Epistl 1. ep 4. Soperemini inquit Dominus a taberuaculis hominum istorum durissimorum nolite tangere ea qua ad eos pertinent ne simul pereat is in peccatis eorum Propter quod plebs obsequens praeceptis Domini Deum meturus à peccato praepofitó seperare se debet nec se ad Sacrilegi Sacerdotis Sacrificia misare quando ipsa defectu sidelis Magistratus maxime habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel recusandi indignos Thus far he in open defiance of his present undertaking But to proceed in Sect. 2. and afterwards we have an account notwithstanding his late discouragement in writing why he still follows that employment and in particular of his engaging in the confutation of the Treatise under consideration which may be reduced to these heads 1. The expectation of hâ—â— giving account of the Talents committed to him by hâ—s â—ord and Master which being restrained from publick preaching he thinks he ought to make use of this way Answ That a strict account must be given to the Lord for the improvement of Talents received is undeniable The Parable Mat. 25. 14 to 31. evâ—nceth as much The consideration whereof should quicken us to our duty the most exact and diligent performance of it imaginable that we have not at the last the most direful judgment of the wicked and slothful Servant ver 26 28 30. past upon us But every use of our Talent is not a faithful improvement of it for God Wisdom parts c. are Talents given by him many have used them against him and smitten him if I may so say with his own weapons nor had they been in a capacity of doing so much against him had they not received so much from him Whether Mr. T. hath in his present undertaking been improving his Talent according to the mind of Christ I humbly beg him in his more retired thoughts to consider That none can so improve their Talents without the blessed supplies of the Spirit of Christ this Animadverter will not deny 'T is impossible any duty or service should be accepted of God without these 'T is one end for which he is sent from the Father and the Son to in-dwell in the hearts of Believers to enable them hereunto Rom. 8. 26. How little of the Spirit of the Lord in those Magisterial and Dictator-like expressions manifesting too much of a spirit of pride and self-fulâ—ess with an horrible contempt of what is opposit to the mind of this Animadv together with those reproachful biting passionate words that without any just cause given do ever and anon drop from him he will upon a review be able to discern I am not able to foresee We are â—oo apt to judge partially in our own causes and of our own actions but the day will declare it Should I muster up the many expressions of this nature scattered almost from the one end of this Book to â—he other and represent them at once possibly it might somewhat startle this Animadverter of his being restâ—ained from publick preaching I have nothing to say but only this That if Mr. Tombs supposeth himself to be called forth by the Lord to the work of preaching the Gospel I see not now at least whilst not under corporal restraint he can answer the obligation is upon him by such a call by a total neglect of that duty either publickly or privately notwithstanding the interdiction of any Our retreat in such cases to the old Apostolical Maxime Act. 5. 29. Whether it be lawful to obey God or man judge ye being suitable and warrantable Nor is it I believe justifiable to improve Talents given in one work or duty with the neglect of another to which we are as equally obliged by the reception of them He adds as a second Reason of this undertaking his meeting with the Book under consideration and another entituled Prelatical Preachers none of Christ's Teachers which manifesting that the seeds of most rigid Separation were sown and spread themselves amongst many out of the greatness of his love and design to do them good and for the publick peace of the Nation he conceiv'd himself bound to pluck up such roots of bitterness and the rather because some that had known him to be for Believers Baptism have been ready to think him for Separation also Answ That he met with the Book under consideration I readily yeeld him being informed that in some heat of spirit about two years before the publishing his Theodulia he threatned the Refutation thereof But that the seeds of Separation are roots of bitterness is as warmly said as weakly proved in his following Treatise The word though it sounds ill in the ears of the world is of a middle signification denoting neither that which is evil nor good in it self as Mr. T. well knows A twofold Separation we read of in the Scripture 1. A wicked and unlawful Separation which is a causless departure from the People and Appointments of Christ as not able to bear their spirituality strictness purity and glory in contempt of Christ's Institution and meerly for the satisfying their lusts Jude 19. This is the Separation that is condemned in the Scripture Do either of the Tracts mentioned undertake the defence or vindication of it Are there not Principles laid down and asserted therein wholly opposite hereunto 2dly A warrantable lawful Separation enjoyned by Jesus Christ which is a peaceable departure from a Church or People not rightly constituted according to the mind of Christ the pattern exhibited by him or degenerated therefrom beyond a possibility of recovering their first state purely for the enjoyment of the Ordinances of God in power and purity This is the Separation no other pleaded for in the Papers mentioned Which â—â—ch poor worms as we are apt to think there is ground enough in the Scriptures for 1. 'T is of old prophesied of Num. 23. 9. Isa 52. 11 12. 62. 10. 2dly Commanded by the Lord Prov. 4. 14. 9. 6. 14. 7. Eph. 5. 11. 2 Cor. 6. 16. Act. 2. 39. Psa 45. 10. 2 Tim. 3. 5. Rev. 18. 4. 3dly Practised by the Saints not to mention them of old Gen. 4. 26. Exod. 19. 5. Deut. 7. 6. 33. 28. Numb 33. 52. Exod. 24. 12 15. John 15. 19. Rev. 19. 7 8 9. which the Epistles of the Apostles to the Churches justifie who writ to them as Saints separated from the World and the Worship thereof What the Animadverter hath done in order to the plucking up the seeds of this Separation is afterwards considered He that is successfull in such an undertaking oâ— desires to be so had need do more than â—ent his passion in some biting satyrical expressions against the men of his contest or dictate to them as if Wisdom only rested with him and all others were to hang on his lips for Indoctrination whose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without controul were to be submitted But Christ's School knows
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
detestandis Idolis The truth of these things is so generally known throughout the Nation that as I am sorry the mention thereof should drive Mr. T. into such a sweaâ—ing passion as it seems to do so can I not but wonder at his confidence in calling those things palpable gross untruths when the whole Nation knows the contrary His Satyrical expressions I omit The visible Lineaments and Characters of false Prophets being instamped upon the fore-heads of the present Ministers they are not to be heard but separated from CHAP. VIII Arg. 6. Sect. 1. A sixth Argument against hearing the present Ministers Saints must not have Communion with Idolaters The vanity of Mr. T. his arguings to the contrary evinced 1 Cor. 10. 14. 2 Cor. 6. 14 15 16 17 18 opened A threefold Idolatry Whether the Idolaters of old worshipped the creature terminatively Of the golden Calf Baal Molech That the Worshippers of them worshipped them not terminatively proved Of Devil-Worship Psal 106. 37 38 explained The Heathen Images dedicated to the true God The Testimony of the Heathens in this matter Of refined Idolatry Worshiping of God in a way not of his appointment is Idolatry The Testimony of Calvin Perkins Ames Pareus Willet Peter Martyr c. to the truth of the Assertion The Romans worshipped the Godds an hundred and seventy years and more without Images A Sixth Argument advanced in S. T. against hearing the present Ministers is this Those that are guilty of Idolatry Saints may not have communion with much less own them as their Teachers but ought to separate from them But the present Ministers of England are guilty of Idolatry Therefore The Major is bottomed upon express Commands from Christ 1 Cor. 5. 11. 10. 14. 2 Cor. 6. 14 18. To which Mr. T. replies 1. The Conclusion is not the same with that which Chap. 1. was undertaken to be defended That it is not lawful for Saints to hear the present Ministers which we may do though Communion with them be unlawful though we are bound not to own them as our Teachers but separate from them Answ Now this I confess I understand not Communion consists in giving and receiving a constant or frequent attending upon any ones teaching especially when by the Prelates instituted and inducted to such a Parish as a Teacher whereof I am a Member is an Argument of my owning him for my Teacher Separation from any one consists in this that I have no Communion with him in that in respect of which I am bound to separate from him That I should with frequency hear a man preach as a Minister of the Gospel and yet be said to have no Communion with him to separate from him is an Aenigma that needs some Oedipus to unravel He tells us 2dly The Major is not true if the Idolatry be in worshiping in any other way than what he hath prescribed or if the Idolatry be secret or if open if by infirmity a man falls into it and repents or be not censured as such or teacheth not such Idolatry nor requires any communion with him in his Idolatry Answ 1. If the Major be not true it follows that its lawful to have Communion with Idolaters for with persons guilty of Idolatry the Major saith we must not have Communion Mr. T. is driveâ— to his shifts indeed when to defend the cause he hath undertaken he is forced to plead for such gross absurdities so contradictory to the Scriptures and the judgment of all sober Christians that ever were in the world 2. If worshipping God in another way than he hath appointed be in Scripture Idolatry and in it we are commanded to abstain from such Worship and Worshippers then though the Idolatry consist therein the Major is true When the Scripture commands us to flee from Idolatry it means that which is so in its own sense not Mr. T 's 3. 'T is true I am not to separate from a person I know not to be guilty of Idolatry till I know he is so but this reacheth not the case of the present Ministers whom we prove manifestly guilty hereof When Ezekiel once came to understand that the Antients of the House of Israel committed Idolatry in the Chambers of their Imagery Ezek. 8. 7 to 13. he might not have Communion with them though they committed it in the dark 4. Repentance restores a man fallen into the same place amongst the Saints he was in before he fell but this is not at all to the purpose the present Ministers justifie their actings would compel aâ—l to do as they do 5. That 't is not our duty to separate from Idolaters till they are under Church-censure is a meer fancy 1st What if they are such as are in no Church-state persons without with whom the Church hath nothing to do 2dly What if the so called Church be generally overspread with Idolatry as our Animadverter will confess the Church of Rome is must I wait the Churches censure till I refuse to hold communion with Idolaters Is it ever likely that an Apostate Idolatrous Church will pass sentence upon it self or rational that I hold communion with them till they do So is 6. That 't is not our duty so to do except they teach it and require my communion with them in it For 1. he that practiseth it teacheth it by his practice 2. As it relates to the present Ministers 't is vain and frivolous they both practise and preach it and require my communion with them in it He saith 3dly The Texts do not prove the Major Answ Let the judicious Reader judge for himself whether they do or no 1 Cor. 5. 11. we have already vindicated from his exceptions That 1 Cor. 10. 14. is not to our purpose because the Apostle onely saith Flee from Idolatry not from teachers that are Idolaters is a fond conceit The intendment of the Apostle is to provoke to the greatest circumspection not onely to avoid the thing it self which saith Pareus Was not only the gross Idolatry of the Gentiles but every kind of Idolatry but all the occasions thereof And certainly the hearing or attending on the ministry of persons guilty of Idolatry is no mean occasion thereof 2 Cor. 6. 14 15 16 17 18. commands separation from the Idol Mr. T. grants Now I must profess I know not by what Logick he will prove that though it be my duty to separate from Idols I may so far retain communion with the Idolater as to own him for my Teacher the very repeating these absurdities is confutation sufficient Before we attempt the proof of the minor Proposition we premise in S. T. That Idolatry may be considered under a threefold Notion 1. Most gross and absurd Idolatry when the creature is worshiped terminatively This we say few are guilty of In the matter of the golden Calf Israel was not they worshipped God in it Exod. 32. 5. Maimonides de Idolat 8. 2 3. tells us That through the Idols Idolaters worshipped
