far otherwise with respect to the Testimony of the Fathers than is by him intimated and that the footsteps not of the Episcopal Hierarchy Common-Prayer-Book-service Church of England c. but of the way of the Congregational-Churches are to be found in and amongst them And such principles laid down by them that will abundantly justifie persons separating from such a Ministry as that of the Ch. of Engl. Cyprian l. 1. epist 4. tells plainly Nor let the people flatter themselves as if they were free from the contagion of sin when they communicate with a wicked Priest yea that they ought to separate from them wherefore the people that obey the Laws of God and fear him ought to separate themselves from a wicked shepherd and not be present at the sacrifices of a sacrilegious Priest directly contrary to what this Animadverter affirms Sect. 9. Evil persons may be heard as true Ministers And Epist 6. He may by no meanâ— have or keep a Church who is not ordained in the Church viz. to which he is related as Minister which the Ministers of England are not ' Tweâ—e easie to fill many pages with citations to this purpose Mr. T. speaks of Councils and Schoolmen and of some that are not able to examine what is said by them As for the latter of these it had been well for the Church of God if they had never been And the former for the most of them it might have been well without Nazienzen who 't is thought knew as much of them as many other men saith If I must write the truth I am much enclined to flee from all the Councils of Bishops because I never saw a joyful and happy end of any Council nor was there by them any suppression of evils but rather an addition and encrease of them Greg. Naz. ep ad Procul And Luther affirms of the very best of them I understand not that the holy Spirit is in this Council All these Articles are hay stubble wood c. And learned Beza tells us that such was the folly ignorance ambition wickedness of many Bishops in the best times that you would suppose the Devil to be President in their Assemblies Praef. ad N. Test Which if so that which Mr. T. intends as a disparagement will be found to be clean contrary No matter how little we have to do with them had they been studied less than they are and the Scriptures of the Lord more we had 't is more than probable been at a nearer agreement in more controversies than one at this day Had the Lebian Rule of Reformation been laid aside and this Ezratical Golden one been solely made use of in measuring the Temple and them that dwell therein Reformation had been carried on with more celerity and another Gospel-Church-state introduced than many are aware of Sect. 4. Some beams of Light may be communicated by a retrospection into the estate of affairs in the time of the old Law into the present enquiry though the whole thereof be devolved in our present disquisition upon the Scriptures of the New-Testament Gen. 4. 26. considered The Reformation of the then Church by segregation and aggregation The issue hereof was the continuation of their Church-state for about a thousand years after The lawfulness of separation from the Church of England proved by Ainsworth Cotton Bartlet c. No more pollution to be found among those Gen. 4. 26. from whom the Saints then separated than is to be found upon the Church of England The Animadverter begs the question in supposing the Church of England to be a true and rightly constituted Church The end of Separation of calling upon the Name of God Those from whom they separated Gen. 4. in what sense they called upon the Name of God Of the Noachical Separation Gen. 6. The spring of the Apostacy of those from whom they separated Of the old Iron Age. The wickedness of the Church of England The duties we owe to persons from whom we separate IN his fifth Section this Animadverter takes notice of some expressions in S. T. to this purpose That since some beams of Light may be communicated into the present enquiry by a retrospection into the state of things under the Law we are willing to take a little notice of the administration of affairs in the House of God then which after a bare mentioning of what was done by the Faithful in the dayes of Seth Gen. 4. 26. We begin to consider from the time of the giving forth of the Law upon Mount Sinai when we say the People of Israel had a standard set up for them to repair unto and they became as a City on an Hill conspicuous unto all What saith Mr. T. to this Why 1. It will not be easie to discern how some beams of Light may be communicated from a retrospection into the state of affairs of old unto the present enquiry if the whole thereof be devolved on the Scriptures of the New-Testament which being a meer slight and scoff put upon the words of his Antagonist might be passed over in silence That Saints may not receive some beams of Light with respect to their deportment towards the Appointments of Christ now by a view of what was of old instituted and carriage of the Saints then towards those Institutions because the present Institutions in the practice whereof the Saints now are concerned are bottom'd singly upon the Scriptures of the New-Testament had the Animadverter by one Argument laboured to have evinced we should though notwithstanding Mr. T. thinks to the contrary 't is in it self evident they may have further considered it When I find the Lord giving forth Laws to his People of old to walk by and strictly enjoyning them to conform to those Laws without adding any thing of their own thereunto I had thought that the Lord having given forth Laws under the New-Testament for the ordering the affairs of his House now some beams of Light might from hence be communicated touching my deportment towards these Laws from what was done of old and rejecting all mixtures of humane inventions with them which the Soul of the Lord in dayes past manifested his indignation against with relation to his then Institutions The like may be said of the other observations and Laws enjoyned upon that People we have briefly remarked But 2dly he grants he tells us that Dr. Owon hath in his Latine Book of the nature study and progress of true Theology shewed divers corruptions in the Ages before and after the Flood in the pure Worship of God unto Moses his time and that the restitution of true Theology was sometimes by a separation from the Wicked when there was a general Apostacy from the true wayes of God unto a prophanity of his Name as some conceive Gen. 4. 26. is meant either by Blasphemy or setting up of Idol-worship as it was before Abraham's separation Josh 24. 15. Answ 'T is very true that learned person hath done
Christ Deut. 18. 18. Acts 3. 22. Isa 9. 6. But the present Ministers of England hearken and conform not to the Revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House Therefore To which Mr. T. replies by denying the Major or first Proposition But he wisely takes no notice of the Scriptures produced for the Proof hereof as Deut. 18. 18 19. where the Lord promiseth to raise up Christ from among his Brethren in whose mouth he would put his words by whom he would speak to them to whom whosoever will not hearken God saith he will require it of him i. e. take vengeance on him as the Greek renders it or as the Apostle Acts 3. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He shall be exterminated from amongst the People rejected by the Saints as a Despiser oppugner of the Offices of Christ into which he was so solemnly invested by the Father Mat. 3. 17. In Isa 9. 6. It is Prophesied of Christ That the Government should be laid upon his shoulders he should be King in Sion give forth as such Laws and Constitutions for the Government of his People which accordingly he doth and solemnly promulgates them by his Heralds and Messengers fixeth them as upon publick Pillars in the Scriptures of Truth to be seen and read of all men That after all this persons should refuse slight neglect to hearken to these Institutions of Christ violate oppose preach against them and yet not be guilty of denying his Prophetical and Kingly Offices is the first-born of absurdities Go and offer it to thy Prince deal so by the constitutions of thy Rulers and see what they will say to thee what interpretation will be by them put upon thy so dealing with them But he gives the reasons of his denial and tells us 1. Denial is more than not hearkening to Answ There is a denial its true that is more than a not hearkening to but there is a not hearkening to that is a real denial rejection of the Authority of him to whom we refuse to hearken The Scripture expresly affirms it Psal 81. 11. But my People would not hearken to my voice Israel would none of me Ezek. 20. 8. but they rebelled against me i. e. opposed rejected my Authority and would not hearken unto me Nor can I tell how those Luke 19. 14. are said to send a message after Christ saying We will not have this man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to King it over us which is sure a denial of his Kingly Authority but by refusing to hearken and conform to his Royal Appointments He adds 2dly The not hearkning may be out of ignorance incapacity to understand fearfulness c. without any enmity of heart habitual stubbornness which are requisite to a plain denial of the Offices of Christ Answ 1. It may be so indeed but whether this be the reason of the Ministers of England not hearkening thereunto he acquaints us not Certainly they are not fit to be Ministers of the Gospel or to be accounted Overseers of the flock of Christ who are ignorant of his Institutions and incapable of understanding them 2. Though it be out of fearfulness prevalency of temptation that they hearken not yet may their not so doing be a denial of the Offices of Christ It was out of fearfulness the prevalency of temptation that Peter denied his Lord without any enmity of heart yet his denial was a plain denial So false is that which Mr. T. saith That enmity of heart habitual stubbornness or wilful gainsaying are requisite hereunto He tells us 3dly There may be sundry Orders of his House controverted if acknowledged such not thought to be of that moment as to break the Peace of the Church by contending for them or not judg'd perpetual or not binding the Ministers to observe till the Magistrates reform Answ 1. But upon such Principles as these I know not but Christ may be divested of the Scepter of his Kingdom all his bonds and cords broken asunder and cast away and yet no one would be nocent It is evident that this is the lot of many most of them already 2dly There are but few of the Orders of Christs House but are controverted amongst the Children of men will this excuse any from subjection to them May not the Papists plead thus for their rejection of the Institutions of Christ Must Christ lose his obedience till the parties Litigant are at an agreement Nugae tricae sicâ—lae what more frivolous could have been invented 3dly This Animadverter will one day find that there are no Institutions of Christ but what are of moment how derogatory to the glory of Christ the Oeconomie and Administration of the Gospel such assertions as these are others will judge 4thly That any of the Institutions of Christ remarked by us were temporary I challenge Mr. T. to make good i. e. such as were not to endure till his coming Such Principles as these would soon evert all Gospel-Institutions and make way for the Introduction of unwritten Vanities and humane Traditions which the soul of our Lord abhors 5thly I desire to be informed what Appointments of Christ those are that are not binding to the Ministers till the Magistrate reform I know not any such and conceive the assertion to be foreign to Truth 1. The Primitive Believers were obliged to conform to â—hem all though the Magistrate blasphemed and opposed 2. 'T is wonderous derogatory to Christs honour to ask the Magistrate leave whether his Institutions shall be binding or not i. e. â—f he will reform they shall otherwise not such trash as this will nevâ—r pass for sound reason absurd dictates without proof though never â—o importunely imposed Mr. T. must not imagine will meet with reception amongst judicious Christians 6thly That it should be scandalous to hearken to the Institutions of Christ as he suggests is such a monstrous assertion that I aâ— amazed to think it should drop from such a person The reciting it iâ— refutation sufficient So that the Major Proposition I still take for manifest truth notwithstanding his three dictates to the contrary which are now abundantly refuted Sect. 2. The present Ministers of England do not hearken and conform to the Revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House proved by the induction of seven particulars All power for the Calling Institution Order and Government of his Church is invested solely in Christ Mat. 28. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 14 15. John 3. 35. Acts 3. 22. and 5. 31. Mat. 23. 8 9 10. 1 Cor. 11. 23. and 14. 37. Gal. 1. 8. 2 John 10. Rev. 22. 18. Acts 15. 25 28. considered The present Ministers own other Lords that have a Law-making-Power over his Churches besides Christ which Mr. T. grants is a denyal of his Kingly Authority Separation from the World and Saints walking together in particular Societies an Institution of Christ proved This is opposed by the present Ministers 1 Cor. 1. 2. Phil.
