the beginning from Christ from the Apostles and their Immediate Successors And for proof thereof desires no better rule then what the Papists many times bring in on their side to wit Antiquity Universality and Unity And Calvin acknowledgeth as in our last Paper we shewed you there can be no better nor surer remedy for Interpretation of Scripture then what the Fathers in the primitive Churches gave especially in the first four General Councils of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon which contain nothing saith he but the pure and genuine Interpretation of Scripture and which he professeth to embrace and reverence as hallowed and inviolable So they rest not in private interpretation but willingly submit to a judg and rule besides the Scriptures even such as the Papists themselves cannot except against viz. the primitive Churches practise and Universal and unanimous consent of Fathers and general Councils By these our Church is content to be tryed and to this rule we bring the Church Government to be tried thereby And on this score your Presbytery is quite our of doors being of examples and practise of the Church and Testimonies of the Fathers wholly destitute wherein as the King hath it the whole stream runs so for Episcopacy that that there 's not the least rivulet for any others Which you being sensible of have no way to evade this rule but una liturâ to blot out all records and monuments
of Antiquity for the space of three hundred years after Christ as imperfect and far from shewing the Universal practise of the Church then and to brand the most approved Authors of those times as spurious and corrupt void of all modesty and shewing thereby no great store either of judgement or honesty But suppose the Monuments and Records of Antiquity for the space of three hundred years after Christ were now as you say grown unperfect and not able to shew what was then the Churches practise yet come we to the General Councils which are the best Expositors of Scripture and of the Churches practise and we by them shall find the practise of the Church in former time That famous Council of Nice which must be and is of all wise and Learned men reverenced esteemed and imbraced next unto the Scriptures themselves shews you the practise of the Church in its form of Church Government by Patriarch Metropolitan Arch-Bishop Bishop c. as by the 6th 7th 13th 25th 26th and 27th Canons of the same Council appeareth Not that this Council did constitute and create as some falsly conceit but did onely confirm and strengthen those orders and degrees which were in the Church even from the beginning so are the words of the Council Can. 6. The very first words of that Canon whereby it is ordained that the whole power of all Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis should belong to the Patriarch of Alexandria even as it is also there decreed that the ancient Customes and Priviledges which belonged to the Bishop of Rome Antioch and the Metropolitanes of other Provinces should be preserved are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The very words which Ignatius useth to express the Apostolical Traditions Anriqui mores obtineant in Aegypto Lybiâ Pentapoli c. i. e. Let the ancient customes in Aegypt Lybia and Pâ—ntapolis continue that the Patriarcks of Alexandria should have power over all these even those Customes which were deduced down to those times from St Mark the Evangelist not only Bishop of Alexandria but of the Churches of Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis also So Eusebius lib 2. cap. 15 16. and others So that these Canons here made gave no new thing did not de novo institute or establish this standing subordination in the Church viz. of all inferiour Officers in the Church to the Bishop in every Diocess of the Bishop in every Province to the Metropolitan of the Metropolitane in every Region to the Patriarch or Primate but did onely confirm it These standing powers and subjection being defined and asserted by the ancient Canons yea the most Ancient even in memorial Apostolicall Tradition and Custome avouched for it as may appear Concil Nicen. 1. cap. 4 6. Concil Antioch cap. 1 20. Concil Chalced. cap. 119. See more of this in Dr Hammond of Schism Cap. 3. sect 22. 23 24 25. cap. 8. sect 8. Thus much to shew the practice of the Church in point of Church Government for the first three hundred years even from generall Councils the best Expositors of the practice of the Church in those times And as they are our best Informers of the Churches practise so are they the best Interpreters of the mind and will of God in Scripture touching Church Government Calvin reckoning up the severall orders and degrees of Bishops Arch-Bishops Metropolitane and Patriarch and rendring the reason of such Governours ordained by the said Council of Nice though he dislike the name Hierarchie which some gave unto that Government yet saith he omitting the name if we look into the thing we shall find that these ancient Bishops did not frame a form of Church Government differing from that which Christ hath prescribed in his word Mark we pray the Churches practice in the form of Church Government was hitherto according to the prescript of Gods Word in Calvins judgment And this was 330. years after Christ Yea Beza likewise that earnest â—atron of Presbyterian discipline confesseth That those things which were ordained of the ancient Fathers concerning the seats of Bishops Metropolitanes and Patriarchs assigning their limits and attributing to them certain Authority were appointed optimo zelo out of a very good zeal and therefore such sure as was according to