tye many particular Churches is lawfull to us I prove the assumption A question troubled these Churches some false teachers said Cyrinthus as Epiphanius thinketh You must be circumcised after the manner of Moses Acts 15. ver 1. and there was no small dissention and disputation about this ver 2. and this question troubled the Church of Jerusalem as ver 4. and 5. doe declare And it troubled the Churches of Antioch Syria and Cylicia ver 23. 2. That the question could not well be determined in their particular Churches is cleare from ver 34 from three circumstances 1. The maintainers of the question troubled them 2. They almost subverted their soules with words 3. They alleadge a necessity of keeping Moses Law and that it was the commandement and doctrine of the Apostles and Elders 3. That in this question that troubled them so much they have their recourse to a Synod is cleare ver 6. And the Apostles and Elders came to consider of this matter and ver 2. They determined that Paul and Barnabas and certaine others of them should goe up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and Elders about this question And that the Apostles who were led by an infallible spirit and could not erre might have determined the question is cleare by their speeches in the counsell if the Apostles had not had a mind to set down a Samplar and a Copy of an Assembly in such cases 4. That there are here the members of a Synod is cleare Apostles Elders Brethren ver 23. and Commissioners from Antioch ver 2. certaine others and the Elders of the Church at Jerusalem James Paul and the Elders of Jerusalem chap. 21. v. 17 18 compared with ver 25. So here are Elders from sundry Congregations 5. That these Decrees did tye and Ecclesiastically oblige the Churches howbeit all the members were not present to consent is cleare chap. 16. ver 4. And as they went through the Cities they delivered them the Decrees for to keep Acts 21. ver 25. We have written and concluded that they observe no such things but that they keep themselves c. So chap. 15. 28. It seemed good to lay on you no greater burden then these necessary things c. Now let us heare the exceptions which our brethren propound on the contraâ—y to prove that this was no generall Assembly They object 1. This cannot be proved to be an oâ—cumenicke Councell that is an Assembly of the whole Churches of the world Answ. Howbeit Augustine Chrysostome Cyrillus Theophylact Theodoret Cyprian Ambrose and most of the learned Fathers agree that it was an oâ—cumenicke Assembly yet we will not contend many Churches of Jewes and Gentiles were here by their Commâ—ssioners which is sufficient for our point 2. The Apostles who were universall Pastors of the whole world were here 2. They object There is no word of a Synod or Assembly in the Text. Answ. The thing it selfe is here if not the name saith that learned Voetius 2. Neither is the name of an independent Church in Scripture nor the word Trinity or Sacrament what then the the things are in Scripture 3. verse 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they assembled and ver 25. they were together is plainly a Synod They object 3. Though there were a generall assembly here yet it proveth nothing for the power of the keyes to be in such an assembly but onely it saith something for a power of deciding of controversies in matter of â—aith which implyeth no act of iurisdiction Answ. 1. The deciding of controversies in matters of doctrine tying the Churches and laying a burthen on them as it is ver 28. and tying them to keep the Decrees chap. 21. 25. chap. 16. 4. is an aâ—t of jurisdiction and an opening and shutting heaven by the power of the keyes when it is done Synodically as this is here 2. This presupposeth that the power of the keyes is onely in censuring matters of fact and not in a ministeriall jâ—dging and condemning of false doctrine which is against Scripture For Ephesus is commended for using the keyes in condemning the doctrine of those who called themselves Apostles and were not and Pergamus rebuked for suffering the doctrine of Balaam and Thyatira is rebuked for suffering Jezabel to teach the lawfulnesse of fornication and of eating things sacrificed unto Idols Rev. 2. v. 2. v. 14. v. 20. They object fourthly The true cause why Paul and Barnabas were sent to Jerusalem was not to get authoritative resolution of the question in hand but to know whether these teachers had warrant from the Apostles to teach the necessity of circumcision as they pretended they had as may be gathered from ver 24. To whom we gave no such command Answ. The contrary is seen in the Text For if the Apostles had commanded any such thing it was a dispute of fact in this Synod and they might soone have answered that but the thing questioned was questis iuris a question if circumcision must be v. 5. and that they must be circumcised ver 24. Also Paul and Barnabas were sent to Jerusalem ver 2. about this question Now the question was not whether the Apostles had taught the lawfulnesse of circumcision or not But the question is ver 1. Certaine men taught except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses you cannot be saved 2. It were a vaine thing to say that v. 6. the Apostles and Elders met about this matter to see what the Apostles had taught and what not 3. The Apostles bring reasons from the Scriptures and from the calling of the Gentiles which were vaine reasons if nothing were in question but whether the Apostles had taught this point or not taught it 4. That Paul and Barnabas were sent to be resolved of more then whether the Apostles had taught this or not is cleare by their answer in the Decree It seemed good c. to lay no greater burden on you and that you abstaine from meats offered to Idols c. They object fifthly There was no combination of many Pastors of divers Churches but onely a few messengers sene from Antioch to the Congregation at Jerusalem Hence many say it was an assembly of a particular Church and it bindeth only as a particular and speciall meeting So M. Best Answ 1. We stand not upon an exact meeting of all Churches when as the nature and essence of a Synodicall and Assembly-meeting is saved Here were Apostles and Elders whose charge was the wide world And the Elders of Ierusalem and Commissioners sent from Antioch and they send Canons and Decrees to other Churches 2. A decree of one particular independent Congregation cannot bind another as our brethren teach But the Decrees made here did tye the Churches of Syria Cylicia Antioch and Ierusalem v. 22 23. chap. 16. v. 4. Yea and all the Churches of the Gentiles Acts 21. 25. remember that enemies to our Synods as Bridgesius