1. 1 5. 2 Cor. 8. 5. John 15. 19 and 17. 6. 1 Cor. 5. 12. Acts 2. 40. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Acts 19. 9. Rev. 18. 4. considered Of the acception of the word World Characters of persons that are not of the World A third Institution of Christ remarked Of the power Christ hath intrusted his Church with Acts 1. 23. 1 Cor. 5. 5. explained Of the Officers of Christ's appointment Their Election by the Church Of the Liberty of Prophesying Nothing must be offered up to God in Worshiâ— but what is of his own prescription The present Ministers of England refuse to subject to these Ordinances of Christ An Objection answered Mr. T. his Exceptions considered and removed out of the way 2dly THat the present Ministers of England do not hearken and conform to the Revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House we prove in S. T. by the induction of seven particulars To this Mr. T. replies in Sect. 3. Chap. 4. 1st In the stead of Argument he proves all with Interrogations Answ False and untrue I wonder at the conscience and confidence of the man in asserting it He knows I prove it by the induction of the most remarkable Orders of the House of Christ which they hearken not to 2dly He askes Which of the Ordinances of Christ have they made void Answ They were under his view whilest he wrote these words so that his question is frivolous I enumerate seven of the Orders and Institutions of Christ they have so dealt with He adds 3dly He should have reckoned up seven times seven Answ 1. And why so If guilty of a rejection of these which are the principal they oppose his Kingly and Prophetical Office though they embrace some others that are of his appointment The Romanists do so yet this Animadverter grants they are guilty of the crime instanced in 2. Mr. T. cannot reckon up seven times seven Institutions of Christ that are of the peculiar Institutions of his House to be performed by Saints embodied and united together in the fellowship of the Gospel nor many more than these seven mentioned by us He instanceth in hearing the Word praying to the Father in the Name of Christ which he tells us they have not made void by their Traditions Answ 1. The first of these is in a great measure if not totally made void by them 1. They oppose and deny the management of this duty in the way of Christ's appointment whilest they debar Christians from electing their own Officers or attending upon the Ministry of such as are according to the mind of Christ elected by them 2. The Preaching of the Word must give way to their Service-Book-Worship or Forms of humane devising which I am much mistaken if it be not in a great measure a making void of that Institution of Christ he speaks of by their Traditions 2. I wish the same may not be said with respect to the most of them at least of praying to the Father in the Name of Christ which none can do but by the Spirit whom they despise reproach set up their stinted Formâ— in opposition to him and his breathings The first of the Orders of Christ's House instanced in is That all Power for the Calling Institution Order and Government of his Church is invested solely in him as the alone Lord Soveraign Ruler and Head thereof Mat. 28. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 14 15. John 3. 35. Acts 3. 22. and 5. 31. Hence Christ chargeth his Disciples not to be called of men Rabbi nor to call any Father viz. not to impose their authority upon any or suffer themselves to be imposed upon by any in the matters of their God Mat. 23. 8 9 10 because one is their Master and Lord viz. Christ. Hence also the Apostles lay the weight of their exhortations upon the Commandment of Christ 1 Cor. 11. 23. and 14. 37. proclaim all to be accursed that preach any other Gospel Gal. 1. 8. Charge Chrâ—stians not to receive such as bring any other Doctrine 2 John 10. The Spirit terribly threatens such as shall add to the Revelation of God Rev. 22. 18. This Institution we say they conform hot really unto they own other Lords Heads and Governours that have a Law-making Power over his Churches beside him To this Mr. T. 1. That all power for the Calling Institution Order and Government of his Church is invested solely in Christ as the alone Lord Soveraign Ruler and Head thereof he grants as a Truth Though 2dly He assents not to our Paraphrase on Mat. 23. 8. As if Christ did forbid the Apostles to impose their Authority upon any in the matters of their God which they did Acts 15. 25 28. Answ 1. By imposing their Authority is meant giving forth Commands Doctrines in their own Names as from themselves without the Authority of Christ Where did they so Do they not every where disavow it 1 Cor. 1. 15. 2 Cor. 4. 5. 1 Cor. 11. 1. Divine Revelation not the Dictates of men one or other of them is the Foundation of a Christians Faith 2. Mr. T. mistakes when he saith they did this Acts 15. 25 28. For 1st They enjoyned nothing but what was before enjoyned by the Lord only acquainted the Gentile Believers therewith as is 1. Abstinence from Fornication Exod. 20. 14. Ezek. 16. 26 29. Mat. 5. 32. 2. From things Strangled Deut. 12. 24. 3. From Blood Gen. 9. 4. 5. i. e. the Life-Blood or any member of the creature pulled from it whilest it is yet alive as the Jewish Rabbins expound it and that truly 2dly He speaks against the express Letter of the Scripture vers 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us Expressions very remote from the countenancing such an authoritative imposition as he speaks of 2. He askes How comes this to be an Order of the House of Christ he took such Orders to be Precepts of Christ to us but this seems to be Gods gift to him Answ That Christs Ruledom and Soveraignty over his House is a gift of God to him we grant but such a gift as doth necessarily imply a duty on the part of his Houshold viz. That they own obey subject to none in the matters of Worship but only him admit no Laws or Institutions amongst them but his And this is expresly asserted in S. T. which we took then and still do for an Order of Christ's House 3. He tells us further That to assert the present Ministers of England own other Lords that have a Law-making Power over his Churches besides him is to unchristen them Answ 1. And however Mr. T. his Book came to be licensed with an intimation from the reverend Licenser That he finds nothing in it contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England Some of them think though I assure him I do not he hath asserted that pag. 123 that doth indeed unchristen them 2. However if the assertion mentioned unchristens them they
as is made by marriage joyn our selves to the Lord c. so Isa 2. 3. Mich. 4. 2. Isa 44. 5. Zech. 8. 21 22 23. 2dly Accordingly we have the Churches of Christ in the New-Testament practising and commended for their so doing as acting therein according to the will of God Acts 2. 41 42. 2 Cor. 8. 5. 3dly The several names and titâ—es given unto particular Churches evince as much Every such Church is called 1. A Body 1 Cor. 12. 27. Col. 3. 15. Rom. 14. 4 5. Eph. 5. 30 32. Col. 1. 18 21. Now 't is not the multitude or number of members whether many or few that constitute or make a Body We say not if we come into a Field where a Battel hath been fought and find an Arm in one place a Leg in another an Hand in a third c. though we meet with as many members scattered up and down as are in the body yea though thrown together in heaps that here is a body no no 't is Rudis indigestaque moles Their union each with other and coalescency in one is that which gives them that denomination Particular Saints scattered here and there or casually coming together are not nor can they be called the Body of Christ their union each with other by their free and mutual consent is that which denominates them so to be 2. An House or Temple Heb. 3. 6. Ephes 2. 21 22. 1 Tim. 3. 15. 1 Pet. 2. 5. Mr. T. knows who have thought the world was made by the casual confluence of Atoms he doth not sure think that a casual concurrence of people professing the Name of the Lord without more ado are or can become an House or Temple for him 3. A City a Kingdom Eph. 2. 19. Mat. 21. 43. Heb. 12. 28. Joh. 18. 36. That a man should be any way a member of these but by his free consent cannot be asserted with the least shew of reason 4. A Fraternity or Brotherhood Zech. 11. 14. 1 Pet. 2. 17. compared with chap. 5. 2 13. 5. A Candlestick in allusion to Moses his Candlesticks Exod. 25. 31. wherein though there were many shafts yet they did all coalesce in one Rev. 1. 11 12 20. All which as they import Aggregation or a solemn union so they clearly evince that this cannot be but by free and mutual consent 4. Besides we find Christ promising his Presence to his Church and People thus aggregated or gathered an Argument of his well-pleasedness therein Mat. 18. 20. which accordingly he makes good to the Churches of Asia as to the rest Rev. 1. 13. which we have proved to be particular Congregational Churches That they were separated from the World and its Worship gathered together by their own free consent for the worshipping God Mr. T. cannot deny There were no Laws to compel them hereunto but the contrary So that 3dly we may righteously retort this Animadverters Argument upon himself There cannot be a true Church where those things essential to a true Church cannot be found But in National Churches in general in the Church of England in particular those things that are essential to a true Church cannot be found Therefore The Major is Mr. T 's The Minor we prove Right matter and form is of the essence of a true Church both wanting in the Church of England 1. The right matter Mr. T. denies not to be visible Saints visible Drunkards Swearers Whoremongers covetous persons are not such yet of such as these is the Church of England mostly composed 2dly The form of a true Church we have manifested to consist in separation from Worldly Formal Antichristian Worshippers gathering together by free consent into a Church-state or particular Societies for the Worship and Service of God neither of which can be asserted of the Church of England Much of the Worship of the Nations of Antichrist at least their rites and modes of Service is retained in it And into that Church-state such as it is in which they are fixed did they never enter by their free and voluntary consent but by the Laws of the Kingdom were they at first I speak of their National-Church-state that the Gospel was early whether by Joseph of Arimathea or some one of the Apostles is not material preached in England that then a true Church or Churches were here planted I grant but this is nothing to their present frame as a Church-National compell'd thereunto and by severe Laws retained therein to this day From which as from the Lordly Prelacy the most sober People of the Nation do every-where groaning being burdened long to be delivered What follows will receive a speedy dispatch 1. 