the Sabbath Baptism Lord's Supper c. and I do so in this dispute Answ Egregie dictum excellently said indeed as if because we affirm that whatever is to be practised in Instituted Worship in the time of the Gospel is to be wholly bottom'd as to the Law and Precept instituting it upon some Commandment of Christ in the New-Testament therefore we assert that no use may be made of the Scriptures of the Old-Testament treating thereabout by way of prophecy or otherwise which is a Consequence this learned Animadverter will never be able to make good 'T is true many learned men do make use of some places of the Old-Testament to prove the morality of one day in seven or the seventh part of time not as I remember except Psa 118. 24 which some conceive by way of prophecy speaks of the Lord 's honouring the first day for the confirmation of the observation of the first day which they conceive Christ's resurrection on that day the practice of the Primitive-Church meeting together for the solemn Worship of God 1 Cor. 16. 2. Acts 20. 7. the appellation the Lord's Day which they judge is given to it c. is a sufficient warrant for their observation thereof in Gospel-times They plead not for Baptism or the Lord's Supper upon any other bottom than Gospel-Institution or their preception by Christ in the New-Testament Though 't is true as touching the subjects of the one and the other they judg they may by way of analogy argue somewhat from Old-Testament-Scriptures from which apprehension they see nothing so weighty in what is tendred by Mr. T. notwithstanding his brag and immodest Assertion pag. 18. Sect. 14. that such a way of arguing is irrational as if wisdom rested with him and he had the measure of it and a man could not differ from him but he must be a block or bruit to influence their departure That because the granting the Assertion would be disadvantagious to the Author and the Separatists therefore it should be in Mr. T. his opinion an unreasonable postulatum to devolve the question upon the Scriptures of the New-Testament I understand not He takes not a measure I presume of the reasonableness or unreasonableness of requests from their advantagiousness or disadvantagiousness to such contemptible creatures as we and should he do so he were much to blame as to infer from hence therefore I see no reasonableness in his Postulatum which is introduced not as the natural issue of any thing premised which he knows it is not but meerly for pomp and shew Sect. 3. The judgments of the Antients no sufficient substratum to build my practice upon in the Worship of God The opinion of the Antients â—hemselves in this matter None but the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures can satisfie the consciences of any dissatisfied in matters relating to Worship Our Faith not to be resolved into the Testimony of men which is a principle decryed by the Antients and Protestant Churches The consciences of none can be satisfied in what is written by the Ancients before they are assured 1. that what they read as or are told is theirs be indeed so and not counterfeited nor adulterated 2. That in their Writings they were as the Apostles and Prophets guided by an unerring Spirit The true use of the Testimony of the Ancients Congregational-Principles owned by them Of Councils and Schoolmen THe fourth Section is fronted with this The judgement of the Ancients not useless in this Controversie as if the Author of the Sober-Testimony had asserted it to be so which Mr. T. knows he no where doth This indeed the words of the Author not perplexing our selves nor the consciences of any with the judgments of men in generations past wherein they cannot acquiesce fairly intimate 1. That the judgment of none of the children of men though never so famous in their generation since the Apostles fell asleep is a sufficient Substratum to build my faith and practice upon in the Worship of my God In which we have the concurrence of the Ancients themselves Basil tels us that it is necessary and consonant to Reason that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scriptures both for the fulness of Godliness and lest they be inured to humane traditions Regul contract 95. p. 902. And Austin Epist 112. ad Paulin. saith If a matter be grounded on the clear authority of the holy Scriptures it is to be believed without all doubt but as for other witnesses and testimonies upon whose credit any thing may be urged unto us to believe it it is lawful for thee either to credit or not to credit them according as thou shalt perceive them of weight to deserve or not to deserve credit Origin saith Homil. 1. in Hierem. We must of necessity call the Scriptures to witness for our senses and interpretations without them are of no credit Famous is the saying of Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem Catech. 4. p. 15. We must not deliver any thing though never so small without the holy Scriptures neither may we be led away with probabilities and shews of words neither yet believe me barely saying these things unto you unless you also believe the demonstration thereof from the Scriptures for the security of our faith ariseth from the demonstration of the holy Scripture 2dly That not the sayings or judgment of the Ancients but the clear Testimony of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures is sufficient and efficacious for the satisfying persons that are dissatisfied in any thing relating to Faith or Worship Come to a poor soul under real scruples of spirit with respect to these and tell him this Father is of this opinion and that Father of that you do but oleum operam perdere when you have said all he remains as he was dissatisfied and so will do without evidence from Scripture More than these two things the Animadverter cannot righteously infer from the expression he discants on What saith he to these not a word more or less And I am apt to believe of Mr. T. that he is a man of greater modesty than to oppose them He tells us indeed that it may be of good use to satisfie mens consciences that no such separation as now is from the present Ministers of the Church of England was allowed of by the first Fathers and Writers what truth there is in this suggestion shall by and by be manifested He will not say surely of what good use he supposeth it to be that the faith of any is to be resolved into their testimony which it must be if what they say satisfie the scrupling conscience i. e. I must believe what they say is true because they say it else that they say it will never tend to my satisfaction which yet is an homage and duty that we owe to none but the Lord. A principle decryed and abhorred by the Ancients themselves The saying of Austin Epist 48. is known
place in the world of which the Poet Erupit Venae pejoris in aevum Omne nefas fugere pudor verumque fidesque In quorum subiere locum fraudesque delique Insidiaeque Vis amor sceleratus habendi Vivitur ex rapto non hospes ab hospite tutus Nec socer à genero fratrum quoque gratia raraest But this saith Mr. T. is not the cause of the Separation avowed by this Author Answ 'T is not indeed the alone cause but one amongst the rest So that in the judgment of this Animadverter the Separation pleaded-for is necessary For whom he intends what he puts in a parenthesis though it appears not but Noah continued to preach to them and live among them I know not As rigid as the Separation pleaded-for is 'T is not so rigid but we do and can do both and more than so too We look upon it as our duty to follow the Callings and Imployments the Lord-hath placed us in in the World to have civil converse amongst the men thereof 1 Cor. 5. 10. to fill up all the duties of the relation we stand in to the worst amongst them to do any office of love we can for them nor do we cease to pour forth our souls though they are some of them desirous to pour out our blood to the Lord on their behalf that they may be turned from darkness to light from the power of Satan unto God And are as we have opportunity preaching to them though we run the hazard of the loss of our Liberties if not Life it self thereby we know Christs bowels and pity to poor sinners is great we have found it to be so who have obtained grace from God and we cannot knowing also the terrors of the Lord but warn and beseech them to flee from the wrath that is to come What follows in this Section not at all relating to the matter in controversie being only a captions exception against an expression made use of by me my intendment wherein is obvious to any ordinary understanding might be passed over in silence I say not as Mr. T. falsly represents my words that he might take occasion to talk of Job and other holy men who he thinks were not bound to repair to the people of Israel except they would become Proseâ—ytes which the avoiding the Idolatry of the Gentiles might require of them not such corruptions only as are in the Church of Engl. that a Standard was set up for the people to repair unto i. e. as he seems to intimate the people of the Gentile world at least those that feared the Lord amongst them but them viz. the People of the Jews So that his discourse about Job and such like is impertinent and frivolous Job lived about the year of the World 2100 several years after the giving the Land He with the rest he tels us were not bound to repair to them except they would become Proselytes which the avoiding the Idolatry of the Gentiles might require i. e. they were bound to repair to them which indeed they could not do or if they did they would noâ— nor could they be accepted except they turned Proselytes But the corruptions that were amongst the Gentiles were not only such as are in the Church of England i. e. they were somewhat more and greater and God forbid they should Lesser abominations in a once rightly constituted Church are warrant sufficient for separation from it than what were at that day to be found amongst the Gentiles But these things are not at all to the business in hand Sect. 5. The People of the Jews indispensibly bound to the Statutes and Ordinances Jehovah gave forth to them with respect to Ecclesiasticals and Civils without addition or detraction The case of the Disciples plucking the ears of Corn and David 's eating the Shew-bread considered Hos 6. 6. explained God's dispensing with his own Law no argument that the Jews might add to or diminish therefrom Of the seven other dayes kept by the Assembly 2 Chron. 30. 23. Of David's Ordinance 1 Sam. 30. 20 25. MR. T. in his 6th Section repeats what I affirmed pag. 8. of S. T. touching the people of the Jews the sum where of is That God gave them Statutes and Ordinances both with relation to Civils and Ecclesiasticks which they were without adding to or detracting from indispensibly bound to conform to To this the Animadverter replies 1. By way of concession They were he saith bound to conform to them and so much the Texts alledged do prove 2dly By way of negation That they were bound indispensibly without adding to or detracting therefrom to conform hereunto not one of the Scriptures prove This is to be considered The first Scripture instanc'd in is Exod. 21. 