and Hugo Grotius object this also This is the answer of Bridgesius and Hugo Grotius who deny the necessity of reformed Synods Parker who is for our brethren in many points refuteth this and proveth it was a Synod They object sixthly They were not neighbouring Churches that sent for Jerusalem did lye two hundred â—iles from Antioch How could they that lay so far distant ordinarily meet as your Classes did Answ. To the essence of a Synod and the necessity thereof is not required such meetings of Churches so farre distant but when the Churches necessity requireth it the lawfulnesse thereof may hence well be concluded and that when they lye so neâ—r-hand they may more conveniently meet 2. Neither is this much to give M. Best his Geography at his owne measure when the Churches were now in their infancy and the question of such importance that the Churches travell many miles for their resolutâ—on in this They object seventhly How prove you that these that were sent from Antioch had authority in the Church of Jerusalem Answ. Because Paul and Barnabas sent from Antioch had voyces in these Decrees They object eighthly It cannot be proved from henâ—e that Antioch was a Church depending on Jerusalem Answ. Neither doe we intend to prove such a matter But hence it followeth that both Antioch and Jerusalem and Syria and Cilicia depend upon the Decrees of these Pastors of divers Congregations assembled in this Synod They object ninthly That Papists and Prelates alleadge this place to prove their Diocâ—san Synods Answ. So doth Satan alleadge a Scripture Psalme 91. which must not be rejected because it was once in his foule mouth Prelates alleadge this place to make Jerusalem a Cathedrall and Mother-church having Supremacy and Jurisdiction over Antioâ—h and other Churches that there may be erected there a silken chaire for my Lord Prelate and that Lawes may bee given by him to bind all mens consciences under him in things which they call indifferent we alleadge this place for an Apostolike assembly to make Jerusalem a collaterall and Sister-church with Antioch and the Churches of Syria and Cilicia depending on a generall Councell We deny all Primacie to Jerusalem it was only judged the most convenient seat for the Councell We allow no Chaire for Prelate or Pastors but that they determine in the Councell according to Gods Word laying bands on no mans conscience farther then the Word of God and the dictates of sound reason and Christian prudency doe require They tenthly object That the matter carried from Antioch to Jerusalem was agreed upon by the whole Church and not carried thither by one man as is done in your Classes So M. Best Answ. It were good that things that concerne many Churches were referred by common consent to higher assemblies but if one man be wronged and see truth suffer by partiality the Law of nature will warrant him to appeale to an assembly where there is more light and greater authority as the weaker may â—ly to the stronger And the Churches whose soules were subverted with words Acts 15. v. 24. did â—ly to the authority of a greater assembly when therâ— is no small dissention about the question in hand Acts 15. 2. They object eleventhly The thing concluded in this assembly was divine Scripture imposed upon all the Churches of the Gentiles v. 22. 28. and the conclusion obliged because it was Apostolike and Canonicke Scripture not because it was Synodicall and the Decree of a Church-assembly and so the tye was Divine not Ecclesiasticke It seemed good to the Holy-Ghost Answ. 1. So the excommunication of the incestuous man 1 Cor. 5. if he was excommunicated and his re-receiving againe in the bosome of the Church 1 Cor. 2. and the laying on of the hands of the Elders on Timothy 1 Tim. 4. 14. and the appointing Elders at Lystra Iconium Antioch and fasting and praying at the said ordination Acts 14. v. 21 22 23. was Scripture and set downe in the Canonicke History by the Holy-Ghost but no man can deny that the conclusion or Decree of excommunication given out by the Church of Corinth and the ordination of Timothy to be a Pastor and the appointing of the Elders at Lystra did oblige the Churches of Corinth Ephesus and Lystra with an Ecclesiasticall tye as Ecclesiasticall Synods doe oblige 2. That this conclusion doth oblige as a Decree of a Synod and not as Apostolike and Canonicke Scripture I prove 1. Because the Apostles and Prophets being immediately inspired by the Holy-Ghost in the penning of Scripture doe never consult and give decisive voices to Elders Brethren and the whole community of beleevers in the penning holy Scripture For then as it is said Ephes. 2. 20. That our faith is built upon the Apostles and Prophets that is upon their doctrine so shall our faith in this point concerning the taking in of the Church of the Gentilâ—s in one body with the Jewes as is proved from Scripture v. 14 15 16 17. be built upon the doctrine of Elders Brethren and whole Church of Jerusalem for all had joynt voyces in this Councell as our brethren say which is a great absurdity The commandements of the Apostles are the commandements of the Lord 1 Cor. 14. 37. But the commandements of the whole Church of Jerusalem such as they say this Decree was are not the commandements of the Lord For we condemne Papists such as Suareâ— Vasquez Bellarmine Caiâ—tan Sotus and with them Formalists such as Hooker and Sutluvius who make a difference betwixt divine commaâ—dements and Apostolike commandements and humane ordinances for our Divines as Junius Beza Pareus Tylen Sibrandus Whittaker Willet Reynolds Jewell make all Apostolike mandates to be divinâ— and humane commandements or â—cclesiasticall mandates to oblige onely secondarily and as they agree with divine and Apostolike commandements But here our brethren make mandates of ordinary beleevers that were neither Apostles nor Prophets to be divine and Canonicke Scripture 3. That which is proper to the Church to Christ his second comming againe doth not oblige as Canonicke Scripture â—or Canonicke Scripture shall not be still written till Christ come againe because the Canon is already closed with a curse upon all adders Rev. 22. but what is decreed according to Gods word by Church-guides with the consent tacit or expresse of all the community of beleevers as this was v. 22. as we and our brethren doe joyntly confesse is proper to the Church to Christs second comming Ergo this Decree obligeth not as Scripture 4. The Apostles if they had not purpose that this Decree should oblige as an Ecclesiasticall mandate but as Canonicke Scripture they would not 1. have advised with all the beleevers as with collaterall and joynt pen-men with them of holy Scripture 2. They would not have disputed and reasoned together every one helping another as they doe here v. 6 7 8 9 10 c. 3.