'T is true the defect of outward order i. e. of every outward order though of the institution of Christ doth not nullifie the Church but want of that order which is of the essence of the Church as we have evinced to be the case of the Church of England doth so 2dly Mr. T 's instances of the disorders in the Church of Corinth yet a true Church are so evidently impertinent that the bare mentioning them is confutation sufficient The Church of Corinth was a rightly constituted Church made up of visible Saints 1 Cor. 1. 1. gathered together into a particular body 1 Cor. 12. 27. meeting together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same place for the Worship of God 1 Cor. 11. 20. 14. 23. Some disorders found amongst this Church did not nullifie it Ergo the defect of that Order that is instituted by Christ ad esse to the very existence and being of a Gospel-Church as is the case of National Churches doth not nullifie them will not in hast be made good When Mr. T. proves the sameness of constitution betwixt the particular Church of Corinth and the National Church of England his instance of disorders amongst the Corinthians will be acknowledged pertinent but till then he will not himself upon second thoughts say it is so The having of Natioâ—al Rulers Ecclesiastical either single persons or in a Synod or Convocation make not a false Church saith the Animadverter Answ 1. But should this be granted it would not follow that a National Church is not a false Church which it may be upon other accounts though upon the account hereof it should be acqâ—itted But 2ly National Officers or Rulers Ecclesiastical in whom all Church-power is stated as Arch-Bishop and from thence derived to Diocesan Bishops and by them communicated in part to the ordinary Parish-Priests as is the case of the National Ecclesiastical Officers of England are false and Antichristian Officers and Ministers we prove chap. 3. of the S. T. That a National Church so denominated from their subjection to these should be a true Church is beyond the reach of my understanding What he addeth touching Synods owned and submitted unto by those of the Congregational way and Churches of a greater number and at a greater distance than could meet in one place every Lord's day is
they were oblieged to fashion their building is not from hence proved 'T was of old prophesied of Christ That he should build his spiritual House or Temple and bear the glory Zac. 6. 13. which accordingly 't is said he did in which he was faithful Heb. 3. 3 5. How either the one or other can be affirmed of Christ if he not at all concerned himself with the figure or quantity of his House but left this to the prudence of men I am not able to conceive Certainly if there be any glory in the Structure 't is to be ascribed according to this Animadverters principles to the dreg and net of humane prudence and policy Man must bear the glory thereof not Christ which whether it be not plainly to justle Christ out of the Throne of his Glory and set up a Man of clay there a very Idol in his room let the judicious Reader determine 2dly Where any besides Christ is called The Foundation of this Building as this Animadverter asserts I know not I remember full well that the Apostle speaks of him as the alone Foundation 1 Cor. 3. 10 11. an expression wholly destructive of Mr. T. his Assertion 'T is true Eph. 2. 20. the Apostle tells the Ephesians They were built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles i. e. on Christ the Foundation upon which they and all Believers that ever were in the world were built But he no where saith That these were the Churches Foundation And yet were this yeelded him it would be short of an evident demonstration of what our Animadverter introduceth it to evince viz. That many things appertaining to the outward figure and quantity of the Church were left to them to order and determine in and by their own private spirit What they did in this matter they had instructions from Christ to do were infallibly guided by the Spirit of the Lord in Yet were it further granted him That the distribution of Churches was in a great measure left to the Apostles doth it thence follow That others of the Children of Men Antichrist the Son of Perdition may distribute and figure them as they please and that in direct opposition to the figure and quantity of them exhibited by the Apostles in the first Institution of Churches in the world What more frivolous The worthy Parker proceeds The Material Temple had its breadth and its measure described most accurately by God shall not the Spiritual have its Wherefore then was that Reed given to John Wherefore a Command to measure the Temple Rev. 11. 1 To which Mr. T. 1st By way of Concession Each Congregational Church is the Temple of God The true Christian Church is shadowed by the Type of the Old Temple the several parts of which were of old most accurately described and measured by the command of God that men might know that this House was made by God that it is not of humane Structure God hath by his providence described the Spiritual Temple as well as the Material 2dly By way of Negation God hath not given us any such description of the outward fashion and order the breadth and measure i. e. the number c. of the Spiritual Temple as he did to Moses c. of the material Temple And afterwards God hath not determined the distribution and order of particular Churches so but that he hath left many things therein to humane prudence Answ And this Mr. T. calls an Answer to the forementioned Argument that any person not bereft of his understanding besides himself will deem it to be so he must not imagine The Question is Whether the Form of Churches be of Divine Institution Mr. T. deries it The learned Parker proves it is Because the Form of the Temple which was a Type of the Gospel Churches was so and God cannot be supposed to take less care of his Spiritual than he did of his material Temple What is our Animadverters reply Why the Form of Churches is not of Divine Institution He persists in his opinion without taking the least notice of the Argument advanced against it But seriously Sir persons of judgment and sobriety will either smile at your folly or pitty you for your self-conceit in such replies as these In my shallow judgement would he have removed this Argument out of his way he should either have proved that the material Temple of old was not typical of Gospel-Churches or that the figure and model of it was not of divine Institution or that though both these are true which he grants the consequence is not valid that therefore God hath instituted the form of his New-Testament-Churches which when he shall be able to prove that the Antitype must not correspond with the Type or that Gods care was more about his material than his Spiritual Temple he will be supposed to say someting but till then though he cry till his Lungs crack falleris Parkere falleris though he may amuse the simple with his noise of words the intelligent Reader will discern his weakness and nakedness 2dly Gods describing the Spiritual Temple as well as the Corporal by his providence is a certain kind of Gibberish I understand not he describes both in his Word To that Question Wherefore then was the Reed given to John Wherefore a Command to measure the Temple Rev. 11. 1. Our An madverter Replies It was not that he should set down the figure or quaâ—tity of each particular Church or the number of Persons that are to belong to it c. but his measuring the Temple was his understanding the the extent of it i. e how large and how narrow the Church should be in after-times in what estate of Peace or Persecution c. Answ But these are his wonted dictates without any tender of proof 1. The Temple of God was typical of the New Testament Churches who are therefore here represented under the notion and similitude of the Temple 2. These had hitherto during the first ten Persecutions remained in some measure of Purity and consonancy to the first Institution 3. But now they were to contest with another an Antichristian Beast therefore measure them saith the Angel to John with a Reed Let them look to it that they mend what is already amiss in and amongst them by and that they swerve not from the measuring Reed or Rule for therein will lie their safety as we know it hath done from Antichristian defilements 4. The Golden Reed is the Word of God which though in it self precious and excellent as Gold to the men of the world and the carnal Antichristian Church it 's accounted and used as a Reed a mean and contemptible thing though it is indeed like unto a Rod the Rod of Christ's strength it is by which he ruleth in the midst of his enemies That there should be a Command given forth to measure the Temple the Churches by this Reed if their Form were not instituted and appointed therein is not to