1. Now these are the Judgments thou shalt set before them the Judgments i. e. the Judicial Laws or Civil Sanctions as by Statutes or Decrees the Ordinances relating to Worship are usually understood which he particularly doth in the following verses To what purpose he is charged to set them before them is easie to be conjectured viz. that they might conform to them and not solely to do so had been a contempt and disvaluation of the wisdom and love of God who gave them forth and chargeth them chap. 23. 13. that with respect unto them they be circumspect i. e. that they heed them and them only Lev. 18. 4. the second place instanced speaks after this wise Ye shall do my Judgments i. e. mine only as him thou shalt serve Deut. 6. 13. is expounded by Christ Mat. 4. 10. him only shalt thou serve Nor is there any thing more frequent in the Hebrew language which is short and concise as is known than such a manner of speech The same line of interpretation is to be stretched over Lev. 19. 37. 20. 22. 25. 18. But how egregiously doth Mr. T. mistake in affirming that not one of the Scriptures instanced in saith that they were indispensibly bound without adding or detracting to conform to these Statutes and Judgments when Deut. 4. 2. the 7th Scripture instanc'd in expresly asserts it Now therefore hearken O Israel unto the Statutes and Judgments which I teach you for to do them Ye shall not add unto the Word which I command you neither shall ye diminish ought from it that you may keep the Commandments of the Lord you God which I command you bound they were by this Scripture to conform to the Statutes and Judgments without addition to them thou shalt not adde or detraction from them neither shalt thou diminish And if bound they were indispensibly so For no man hath power though the Papists blasphemously assert their Pope hath to dispense with the breach of Jehovah's Law what he himself may do is not of our present disquisition which is enough to evince the falsity of Mr. T. his Assertion This one Scripture if there had been no more as it is a sufficient proof of what we
v. 10. And the children of Israel i. e. some of the chief amongst them in the name of the whole as say our Annotators shall put their hands upon the Levites by which sign saith Ainsworth they put the charge and service of the Church upon them and consecrated them to God in their name wherein they figured the Church of Christ called the General Assembly of the First-born from whence in the very next verse they are called the Offering or Wave-Offering of the children of Israel which Aaron is said to offer or wave for them v. 11. and are said v. 14. to be thus separated from amongst the children of Israel i. e. according to the Rites before-mentioned in allusion to which some think the same word is used Acts 13. 2. and Paul Rom. 1. 1. saith of himself that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 separated to the Gospel of God If it be objected that it is said ver 14. Thus shalt thou separate as if it were Moses his act alone the whole context confutes that vanity in which there is an apparent distinction betwixt the act of Moses Aaron and the People But here he is said to separate them because the whole of this affair was managed according to the directions given by him from the Lord to them And vers 16. to be wholly given to the Lord viz. by the People Given of the sons of Israel unto God i. e. for his Service faith Chazkum After all which they enter upon the work of the Lord to which they were thus solemnly deputed and set apart v. 11 15. This Animadverter saith indeed that the reason of the laying on of the hands of the children of Israel upon the Levites was to signifie their obedient yeelding them in their stead to God c. If he mean that it was one reason whereof it 's granted no act of worship which we perform but we thereby signifie our subjection and obedience to God If the formal and only reason his Assertion is void of truth it being as was shewed to set them apart to the office of Ministry or Service of God that they laid their hands on them nor is there the least print in v. 19 the only proof of this Assertion of any such thing 'T is true the choice i. e. the first-choice or appointment of them to this Ministry was God's the presentment of them to the Congregation Moses his act the yeelding of them or rather the solemn deputation of them to the work of the Lord not the act of the first-born meerly but of the Congregation who were called together for this purpose The Assembly in their Annotations speak clearly hereunto Numb 8. 10. The Children meaning some of the chief among them in the name of the whole Their hands the imposition of hands was used in Benedictions and Ordinations not only in the Old-Testament as Gen. 48. 17 20. Numb 27. 23. but in the New See Acts 6. 6. 13. 3. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 1. 6. The Peoples putting their hands upon the Levites was partly to testifie that they gave up all carnal and worldly respects and interests in them and bequeathed them wholly to God and that they did approve of their office in the behalf of themselves in whose stead they stood in the performance of many of their ministrations But Mr. T. hath found out a grievous mistake which he again takes notice of Sect. 8. which if true enervates all that we have asserted and that is that these were not Priests they were distinct from the Levites viz. Aaron and his sons who were called of God Heb. 5. 4. without the Peoples laying on of hands But 1. Aaron and his sons were Levites Exod. 4. 14 16 18 20. 2dly Calling of God and Consent and Ordination of the People are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that though Aaron wâ—s called of God he might also be set apart by the People unto that work who were not altogether therein unconcerned as is evident Exo. 29. 4. Lev. 8. 2 3 4. This Animadverter is not ignorant of the saying of Cyprian upon that action of Moses Num. 20. 26. Sicâ—t in Numeris c. As in the book of Numbers God commanded Moses saying Take Aaron thy brother and Eleazer his son and set them before all the Synagogue God commands him to be constituted Priest before all the Synagogue whereby he instructeth and sheweth that Sacerdotal Ordinations ought not to be managed without the knowledge of the People who are to assist therein c. And Piscator upon Heb. 5. 4. saith Ministerio Ecclesiae c. i. e. None ought to exercise the Ministerial Function except he who is thereunto called of God Now this vocation is either immediate or mediate The Prophets Apostles and Christ the Prince of them were immediately called Mediately were the PRIESTS of old and Evangelists called as are at this day Pastors Teachers Governors and Deacons each of whose vocation is by the Church And Josephus tells us plainly Lib. 3. cap. 9. that all the People approved the election of Aaron to the Priesthood which God had made And l. 4. c. 2. introduceth Moses speaking to the People upon the occasion of Korah's Rebellion thus Although by the loss of that honour viz. of the Priesthood which he Aaron hath received from your own election And 't is most certain that a long time after Zadok was anointed to the office of High-Priest by the People 1 Chron. 29. 22. But the Levites were not Priests Answ 1. That they were not such Priests as Aaron and his sons is granted Priests to offer Sacrifice or burn Incense they were not nor do I any where assert them so to be Priests and Levites are sometimes in Scripture distinguished I also grant but then Priests are taken for the Sacrificing-Priests viz. Aaron and his sons to whose assistance in their ministry and service they were appointed by the Lord. Yet 2dly That the word Priests is of various acceptions in the Scripture Mr. T. cannot deny 1. The People of Israel all of them are called a Kingdom of Priests Exod. 19. 6. 2dly Persons of note eminency power and authority Gen. 41. 45. Exod. 2. 16. pass under the same denomination 3dly The first-born of the male-children Exod. 19. 22. with 13. 2. are say some so called As â—s 4thly Christ Heb. 7. 17. 5thly The Saints 1 Pet. 2. 5. The word is 6thly usually taken for Church-officers that were solemnly set apart as Ministers of the Sanctuary for the solemn management of the publick Worship and Service of God And of these with the leave of Mr. T. I would take the confidence to assert that amongst others there were of these three sorts 1. The Chief or High-Priest who alone might once in the year enter into the most Holy but not withouâ— Blood Heb. 9. 7. 2dly The inferiour and ordinary Priests who approached to the Altar of Burnt-Incense offered Sacrifices c. 3. The Levites who were a
that if her Worship be Fornication the Worship of England being the very Worship of Rome is so too From which Mr. T. tells us in this Sect. without controversie the People of God were to separate and have no communion with any in So that Habemus confitentem reum He passeth sentence upon himself in having communion with and pleading for the Church and Worship of England and aquits the Innocent in their righteous Separation there-from in that very Treatise he designed to justifie the one and condemn the other That which is further is a most sorry begging of the Question a piece of Sophistry this Animadverter is frequently guilty of the sum is But neither the Texts alledged nor any other do require separation from the Worship of God or the Ministers of God that are in some things corrupt even in their ministration which he exemplifies in Samuels ministring before the Lord and Hannâ—h's presenting him and her self at the solemn Feasts when Hophni and Phinehas did corrupt the Worship of God And those of Judah were not to separate from the service at Jerusalem which was to God while there was burning incense and sacriâ—icing on the high-places and though there were sundry corruptions in the Church and Services of the Jews yet did Christ joyn in the publick Service of the Temple and perswaded the cleansed Leaper to offer the Gift Moses had commanded From whence he infers That though there should be some degree of corruption in Worship yet this is not sufficient to justifie our Separation from the Church and Ministers of England Answ 1. That every corruption in Worship that every diâ—order in Church-administrations is a sufficient warrant for separation from the Worship Church or Churches that are of Divine Institution as was the Worship and Church at Jerusalem I no where asserâ— never thought 2dly Whilest from hâ—nce the Animadverter infers That though there should be some degree of Corruption in Worship yet this is not sufficient to justifie our separation from the Ministers and Church of England He doth but like an unwise Souldier that not well heeding the ground he stands on is displaying his Colours till he sinks into the Earth There is one thing wanting to his Inference that makes it too light to pass with persons but of ordinary understanding viz. That the Church oâ— England is a true Church the Worship thereof the true Worship of God a strong supposition whereof instead of evident demonstration is the Basis upon which the inference is built For what though there were Corruptions in the Church and Worship of Israel in Samuels time in Christ's time What if notwithstanding these Corruptions it were noâ— the duty of persons to separate from that Church and Worship which was originally from God what is this to the case of separation from the Church and Worship of England which this Animadverter knows we deny to be of God which when he or any one for him shall prove to be I do faithfully assure him never to plead for nor practise separation more which I speak from an assured confidence they can never be able so to do Though otherwise upon supposition it could be proved a true Church at first rightly constituted according to the mind of Christ such corruptions are to be found upon it that are sufficient to jâ—stifie any mans peaceable separation from it Though every corruption in Worship and Church-Administrations as was said will not do so There is nothing in this 4th Sect. of that moment as to require our stay in the consideration thereof Whether those eight Positions asserted in S. T. touching the management of affairs of old be evidently comprized in the Scripture or no may be perceived by the examination of Mr. T. his exceptions against them let the Christian and judicious Reader judge I argue not from thence by way of Analogy though I conceive the Institution being founded upon some command of Christ in the New Test the only warrant for the practice of Gospel-Appointments To argue from the carriage and deportment of Saints to Divine Ordinances of old to the carriage of Saints towards New Test Institutions from parity of Reason is neither irrational nor unwarrantable which when Mr. T. proves it to be or attempts to do so his Arguments shall be considered his second and third Sect. in his second part of the review of the dispute about Paedo-Baptism to which he directs us spake not a word hereunto as he knows Sect. 13. Of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it imports Its acceptions in the Scripture 1 Cor. 12. 