knowledg and the word of God otherwise it would be far from being optimus the best zeal And thus we have found a Church Government agreeable to the will of God and universall practise of primitive Churches such a one as we pray for may be established in this Nation putting both together not the word of God alone nor the Churches practice alone but both together and both in their due piaces not crying up the Church above the Scripture nor crying up the Scripture to the contempt and neglect of the Church but restoring the practice and customes of the Church into that credit is due unto them by invalidating of which all hereticall and schismaticall persons seek to overthrow the Church Nay but yours is that Government which is most consonant to the will of God revealed in Scriptures and your ruling Elders are jure divino which you cannot part with unless you should betray the truth of Christ Rom. 12. 1 Cor. 12. 1 Tim. 5. We answer these Texts are too generall to prove a ruling Presbytery out of and so you have been often told by many more learned Doctors of our English Church Yet ruling Elders must be found here for so you will have it let Gideâ—ns fleece be wet or dry That is whether there be dew enough in those Texts to water the sense or no Therefore being resolyed on it you wrest the Scriptures which St Peter complains of with Expositions and glosses newly coined to make them speak what they never meant giving such new and strange senses to places of Scripture as the Church of Christ never heard of till of late years This wresting of Scripture Dr Andrews taxeth the Papists withall saying Malus hic Cardinalium mos and we as truly Malus hic Presbyterorum mos rem facias rem si possis rectè si non quocunque modo rem c. such a sense you give of these places which none of the Fathers â—ave or heard of and being a stranger to them we can but terme it an Imagination of yours and so leave it and you to what we have in our last Paper further spoken of it Touching which no reply hath been as yet sent us from you The Animadversions of the Class upon it WE are sure we are now come to that which is the worst part in all your Paper your principles here being very corrupt even in a Doctrinall matter of high concernment and that distemper which was upon your spirit breaking out here into railing in an high degree if not to blasphemie besides your flandering of us and scoffing at us which is ordinary with you of which we shall speak anon particularly 1. But we shall begin with that Representation which you first make of what we
here urged but we judge these sufficient and so having dispatcht what we promised we shall now proceed 3. For you having not urged Arguments against the rule by us propounded for the determining controversies in matters of Religion but only vented against us the distemper of your spirit for that proposal do now further declare your selves touching what you would have to be the judge and rule for interpretation of the Scripture and do adde unto the universal â—ractice of the Church mentioned in your first Paper the Churches exposition meaning the exposition of Councils and unanimous consent of Fathers as you here declare your selves concerning which we shall 1. Propound the true state of the Question betwixt you and us 2. And then urge some Arguments against the rule by you here made 3. and lastly We shall answer what you have here to say for your opinion As touching the first we do here declare our selves that we do readily grant the Church may expound the Scripture though as we said in our answer which you here acknowledge it be tied to the rule of Gods word in such proceedings as Judges to the Law and so therefore the Churches exposition may and is to be made use of as a meanes appointed by God that we might understand the word where there is a doubt or difficulty but we must not allow what you further adde sc that we are bound up by the Churches exposition as we are according to what you say to those cases in the Law which are the judgement and exposition of the Judges upon the dark places of the same neither must we close with you when you say the Churches exposition and practice is our rule in such cases and the best rule too or that when there is a difference about interpretation of Scripture we must necessarily make another judge and rule for interpretation of Scripture besides Scripture as you speak the Scripture it self being in such a case the only sure interpreter of it self the doubtfull and hard places thereof being to be expounded by the more plain Further we do here declare that we grant the Church is a judge touching matters of Religion in controversie or touching the interpretation of doubtfull or difficult places of Scripture but a ministerial Judge only and not the rule for its interpretation as you speak or such a judge from which there is no appeal no not to the Scriptureit self as you intimate Again the Church is such a judge to which all parties ought to submit in regard of her juridical authority to be censured by her in regard of opinions or practices but not such a judge to whose determination we must submit our faith or resolve it into her sentence In a word we grant unto the Church a Ministry but not a dominion over our faith nor make her interpretation of the Scripture where there is a doubt or difficulty the rule of faith or practice And if you had given to the Church no more nor had ascribed to the Scriptures in this case too little we should not have had this for a controversie that is now a great matter in difference betwixt you and us For whereas you reject the rule propounded by us in our answer touching the determining of