would have them I think saith he 't is not without example in the best ordered Churches Answ 1. I remember Pope Leo the 10th in the Lateran Council Ses 2. decreed That none should preach concerning the coming of Antichrist but if the Lord shall reveal some things to others as by Amos he promiseth to do they ought not to divulge it before the Sea Apostolick hath examined it or if that cannot commodiously be the Bishop with some others he that doth otherwise let him be excommunicated From whence the Reader may easily conjecture from what quarter the present practice of the Bishops in this matter doth arrive 2dly 'T is true the Apostle would have Timothy to abiâ—e at Ephesus that he charge some that they teach no other doctrine 1 Tim 1. 3. and Titus to reject an Heretick Tit. 3. 10. and saith 1 Cor. 14. 30. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by the first must hold his peace But that because Paul took all the care he could to hinder the spreading of error and the preventing disorderly prophesyings as more than one speaking at once therefore 't is lawful for the Bishops in an Antichristian way by force and violence to hinder the free passage of Gospel-truths is like the rest of this B. D. Logick for which I dare say the least Smatterer in that kind of learning will say he needed not to have taken any degree in the Schools 3dly That the practice instanced in is not without example in the best ordered Churches after an unusual rate of modesty with him our Dictator tells us he doth think but he might easily have informed himself otherwise 'T is such a piece of tyranny that â—ell ordered Churches cannot bear that persons sanctified and taught by the Spirit of the Lord sound in the Faith called also according to the appointment and way of Christ to preach the Gospel should noâ— be suffered so to do without the licence of an Antichristian Foundling a dumb Idol of the Popes make call'd a Lordain I should have said a Lord Bishop Many of the worthies of the Lord have protested against as the renowned John Hus the Churches in Bohemia the most eminent in the Council of Basil as abominable and Antichristian But Mr. T. further tells us that if the Prelates silence persons when they should not they are accountable to Christ but it is no proof that their Ministry is not from Christ who submit to the commands of men who have power over them forbiding them to preach some truths Answ 1. That the Prelates are accountable to none but Christ as this Animadverters expressions intimates I am sorry to hear from him the most flattring Canonist would not say more of the Pope himself 2ly 'T is a proof that the Ministry is not of Christ that is so bounded if Pauls words be true Gal. 1. 10. 3. That Lord Bishops have any power over the Ministers of Christ by vertue of any institution of his he cannot prove the submission of Ministers unto them in things Ecclesiastical when they are distitute of such authority is so far from being an extenuation that it is an aggravation of their crime We add in S. T. 3dly That the admission of the present Ministers into their Office by a Lord Bishop without the consent of the Congregation in which they act as Officers is also forraign to the Scripture What Mr. T. hath before said in opposition hereunto is already answered What he hath further to argue shall be now considered He tells us 1. The admission of the present Ministers hath not alwayes been by Lord-Bishops some have been made by Suffragan Bishops Answ 1. The most of the present Ministers Mr. T. denyes not nor can he have their admission from a Lord-Bishop 2dly The very truth is they all have so the Suffragan Bishops he speaks of is but the Lord Bishops Deputy who represents his Lordships person in that act of Ordination and therefore what is done by him is done by the Lord Bishop 3dly Admission by a Suffragan titular Bishop is forraign to Scripture as well as admission by a Lord-Bishop He proceeds 2dly Where the Parishioners are Patrons there is the election of the Congregation Answ There are but few Parishes that as Patrons present their own Ministers and yet those that do must not have any Minister but whom the Lord-Bishop pleaseth his admission is still from him He further tells us 3dly In others there is an implioit consent in their Ancestors yielding that power to their Patron to present and an after-consent by receiving him that is instituted as their Minister Answ This is a vanity not worth the minding 1. He cannot produce any authentick Writing testifying such a reddition by our Ancestors 2. If he could though it may be supposed they may alienate what of right belongs to us as men which yet in many cases is false 't is impossible they should do so with respect of what appertains to us as Christians 3. The after-consent signifies nothing they must consent whether they will or no if they do not but testifie their dissent by abstaining from hearing them they are presented into their Ecclesiastick Courts excommunicated imprisoned ruined He adds 4thly But whether these usages be right or wrong notwithstanding them yet may the Offices of the present Ministers of England be from Christ Answ 1. This is a dictate without proof which we reject 2. That a Minister should in their names office and admission thereunto not symbolize with the Ministers of Christ and yet be his Ministers is absur'd and irrational to imagine This we have proved of the present Ministers and add that in all these they symbolize with the Popish ordeâ— of Priests which we at large demonstratâ— in S. T. what Mr. T. excepts against it shall be considered in the next Section Sect. 3. The present Ministers of England symbolize with the Popish order of Priests Of the name Priests The abolition of names once abused to idolatry Hos 2. 15. Zâ—ch 13. 2. explained Baali what it signifies Exod. 23. 13. Psal 16. 4. opened Of Orthodox Antiquity 't is no sufficient justification of what we do in divine things The Testimony of the Ancients M. T. his arguing and Baronius the Papist alike Ignatius his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The book of ordering Priests and Deacons is stolen out of the Popes Pontifical as is evident by the parallel drawn betwixt them THat the present Ministers of England symbolize witâ— the Popish order of Priests we evince in S. T. under several considerations 1. They are both called and own themselves Priests which being a term borrowed either from the Priests of the Law the assertion of such a Priesthood being a denial of Christ come in the flesh or from the Priests of the Heathen from whom the word Orders is undoâ—btedly borrowed or from the Antichristian Church of Rome such idolatrous superstitious names being commanded by the Lord to be abolished Hos 2. 15 Zech
ever he met with hath judged them Antichristian must be imputed to the shortness of his memory He haâ—h I suppose met with Zuinglius Keckerman who say little less The former Art 34. p. 254 255 tells us That for any to claim any Rule Power or Superiority over any Church of Christ which we know out Bishops do is Devilish Proud and Popish Arrogancy And Aretius in his Problems producing Christ's prohibition of Superiour power to his Apostles Mar. 10. 5. Luke 22. 25. saith None but Antichrist dare be so fancy as to usurp it Marlorat on Rev. 17. 3. saith That Arch-Bishops are in Office under Antichrist And on Chap. 19. The tailes of Antichrist Bale on Rev. 17 saith That Canterbury and York are the Beastly Antichrists Metropolitans And on Chap. 13. That Arch-Bishop Diocesan are very Names of Blasphemy Of these we spake pag. 28. S. T. who I dare say were sober Writers and considerate men Mr. T. his answer to their Testimony viz. That they writ thus against the Romish Hierarchy is ridiculous they writ against the Offices of Arch-Bishops as such which are not a whit the better because they constitute the English Hierarchy We mention Cartwright the seekers of Reformation in Queen Elizabeths dayes proclaiming them to come out of the bottomless Pit of Hell to be Antichristian Devilish These also must pass in the Roll of inconsiderate fellows yet others as wise as Mr. T. think otherwise of them For the proof of the Antichristianism of the Office of Lord-Bishops I propose a few things briefly in the S. T. as 1st That Office that is not to be found in the Scripture of the Institution of Christ but is contrary to express Precepts of his is Antichristian But the Office of Lord-Bishops is not to be found in the Scriptures is contrary to express Precepts Therefore The Major Mr. T. is nibling at but he doth but think he tells us if Universal it is not true The Office of the Religious Votaries he talks of is Antichristian If there be any Antichristian Office in the World that must needs be so that is introduced into the Church of Christ though not of his Institution directly contrary to express Precepts That this Assertion should necessitate any one to affirm every sin to be Antichristian though in a large sence as Antichristian signifies that which is against Christ every sin every errour is so is absurd to imagine The Minor I say consists of two parts 1. That the Office of Lord Bishops is not to be found in Scripture of the Institution of Christ This I manifest by considering the most remarkable places where the Officers and Offices that are of Christs appointment are enumerated in which we have a total silence of them Ephes 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Tim. 3. 12. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5 7. Acts 20. 28. I add also that they were never dreamt of in the world for some hundreds of years after Christ We introduce the Testimony of Clemens Lombard Dr. Hamonds acknowledgment of their Rise To which Mr. T. answers The whole Discourse is impertinent the thing to be proved was that the Office of Lord-Bishops was not to be found in the Scriptures and the whole Discourse is about the Superiority of Order above Presbyters Primacy or Supremacy of Degrees among Bishops Answ 1. We have examined the particular places wherein mention is made of the Officers of Christs Institution and find no Lord-Bishops instituted in any of them which manifests that they are not If this be not taken for proof I know not what will If this be not to the purpose I am in dispair of producing any thing that he will account so 2dly The Office of Lord-Bishops as such consists in the Primacy Superiority and Supremacy mentioned as is known If Mr. T. grants this not to be found of the Institution of Christ in the Scripture he gives away the Cause 3dly They themselves do own and avow a great part of their Office to consist in the foresaid Primacy Jurisdiction And if this be not it I am sure some of them are seldom or never minding their Office these things are what is most attended by them Of whom we may complain as Bernard of old Vides omnem Ecclesiasticum Zelum forvere prâ— sola dignitate tuenda honori tantum datur sanctitati nihil aut parum Si causâ requirente paulo submissius agere aut socialius to habere tentaveris absit inquiunt non decet tempori non congruit majestati non convenit quam geras personam attendito De placito Dei ultima mentio est pro jactura salutis nulla cunctatio quod sublime est hoc salutare putamus quod gloriam redolet id justum De Considerat Lib. 4. His following Exceptions are not worth the heeding I mention Diotrephes in S. T. and say That some appearances of a Spirit striving to ascend into this Chair of wickedness was seen in him and others in the Apostles dayes To this Mr. T. But this was not the usurping the Superiority of Order of a Bishop above a Presbyter Answ Nor do I say it was I expresly affirm the contrary whâ—n I say that such a Superiority was not in the world for some hundred of years after Christ we only say that some appearances of that Spirit was seen in him which the Apostle affirms John Epist 3. Vers 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He loveth the preheminence among them attempts the Primacy so Beza Which if it be not an appearance of the Spirit mentioned I know not what is he endeavoured to rule all himself carried it proudly pragmatically arrogantly over the Church the Brethren John himself who was an Elder saith Mr. T. He that cannot see somewhat of our Episcopal Spirit in this is I fear willfully blind I am fure he must wink hard He takes notice that in reciting Ephes 4. 