28. and 15. 9. Act. 4. 32. opened The Churches of Asia Galatia Judaea not National Diocesan or Provincial but particular Churches The foundation of Diocesan Churches Mat. 16. 18. and 18. 17. expounded By the Church not meant the Pope and his Cardinals a Synod the Bishop or Chancellors Court the Magistrate the Presbytery nor select Arbitrators but the whole Church consisting of Elders and Brethren proved IN Sect. 15th Mr. T. begins to consider the Queries in the Preface of S. T. and in answer to the first Query whether there be any National Church of the Institution of Christ under the Oeconomy of the Gospel he falls upon the consideration of the word Church and tells us in the New Testament it s taken for 1. An assembly of Unbelievers Act. 19. 32 39 40. 2dly For the Congregation of Israel in the Wilderness Acts 7. 38. 3 dly The Universal Church whether visible or invisible 1 Cor. 12. 28. Heb. 12. 23. Ephes 1. 22. 4 thly The visible Church indefinitely but not universally 1 Cor. 15. 9. 5 thly The Church Topical as of a City Town or House Act. 8. 1. Philem. 2. or of a Country or Nation and then it s put in the Plural Number as the Churches of Asia Galatia Judaea Answ 1. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Church is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to advocate or call out Because as saith Musculus in Rom. 1. 7. the Church is a number called out from the rest and in the general signifies any company of men singled out or separated from the rest for any end or purpose whatsoever That 't is of various acceptations in the Scripture cannot be denied some of which are rightly assigned by the Animadverter First 'T is taken for an Assembly of Unbelievers Acts 19. 32. 39. Secondly For the Congregation of Israel in the Wilderness Acts 7. 38. But Thirdly As touching the third acceptation of the word instanced in by this Animadverter we must crave leave a little to demur about it 1st If by the Universal Church visible he mean that which some call the Church-Catholick visible consisting of the universality of men professing the Doctrine of the Gospel and yeelding obedience thereunto throughout the World I do very much question whether the name of the Church be given to them throughout the Scripture The places instanc'd in by this Animadverter are remote from the proof of any
injury or offence committed against his Brother that is not a sin against God but in this sense we deny the offence here to be private and had Mr. T. by one Argument endeavoured to have evinced it he had done something a failure wherein renders the ensuing fabrick liable to sink with its own weight 1. Sins against our Brother are sins against God Psal 51. 4. Against thee only have I sinned saith David touching the wickedness he had wrought in the matter of Uriah 2. The word rendred trespass against thee Mat. 18. 15. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies properly to erre from the prefixed mark metaphorically to sin a sin or to do that which is contrary to the Law of God Alsted in Lex Theol. which though by it we are injured as a sin is properly against God As all Indictments in criminal pleas are stiled against the King his Crown and Dignity Nor can the Animadverter give one instance throughout the whole New-Testament of the use of the word for such a private offence or scandal committed against a Brother as is not a sin and transgression against God What he adds 2dly That the Brother against whom the trespass is committed might remit or forgive it is 1. more than the Scripture will justifie him in asserting Must be received cum grano Salis with caution or 't is plainly atheological 1. If he mean he might remit or forgive it so far as it was an injury to him 't is granted in â—ome cases he might but it is also a sin against God which he must not suffer to rest upon his Brother Levit. 19. 17. 2. If he mean that upon an acknowledgment of the offence and manifestation of sorrow and repentance so far as he is able to discern unfeigned he be bound to own and receive him as formerly without acquainting any others or the Church with it 't is undoubtedly true He hath attained the utmost end aimed at in the whole process viz. the conviction and bringing the offender to repentance and therefore need not advance one step further to do so were frivilous ridiculous irregular sinful an open breach upon all the rules of charity enjoyned by Christ But yet it follows not that by Church is not meant a particular Congregation but select Arbitrators When Mr. T. proves the consequence of this proposition The offended Brother may forgive the Offender upon his confession of and sorrow for his trespass committed so as to own him for a Brother without publishing his fault that was only known to them two to any other therefore by Church to whom without such acknowledgment and repentance he was to have communicated it we are to understand select Arbitrators I will be his convert In what he adds that there is no act ascribed to the Church save an Admonition to the injurious Brother to do right to him whom he hath wronged this Animadverter is evidently mistaken For 1st Here is a Juridicial Sentence ascribed to the Church vers 18. Verily I say unto you the Church whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth c. 2dly The issue or consequence of this Juridicial Sentence is That hâ— is to the Church for what one is lawfully to a part of the Body he is to the whole as a Heathen or Publican i. e. shut out of their Communion or Fellowship But Mr. T. is sure he tells us the Publicans were not excluded a sacris Answ 1. If by sacra he means those Ordinances that peculiarly related to them as members of the Judaical Church and by Publicans unproselyted uncircumcised Publicans 't is most false that such were not excluded a sacris They might not partake of the Passover with them to instance in no more particulars Exod. 12. 48. And Maimonides in Korban Pesach Cap. 5. Sect. 5. tells us That as the Circumcision of himself omitted debarreth him from keeping the Passover so doth the circumcision of his Sons and his Servants c. if omitted And if he kill it before he do circumcise them it is unlawful Of which R. Menacheâ— renders a reason on Exod. 12. Whilest the power of uncleanness and the superfluous foreskin is upon him c. he is unfit to be united with the divine Majesty c. 2. If by sacra he mean coming to their Synagogueâ— to hear them Preach or Expound the Law he speaks nothing to the purpose an Excommunicated person may come to the Church-Assemblies and hear and see what is done there as may an Heathen The Scripture instanc't in affords not the least sanctuary to his Assertion First 'T is a Parable and so it may be a supposition of what never was Secondly 'T is spoken it seems of a broken converted Publican He looked down smote upon his Breast cried out The Lord be merciful to me a sinner Thirdly 'T is not said that he joyned with the Jewish Church in any act of Worship That he went up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Holy the whole building of the Temple consisting of an inward and outward Court is so called to pray is Parabolically said of him as of the Pharisee but both the one and the other prayed by themselves severally and apart vers 11. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 word for word standing to himself or apart from the Publican he prayed these things O God I thank thee c. vers 13. And the Publican 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 standing a far off viz. in the first Court of the Temple where all sorts of People Publicans and Sinners might come 1 Kings 8. 41. Fourthly 'T is most certain and the Animadverter cannot be ignorant hereof That the Publicans were excluded not only a sacris which they were but also from Civil Communion so far as possibly they could insomuch as it was a great crime charged upon Christ by them That heate and drank with Publicans and Sinners and that more than once Matth. 9. 11. and 11. 19. Mark 2. 16. Luke 5. 30. and 7. 34. Accordingly upon this sentence of the Church upon the Offender the Members of the Society are to carry it towards him not only as towards a Heathen with whom they might have civil Commerce but as towards a Publican with whom they at that day had none 1 Cor. 5. 11. 2 Thes 3. 14. And he that should have seen the Publican Luke 18. if there was ever such a thing done praying in one Court and the Pharisee in another or if in the same Court one at one Corner and the other at the other apart by themselves would scarce have concluded that they held Communion together or inferred therefore the Publicans were not excluded a sacris Which Consequence Mr. T. will take time to make good usque ad Graecas Calendas It remains That forasmuch as by Church Mat. 18. 17. is not meant the Jâ—â—ish Synedrium nor the Lord Bishop and his Consistory nor the Civil Magistrate nor the Presbyterie nor Mr. T. his Select