controversies in Religion sc the word of God alone and notwithstanding our reasons there urged against your adding the universal and constant practice of the Church unto the word of God to make up the rule to judge by in matters of this nature yet do here professedly adhere to what you did but seem to insinuate in your first Paper and because we had propounded the Scripture only as the only sure rule to walk by you hereupon as hath been said rail upon us calling us Scripturists and scorn and scoff at us for making the word of God alone the rule of faith and manners we hereupon cannot but conceive you ascribe a deal more to the Church then a meer Ministery setting up her determination for the rule of interpreting Scripture and issuing of controversies and take away from the Scripture that which you should yeild unto it even to be the only sure rule for the interpreting it self for though you here acknowledge that the Church in expounding Scripture is tied to the rule of Gods word in such proceedings as Judges to the Law yet you say we were concluded and bound up by her exposition and therefore though she be tyed in her expounding of Scripture according to this concession yet by this assertion it will follow that we are bound to believe she hath rightly expounded the Scripture according to her duty for you say her exposition and practice is our rule and best rule too and that we necessarily make another judge and rule for interpretation of Scripture or else we prove nothing and that else we give way to private interpretation which is the Popish false gloss upon the Text pointed at in that expression and anon you tell of another judge and rule besides the Scripture that is to be submitted unto even such as the Papists themselves cannot exâ—… viz. the Primitive Churches practice and universal and â—…nimous consent of Fathers and general Councils and which though you would father upon Mr. Philpot and Calvin yet is that 〈◊〉 they together with all other sound Protestants in their wâ—…s against the Papists have unanimously disclaimed 〈…〉 as the Papists more anciently seeing if they muâ—… the determination of Scriptures they were cast â—…ly to Councils and the unanimous consent of Fathers as to the rule whereby they would be tryed so you with them betake your selves to these and refuse to be tryed by the Scriptures as the sole judg because thence it is manifest that that Episcopacy that you are for is quite cashiered the whole current of the Scripture of the New Testament making a Bishop and a Presbyter all one But the Question betwixt us being thus stated as we gave our reasons even now why the Scriptures were to be the only judge of controversies and rule of faith and life so we shall now give our reasons why the Churches exposition the unanimous consent of Fathers and general Councils are not to be the rule of its interpretation much less the best rule where there is a doubt or difficulty as you assert Argument 1. Because it is God only that is the author of Scripture all Scripture being given by inspiration of God 2 Tim. 3. 16. It is he only that is the chief Law-giver and Doctor of the Church Jam. 4. 12. Mat. 22. 10. and therefore he only speaking in the Scripture and in the hearts of his people by his Spirit is the supream and infallible interpreter of Scripture every one being the best interpreter of his own words and the Law-giver best understanding the meaning of the Law he makes and being the Scriptures cannot be interpreted and understood but by that same Spirit whereby they are written whence that of Bernard Nunquam
in grace and in the knowledg of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to keep their hearts with all diligence and to infinite more things of the like nature and which are duties they should apply themselves unto when yet there is no room for an admonition in order to any Church censure in case it be not obeyed Nay when men may perceive there is not that care that should be in persons in regard of some of their words and carriages there may be place for an exhortation and yet for no admonition in order to any Church censure in case the exhortation be not hearkned unto if there be not any further scandalous outbreakings of corruption that may merit it Church censures are not to passe upon men for every fault nor against such as be guilty of such sins of infirmity as are commonly found in the children of God as in that case by the rule of our Government it is provided against And yet an exhortation to righteousness and watch fullness in such cases is not useless And so it may be well appointed by us that the Minister should exhort such as are found by him to be persons of knowledg and are in conversation blameless to present themselves to the Eldership that so they might be regularly and orderly admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper an Ordâ—nance that is not to be sleighted as it is by many but upon too sleight grounds as they will be found to be when they are to be tried in the day of account and yet no proceedings by Church censures against such persons in case an exhortation prevail not Thus far we have recited what we answered but now what is it that is replied to all this not one word but only a bitter scoff as if that were sufficient to answer every argument But we beleeve all sober persons will see you have not therein very learnedly answered us however scornfull men whose censures we matter not may therein applaud you But yet to clear up the matter further however we judg all ingenuous persons will be fully satisfied with the bare recitall of the Answer that had been given because we see you have put our words upon the rack and stretcht them upon the tenters till they have quite lost their sense in which we used them and that you are resolved to deal as strictly with us as you can where you apprehend you have any advantage We must here open this matter a little more fully And first We shall not deny that the word admonish is sometimes taken so largely as that it is the same with the word exhort and so some of the Texts you urge may prove c. Acts 20. 