11. I twice leave out Evangelists which he knows not the reason of Answ Nor do I my self possibly it was an oversight it may be an omission of the Amanuensis However it was it was not I assure him any fear I had that he or any one could justly plead that our Prelates were Evangelists 1. I know that Title is declined by Pleaders for Episcopal Jurisdiction 2. Our Bishops do not the works of Evangelists They had no setled residence but travelled up and down with or after the Apostles to help forward the work of Christ that was set on foot in the world by them We find Titus who was an Evangelist somtimes at Crete Gal. 2. 3. At Dalmatia 2 Tim. 4. 10. appointed to meet Paul at Nicopolis Tit. 3. 12. Sent to Corinth 2 Cor. 12. 18. At Macedonia 2 Cor. 7. 5 6. Such an itinerant laborious life that our Bishops are unacquainted with 3. Evangelists were such extraordinary Officers as ceased with that Age for we find no directions given touching their future Election in in the Churches Mr. T. tells us Our Prelates
which yet they do but rarely if at all is not the Succession pleaded for by our Prelates They care not for Preaching hinder oppose it many of them dreading it as the Engine in the hand of the Spirit that would shake their Kingdom and utterly overturn and demolish it so they may have their Lordships Pleasures and Pallaces 'T is not indeed Antichristian for me to confess the Apostles Creed because it is conveyed to our hands through the Papacy for however it cannot be so called because the Apostles were the Formers of it which they were not yet the matter thereof being except in one Article bottom'd upon the Scriptures I ought to confess it But this is remote from what he is pleading for viz. A personal succession of Bishops through the Papacy receiving their Power and Authority from the man of Sin which I say still whilst the Bishops pretend to they do therein proclaim their shame and yeeld the matter in controversie though their Advocate shamefully prevaricates that he may with a multitude of words cover their nakedness omitting the consideration of what was incumbent upon him especially to have removed out of the way viz. The Arguments produced to evince That the Apostles as Apostles had no successor in that their Office Which if it remain good the present Bishops most assuredly cannot be their Successorâ— as Apostles He adds 5thly That Bishops as a Superior order or degree above Presbyters were not dreamt of in the world for several hundreds of years after Christ he thinks can hardly be made good but he wisely reâ—reats with a Protestation that he will not enter the lists with respect to that point The truth is he knows it hath been proved and that with that strength of evidence that he cannot bear up against That Clemens his not takeing notice of them as distinct from Presbyters is ballanced by the passages in Ignatius his Epistles which I am perswaded he rejects as spurious and counterfeit I am sure it were easie to manifest them to be so it is already done by others is such a pitiful covert that a man would never fly to but in case of extreme necessity when he knows not what to say Lombards words import he grants that the order of Bishops above Presbyters was not known till after the Apostles dayes and if so they are no order of divine institution in which he once more perfectly yeelds the cause they are not of the institution of Christ in the Scripture Though he cannot prove that by the primitive Church Lombard means the Churches in the dayes of the Apostles his words seem to import somewhat more And Bellarmins himself acknowledgeth that the name of Elders was given in common to Bishops and Elders And Eusebius lib. 5. c. 24. calls Victor Anicetus Pius Telesphorus Xistus who was almost three hundred years after Christ Bishops of Rome Elders And the learned Whitaker ingenuously confesseth That betwixt an Elder and a Bishop there was of old no difference That such Bishops as are now in the Roman Church in the English Church we may as truly say were from the beginning is most false and can never be proved There were then more Bishops i. e. Pastors of one Church Act. 20. 17. contr 2. q. 5. c. 6. p. 284. But Mr. T. tells us 'T is enough for his purpose if the office be found in Scripture though not their Superiority Answ And is this your pleading for your Clients Seriously Sir you would discourage any person in the world from entertaining you as his Advocate when you are exposing your Client thus to ruin by your own pleadings at every turn The question is whether the office of Lord-Bishops which as such consists in there Superiority jurisdiction over the Priests and Ministers of England be of the institution of Christ Saith Mr. T. their Superiority is not Very good what needed so many words to no purpose 't is well however he will be so ingenuous as to confess at last that the juridicial office of Lord-Bishop is not of Christs institution The words of Dr. Hammond he grants to be as we recite them but thinks we misapply them But certainly if as the Dr. saith a Primary Metropolitical seat was constituted over Episcopal Seats and Churches viz. such as are Diocesan that their state and frame may be accommodated to the state and condition of the Government of the Nations in the Empire he that hath but half an eye will see that hence it follows that the Primacy and Supremacy of the Bishops over these Churches was the result of the designs of men to accommodate the state and frame of the Church to the state and condition of the Government of the Nations But the truth of this Assertion depends not upon the Doctors concession it s notoriously known and acknowledged by several others The distribution of Churches ordinarily followed the destribution of the Common-wealth so that when some Regions were subjected to the Civil jurisdiction in any City the same were ordinarily subjected also to the Ecclesiastical and as they were reckoned to be of the same Province in respect of the Civil so were they of the same Church or Diocess in respect of the Spiritual Government saith Rainoldes Confer with Hart. And the Council of Constantinople decreed That if any new City by the Authority of the Emperor was erected that the order of Ecclesiastical things should follow the Civil and Publick form Hence by the same Council Constantinople receives the Primacy because it was New Rome Can. 5. which before Old Rome enjoyed for that very reason But that you may understand how the Pope incroached on Bishops by degrees untill of an Equal he became a Soveraign first over a few next over many at last over all I must fetch the matter of Bishops Metropolitans and Arch-Bishops somewhat higher and shew how Christian Cities Provinces and Diocesses were alotted to them First therefore when Elders were ordained by the Apostles in every Church Act. 14. 23. through every City Tit. 1. 5. to feed the flock of Christ whereof the Holy Ghost had made them overseers Act. 20. 28. They to the intent they might the better do it by common councel and consent did use to assemble themselves and meet together In which meetings for the more orderly handling and concluding of things pertaining to their charge they chose one amongst them to be the President of their Company and Moderator of their actions And this is he whom afterward in the Primitive Church the â—athers called Bishop i. e. the President of the Presbyters who was thâ— Bishop of the chiefest City whom they called the Metropolitane For a Province as they termed it was the same with them that a Shire is with us And the Shire-town as you would say of the Province was called Metropolis i. e. the Mother-City In which as the Judges and Justices with us do hear at certain times the causes of the whole Shire So the Ruler of the
Witnesses of Christ the Waldenses state the Defection of the Church Catal. Test 1509. From which time at least whatever Offices or Rites were introduced being introduced by the Antichrist that was now gradually revealing himself are justly to be accounted Antichristian 3dly Would Mr. T. had told us what Officers they are that are only continued in the Church of Rome that are of divine appointment that we might have considered the truth of his suggestion Lord-Bishops we prove are not such He further tells us 2dly That it is not true that the office of Lord-Bishops is derived from and is only to be found in the Papacy 1. It is manifest in the first Nicene Council can 6. that then and before were Patriarchs Metropolitan Bishops and Lord-Bishops with their Office Answ 1. That they were before is not so easily proved Hither as to their source and spring are they usually referred The learned Hooper tells us A Bishop ought to be a Bishop only of one City it is to be lamented that the Episcopal Office is so greatly degenerated Iâ— was not so from the beginning when Paul commanded Titus to constitute Bishops through every City And certainly if the ancient love toward the people did flourish in us we should confess that there is more to be done in one City than can easily be performed by the best 'T is sufficiently known that the Primitive-Church had no such Bishops as were over more Cities or Congregations than one before the time of Sylvester the first In whose time was the first Nicene Council 2dly That because the first Nicene Council acknowledged Metropolitane and Lord-Bishops therefore they are not derived from the Papacy is not so easily demonstrated This Council was in oâ— about the year 315. Long before the Spirit by which the body Antichristian is animated visibly manifested it self not once nor