people of weak judgements did satisfie themselves in these things in the judgement of their faithful learned wise and holy Teachers and Rulers Answ Bravely spoken had it been at Rome our English stomachs can scarce away with such Coleworts O dura Messorum ilia 1. The Animadverter all along takes for granted that which we expresly told him Chap. 5. 7. of the S. T. pag. 41 62. we denied viz. That there are any circumstances or particularities of Worship relating to it as such undetermined by the Lord. 2dly Under the notion of particularities of Worship undetermined he shrouds the many Popish toyes and Antichristian inventions as Cross in Baptism Ring in Marriage Surplice yet retained in the Church of England These he would not have persons too careful about But seriously Sir those that know the Lord know him to be a jealous God and that he hath manifested his jealousie in such terrible rebukes against some of the sons of men as Nadab and Abihu Levit. 10. 1 2. Vzza 2 Sam. 6. 6 7. whom he slew in his fury for their Worshipping him otherwise than he had determined that be they never so weak they tremble and abhor to draw nigh to God in a way they have no Scripture-warrant for 3dly They desire to be satisfied in the authority of the Children of men in their attempts to impose upon their Consciences and make those things the necessary parts of Worship which they themselves acknowledge Christ hath left as particularities undetermined 4thly They would also be directed by Mr. T. to those faithful learned wise and holy Teachers he speaks of for they can find few or none such in a whole County And yet 5thly One thing more they would be satisfied in Whether an implicite Faith in matters of Worship be any more tolerable and justifiable than in matters of Doctrine And whether this will ever be a satisfactory answer to their mighty Sovereign the Lord of Hosts when he shall demand of them Who hath required this at your hands Why truth Lord we never read that thou didst ever do so but our faithful Teachers told us we might yea ought notwithstanding to practise these things and believe it will never be accepted as such 6thly His scurrilous reflections they can freely pardon though they know that the brood of Ranters c. he speaks of have not been produced by the inquisitiveness of any after the mind of God with respect to Instituted Worship but persons taking up with such slight thoughts of the Worship of the Holy God as such expressions as these used by him are apt enough to beget in the minds of men together with the instability and inconstancy of persons whom they have it may be owned as their Teachers and Rulers being ready to imbrace and shake hands with whatever is uppermost in the world labouring to support uphold and draw others to the imbracement of that now which not long ago they Prayed Preached against and with hands and eyes lift vp to Heaven they swore to seek to the uttermost of their power to root out and demollish Sir these things are some of those occasions through the subtilty of Satan and the corruption of mans nature of that Raâ—tism Atheism c. that is in the world And blessed be the Lord the Congregations of his People have been but little emptied hereby they are a brood issuing for the most part out of the Womb of the Church of England and are such as it 's known that little enquired into these matters taking all for Gospel that their Preachers taught them The next attempt of the Animadverter is the exatnination of the Arguments advanced in the S. T. against hearing the present Ministers of England The first is That which there is no warrant for in the Scripture â—eing part of Instituted Worship is not lawful for the Saints to practise But there is no warrant in the Scripture for hearing the present Ministers and Heariug is part of Instituted Worship Therefore To which he answers Sect. 2. Chap. 1. The sum is There is a Twofold Warrant by Command or by Permission Of Instituted Worship there are two Parts 1. Essential without which it is not or is not rightly called Instituted Worship 2. Accidental which may be present or absent and yet the Worship be or righteously be so called If the Major be meant of Warrant by Command and part accidental of Instituted Worship it is denied and so is the Minor Hearing the Word from this or that person is a part accidental of Instituted Worship undetermined and hath a warrant by Permission as being not contrary to any Precept or Rule in Scripture about such Worship Answ 1. This Animadverter continues still his old trade of begging and dictating without proof which doth not become him and being in matters wherein our souls are so nearly concerned we cannot bear it in him 1. He teâ—ls us That with respect to Instituted Worship there is a twofold warrant by Command or by Permission but would he had thought it incumbent upon him to have proved what he asserted This we deny Whatever hath not a warrant of Command in the Scripture is plainly interdicted and forbidden therein Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Rev. 22. 18. punished with no less than death upon those that have adventured to act exorbitantly without such a warrant as we but now manifested 2dly He tells us That there are two Parts of Instituted Worship Essential and Accidental but this also is false and untrue we expect his proof of it A part Accidental of Instituted Worship is a sort of gibberish that as it is unscriptural so it is little less than down-right-nonsence Instituted Worship is such Worship as is appointed by command from Christ or that is by Christs institution saith Mr. T. in answer to the Preface of S. T. Sect. 2. How any part of instituted Worship can be an accidental part i. e. such a part of Worship as though enjoyned by Christ which if it be not it is not instituted as may be done or not done without sin I must profess I understand not And desire Mr. T. would inform me not in a Dictator-like way as if he were a second Pythagoras but from Scripture-evidence And lest he should mistake this is that which is incumbent upon him to prove That a part of instituted Worship which is a Worship commanded by Christ may be accidental i. e. performed or not performed without sin 3dly That hearing the present Ministers of England preach the Doctrines and Traditions of men as he must do at some time or other that constantly attends on their Ministry or according to Mr. T. the Word of God hath Warrant in Scripture by permission as being not contrary to any Precept about Worship is another dictate of his that he will make good ad Graecas Calendas 'T is true the Light of Nature dictates That God is to be heard by whomsoever he speaks and 't is as true that God having
in S. T. reflects sadly upon its authority and perfection which is the next thing we affirm to evidence the truth of the major Proposition This M. T. saith is true with respect to all Doctrinals of Faith and Manners and Worship in respect of Essentials but not of Accidentals thereof undetermined in the Scripture Answ 1. The unscripturalness and vanity of that distinction we have already discovered 2ly We had thought that the perfection of the Scripture had consisted in this that the whole of that obedience that God required of us had therein been stated and enjoyned for which end we conceive it was at first commanded to be written and hitherto by the wonderful gracious providence of the Lord continued to us The Accidentals of Worship are either part of that Obedience we owe to God or they are not If not how come they to be such parts of Worship as without them we are interdicted to perform it or indeed whence is it that we are tendring them up to God when all our Worship is nothing else but the solemn tender of that Obedience that we owe to him if they are then there is some part of our Obedience that is not prescribed in the Scripture then is the Scripture imperfect and that with respect to the main end for which it was given forth viz. to indoctrinate and direct us in the whole of that Obedience that God requires of us and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Aristotle l. 2. de Coelo c. 4. But this is contrary to 1. The testimony and witness of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures 2 Tim. 3. 15. Prov. 2. 1 9. Isa 8. 20. 2 Pet. 1. 19. Luke 1. 4. John 5. 39. 20. 31. 2 Cor. 4. 6. Lukâ— 10. 26. 16. 29. Deut. 12. 8 32. Prov. 30. 5. Mat. 22. 29. Gal. 1. 8. Eph. 2. 20. Heb. 4. 12. Rev. 22. 18. 2dly To the Witness of many of the Worthies of the Lord in their day The renowned Waldenses or the Church of Christ in the Wilderness some hundreds of years ago declare and attest that nothing is to be admitted in Religion but what only is commanded in the Word of God that all mens Traditions are to be rejected and therefore this singing and superfluous chanting in the Chancel to be left It is necessary and consonant to reason that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scriptures both for the fulness of Godliness and lest they be inured to humane traditions saith Basil Regul contract 95. pag. 502. God will ask no more of a Christian Believer in this life but only to obey the Precepts of that most blessed Law If any Prelate of the Church require more or else any other kind of obedience than this to be used he contemneth Christ exalting himself above God and so becâ—meth an open Antichrist saith the Lord Cobham in the Confession of his Faith offered to Hen. the 5th about the year 1413. Chrysostom calls them a most exquisite rule and exact square and ballance to try all things by Augustine expounding Gal. 1. 8. saith If we or an Angel from Heaven declare unto you either concerning Christ or his Church any other matter belonging to our Faith or Life any thing but that which you have received in the writings of the Law and the Gospel let him be accursed Cont. Lit. Petilian Don. l. 3. c. 6. de unitat Eccles cap. 11. Et honos praeter mandatum est dedecus God is dishonoured by that honour that is ascribed to him beyond his own prescription saith Hierome Yea 3dly our Protestant Divines disputing with the Papists about an universal Head of the Church Cardinals Purgatory Mass c. have ever thought this one good Argument against them that they find them not commanded in the Scripture and to assert them needful or lawful to be used in the Church of Christ they affirm to be derogatory to the perfection of the Scripture Suppose a Papist â—o say 'T is true the Scripture is perfect with respect to the essential parts of Worship not so with respect to Accidentals such as are Cross Spittle Salt in Baptism Holy Water Pope Cardinals Crosses c. What would Mr. T. answer hereunto 'T is a thousand to one but the same Answer would stop his own mouth in the reply to the Argument undertaken to be refuted by him We add in S. T. as a further confirmation of the truth of the Proposition under debate 7thly That God condemns not only that which is done against the warrant and direction of the Word but also that which is done beside it Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Mat. 15. 9. Lev. 10. 1. Prov. 30. 6. Jer. 7. 31. To which Mr. T. replies 1. That the Assertion understood of Accidentals of Instituted Worship is false Answ 1st Very good It seems then it is lawful to add what we please as accidental parts of instituted Worship for God no where condemns our doing so Altars Candles Crucifixes Baptism with Spittle Salt c. Dedication of Churches to He-Saints and She-Saints with the Inscription of Laus Deo S ta Helena of the Popes make Baptism of Bells the whole Farrago of Popish Inventions may by Mr. T. his arguing be introduced for these are but Accidentals of Worship and no where expresly interdicted Secondly The Protestant Divines have ever thought this a sufficient convincing Argument against these fooleries of the Papists That Christ hath no where commanded them therefore they may justly reject them as unlawful Christ being the alone Pastor Eccl. 12. 11. Master Mat. 23. 8 10. Prophet of his Church Acts 7. 37. Who shall dare to speak where he is silent or can do so without an open undervaluing and contempt of his Authority 'T were easie to fill many Pages with citations of Protestants to this purpose in whose Writings nothing is more frequent than this Nihil sine nihil extra nihil praeter nihil ultra Divinam Scripturam admittendum esse Peter Martyr on 2 Sam. cap. 6. pag. 212 213 saith From this History we may see that the true Worship of God he speaks of Uzzah's touching the Ark is not to be deduced from the Palestines or Ethnicks but the Word of God For God will be worshipped according to his own Praescript not our Inventions But as touching what pertains to the Worship of God nothing is to be sought without the Word of God It went ill with Uzza that he would imitate the Palestines with Nadab and Abihu that they would offer profane fire with Ozias the King that he would offer Incense in the Tabernacle when he was neither Priest nor of the Tribe of Levi. But Thirdly The Scriptures produced abundantly manifest the truth of the Assertion Let the judicious Reader seriously peruse them and they will lead him captive to the belief of it Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Pro. 30. 6. Strictly interdict mans adding to the Word of God which if it be not a condemnation of