31. Rom. 15. 14. Col. 3. 16. in which Texts the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that doth properly signifie to admonish is used And yet we shall not contend but the sense of it there may be the same with the word that doth properly signifie to exhort as also when the Apostle in another of the Texts cited by you viz. Titus 3. 1. saith using another word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put them in mind though it should be rendred admone illos that word may imply an exhortation And again we shall as readily grant that the word exhort is sometimes taken so largely as that it may comprehend under the latitude of it that which is usually understood by the word admonish strictly taken as in Rom. 12. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that exhorteth on exhortation In which words the whole office of the Pastor is held forth who was not only to exhort but to admonish reprove and comfort also as there might be occasion But yet though these words are sometimes used thus promiscuously they are also distinguished To admonish taken strictly and especially in an Ecclasiasticall sense is to reprehend in regard of some fault and so it is taken 1 Thes 5. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e warne or admonish them that are unruly and is there distinguished from the word admonish taken in a more large sense as appears from ver 13. immediately going before Know them that are over you in the Lord and admonish you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and likewise from the word exhort taken strictly as appears from the same ver 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. we exhort you brethren and yet doubtless the Apostle did not by that exhortation admonish those he writes unto to warne or admonish the unruly in that sense as he would have those unruly ones to be admonished But to make the matter more plain we may here distinguish concerning admonition There is a meer charitative admonition and an admonition in order unto further censure if not hearkned unto This latter as we have told you is not to be given for such infirmities as are commonly found in the children of God no nor yet for smaller faults or injuries which Christian prudence love and peaceableness require an overlooking and passing by and of which Mat. 18. 15. is not to be understood but the offence there grounding the admonition is a greater evil endangering the soul of the doer scandalizing the brother seeing it and lying as a stumbling stone in his Christian course and such a sin that for the nature of it is fit in case of insuccessefullness of admonition to be brought before the Church as herein our reverend brethren the associated Ministers of the County of Essex do very well deliver themselves in their late Agreement pag. 14. n. 5. This admonition that is in order to Church censure is either of private members and which may be also called brotherly and charitative or else it is of the Officers of the Church and which is either given by any one or more of the Officers severally which yet in them is authoritative or else by them all joyntly and which is the admonition of the Church spoken of Mat. 18. ver 17. which is another of the Texts you here mention although it is most orderly that this admonition be given by the Minister or one of them where there be two or more in the name of the rest of the Church-Officers that give the offender this admonition But besides this admonition that is in order to Church censure in case it prevail not there is also a meer charitative admonition that may be for lesser faults that yet are not to be censured with Church censures in case there be not reformation Although there are to be endeavours to redress such offences and which kind of meer charitative admonitions may be comprehended under the latitude of that rule laid down Gal. 6. 1. You your selves do not here deny but there may be a private admonition that is not in order to Church censure when upon your quoting Calvins words on Titus 3. 10. you say seeming to approve of what you take to be his meaning though you misinterpret him as we shall shew anon not every private admonition is in
order to excommunication in Calvins judgement And this was necessarily implied in the words we used in our Answer when we opposed an admonition in order to further censure unto that which is but an exhortation only intimating plainly enough thereby that there was besides an admonition in order to further censure a meer charitative admonition which was not to be followed with any Church censure in case it prevailed not This is that likewise which our forementioned Reverend Brethren of Essex in their Agreement do also speak of having given their sense upon Mat. 18. 15. they further say in their Agreement pag. 15. n. 6. Besides this Ecclesiasticall admonition we yeeld there may be other charitative admonitions which must not preceed to Ecclesiasticall censure But from all that hath been thus far spoken touching admonition it s very clear that admonition taken strictly and properly is a reprehension in regard of some evill or fault done Though we do not deny but there may be an admonition by way of caution warning to take heed of some sin that one may be in danger to commit We shall now proceed to shew what exhortation is taken in a strict acceptation To exhort strictly is to excite or perswade and stir up unto that which is good and is distinguished from admonition taken properly as is manifest from the Text before quoted 1 Thes 5. 