is to prove the power of the keyes to be in the multitude But we are now disputeing about the power of the keyes in a Church ministeriall which is totum heterageneum where the whole giveth not a denomination to the part as every part of a man is not a man a Church made up of only believers is not Christs organicall body where there are eyes eares and hands and feet as is meaned Rom. 12. and 1 Cor. 12. for all are here an eye of believers and all of collaterall and equall authoritie neither is there here an eye or an hand in a ministeriall function above a foote But wee now dispute about the keyes of a ministeriall Church as Iunius saith made up of integrall parts of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Shepheards and Sheepe V. Conclusion The office bearers of the Church have the power of the Keyes and their office immediately from Christ by the immediation of free gift they have their offices from the Church by the mediation of orderly designation seeing it is the Church which designeth such a man to such an office therefore it is said Eph. 4. 11. Hee gave some to be Apostles for the Church he saith not to the Church as if the faithfull by an innate and received power from Christ did ordaine by authoritie Ministers as their servants and Deputies for all the authoritie is Christs not the believers I grant what is given for the Church in some sense is said to be given to the Church as Chrysostome said The gift of baptisme is given to the whole Church but the power of baptising is not given to all the believers as to the subject This Conclusion I prove 1. That is not to be holden which is not written as our brethren hold So Best Travers Parker Ames M. Iacob so also Theodoret Cyrill Augustine Ambrose but it is neither expresly nor by good consequence in Scriptures no precept no promise where all the faithfull lay hands on men for the Ministerie as Titus Paul and the Presbyterie doe 1 Timothy 4. 14. or where all the faithfull doe binde and loose and receive witnesses judicially against Elders as Peter and Timothy have authority to doe 2. Argument If the word say that the power of the keyes is given to certaine select persons and not to all believers then is not this power given to all believers but the word saith the former er The Assumption is thus proved If these Offices that essentially include both the power and the exercise of the Keyes be given to some select persons and not to all the faithfull then are not the Keyes given to all the faithfull but the Lord gave the office of Apostles Prophets c. to some only And God hath set some in the Church then not all first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers c. And hee gave some to be Apostles not all and some Prophets c. Are all Apostles The major is proved because to be an Apostle a Pastor c. is to have a power given by Christ to use the keyes by preaching binding and loosing by censures as an Apostle Pastor c. This cannot be answered seeing there must be another power to binde and loose in Pastours and Elders than is in all believers women believing children and many believers unapt to governe 3 Argument To whomsoever Christ giveth the power of the Keyes to them he gave a ministeriall spirit by way of speciall ambassage to remit and to retaine sins as the Ambassadors of God in Christs stead and them he sent as the fatheâ— sent him as is cleare in the Scripture As the Father sent me so send I you c. He breatâ—ed on them and said receive the Holy Ghost whosoever sinnes ye remit they are remitted In which words our Divines Calvin Bullinger Musculus Beza yea and Papists Cajetan Toletus teach that Christ here did inaugurate his Disciples to preach and exercise the censures of the Church so also Cyrill Chrysostome Cyprian But this ministeriall spirit Christ gave not to all the faithfull but only to the Apostles for he sent not Mary Magdalene and Cleophas in this place as M. Smith saith and why because it is gathered from Luk. 24. 33 34 36. That Magdalene and Cleophas were there saith he when Christ said As my Father sent me so send I you Therefore Mary also and Cleophaâ— received a ministeriall power of the keyes all as well as 〈◊〉 Apostles I answer but this place is all one with Mat. 28. 18 19. where they are commanded to preach and baptize which is not lawfull to women 1 Cor. 14. 1 Tim. 2. And it is all one with the Commission Mark 16 14. which is restruted to the eleven Another weake ground he hath that the eleven were not made Apostles untill Christs Ascension Act. 2. when the spirit was sent and untill he led captivitie captive Ephes. 4. 11. but this power was given to all the Disciples before his ascension Answer a higher mâ—asure of the Spirit was powred on the Apostles at Christs Ascension and by vertue of his Ascension he ordained Apostles Eph. 4. 11. but will it follow none were made Apostles untill he ascended if this were good by vertue of his death wee obtaine forgivenesse of sinnes by his ascending to heaven we also ascend But hence it followeth not that there is no forgivenesse of sinnes while Christ die and that there is no ascending to heaven of the spirits of the Patriarchs and Fathers while Christ ascended 2. That the Apostles were called and received Apostleship from Christ in the dayes of his slesh before his death is cleare Matth. 10. 2 3. and that they went out and preached and cast out divels A second exception there is of some who say a concionall or preaching power of forgivnesse of sinnes is not given to all to whom a loosing from sins by Church censures is given as is cleare in our Ruling Elders who have not power to forgive sinnes by preaching yet have power to forgive binde and loose by Church-censures Answer We may distinguish where the law distinguisheth for howbeit the power of preaching be not given formally to ruleing Elders yet it is effectually in the fruit given to them in the judiciall and authoritative applicatioâ— in the externall court of Christs Church but believers as believers only have neither power to preach formally nor yet effectively to apply judicially the threatnings of the word in discipline to the judiciall correction of delinquents now the keyes in the word and the keyes in the discipline are the same keyes of Christs kingdome as Amesius observeth and the keyes of the word are the keyes of the kingdome committed to all either formally or effectively to whom the keyes of discipline are given but they are never given to