twice aâ— is known What other spirit shewed it self in Victor who excommunicated the Eastern Bishops for not keeping Easter with him at the same time which brawl continued till the first Council of Nice which sides with Victor an Argument that they were acted by the same spirit 3dly What assurance will our Animadverter give us that this Canon as well as some others which confessedly are is not foisted into the Acts of that Council by persons of after-ages He is not ignorant that Protestants plead this against the Papists who for the establishment of the Tyranny of the Roman Primacy produce a fictitious Canon of the Nicene Council 4thly 'T is incumbent upon him to prove that such Metropolitane Bishops and Lord-Bishops as are now in England were in and before the first Nicene Council which he knows to be false and untrue 1. The English Episcopacy is an order above the order of Presbyters then Episcopacy and Presbytery was accounted one and the same order 2. Ruledom and Jurisdiction is the peculiar flower of the Garland of our English Episcopacy of that it was not so As the Presâ—yters were to do nothing without the Bishop so neither was the Bishop to do any thing without the Presbyters He adds 2. That in the Greek Eastern Russian Churches the same Office is continued Answ 1. Nor do we affirm the contrary that we should do so is not necessary The Greek-Churches were at the first involved in the same Apostasie with the Roman at least with respect to the matter in debate betwixt us 2. We only say that 't is only found in the Papacy with respect to the Reformed-Churches none of them have continued it He therefore adds 3. That it is also pleaded that the Lutheran Churches Reformed that have separated from the Papacy in Germany Denmark Swethland have retained the same Office under the name of Superintendents Answ 'T is indeed thus pleaded by Downham c. who 't is like took up the story of Hadrianus Saravia a known Patron of the Popish Hierarchy who asserts it in a way of reproach to the Lutheran Reformation whether it be truly pleaded or otherwise Mr. T. tells us not though he cannot be ignorant of the contrary The Superintendency of the Lutheran Churches is exceeding different from the Office of our Bishops 1. Their Superintendent is only as a President or Chairman for the preservation of order in an Assembly 2. He is only so during the Session out of it he exerciseth no authority at all more than the rest of his Co-Presbyters as do the Bishops of England 3. He is subject to the Presbytery our Bishops Lords over them 4. He differs not in order and degree from the rest of the Ministeâ—â— as do the Bishops of England 5. He is but a Pastor of one particular Church our Bishops are of scores hundreds He proceeds after the same rate of confidence and verity 4. That it is false that the true Spouse and Witnesses of Christ have in all ages utterly rejected the Office of Lord-Bishops and that it hath its entertainment only by the false Antichristian Church Answ 1. 'T is much he doth not produce one instance of this Assertion and yet so confidently avers it which could he have done he would as well have proved it false as said it was so 2dly For the confirmation of the truth of what he saith is false we have produced several Testimonies his Answer thereunto such as it is we have already taken notice of it and manifested its lightness and vanity He adds This is manifest by the many Epistles written to the English Prelates by their reception at the Synod of Dort Answ 1. What the Epistles are he intends what the Reception mentioned is not of such import as to spend our time in enquiring thereabout 2dly That they have rejected the Office of Lord-Bishops is known they have published their dislike and detestation of it in their Confession to the world What respect any of them give them either in point of civility or as Messengers or persons sent from the King or perhaps not being truly informed what the Jurisdiction and Office is they exercise in their private Letters or otherwise is not considerable in the matter in hand The Office of Lord-Bishops or a superiority of Order above Presbyters or Elders they absolutely condemn as we have proved We add in S. T. One Stone of Offence must be removed out of our way It is said that though Lord-Bishops are Antichristian yet it doth not follow that the Office and Ministry derived from them is so for they are also Presbyters and ordained as Presbyters To which Mr. T. subjoyns 1. There is nothing replied to the allegation that Bishops ordain with Presbyters Answ 1. Nor is there any such allegation in the objection proposed 2ly If there were it s not so considerable as to deserve to be taken notice of They are only assistants to the Bishop 't is he not they that sets them apart admits them into Sacred Orders as they heathenishly call them He adds 2dly Nor to this that some of the Bishops have acknowledged Episcopacy
unchristen themselves The persons I mean that they own as Lords and Governours that have a Law-making power are the Prelates in the Convocation-House That they own these as such to them and their Canons they promise obedience and subjection needs no more proof than the Sun at noon-dayes that it shineth Whether this be a denial of Christs authority rebellion against him let the Reader inform himself from Mr. T. Chap. 4. Pag. 119. of his Theodulia He that ascribes Kingly power to a subject doth make another King than the right King and so doth unking him this he tells us the Papists do when they assert the Pope can make Laws to bind the Conscience by virtue of his authority and I know no more power our Convocation of Bishops have to do so then the Pope Till that be shewed the Animadverter grants our Ministers asserting the same of them in this matter as the Papists of the Pope they really unking Christ Nor 3dly Let him think that he is to deal with such Children that with his drollery will be perswaded that they see and know not what they both see and know 'T is not the calling persons as he doth by what spirit let him judge Diabolical Calumniators Railers and Scolds in Latine and English that now a dayes will be taken for an answer or confutation of what the whole Nation know to be true And they themselves will acknowledge and plead for it A 2d Order and Institution of Christ we mention in S. T. viz. That 't is his will that those whom he hath called by his Word should separate from the World walk together in particular Societies and Churches 1 Cor. 1. 2. and 5. 12. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Rev. 18. 4. John 15. 19. and 17. 6. Acts 2. 40. and 19. 9. Phil. 1. 5. Acts 2. 41. and 17. 4. 2 Cor. 8. 5. This Institution we say the Ministers of England are at open defiance with admitting persons visibly wicked and prophane into their Communion To this Mr. T. replies Sect. 4. 1st He hath read somewhat in Ainsworth Cottons Writings for to them we refer the Reader for further satisfaction But he doth not find in them nor the Scriptures mentioned any such separation as these Authors press Answ The Separation we press is a separation from the visible wicked and prophane cannot the Animadverter find this in the Scriptures nor in the Authors instanced in Let me prevail with him in a sedate frame without passion or prejudice once more to review them and beg of the Lord to open the eyes of his understanding that he may see his mind therein 1 Cor. 1. 2. Phil. 1. 1 5. 2 Cor. 8. 5. Give us an account that those who constituted and made up those particular Churches were visible Saints sanctified in Christ Jesus The like instance might be given of the rest of the Churches mentioned in the Scripture The Disciples of Christ are said to be chosen out of the World John 15. 19. and 17. 6. The Saints in a Church-state are commanded not to suffer a Fornicator Covetous person an Idolater or a Railer or a Drunkard or an Extortioner in their Communion though allowed civil commerce with them in the world 1 Cor. 5. 12. In Acts 2. 40. 2 Cor. 6. 17. we find the Apostles pressing and Chap. 19. 9. practising Separation from the wicked World which is also commanded with respect to Antichristian worship Rev. 18. 4. If Mr. T. cannot see such a Separation as we press contained in these Scriptures I cannot but pitty him 'T is said that when this way was more countenanced he practised somewhat not much unlike thereunto 2dly He grants That Separation from the World in respect of Worship is the duty of Saints 2 Cor. 6. 17. but then by the World is meant professed Infidels or at least such as were professed unbelievers as John 15. 19. and 17. 6. Acts 2. 40. and 19. 9. Answ 1. That the word World is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word of various acceptions in the Scripture is known with which we shall not trouble the Reader The Animadverter grants That it is taken for persons living in the World Now these are but of two sorts that I know of regenerate or unregenerate such as walk after the Flesh or such as walk after the Spirit Believers or Unbelievers And when the word World is put in opposition to the Saints it s alwayes taken for the World of unregenerate persons that lies in wickedness or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in subjection to the wicked one 1 John 5. 19. That men are not of the World because from Tradition Education Compulsion Interest or the like they profess the Name of Christ though they never knew a work of Grace or change upon their spirits is a fiction of this Animadverter that he will never make good If such as these are not of the world they are chosen called out of it let us a little consider whether the Characters of these be found upon them 1. They are said to be Branches in Christ that abide in him and bring forth fruit John 15. 2 4 5. 2dly They are clean through the word that he hath spoken to them vers 3. 3dly They have a mighty power and prevalency with God vers 7 16. 4thly They have the words of Christ abiding in them vers 7. 5thly Are such whom Christ loves vers 9. 6thly His Lovers and Friends ready prēst to do whatever he commands them vers 14 15. 7thly To whom he hath revealed the Mysteries of God vers 15. Chap. 17. 6 14. 8thly They are hated of the world vers 18 19 20 21. and Chap. 16. 2 3 33. and 17. 14. 9thly Keep Gods Word Chap. 17. 6. 10thly To them Christ gives the glory that the Father hath given to him Chap. 17. 22. will have them to be with him where he is to behold his glory vers 24. with much more that might be instanced Elsewhere they are called such as are delivered from the power of darkness Col. 1. 13. Quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins Ephes 2. 1. Called to be Saints Rom. 1. 7. 1. Cor. 1. 2. Are Light in the Lord Ephes 5. 8. have received the Spirit which the World or Men of the world cannot receive and abide such John 14. 17. These are the Characters of those that are not of the world Do we refuse to hold communion with do we separate from persons of this complexion What more false We cry aloud to them woe beseech intreat them as many of them as are yet too much holding fellowship with the carnal wicked world in Worship to come out from them which was one and no small part of our design in S. T. As for others that know nothing of the things mentioned they are yet in their sins though they profess the Name of Christ under the regiment of the wicked one and of the world and therefore to be separated from as this Animadverter grants Of the Apostles going