14. Now we exhort you brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 warne them that are unruly c. The Thessalonians are here exhorted only or stird up to perform their duty towards the unruly c. and are not at all blamed by the Apostle but the unruly that were to be warned or admonished were to be reproved and blamed by the Thessalonians for their unruliness And there is place frequently for an exhortation when there is not to be any reprehension or admonition given in regard of any thing amiss But to make this matter yet more plain we may here distinguish of exhortation as before of admonition For exhortation also is either charitative or of private Christians and of which Heb. 3. 13. Exhort one another daily while it is called to day and Heb. 10. 25. Not forsaking the assembling of your selves together as the manner of some is but exhorting one another c. or authoritative and of the Minister and which may be either publick or private and of which there is often speech in the new Testament As 1 Tim. 2. 1. I exhort therefore that first of all supplications and prayers c. be made for all men 2 Cor. 9. 5. Therefore I thought it necessary to exhort the brethren 1 Tim. 6. 21. These things teach and exhort So in one of the Texts alleadged by you Titus 2. 15. These things speak and exhort and rebuke with all authority Where exhortation may well be distinguished from rebuke though both be authoritative and are to be joyned with Doctrine such applications of Doctrine being very usefull and necessary So 1 Pet. 5. 1. The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder By these Texts it is clear that as an exhortation properly is an excitation or perswasion unto something that is good so it is distinguished from admonition taken strictly and which is a reprehension for something amiss and that in many cases it may be usefull when there is not the least intimation of any neglect or sin committed for which the parties so exhorted are reproved Unto which we may further adde Acts 27. 22. where Paul saish to those in the ship with him And now I exhort you to be of good chear This exhortation was not doubtless in order to any Church censure and therefore must needs be distinguished from such an admonition So when it is said of Barnabas that when he had seen the grace of God he was glad and exhorted them all that with purpose of heart they would cleave to the Lord Acts 11. 23. This cannot be with any colour understood of any admonition in order to Church censure The best of men that walk never so blamelesly may be exhorted when yet there is no reason why they should be admonished in order to Church censure except men must be admonished and censured for such common infirmities from which no men on earth are wholly free But by this that we have said it is sufficiently evidenced that in Scripture language an exhortation taken strictly and properly is notwithstanding your scoff a different thing from an admonition in order to further censure if it prevail not And we think however you may account of us you had shewed your selves to have been more learned if you had not so causelesly quarrelled with that which is so manifest to any that are versed either in Scripture or any other approved Authors But we shall not examin what you oppose to what we had herein asserted 1. And first you begin with us sharply and say What every admonition a kind of Church censure or in order as we call it thereuntâ— not exhortation so You confess your ignorance of such a distinction not having as yet learned â—t either from Scripture Fathers c. But here you charge us with what we never said c. That every admonition is a kind of Church censure or in order to it and no exhortation so Our distinction intimated that besides the admonition that was in order to Church Censure there might be a charitative admonition as there may be a charitative exhortation yea an authoritative by the Minister when yet there is no place for censure in case the exhortation be successeless This we have shewed you from Scripture though you twit us again with being for the word of God alone for which we are not ashamed to profess our selves to be And thus you have very learnedly in the first place opposed us by imputing to us what we never said 2. But it may be your next is of greater strength and therefore we shall hearken to what you have to tell us sc That the words admonish and exhort are promiscuously used And who ever denied this Here therefore you have put your selves upon the pains to prove what we never gainsayed nay you prove by could not be the catechized persons mentioned immediately before who were to be exhorted only But these only in the beginning of the fourth Order that were to be privately admonished according to the Order prescribed Mat. 18. once or twice to see if they would reforme But this reason because you could not answer you do warily passe it over and never meddle with it 2. But notwithstanding this reason rendred you hope to bfnde us to your absurd and uncharitable construction you had put upon us But when we examine with what Arguments you do it you again discover therein your wonted deficiency And therefore 1. In your reply as it was presented unto us for want of reason wherewith to oppose us the first thing that we meet with in answer to our assertion and