rebuke him from this Text. 14. Christ immediately and without the mediation of the Church saith Parker communicateth himselfe to beleevers ergo he communicateth his power also immediately to his Church Ans. It followeth not because he communicateth not his power of the keyes to the Church of believers either mediately or immediately because he giveth it not to them at all CHAP. V. Q. Whether or no some doe warrantably teach that the power of the Keyes is essentially and originally in the Church of Beleevers and in the Church-guides only at the second hand and in the by quoad exerâ—itium so as the Church of Believers should be the mistresse delegating the keyes by an imbred and kindly authority and the Church-guides as her proper servants and delegats do borrow the use and exercise of the keyes from the foresaid Church of Believers THe tenent of these with whom we now dispute is that all the power of the keyes is given by Christ to the multitude of Believers as to the first fountaine and that this power is derived and gested by the mulmultitude of believers to such and such persons to be used and exercised by them as the servants both of Christ and the Church For the clearing of the question and trying if this distinction be law-biding These distinctions are to be observed 1. The power of the keyes may be thought to come to the Ministers of the Church three waies as shall be cleared 1. By mediate derivation the Church receiving this power from Christ and deriving it over to the friends of the Bridegroome 2. By immediate donation God immediately giveth the honour of the keyes to these whom he maketh his Courtyers in this kinde 3. By application the Church only naming the men to the office 2. The power of the keyes and all sacred offices in Gods House are from the immediate wisdome of Christ The designation of such men to such offices is by the ministery of the Church 3. The power of the keyes is one thing the lawfull exercise of the keyes is another thing 4. The Ministers may be thought the servants either of the Church or servants of Christ for the Church 5. Designation of men by the Church to sacred offices may be thought either in the Churches free-will or tyed to the lawes designed by Christ. 6. The Church of believers may be thought either the virtuall or the formall subiect of the keyes 7. The power of the keyes may be thought to be given to the community or multitude of Believers or professours of faith in Christ in the generall not designing one man rather then another but leaving that to the disposition of meanes and disposition of second causes who shalâ— be the man as to be a Musitian to be an Astronomer is given to mankinde as some way proper to man as Porphyre saith howbeit all and every one of mankinde be not alwayes Musitians and Astronomers It is thought by our Brethren that the Church of believers is the first seat the prime subject and head fountaine under Jesus Christ to whom the keyes are given and that howbeit all offices and officers be only of Christs institution yet the Church of believers doe as the Spouse and Mistresse and bride of Christ communicate the lawfull exercise of some acts of the keyes as to preach administer the Sacraments oversee the conversation of the flock care for the poore to some certain men as her deputies and servants with borrowed authority from her selfe as the Well-head and prime fountain under Christ of all the authority and use of the keyes that is in the officers of the House as Pastors Doctors and Elders the Church still keeping in her own hands authority and power of the keyes in most materiall acts of the power of the keyes as by these keyes to ordain and elect all the officers and in case of aberration or failing to censure depose excommunicate them and all members of the visible Church and that independently and without any subordination to Presbyteries Classes and Synods even as the kingly power of actuall government is in the Kings hand and he appointeth deputies and servants under himself and in his name and authority to do and execute his will according to the Laws of the Kingdom so doth the Church of believers under Christ by an imbred authority and power received from Christ send out Pastors Doctors and Elders in her name and authority to exercise certain ministeriall acts yet so as the Church of believers in all the acts performed by the officers remaineth the principall and prime agent cause and actor under Christ and the officers only her servants deputies and instruments performing all by authority borrowed from her the bride Queen and Spouse of Christ This they believe to be contained in the Scriptures and taught by Fathers and Doctors of the Church I deny not but by the faculty of Paris this question was agitated in the Councell of Basil and Constance to bring the Pope as a sonne and servant under the power of a Generall Councell The Sorbonists and Doctors of Paris that are not near the smoake of the Popes glory for this contend with the Jesuites men that are sworne bellies to the world and the Pope The Parisians cite the Councell of Carthage where Augustine was present And Augustine and Tertullian and Chrysostome seeme to favour this So Maldonate Ferus Jansenius Sutluvius Whittaker Morton Spalato Gerson Almain Petr. de Alliac Also Edmundus Richerius and Sim. Vegorius set out a booke of Church policy depressing the Pope and extolling the Church power as full and compleat without a ministeriall head as their owne Parisian Doctors acknowledging the command of having a Pope to be affirmative and not to bind alwayes and that the Churches power remaineth full when the Pope is dead as the Parisians say p. 8. The booke came out without the name of an Authour and was condemned by Cardinall Peronius Archbishop of Senona and Primate of France and Germany and is refuted by Andreas Duvallius a Sorbonist What our Divines say in this I have exponed to be far otherwise then is the mind of Parker M. Jacob M. Best and the Authours of presbyteriall government examined Ann. 1641. Hence our first conclusion is All offices and office-bearers in Gods house have their warrant immediately from Christ Jesus as we all agree against the bastard prelacy 1. because of the perfection and plenitude of Scripture 2 because of our Law-giver Christs wisedome and his seven Spirits that are before the Throne seeing he seeth better then men 3. because of the Scriptures Eph. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8 9. w 1 Cor. 12. 26 27 28 29. 1 Tim. 3. Act. 20. â—8 And therefore Presbyters and Deacons have their offices immediately from Christ and not from the Prelates 11. Conclusion The first subject of the keyes is either made quate or narrower as one Pastor and some ruling Elders of