Miracles by the Apostle there had been no need to have assembled the Church but it was necessary that to the doing of this act the Church be assembled vers 4 5. 5thly He is to be delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved which is not likely to be effected by Satans Ministry 6thly 'T is more than probable the Church did what the Apostle commanded them to do Now this is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the publick rebuke inflicted by many which many cannot signifie the Apostle but the Church of Corinth all which evince that it was a Church-act and no more than what is practised by the Churches of Christ at this day Though 't is true it is more than the ordinary Excommunication of the Church of England by a Chancellour or Proctor several miles from the Parish-Church to which the person is related and it may be unknown to them an argument they own not this Institution of Christ We add in S. T. as another Institution of Christ 4. That the Officers of his appointment are only such as these Pastors Teachers Elders Deacons Widows or Helpers who as they are in one particular Congregation so they have not any Lordly authority over each other Ephes 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7. and 16. 1. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Phil. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. Acts 6. 5. and 15. 2. and 20. 17. and 28. 21 28. 1 Tim. 3. chapt and 5. 9 10 17. This Law of Christ they subject not we say unto set up other Officers and Offices To which Mr. T. 1st There were other Officers given by Chrst besides these mentioned viz. Apostles therefore these are not the only Officers of his appointment Answ 1. Had he said therefore These were not the only Officers of his appointment he had spoken more properly Apostles were of his appointment are not now as we have proved 2. We are speaking of ordinary fixed Officers in the particular Churches of Christ which the Apostles were not so that his instancing these and inference thereupon is frivoâ—ous and impertinent If these had Superiority over others it will not advantage the Animadverter except he can prove the Bishops in respect of Office to be their Successors which he will never be able to do That because the Elders mentioned 1 Tim. 5. 17. must be accounted worthy of double honour therefore they were of a Superiour order of Ministry to lord it over the rest is one of Mr. T. his Consequences that a youth of half a years stâ—nding in the University would be ashamed of Besides Sir the double honour is due to the working Presbyter not the lording loytering Bishop as is the custom of England The person mentioned 2 Cor. 8. 19. was chosen by the Churches for the present expedition was no standing fixed Officer amongst them therefore appertains not to our present disquisition He adds Whether all the Officers and Offices be rightly ordered in the Church of England is not our present inquiry Answ But this is no small part of our present enquiry for if they are not rightly ordered they are not Officers of Christ if they are not such 't is evident they reject this Institution of his set up other Officers and Offices What he tells us is notoriously false viz. That the present Ministers of England have neither Name nor thing required by Christ in this Law is manifestly true Their Parish Ministers are called Priests not Pastors or Teachers 'T is true they have those are called Doctors which signifies Teachers but that is a School not a Church-Title they are call'd so with respect to an Academick degree not with relation to any particular Church or Churches in whom they are placed They have those thaâ— are called Deacons but they are not such Officers as Christ calls so those that come nearest to these are those they call Church-wardens oâ— Overseers of the Poor But they have the thing the Office of preachâ—ng the Gospel continues with them Answ 1. 'T were well if it could be said of many of them that they preached the Gospel Alas they understand it not 2dly However they have not the Office as we prove whilest he suggests the contrary he doth but beg the Question Whether the Assertion That they set up other Officers and Offices as if in open contempt and defiance of Christs Authority be very unrighteously said others will judge I am sure as was said in S. T. They are such of which it may righteously be said he did at no time command them neither did it ever enter into his heart so to do And I challenge Mr. T. to give an instance of the contrary We remark a 5th Institution of Christ in S. T. viz. That these Officers be chosen by the common Suffrage of the Church of Christ according to Acts 1. 15 23 26. and 6. 1 2 3 5. and 14. 23. and 9. 26. which we find the Church in the practise of for some Centuries of Years As the Epistle of Clemens to the Church of Corinth Martin Luther Cyprian Lambard Peter Martyr Bullinger Gualter Zanchy Calvin Beza the united Brethren of Bohemia manifest Of which at large we there treat This Institution of Christ we say the present Ministers conform not to Mr. T. replies 1. He finds not this to be an Appointment of Christ in the Scriptures mentioned Answ Whether it be or not let the Reader judge the impertinency of his Answer to the three first we have already shewed Acts 9. 26 27. proves thus much That 't is in the Churches power to reject any one or refuse to receive him as a Preacher amongst them till they have received satisfaction touching him which doth not a little demonstrate the power of Election of their own Officers to be seated in them For he assayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to joyn himself to the Disciples as a Brother in the fellowship of the Gospel as the word signifies Acts 5. 13. 1 Cor. 6. 16 17. but they would not suffer him so to do till better informed of him and then he comes in and goes out at Jerusalem ver 28. i. e. is owned received by them What follows is a repetition of what he had before said Sect. 22. in answer to the Preface to which we have there spoken Clemens speaks fully to our purpose Ministers must be appointed by famous and discreet men with the good liking and consent of ALL the Church without which it seems they could not be constituted In that which follows in Clemens his Epistle touching a readiness in the Elder or Pastor to depart or return according as the multitude of Believers should determine We have sure a proof that the choice or rejection of a Pastor is seated in them That Luther Bullinger meant no more than the not obtruding unable Ministers on the Churches of Christ is Mr. T. his mistake They both assert the Churches priviledge in the choice of their own Pastors Their voice saith
Kneeling at the Sacrament is wisely done and had he wav'd the whole Controversie some think it had been no argument of his indiscretion but his so doing is no Answer He that will justifie the present Ministry and Worship of the Church of England persons of such dull capacities as our selves conceive must justifie these too They being made so necessary a part of their Worship that the Worship it self must rather be omitted than these devices of their Prelates or rather the Arch-Priest of Rome a Minister though never so able must not Preach if he will not wear the Surplice nor Baptize if he will not Cross nor may any either administer the Communion or receive it without Kneeling In which things if they transgress they are liable to be presented suspended excommunicated I have no power to compel Mr. T. to plead for any thing that he hath no mind to plead for In due time for ought I know he may as fast draw off from the tents of these men as he hath of late been advancing towards them He will not plead for their Canons nor for their Ceremonies at least some of them he tells us p. 54. It may be the next step may be nor for their Ministry To what purpose Mr. T. disputes for the power of Governors to Institute Rules for Church-Polity when he will not plead for those they Institute I know not We manifested in S. T. the invalidity of this Argument The Apostle by an infallible Spirit adviseth the Church of Corinth That all things de done decently and in order and discovers to them wherein that Decency and Order lay therefore persons that pretend not to such a Spirit may of their own head bind our Consciences by Laws and Rules of their own in the Service of God To this Mr. T. replies He conceives none would thus unadvisedly conclude Answ And I believe so too but if they will argue rightly from this Scripture thus must they argue as we have demonstrated But he will yet prove the power of Governours in this matter from 1 Cor. 14 40. thus That which belonging to Decency and Order is commanded in general but not in the particularities determined is in respect of Communities left to be determined by their Rulers But so is the Apostles command 1 Cor. 14. 