what is practised in his Worship without any warrant from him I must confess I know not what is Is not You shall sign with the Cross in Baptism kneel at the Sacrament wear the Surplice c. an adding to the Word of God when he is altogetheâ— in the Scriptures silent in these matters Mat. 15. 9. speaks of the Inventions of men with respect to accidental parts of Worship as Mr. T. accounts them The essentials of Worship as praying hearing c. they had from the Lord these things were not what Christ condemns in them as the Doctrines of men What was it then Mr. T. in his Fermentum Pharisaeorum on Mat. 15. 9. shall answer for me But in this place saith he that which our Saviour objects to them is That they sought to establish the Traditions of men chiefly that they taught men to observe things praeter Legem besides the Law in stead of Gods Law as the washing of hands before meals the washing of Cups and Potts with many such like Traditions inveâ—ted by men And afterwards Sect. 5. tells us That Bowings Duckings and such like Gestures Usages and Rites invented by men to express Humility Devotion and Reverence to God he contemns as Childish Apish Theatrical and ridiculous And Sect. 7. he adds That this teaching for Doctrine the Commandments of men intrencheth on Gods Prerogative who is the only Law-giver to his Church Jam. 4. 12. for his Worship and that with respect to the fashion and way of Service 'T is an injuring God whilest we conceive him to be so childish as to be affected with pomps and shews gestures and carnal Rites which he never appointed It opposeth Gods Word his Law his Gospel because it brings in another Rule of Worship than God's Law viz. Tradition of Elders Custom Example contrary to Deut. 4. 2. Pro. 30. 6. It opposeth the manifestation of the clear light of the Gospel as shadows the light of the Sun Look into the places where there is so much preaching of Ceremonies and Church-orders and such a regular observation of them as in places where the Cathedral and Canonical Preachers and officiating Priests do bear sway there is little spiritual understanding and lively feeling of the Doctrine and Grace of Christ to be found Sect. 8. with much more to the same purpose Lev. 10. â— Jer. 7. 31. expresly assert that their sin lay in doing that which God commanded them not which had he done it had been lawful Let Mr. T. shew where the offering of strange fire was expresly forbidden and he may be supposed to say somewhat that is pertinent Mr. Ainsworth whom he cites on Lev. 10. 1. is against him Strange fire he tells us is other fire than God hath sanctified on his Altar fire not commanded And the Assembly upon the place say rightly In God's Worship his Command not man's wit or will must be our rule The citation of Josh 22. 34. 2 Chron. 20. 3. 30. 23. Esth 9. 27 31. by this Animadverter is impertinent Josh 22. 34. gives us an account of their building an Altar but they expresly affirm it was not for burnt-offerings nor for Sacrifices not for an Ecclesiastical but a Civil use v. 22 23 24 26 28. Had they built it for the Worship of God it had in the judgment of the whole Congregation of Israel been Rebellion against him ver 16. So that this Scripture instead of supporting cuts the throat of his dying cause nor can Mr. T. ever satisfactorily answer this Argument 'T is great wickedness to commit a trespass against to turn away from following to rebel against the Lord But the doing or practising any thing in his Worship besides what God hath enjoyned to be done is to commit a trespass against him to turn away from following to rebel against him Therefore The Major no sober Christian will deny The Minor is evident from v. 16 18 19. Nor will Mr. T. his old shift of Essential and Accidental parts of Worship serve him in this case For 1. The erection of an Altar he supposeth to be but an accidental part of Worship 2. He produceth this Scripture to prove the lawfulness of mens orders in and about the Accidentals of Instituted Worship As for his other Scriptures 2 Chron. 30. 23. hath been already considered and answered in our Answer to Prof. Sect. 5. 2 Chron. 20. 3. Esth 9. 27 31. speak only of the Proclamation and Decree or Purpose of the King and People to observe and keep certain dayes unto the Lord upon the account of such signal providences that the Lord had brought them under wherein they judged he was calling them thereunto To what is added in S. T. touching the judgment of the Ancients Mr. T. replies but so jejunely that it deserves not to be taken notice of As for Cyprian's testimony 't is full up to the matter in hand the foundation upon which he dealt against the Aquarii being no other than what we are pleading-for that Christ alone is to be heard in matters of Instituted Worship as Mr. T. will grant the Sacrament to be I stand amazed at the confidence of the Animadverter in asserting that Beza's words on Phil. 1. 1. are to be understood of things determined in the Scripture when he expresly speaks of giving the title of Bishop for Polities sake peculiarly to him that did preside in the Assembly whereof he tels us the Devil began to lay the first foundation of Tyranny in the Church of God and then he adds Behold of how great moment it is to decline from the Word of God though but an hairs breadth if it be but in giving titles peculiarly to persons which are not so given to them in the Scripture And much more do I wonder if he did without blushing write that Luther is to be understood of Doctrines and Decrees if he oppose these to Church-Ceremonies which if he do not he yeelds his Cause when he expresly saith he means that nothing with respect to external Rites which he calls Traditions and the mixing the Worship of God with foolish Gewgaws is to be taught without the express words of God for our warrant 'T is true Dr. Whitakers words are meant of the Popish use of Oyl in their Sacraments but the ground of his opposing it is plainly the same with that we are contesting about viz. That nothing is to be added to the Instituted Worship as a part thereof without warrant from the Scripture for saith he we acknowledge no Oyl because we read nothing of Oyl in the Scriptures To these I say many may be added Take a few instances instead of many Whatsoever things men find and fain without the Authority and Testimony of the Scripture as if they were from Apostolical Tradition are smitten by the Sword of God saith Hierom Comment in Hag. c. 2. And again Men are saith he set to eat their meat without Salt when they are commanded any thing that hath no relish from the
Word and to build without Hay and Stubble like Israel in Egypt when they be not allowed some warrant out of the Scripture which only can combine the matter of the work and make the frame of the building sure And Chrysostom giveth a reason why we must take nothing from the Prelates which is not clarè perspicuously demonstrated from the Scriptures for our Cogitation halteth when the Word wanteth which halting is sâ—n because we are bound to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a full perswasion even in indifferent things and all Chrys in 1 Cor. Homil. 13. So the Churches of Helvetia The universal Church of Christ hath fully explained in the Scriptures whatever things appertain to saving Faith and to the informing the Life rightly to please God To which that nothing may be added or diminished is distinctly commanded by the Lord. We judge therefore that from these Scriptures true Wisdom and Piety is to be sought Also the Reformation and Government of the Church which are with Mr. T. Adjuncts of Worship and the Institution of all duties of Piety C. 1. Conf. Helvet poster in Harmon Conf. And those famous Witnesses of Christ the Waldenses speak after the same rate In hac enim de Scripturâ ejus perfectione loquuntur quae ad Doctrinam Sanctae Ecclesiae Disciplinam Gubernationem ad singulos universos in ordinario salutis Ministerio unde vera fides existit necessaria sunt Ea inquam omnia plene omnino quantum opus est ut in eximio artificiocissimoque Sancti Spiritus opere in hac comprehensae sunt conclusa quâ nec Angelus de Coelo ullus proferre aliquid certius potest si adferret diversum aliquid credi ei non deberet Conses Bohem. seu Walden in Harmo Confes Which if Mr. T. will not others will believe speak home to the matter in hand The Declaration of the Congregational Elders chap. 1. I own and told Mr. T. as much as they say in S. T. Circumstances concerning the Worship of God c. common to humane actions and societies are to be ordered by the Light of Nature and Christian prudence as place time of meetings c. but they assert not that Circumstances of Worship as such are so to be ordered or to be practised without warrant from Scripture which is that we deny Thus far of the Major Proposition of our first Argument His Exceptions to the Minor will receive a speedy dispatch of which in the next Section Sect. 2. Hearing the Word part of Instituted Worship proved Mr. T. his Objection refelled The Judgment of Mr. Burroughs in this matter Hearing the present Ministers not warranted in the Scripture Of the tendency of the Separation pleaded-for Mr. T. a self-contradicter Of declaring for or against things according to affection The saying of Hierome THe Minor Proposition of our first Argument against Hearing we say consists of two parts 1. That Hearing is part of Instituted Worship which we proved by this Argument That in which we wait upon God in the way of an Ordinance for the communication of good beyond the vertue of any creature to conveigh is part of Instituted Worship But in the hearing the Word we thus wait upon God Therefore To which Mr. T. replies 1. by way of concession In some sense he grants Hearing to be part of Instituted Worship But 2dly if he takes not the Argument to be demonstrative sith there be many things As Marriage Eating Drinking c. in which we wait upon God in the way of an Ordinance for the communication of good beyond the vertue of any creature to convey to us and yet are not parts of the Instituted Worship of God Answ 1. But how sophistically and ludicrously doth he argue The Argument is of Good Spiritual and Eternal Mr. T. talks of Good Natural Political Temporary If he will prove the Argumenâ— not to be demonstrative he must prove that that in which we wait upon God in the way of an Ordinance for the communication of Spiritual and Eternal Good beyond the vertue of any creature to convey to us is not part of Instituted Worship 2. Precious Mr. Burroughs speaks fully to this Objection When I am busied in natural civil actions there I must profess that these things can do me no good without God but I do not wait â—pon God in an Ordinance for the conveyance of Natural good beyond what God hath put into the creature 't is his blessing with it that God in the ordinary course of his Providence doth convey such natural or civil good in the use of those creatures But now when I come to hear his Word I here come to wait on God in the way of an Ordinance for the conveyance of some spiritual good that this Ordinance hath not in it self take it materially but meerly as it hath an Iâ—stitution in it and is appointed by God for the conveyance of such and such things God doth appoint meat to nourish me and together with his Appointment he hath given a natural power to meat to nourish my body that in an ordinary course of Providence is enough for the nourishment of my body But now when I come to hear the Word I must look upon that not only as a thing to work upon my soul and to save my soul by not as a thing that hath any efficacy put into it as the other hath in a natural way it is not in the nature of the thing that carries such a power in it but it is the Institution of God and the Ordinance of God in it But I say 3dly Hearing the present Ministers is not warranted in the Scriptures This will be manifested when we come to thâ— ventilating and scanning those places which usually are produced for the abetting the practice of some in this matter To which Mr. T. subjoyns 1. The Scripture warrants the hearing them whilst they teach the Doctrine of Gods Word Answ When he shews us where it doth so he will say somewhat till then we are not bound to believe him Every one that teacheth true Doctrine we have proved is not to be heard He adds 2. The Scripture forbids only the hearing false Prophets Mat. 7. 15. Antichrists 1 John 2. 18. c. Answ 1. This Assertion is false as we have already manifested 2. We have in S. T. chap. 6. proved the present Ministers to be false Prophets and in our Answer to Mr. T. his Exceptions to the Preface Sect. 10. He saith further 3. Personal Exceptions against their entry into the Ministry or their sinful practices or the ventilating the places produced for the abetting the practices of some in this matter will not prove the Minor Answ But if we prove they act from an Antichristian Call and that 't is the mind of Christ we should not attend upon a Ministry that so acts if we prove them guilty of such sinful practices as Christ commands us to withdraw from persons