but the childâ—en of beleeving parents aime at this That the faith of the father is imputed to the children which indeed reverend Beza doth maintaine Or then a worse that Infants are not to be baptized at all seeing they oppose the places that we cite for the lawfulnesse of baptizing Infants The authors of Presbyteriall government call the baptizing of children a untimous anticipation Our brethrens mind is that the Infants of both Parents knowne to be unbeleevers are not to be baptized untill they come to age and can give proofe that they are within the covenant of grace what Anabaptists thinke here is knowne Some say that Boniface the 4. in the yeare 606. began the Baptisme of infants M. Best saith too nakedly I beleeve at Augustine Cyprian Origen Cyrill Nazianzen Ambrose and many other Fathers affirme that the Church hath received the Baptisme of Infants from the Apostles What doth he not beleeve that it is most evidently in Scripture and hath he no better warrant then the â—athers Fourthly M. Best objecteth If there be no precept nor example for baptizing of Infants begotten of both Parents unbeleeving then there is no promise of blessing made unto it but the first is true Ergo the second Answ. 1. We aske with what faith and by what precept or example was ever circumcision in the whole old Testament denyed to any male-childe of the most wicked Jewes and by what precept and example is Baptisme denyed to any Infant in the New Testament for his Parents wickednesse the Fathers professing the Christian Faith Yea seeing Baptisme is denyed to Infants upon a suspition that their Parents are destitute of faith and not within the Covenant Now this suspition is not faith nor grounded upon any word of God or certaintie of faith for whether an other man beleeve or beleeve not it is not faith nor knowne by faiths certaintie to me but by the judgement of charitie Fifthly they object If all promiscuously be baptized Gods name is taken in vaine and the holy Sacrament greatly abused Mal. 1. 12. Heb. 10 29. Answ. This is to accuse God as if he had not found sufficient wayes out to save his owne name from blasphemy Nor can our brethren by their Doctrine save his name from dishonour nor the Sacrament from prophanation because multitudes of Infants borne of beleeving Parents are reprobates and yet God hath commanded to baptize them who being reprobates must be without the covenant and so the covenant is prophaned and many Infants of wicked Parents are chosen and within the covenant yet are we forbidden by our brethren to give them the seales of the covenant untill they come to age which also should be given to them and needs force by their doctrine that Christ hath commanded a certaine way of dishonouring his name which is blasphemy â—or we have not such a cleare way to know Infants cleane and uncleane as the Priest had to know the polluted bread and the polluted sacrifices Mal. 1. 7 12. as he citeth For what Infants are within the covenant indeed and chosen of God and what not We neither know nor is it requisite that we know further then that we are to know that they are borne within the visible Church Sixthly they say The Church of God is defiled Hag. 2. 14 15. Ezech. 44. 7. If all Infants promiscuously be baptized for then the people and every worke of their hand and their offering is uncleane So M. Best Answ. We deny that children borne within the visible Church are an uncleane offering to the Lord and that the baptizing of them polluteth the Nation and all the worship of the Nation as they would gather from Haggai For being borne of the holy Nation they are holy with a federall and nationall holinesse Rom. 11. 16. If the root be holy so are the branches For our brethren baptize children of Parents who are hypocrites and unbeleevers and so the uncircumcised in heart come into the Sanctuary Yea Peter in baptizing Simon Magus and Ananias and Saphira brought in the uncircumcised in heart and the strangers to Gods covenant as Best alledgeth from Ezech. 44. borrowing such abused testimonies of Gods word from Separatists as they borrowed them from Anabaptists For we preach and invite in the Gospell all the uncircumcised in heart and all the wicked to come and heare and partake of the holy things of the Gospell and receive the promises thereof with faith And when many come to this heavenly banquet without their wedding garment Mat. â—2 12 13. 2 Cor. 2. 16. Mat. 21. 43 44. It followeth not because they prophane the holy things of God that Ministers who baptize the Infants of hypocrites and prophane persons are accessarie to the prophaning of the holy things of God and that we bring in the polluted in heart to the Sanctuary of God It is one thing whom Ministers should receive as members of the Sanctuary and Church and another thing who should come in and what sort of persons they are obliged to be who come to be members To say that Ministers should receive none into the Church but those that are circumcised in heart and cleane and holy and cloathed with the wedding garment of faith is more then our brethren can prove Nay we are to invite to the wedding good and bad chosen and unchosen Mat. 22. 9. As many as you find bid to the wedding But that all that come to be received members of the unvisible Church are obliged to be circumcised in heart and holy and cloathed with the wedding garment else they prophane the Sanctuary and holy things of God is most true But we desire that our brethren would prove this The Porters that held out the uncircumcised and the strangers out of the Sanctuary were types of the Ministers and Church of the New Testament who should receive none to be Church-members and invite none to the wedding of the Gospell but such as have their wedding garment and are circumcised in heart and are cleane and holy else they prophane and defile the Church of God as M. Best saith We beleeve this latter to be an untruth and yet the strength of this Argument doth hang upon this They are obliged to be such who enter into the Church else they defile the Sanctuary Ergo the Church and Ministers of the New Testament are obliged to invite none to any Church-communion or receive them into a Church fellowship but only the circumcised in heart Wee utterly deny this consequence It is one thing what sort of persons they ought to be that should be members of the Church doubtlesse they should be beleevers And another thing whom the Church should receive in these should be professors Seventhly M. Best reasoneth thus The Minister is made a covenant-breaker Mal. 2. 8. who baptized the childe of prophane Parents and why because he offereth the blinde for a sacrifice to God Answ. What if the Parents be