40. Therefore Answ 1. Both Propositions are liable to exception 1. Upon supposition that what in the Worship of Christ belongs to Decency and Order is left undetermined it doth not follow that it belongs to the Rules of the Church to determine thereof which is to make the Rulers Lords over Gods Heritage to introduce insupportable Tyranny into the Churches of Christ They are the Churches Servants not Lords that are her Ministers 2dly The Minor Proposition is notoriously false and untrue the Apostle is debating the business of Prophesying touching this he lays down particular rules for Decency and Order which he requires them to conform to Let any sober Christian peruse the Chapter he will see this shining therein in brightness So Ambrose Aquinas c. inform us Decently and in Order that no unseemliness or tumult arise But this prescription of the Apostle is not to be applied to any Episcopal Traditions but the Apostles own viz. such as he had delivered to the Churches saith a learned man Thus the heat of this contest is allayed Pulveris exigui jactu We further reply in S. T. But let this be granted suppose that 't is the Priviledge and Duty of the Church to make Laws and Constitutions for the binding of the Consciences of men in matters of Decency and Order this Church herein is bounded by the Scripture or 't is not If it be then when it hath no prescription therein for its commands it 's not to be obeyed and so we are where we were before That Decency and Order is to be determined by the Scripture If it be not bounded thereby then whatever Ceremonies it introduceth not directly contrary thereunto they must be subjected to which how fair an inlet it is to the whole Farrago of Popish Inventions who sees not To this Mr. T. adjoyns That he doth not plead that it is the Priviledge and Duty of the Church to make Laws and Constitutions for the binding of the Consciences of men in matters of Decency and Order Answ Very good The Church of England Mr. T. thinks hath no such Power Priviledge or Authority granted unto them by the Lord Jesus Then have they whilst they have so done invaded his Throne and Kingly Authority The Parish Priests whilst they own abet and subscribe to what they have done in this matter are Co-partners with them in their iniquity are really guilty of opposing the King-ship of Christ which was the matter we have been all this while contesting about and is now in effect granted by our wary Antagonist We argue thus Those that assume power to make Laws and impose the reception of them upon the People of a Nation beside those and without any Priviledge or grant to them by such given in whom the Soveraign Power of Ruledom resides are guilty of Rebellion against such their Rulers and Governours Those that abet them herein are guilty of the same Rebellion But this the Church of England with respect to Jesus Christ the onely Soveraign Lord and Ruler of his Churches hath done her Ministers have abetted her herein Therefore The Major cannot be denied The Minor is evident 1. That the Church of England hath made Constitutions for the binding thâ— Consciences of men in the maters of Decency and Order their Book of Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical evince that they have no authority from Christ so to do Mr. T. grants So that in what follows we are little concerned partly because he hath already yeelded the cause and partly because the particularities he speaks of be they what they will are only he tells us of Decency and Order not determined in the Scripture Now we deny any such particularities undetermined we think it a most fearful undervaluing of the Wisdom of Christ to assert That mans ' Devices can add Beauty Order or Decency to Christ's Institutions i. e. They are not Orderly or Decent without Humane Impositions Nor see we how these can be prescribed by Canons Ecclesiastical to be obeyed because enjoyned by the Rulers of the Church to whom we are saith Mr. T. in Conscience bound to submit if it be not the Priviledge nor Duty of the Church to make Laws and Constitutions for the binding the Consciences of men in matters of this nature and think that the latter part of his Answer is in contention with the former Besides we are yet â—o seek for a proof of this matter That we are obliged to obey Rulers Ecclesiastical commanding us any thing in the Worship of God as such under the notion of Decency and Order and believe this very assertion is contrary to the Law of Nature and right Reason which teacheth us That God
enough of this 't is evident that Mat. 23. 1 2. refuseth to afford the least sanctuary to the opinion of hearing the present Ministers Sect. 2. The Answer to the second Objection vindicated from Mr. T. his Exceptions Of Christ and the Apostles going into the Synagogues The ends of their so doing The 3d Objection vindicated Phil. 1. 15 16 opened All preaching of Christ not to be rejoyced in proved A Second Objection proposed in S. T. to be considered is this We find Christ and his Apostles going frequently into the Synagognes where the Scribes and Pharisees preached Which Mr. T. proves they did from Luke 2. 46. 4. 16. Acts 3. 1. 13. 14 15. 16. 13. 17. 2. And further addâ— That the Synagogues nor their Rulers nor their order of the reading of the Law nor their Teachers were of the appointment of God yet our Lord and his Disciples were present at them and joyned with them in hearing them read and such other services of Religion as were done to God which iâ— a good reason wherefore it should not be accounted necessary to separate from the present Assemblies of England and the publick Ministers notwithstanding corruption in Worship defect in calling To which we Answer in S. T. 1. That all that Christ and the Apostles did is not lawful for Saints to practise To which Mr. T. Sect. 6. What they did out of peculiar power commission or instinct is not lawful for us to do but what they did as mâ—n or part of the Jewish People in the Worship and Church of the Jews is a warrant for us in the like case to do in the assemblies of the Christians Answ 1. But he proves not that they did not this out of peculiar instinct which if they did by his own confession the Argument deduced from hence for the lawfulness of hearing the present Ministers is not valid 2. If they did it in discharge of their duties as members of the Jewish Church as he intimates their example binds us as he saith only in the like case i. e. Members of a rightly constituted Church for so was the Church of the Jews are to worship in the Church-Assemblies with them notwithstanding some corruptions But the Church of England we have proved is no rightly constituted Church we were never Members thereof So that hitherto he hath said nothing that is pertinent We further answer in S. T. 2dly That 't is one thing to go into the Synagogues and another thing to go thither to attend upon the Ministry of such aâ— taught there This the present case which that Christ or his Apostles ever did cannot be proved Our Animadverter replies Though Christ and his Apostles did not go to attend on the Ministry of such as taught there yet they did there hear the Law and the Prophets read and joyn in Prayers Answ 1. If they went not to attend on the Ministry of such as taught there an attendment upon the present Ministers of England cannot be proved from their example In which assertion that Mr. T. hath given away the cause he hath all this while been pleading for is in it self evident If we may not attend on their Ministry we may not hear them as Ministers Nor indeed 2dly can we hear them at all for in that their Ministry they act as Ministers 'T is true Christ and the Apostles went to the Synagogues whither the People were gathered together and somtimes they heard the Law and the Prophets read that they joyned in Prayer with them is no where affirmed Acts 3. 1. 't is said They went up to the Temple at the hour of Prayer but 't is evident they went not in to pray with them for Peter having wrought that miracle in cureing the Cripple they flock to him and he preacheth to them And Act. 16. 13. 't is said Paul went to the Rivers side where Prayer was wont to be made but that he prayed with them there is not intimated nor probable but their end in going thither as is evident by their practice was to take an opportunity to teach and instruct the People who were convened together which is no warrant for our going to the present Assemblies where liberty so to do is not afforded us nor do we or can we propose such an end to our selves in going thither We add in S. T. 3dly They went thither to oppose them in and confute their Innovations and Traditions in the Worship of God to take an opportunity to teach and instruct the People Which when any have a spirit to do and are satisfied they are thereunto called by the Lord in respect of the present Ministers and Worship of England we shall be so far from condemning them therein that we shall bless God for them But this is not to the purpose in hand The attendance of our Brethren upon the Ministers of England is quite another thing that requires other Arguments for its support than we have hitherto met with What saith Mr. T. hereunto Doth he manifest that these were not the ends of their going to the Temple and Synagogues Doth he manifest that upon supposition they â—ere the Argument from their example is valid He attempts not the one or the other which yet if he will not give up his concern in the present Argument he could not but see was incumbent upon him â—o prove He only tells us That Christ or his Apostles went into their Synagogues to oppose them in or confute their Innovations Traditions in the Worship of God he doth not remember to have read Answ 1. That they came thither to take an opportâ—nity to teach the People Mr. T. denies not which were enough to enervate what can be argued for the hearing the present Ministers from their example as was said before But 2dly The shortness of his memory I am not able to mend would he converse with the Scriptures of the Lord more possibly that might make him more ready than he seems to be in them 'T is evident they did oppose them in and confute their Innovations Christ did so in the Temple Matth. 21. 12 13. and Chap. 23. For that Discourse of his was in the Temple as is evident from Chap. 24 1. In the Synagogue Mark 3. 1. where he confutes their Innovation touching the Sabbath by manifesting that works of mercy might be done on that day vers 4 5. see Mat. 12. 9 10 11 12 13. Luke 6. 6 7 8 9 10. and 13. 10. contrary to the Tradition of the Elders The Apostles Acts 17. 1 2 17. 18. 4 19. 19. 8. How little Mr. T. hath said to reinforce the Argument the Reader will judge We proceed in S. T. and propose a 3d Objection Object 3. Paul rejoyceth at the preaching of the Gospel though it was preached out of envy Phil. 1. 15 16. From whence our Animadverter argues Arg. 1. They in whose preaching of Christ we may rejoyce though they should not preach Christ sincerely but in