that are guilty of them if we demonstrate that there is not a word in Scripture to justifie any in their practise of hearing them the most partially addicted Reader to the cause of the Church of England will acknowledge we have fully proved the unlawfulness of attending on its Ministry This we do chap. 2 3 c. of S. T. The Argument drawn from Judas his preaching the Gospel we answer ch 10. of S. T. and we are unwilling actum agere That the Separation pleaded-for tends to the undoing of men in their estates we may thank some for and this Animadverâ—er is not wanting to blow the coals That it hinders the publick peace is a papistical wicked and false suggestion than which a more malicious one could not have been invented by the Devil That the furtherance of the Gospel is thereby hindered is monstrously false The aim and motive of the author of the S. T. in that Treatise and Mr. T. in this Reply is known to the Lord and may shortly be more manifestly discovered then some would wish And considering how he doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contradict and oppose now what not many years agone he so confidently pleaded for I wish him to examine his heart and to take heed he be not found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who they are speak for or against things according to the affection they bear to men I know not And do heartily wish they may be reduced from that evil custom trying and proving things offered to them by the Scriptures whether they be so or not I approve of the saying of Hierome Epist 152. Non juxta Pythagorae discipulos praejudicata Doctoris opinio sed doctrinae ratio ponderanda est omnia probate quod bonum est tenete Et estote probati nummularii ut si quis nummus adulter est et figuram Caesaris non habet nec signatus est moneta publica reprobatur quj autem Christi faciem claro lumine praefert in cordis nostri marsupium recondatur Cur me lacerant amici mei adversum silentem crassae sues grunniunt quarum omne studium est imo scientiae supercilium aliena carpere et sic Veterum perfidiam defendere ut perdant fidem suam Meum propositum est antiquos legere probare singula retinere quae bona sunt et a fide Ecclesiae Catholicae non recedere which should all practise the service and ceremonies of the Church of England would soon be return'd into her Mother's lap of Rome from whence they were borrowed Mr. T. promiseth fair he will shew Scripture warrant he saith for hearing the Ministers of England And I assure him if he doth I will do what penance they shall be pleased to impose on me though it be to hear them in a white sheet for lifting up my pen against them I only advise Mr. T. Ne impossibilia captas CHAP. III. Sect. 1. The second Argument in S. T. vindicated from Mr. T. his Exceptions Speaking the truth of the Gospel not the only consideration requisite to the Hearers to be respected in hearing Mr. T. his six Reason answered Christ forbids to hear others besides such as preach falshood Saints fit to examine the office c of those they hear Of hearing such who are not in Office nor gifted Brethren The practice of the Barâ—ans The Scriptures not onely the Rule of the Doctrine we hear but of the Persons whom we should hear The Principle pleaded-for no hindranâ—e of a mans edification c. Of the old Apostolical Rule of receiving â—one without the Testimonial of Brethren of known integrity in the Churches c. IN his second Chap. Mr. T. attempts the confutation of the second Argument produced in S. T. to prove the unlawfulness of hearing the present Ministers of England the sum whereof is If it be lawful to hear the present Ministers it is lawful to hear them either as Ministers of the Gospel or as gifted Brethren But it is not lawful to hear them either as Ministers of the Gospel or as gifted Brethren Therefore The Major I took for granted but this Animadverter is pleased to deny it and that for a two fold Reason 1. Because the disâ—unction is of terms not opposite but co-incident Answ Very good It seems then that Ministers of the Gospel and gifted Brethren are terms co-incident but this Mr. T. upon second thoughts will be ashamed of This is not the first instance that his Theodulia was writ in haste and requires a review 'T is true every Minister of the Gospel is a gifted Brother yet not quâ Minister of the Gospel 'T is most false that every gifted Brother is a Minister of the Gospel so that the terms are not as he suggests co-incident He adds 2. The disjunction is not full sith a third member may be assigned that they may be heard as preaching the Word of God Answ This Animadverter hath a rare invention but it will not alway serve his turn What strange Preachers of the Word of God he surmiseth that are neither Ministers of the Gospel nor gifted Brethren ipse videat for my part I desire not to be acquainted with them I had ever thought that at least gifts enabling a man for the creditable discharge of the office of preaching the Gospel had been required in every one that should have undertaken that employment Cucullus non facit Monachum nec barba Philosophum But this Animadverter will prove That speaking the truth of the Gospel is the only consideration requisite to the hearer to be respected in hearing Answ 1. He should have excepted the Devil who spake the truth of the Gospel yet somewhat else was requisite to the hearer to be respected in hearing for him he might not hear 2. He should have put in the mixed truth of the Gospel the sincere Word of God For those that are partial therein are not to be attended Such were the Preacheâ—s of the Circumcision whom Paul condemns and chargeth us to separate from them Phil. 3. 2. i. e. keep at the greatest distance from them have no communion with them yet they spake the truth of the Gospel they only added therewith the Ceremonies of the Law 3. Yet upon second thoughts he did wisely not to make that addition for then he knew what he had said had not been applicable to the present Ministers who though they preach the Truth of the Gospel yet adde thereto the Ceremonies of humane devising as those of the Circumcision did the Ordinances once of divine appointment But we attend his proof Six Reasons he gives of this Assertion Reas 1. Because God hath forbidden to hear none but such as preach falshood Answ This hath been often before inculcated and as often answer'd its falshood and impertinent application to the present Ministers justification who preach falshood manifested So that we need not further trouble our selves or the Reader with it Reas 2. Because hearers are not fit to examine the
that they might not be heard as gifted Brethren Of which he gives us three learned reasons 1. Because the withdrawing themselves from every Brother that walks disorderly cannot be meant of their excluding themselves from Hearing Praying or receiving the Lords Supper if such an one be present Answ Right but though this withdrawment from such a Brother cannot be meant of exclusion from hearing whilst he is present yet I hope it may from hearing him who walks thus disorderly The same may be said of receiving the Lords Supper If he be there as a looker-on meerly this ought not to hinder any from waiting upon Christ in that institution though the Church of England in imitation of the old Pagan custom of the Druides c. of old interdicts the Priests saying service whilst an excommunicate person is there but if he shall be forced upon the Congregation as a member to joyn with them in that ordinance and much more as their Minister to celebrate it as is our case it is the duty of the Saints to surcease the performance of that duty for that season It was the keeping themselves from being polluted that caused them to sever from him that reason remaining which it doth till he hath testified his repentance their withdrawment is to continue He adds 2ly That the withdrawment mentioned 2 Thes 3. 6 14. is only from arbitrary communion in entertainments c. Answ This is an old shift of Mr. T. we have already refuted He further tells us 3ly If we omit it we omit the Worship of God and so break his Commandments Answ 1. This is a meer petitio principii we deny the ministration of the Sacraments according to the rights of the Church of England to be the Worship of God strictly so called 2ly There 's no need through grace of omitting the Worship of God if we worship not with them there are meetings of his people whither we may have recourse to worship him in his own way To what follows in this chapter we have already answered We attend his advance towards the discussion of our third argument of which in the next chapter CHAP. IIII. Sect. 1. Such as act from an Antichristian calling not to be heard proved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifies Who is Antichrist what is Antichristian explained The Ministers of England derive their Office-power from the Papacie The Bishops of England Petty-Popes 'T is unlawful to attend upon the teachings of Antichrist therefore upon the teachings of such as act by a power derived from him Christ calls his People to separate from every thing of Antichrist Rev. 18. 4. and 14. 9. explained Of trying the Spirits 1 Joh. 4. 1. of Christs instituting Officers of his owâ— No promise of a blessing in attending upon an Antichristian Ministry IN Chap. 3. of S. T. a third Argument is produced against hearing the present Mâ—nisters viz. Those that act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian Power Office or Calling are not to be heard but to be seperated from But the present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian Power Office or Calling Therefore The Major is evident for 1. The Power Office and Calling of Antichrist is opposite and contrary to the Power Office and calling of Christ not to separate from such as act by vertue of such an Office-power is to stand by and plead for Antichrist against Christ The sum of what Mr. T. answers hereunto is If by Antichristian Power Office and Calling be meant the Papal Power and the acting in the holy things be by preaching the doctrine of the Trent Council in the points determined therein against Protestants by administring Sacraments according to the Roman Missal and Discipline according to the Canon-Law of the Popes the Major is granted and the Minor denied But if by Antichristian power c. be meant by vertue of ministry according to the Liturgy Articles of Religion and Homilies of the Câ—urch of England from the Ordination and Licence of the Bishops his Major is denied that which he calls Antichristian is not truly such and it is denied that what he calls Antichristian is opposite and contrary to the Power Office and Calling of Christ Answ 1. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as this Animadverter tells us found only in the Epistle of John and principally 1 John 2. 18. where the Apostle distinguisheth between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 between the mean Antichrists and the main Antichrist The best interpretation of the word seems to be a false Christ or â— Counter-Christ one that under the pretence of being for Christ doth really oppose Christ the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both in opposition and composition signifies For in the Scripture as Mat. 2. 22. Acts. 13. 7. and in Classical Writers as Homer Hesycheius c. in his Offices Ministry Discipline Worship He is Antichrist that under the pretence of acting for Christ doth indeed though covertly act against him in his name and under the vizard of his authority That is Antichristian that though it be pretendedly for and from Christ it really is not And in this sense the Major is to be understood Those that act in the holy things of God viz. Praying Preaching Administration of Sacraments c. by vertue of a Power Office and Calling that is not though pretendedly really from Christ are to be separated from as we plainly declare in the first proof of the Major proposition in S. T. which Mr. T. would have disproved if he could But in the stead thereof he labours to raise a dust with a multitude of words before the eyes of the Reader that he might not be able to perceive wherein the weight of the Argument lay 2ly He acknowledges the Major to be true if understood of the Papal Power Office and Calling so that he which acts in the Holy things of God i. e. in Preaching for whether it be the doctrine of the Trent Councel or otherwise is not in this case considerable for if he act from an Antichristian Office-Power 't is not his preaching Truth which would make that Antichristian Office-Power Christian administration of Sacraments according to the Roman Missal and discipline according to the Canon-Law by vertue of an Antichristian Papal Power is not to be heard but in this sense he denies the Minor And I cannot but wonder at the confidence of the man doth he not know that they derive their Office-Power from the Papacy he is not so ignorant as noâ— to know it Do not the Bishops of England exercise the same power over the Clergy and Laity as they are called thereof as the Pope doth over his so that they are upon the matter Papilli Petty-Popes Is this power Antichristan in the Papacy and not so in the Prelacy Is not the manner of administation of Sacraments in use amongst us taken out of the Popish Missal Mr. T. knows