publikely Answ. These Prophets were Prophets by office and so bâ—side that they were gifted they were sent with officiall authority to preach 1. They are such as Paul speaketh of 1 Cor. 12. 28. God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets Ergo they were officers set in the body as Apostles were at that time Eph. 4. 11. 2. They are called Prophets 1 Cor. 14. v. 29 32. But in all the old or new Testament Prophets signifie over these that are in office as the places in the margen cleare and a place cannot be brought where the word Prophet signifieth a man who publikely preacheth and yet is no Prophet by office but possibly a Fashioner a â—lough-man a Shoomaker 3. The formall â—ffâ—cts of publiâ—e edefying comfeâ—tiâ—g convincing converting soules are ascribed to these â—ophets v. 1 3 4 5 12 24 25 31. which are ascribed to prâ—â—ching Pastors Rom 10. 14 15. 1 Cor. 4. 1 2 3. 4. In this chapter and in chap. 13. Paul doth set downe Canons anent the right use of the offices that he spake of 1 Cor. 12. 28 29. 5. Paul must thinke them Prophets by office while as he compareth himselfe who was an Apostle and Prophet with these Prophets v. 37. If any man thinke himselfe to be a Prophet or spirituall let him acknowledge that the things that I write to you are the Commandements of the Lord. Also these Prophets were extraordinary and temporary as were the gifts of tongues and miracles and therefore none out of office now are to prophesie publikely M. Robinson saith they cannot be extraordinary because extraordinary Prophets are infallible and cannot erre else the Scriptures should have been written by Prophets who could erre but these Prophets 1 Cor. 14. could erre and were not infallible because their doctrine was to be judged v. 29. Answ. This is a silly reason Pareus Bulling Calvin Beza saith all spirits are to be tryed by the word and all Prophets even Samuell and Nathan may erre and looke beside the booke and may speake of their owne spirit how then were the pen-men of Scripture infallible saith Robinson I answer there are none simply infallible but God every man is a lyar The pen-men of the Scripture were infallible because when they were actually inspired by the Holy-Ghost they could not erre And the spirits of all Prophets are to be tryed by the word even of Paul preaching at Berea But it followeth not that Paul then could erre To this they answer that false Prophets as Balaam could not erre when they were actually inspired no more then Canonicke writers Answ. In the case of infallibility all are alike none are infallible by any infused habit of a Propheticall spirit but false Prophets were inspired with an habituall spirit of lying which spirit is not in Canonicke writers Robinson and others of his side thinke them not extraordinarily inspired 1. Because these Prophets might have been interrupted and put to silence that another to whom choiser things were revealed might prophesie v. 3. 2 Because Paul exhorteth to pray for the gift of interpretation and to covet saith others to prophesie Now we cannot seeke in faith from God an extraordinary and miraculous gift 3. Others adde this prophecying was subject to the free-will of the Prophets for they might prophesie or keep silence as they pleased but the acts of extraordinary prophecying are not subjected to the free-will of the Prophets therefore this was but ordinary prophecying to the which all gifted professors even out of oâ—fice are obliged for the edefying of the Church of Christ to the worlds end Answ. All these three come to one to wit acts of extraordinary prophecying are under the determination of free-will A little of this 1. Conclusion Pareus observeth well that there be two kinds of Prophets 1. Some who foretold things to come of these the Text in hand speaketh not 2. Some extraordinarily inspired with an extraordinary grace of interpreting Scripture The former were Prophets in the old Testament the latter especially Prophets of the new Testament knowledge of both were given without study or paines So there was a Propheticall spirit in Paul Gal. 1. 12. I received it not of man neither was I taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. 2. Conclusion The act of foretelling things to come especially things meerly contingent which are determined onely in the free Decree of God is not so under our free-will as the acts of preaching and interpreting Scripture out of a Propheticall infused habit For prophecying things to come seemed to have come on the Prophets of old as a fire-â—lash appeareth to a mans eye in the darke ayre he cannot chuse but see it Ezech. 2. 14. So the spirit lifted me up and tooke me away and I went in bitternesse in the heate of my spirit but the hand of the Lord was strâ—ng upon me Jer. 20. 9. And I said I will not make mention of him nor speak any more in his name but his word was in my heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones and I was weary with forbearing and I could not stay 2. King 3. 15. The hand of the Lord came upon Elisha and he prophecyed See Ierom. Oecumen Gregâ—r and Thomas The Propheticall spirit in the New Testament seemeth to be more swayed with free-will and morall threatnings 1 Cor. 9. 16. Woe unto me if I preach not the Gospell yet the habit from whence he preached was a Propheticall principle Galath 1. 12. 1 Cor. 14. 32. 3. Conclu Hence prophecying is not a habit and it is a habit It is not an habit 1. Because no Prophet can simply prophecy when he will except the man Christ especially of things to come by contingent causes the presence of which things saith Suarez is onely connaturall to God and to no morrall man comming on men by a transient irradiation while as the candle of Gods propheticall light glanceth upon the fancy and from thence to the mind that the man may see and reade the species and images and when this light shineth not Nathan and Samuell reade beside the Bible and are widely out Prophâ—cy also is an habit For 1. something remaine in Isaiah and Jeremiah while they sleepe and prophecy not from whence they are named Prophets and really are Prophets for when God hath once revealed himselfe to one as to his owne Prophet even from by past revelation 1 There remaineth a disposition to prophecy 1 Sam. 3. 20. All Israel knew even from Dan to Beersheba that Samuell was established to be a Prophet of the Lord. 2. Because there remaineth a propheticall light whereby the man gave assâ—nt to the last propheticall revelation and so the species and propheticall images must remaine in the fantasie and with these a propheticall memory of by past predictions and so some experimentall certainty that what he fore-telleth shall come to passe See Thomas and Caietan now the object propheticall is
are not professed beleevers having saving faith can be any thing but a non-Church and such as is a non-Spouse a non-body of Christ and a non-covenanted people and so wanting all power of the keyes Quâ—re If the baptisme of that congregation can be valid baptisme not to be repeated I leave to the consideration of the learned Yea if the Minister be an unbeleever by the former grounds it can be no baptisme But some â—ay it is the baptisme of the Church and so valid suppose the Minister be an unbeliever and so want power I answer the whole congregation may be unbelievers as is the Minister and so yet the baptisme comming from the Church cometh from these who want power and cannot be valid 2. Suppose the congregation be a company of believers yet I see not how by their authority they can make the baptizing of a Pastor wanting all power to be valid for then if the Church should baptize by a Turke or a Woman that baptisme should be valid which no man can say 18. What sort of an Assembly was the meeting Act. 15. if it was a lawfull Synod of sundry particular Churches or an extraordinary meeting the practice whereof doth not oblige us If it was a meere Apostolick meeting obliging as Apostolick and if it oblige us as Apostolick how commeth it that the multitude spake and gave their mind in that which obligeth us as Canonick Scripture For that the multitude spake our brethren collect from v. 12. and how is it that Elders and brethren determine in penning Canonick Scripture Except the first be said there be many doubts here of which the way of independency cannot cleare us Q. 19. How commeth it that the Lords Apostles who were to goe through all the Nations of the world to preach the Gospell doe so often assemble together to consult about the common affairs of the Church and discipline as Act. 1. Act. 2. Act. 4. Act. 6. 4. Act. 8. 14. Act. 11. 1. Act. 13. 1 2 3. Act. 15. Act. 21. 18. Act. 20. Paul and the Elders of Ephesus v. 17 18. 1 Tim. 4. 14. it is questioned seeing these assemblies of many pastors from sundry Churches because the Scriptures saith they were occasioned by the present necessity of ordering things belonging to all the particular Churches if they were only temporary extraordinary and Apostolick meetings which oblige not us to the like practise howbeit there be the like cause of meetings in the Church now as errours and corrupt doctrine in many particular Churches as were Act. 15. the murmurings betwixt Churches as Act. 6. a suspitious practise of a pastor which seemeth to be against Gods law as Peters going in to the uncircumcised Act. 11. 20. Whither or not Paul did not some things as an Apostle as writing of Canonick Scripture working of miracles 2. And some things as a Christian as Phil. 3. 9 10 11 12 13. 3. And some things as an ordinary Elder and Pastor of the Church delivering some persons to Satan 1 Cor. 5. 4. and whither or no is Pauls rod and authority and his power of excommunicating whereof he speaketh 1 Cor. 4. 21. 1 Cor. 5. 4. 2 Cor. 10. 8. common to all believers Our brethren must say it is common to all believers 21. If the power of the keyes be given to all believers a question is 1. If Pastors have no other power of the keyes but that same that believers have seeing the ground of Christs gift is one and the same to wit alike interest in Christ and if alike power of preaching baptizing excommunicating be in Paul and all believers 2. Whither or no the calling of Christ and his Church doth not superadde and confâ—rre to him who is made a pastour some farther power of the keyes then hâ— had before he was cloathed with any such calâ—ing seeing to rebuke exhort and comfort one another are dâ—ties of the law of natâ—â—e and would oblige all suppose Christ had given the 〈◊〉 of the keyes to none at all wee see not but our brethren must deny that the calling of the Church giveth any other power of the keyes then the believer had before he was called 3. If there be not a greater power of preaching baptizing and binding and loosing in the believers then in pastors seeing believers give the power to pastours and may take it away againe 22. If six believers be excommunicated and that justly clave non errante yet remaining believers it is questioned if they keepe not still the power of the keys they must keepe that power and yet are no members of Christs visible body 23. I desire a place may be produced in all the old or new Testament where a ministeriall or governing Church is taken for a company of only believers This our brethren teach 24. If all authoritative Assemblies for renewing a covenant with God restoring of the worship of God be 1. A part of the paedagogy of the law of Moses and removed by Christ 2. If these Assemblies in the Churches of Christ now be a species of Judaisme This we deny 25. If believers exercising the most eminent acts of ordaining pastors publick censuring depriving and excommunicating pastors publick convincing gain-sayers be not formally hence made by our brethren over-seers watch-men for the soules of Pastors and guides and so Pastors of Pastors We answer affirmatively they are by the former grounds 26. Let the godly and learned consider if the Patrons of independent Churches are not to give obedience to Decrees and Canons of Synods for the necessity of the matter as a brotherly counsell from Gods Word obligeth in conscience the brother to whom the counsell and advise is given howbeit the tye be not authoritative by the power of the keyes and if in that they are not to conforme CHAP. XIX Doubts against Presbyteriall government discussed as about ruling Elders Deacons Widowes the Kings power in things ecclesiasticall Quest. 1. HOw doth Calvin and Cartwright deny that the Apostle speaketh of ruling Elders Tit. 1. and yet Junius and Beza that both a preaching and ruling Elder are there comprehended So the authour of the survey of discipline Answ. A great question anent the latitude of an haire how doth many Formalists make the Prelate an humane creature and some jure humano and yet Land of Canterbury and D. Hall maketh him jure divino 2. An office may be described two wayes 1. Directly and expressely as the Pastor 1 Tim. 3. 2. Indirectly as many things agreeing to the Deacon as that he hold the mystery of saith in a good conscience â—e be sober grave faithfull in all things c. all which are required in the Doctor and Pastor also Quest. 2. How are the ruling Elders 1 Tim. 3. omitted where the officers are named Paul passeth from the Bishop to the Deacon omitting the ruling Elder So is hee omitted Ephesian 3. 11 Philip. 1. 1. it is like they are not of Christs making who are not in Christs rowle
Answ. Either the Prelate or the Presbyter is omitted 1 Tim. 3. Phil. 1. not the preaching Presbyter as is cleare by the description agreeing onely to him Ergo the Prelate is out of Christs rowle 2. Doctors are omitted Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 3. and yet are set downe Eph. 4. 11. yet are ruling Elders in other places as Rom. 12. 1 Cor. 12. 3. Paul 1 Tim. 3. is not describing offices but giveth Canons which generally agreeth to all Church-officers howbeit he giveth instance in two yet in such two as includeth all the rest as he that laboureth in teaching and governing and he that taketh care of the Church goods When Moses describeth the Judge he sheweth what a man the King the Justice of peace the Sheriffe the Major of a City the Lord of the privy Councell should be howbeit these be not named in the Text. Hence because they are not named it followeth not that they are omitted and not spoken of in the Text. Quest. 3. But Elders are not 1 Cor. 12. 29. nor yet Rom. 12. but only governours saith Whytgift and Dr. Field and it is an ill argument à genere ad speciem affirmativè he nameth gouernours it followeth not therfore he nameth your governing Elders Answ. 1. Where Paul setteth downe in order officers by their speciall names ordinary and extraordinary as first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers c. he cannot reckon out generals only for so Apostles Prophets Teachers should be also but generals for the words in Scripture also signifie generals 2. The enumeration should halt which yet is orderly set down if it were composed of a number of particulars and the generals of some easten in amongst them Neither can some here well understand the civill Magistrate 1. Because he speaketh of the Church as the body of Christ consisting of divers members ecclesiasticall And God hath set some iâ— the Church and also he speaketh of the Church Rom. 12. 5. seeing wee being many are one body in Christ and in that place the ruler is clearly differenced from the teaching Doctor v. 7. from the exhorting Pastour and him who showeth mercy in the Church but the civill Magistrate is not a Church officer whom God hath set in the Church as hee hath set Apostles Prophets c. for God hath set him in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Common-wealth and his influence in governing Gods house is meerely civill coactive and regall not pastorall ecclesiastick and ministeriall Neither yet can the place be meant of the governing Prelate 1. Because the Prelate is thought to be the Apostles successour and is first in the roule but the governours heere are some steps posterior to Apostles Prophets c. 2. Because the Prelate giveth himselfe out to be a certaine preaching creature such as it may be 1 Tim. 3. 2. Tit. 1. 9. but the governours here in this lincke are contra-distinguished from Prophets and Teachers and so the Prelate should either be a sole lord governor and no teacher or then he shall be twise yea thrice named in one verse 1. under the name of an Apostle next under the name of a Prophet and lastly should come in as a governour so the Prelate as in Church and State so also in the Bible he should carry too much booke Now seeing here are governours in the Church contra-distinguished from Prophets and Teachers from a just enumeration they must be ruling Elders and it is to be observed that the Apostle saith not Are all Arch-bishops are all Primates And surely the Jesuites have no lâ—sse roome without thâ—ong to pinne in in this wall under the name of helpes and governments their regular Canons and secular Priests as Formalists can alledge for Prelates and their long tayle What Tilenus saith against this place is fully answered by Didoclavius for because the Apostle confoundeth or rather reckoneth together in one enumeration ordinary and extraordinary functions in the Church will it follow he doth not here speake of ruling Elders If that reason be good neither is the Prelate here nor is the Pastor or the Doctor here and if there be who excell in the gift of governing who yet arâ— not called to preach who can deny the necessity of this office Many answers are given to elude the force of that place 1 Tim. 5. 17. The Elders who rule well c. shall ever inforce that loytering Pastors who labour not in the Word and Doctrine are commended by the Spirit of God as worthy of double honour For wee reason thus If these sort of Elders who rule well and especially these who labour in the Word and Doctrine are worthy of double honour then are there two sorts of Elders some who rule well and some who labour in the Word and Doctrine But the former is said 1 Tim. 5. 17. Ergo The latter must be true The proposition in terminis almost is our thesis if two sorts of Elders bee worthy of double honour then are there two sort of Elders for à qualitate ab adjuncto subjecti ponitur subjectum ipsum Also if Paul make the well ruling Elder worthy of double honour and more especially the teaching Elder then hee acknowledgeth some well-ruling Elder worthy of double honour howbeit hee labour not in the Word A reason is because the positive and comparative are ever differenced and maketh a number when both are specified with particularities as here they are by well-ruling and labouring in the word and doctrine The Author of the Survay durst not looke this place in the face Bilson Field and Tylen deny our major proposition If one should say say they a preacher is worthy of double honour especially a painfull Preacher he should not say there be two kinds of Preachers some Preachers thus and thus and some painfull Preachers and a King is worthy of honour especially a iust King he should not make two sorts some are Kings and some are iust Kings as Deacons and Pastors are two sort of Offices Answ. He who saith a Pastor is worthy of honour especially a painfull Pastor should clearly insinuate that two sort of honours were due to Pastors two wayes considered For in the former part he should speake of the office which indeed is worthy of honour In the latter part he should speake of the officer in concreto laudably discharging his office but Paul speaketh not so for he speaketh not of the office and the officer of the abstract and concret of the office and the use and exercise of the office as is here alleadged but he speaketh of officers in the exercise and use of their office in both He saith not Elders are worthy of honour for that might well beare this sense that the office of an Elder is worthy of double honour which sense should be most true for the office of an Elder is worthy of double honour which sense should be most true for the office of an Elder is worthy of honour Suppose the man be