it is Is not the Discipline of their Church from the Canon Law with what forehead can he deny it Whence is the Hierarchy Ecclesiastical decrees Episcopal jurisdiction Procurations Dispensations Pluralities Non-residencies Popish-retained-Ceremonies their Excommunications by a Commissary Ordinations Absolutions Degradations Visitations Offerings Courts Silencing of Godly Preachers disquieting the Lords people for Non-conformity if not from the Cannon-Law These things are notoriously known to be from them So that Mr. T. grants the present Ministers may lawfully be separated from But this might be a slip of his pen before he was aware That it is our duty to separate from persons acting from an Antichristian Power Office or Calling we prove 2ly 'T is unlawful to attend upon the Teachings of Antichrist therefore upon the teachings of such as act by vertue of a power derived from him To this Mr. T. replyes If by teachings of Antichrist be meant the teachings of the present Doctrine of the Church of Rome and the power derived from him be meant the English Bishops Ordination it is impudency to say they derived their power from Rome Answ 1. We are not yet speaking of the Ministers of England to separate from those that act from an Antichristian power be they Ministers of Germany Holland if they so act in their Ministry they are to be seperated from and that because we may not attend upon Antichrist in his Teachings or Ministration doth Mr. T. deny tâ—is He saith indeed if they preach truth we may attend upon their Ministry though they so act Answ But this hath been often said without the least proof and as frequently replyed to and its inconsutilousness in its applâ—cation to the present Ministers who preach Popish Errours and are interdicted the preaching all truth manifested 'T is an assertion most derogatory to the Dignity and Authority of our Lord and King and not to be born by his Loyal Subjects Hath not he Servants enough of his own to do his work to preach his Gospel but he must be beholding to the greatest enemies he hath in the world to send forth Servants into his Vineyard 2dly The present Ministers of England deny their power from the Papacy or they do not if they do not it had been my mistake not impudency to say they did If they do as most certain it is they do and they themselves acknowledge it and plead it the Impudency is rather in Mr. T. to deny it I add in S. T. 3dly Christ calls his to separate from every thing of Antichrist Rev. 18. 4. 14. 9 10 11. Therefore from his Ministry or such as act by vertue of an Antichristian power To which our Animadverter replies 1 Rev. 18. 4. may be understood of a local departure from Babylon when her judgment of destruction from the Kings of the Earth draws nigh Answ 1. And who can hinder Mr. T. from making conjectures his it may be is no proof that it is However the ground of the Lord 's calling them out of Rome should it be granted him that by Babylon were meant the City of Rome is plainly intimated to be lest they should partake of their sins Not their dwelling in Rome but their complying with the Antichristian Ministry Worship thereof their abominable Rites and Ceremonies is that which is loathsom to the Lord. 2dly 'T is true God calls not his People to depart from every doctrine the Pope teacheth there is some truth remaining amongst them which is to be cleaved to because truth much less a rejection of the Bible These are but vain words empty flourishes this Animadverter knows full well that these things are not affirmed by those with whom he hath to do 3dly To a departure from her by forsaking Communion with her in Worship and leaving subjection to her Government he grants this Scripture may be extended which is all we need contend for The Worship of Rome and England are much the same as we prove The Church-government in use amongst us by Arch-Bishops Bishops issues from the same sourse and spring as is known Therefore a separation from the Worship and Ministry of England lawful by the Animadverter's confession 4thly When God commands to come out of her he must be interpreted to come out of every thing of her viz. that which is truly hers whatever hath not the stamp and authority of God upon it for the reason why the Lord would have his forsake any thing of hers is because it is hers and hath not his own Image and Superscription 'T is ridiculous to imagine that God should command a separation from her Worship and Government and not from her Ministry when this is a main part of her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Church-Government He adds 2dly By the Beast and his Image Rev. 14. 9 10 11. is meant some Empire or State which promotes Idolatry the Roman Papacy the worshipping of which is undoubtedly the acknowledging of its power and subjection to their Idolatrous Decrees and Edicts The receiving his mark is a profession of our being the servants of the Pope to subject to his authority and after the citation of Mr. Brightman and Mr. Mede speaking to this purpose he saith which doth evince that the worship of the Beast and his Image is not retaining every usage of the Papists though superstitious and corrupt but acknowledging the universal Monarchy of the Popes adoring Images the Host c. Answ 1. But what doth evince that this is all that is intended by worshipping the Image of the Beast Mr. T. would bear his Reader in hand as if he had produced somewhat for the confirmation of his Assertion when he hath not said the least word tending thereunto The very truth is 2ly The Beast mentioned Rev. 14. 9 10. is the same with the Beast mentioned Rev. 13. 11. or the false Prophet Rev. 19. 21. or Antichrist consider'd in his Ecclesiastical State composed of head the Popes and members the rest of the Antichristian Clergy whether at Rome or elsewhere for as the learned Mede saith the Pope alone maketh not up the Beast except the Clergy be joâ—n'd with him since the Beast doth signifie a company of men composed of a certain order of members like as the Beast hath not one man alone the Image of the Beast cannot be a dumb Image 't is expresly said to be a speaking one viz. the Ecclesiastical policy that in its Cannon-Laws upon which both that of Rome and England is founded breatheth forth nothing but Excommunication against such as shall disobey them upon which they are deliver'd over to the Secular Power here with us though not to be burned yet to perpetual Imprisonment The worshipping the Beast and receiving the mark is subjection to an Antichristian Ministry and Church-polity from which it is the duty of the people of God to separate and if we prove not the Ministers of England to be so we acknowledg this Argument to be null and that notwithstanding any thing in it
not What he adds is most frivolous 't were wicked and abominable in our addresses to God to call him Molech Milcom Malcham Jove but that therefore if the names of Idols be to be abolished we may not call him King Lord Jehovah because some of the fore-mentioned Titles so signifie and others as 't is thought were derived from these names of God is most absurd Christ is called Priest he is truly really so and upon the account of his once offering up himself for the sins of the people before any Mass-Priest was thought of in the world that therefore the name of Priests may lawfully be applied to a company of persons accounted Ministers of the Gospel which was a title assumed by the most idolatrous generation of men professing themselves to be of the same order when such as these pretend to be are no where in the Scripture so called will not in haste be proved We manifest in S. T. 1. a further agreement betwixt the Priests of England and Rome 2. They are both Deacons before they are Priests 3. Ordained to their Office by a Lord-Bishop or his Suffragan 4. Both presented by an Archdeacon or his Deputy with these words Reverend Father I present these men unto thee to be admitted to the Order of Priesthood Our Animadverter replies These are granted and avouched as not Popish but justifiable and agreeable to Orthodox Antiquity Answ 1. That these things are not Popish are avouched without proof They are exactly extracted out of the Pope's Portuis not retained in any one of the Reformed Churches but ejected as the sowr leaven of Popery 2dly That they are justifiable is said not proved Mr. T. should not talk thus confidently of Orthodox Antiquity when he knows 't is of all things the most difficult to determine what things are agreeable to Orthodox Antiquity 3dly Nothing will justifie what we do in matters Divine but the Scriptures Orthodox Antiquity is not sufficient Hear what Basil saith If whatever is not of Faith is sin as saith the Apostle but Faith is by hearing and hearing by the Word of God without doubt whatever is without Divine Scripture since it is not of Faith is sin So Hilarie ad Constant Augustine Tertullian de praescript cap. 15. 8. Hierom in Mat. 23. and Lactantius Humane Precepts have no weight which want Divine Authority lib. 3. c. 27. Theophylact saith 'T is Diabolical to account any thing Divine without the authority of Divine-Scriptures that is Divine which is Apostolical nor is it â—o be sought any where without the Scripture lib. 2. Paschal The saying of Ignatius is worthy to be written in letters of Gold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ is our Antiquity Yet 4thly the Animadverter cannot justifie these things from Orthodox Antiquity any better than the Papists can justifie their Oyl Spittle Salt in Baptism their orders Eccâ—â—siastical of Exorcists Acolytes And indeed his arguing and Baronius's for these seems to be much a like although there is mention made in Scripture only of Bishops Presbyters and Deacons yet saith he Ignatius in those counterfeit Epistles you must understand that pass under his name mentions more so that it is necessary that either they were in the Apostles time or at least were approved of by them By such Orthodox Antiquity Mr. T. may soon justifie not only the forementioned practices of our Clergy but all the inventions of the Romish Bawd 'T is a trick of the Devil saith Augustine under the pretext of Antiquity to commend fallacies to us de quaest Vet. Nov. Testa q. 14. some things seem'd to be new that were indeed ancient as Christ's Doctrine to the Pharisees Christian Religion to Celsus and his Pagans some things seem to be ancient that are but the impostures cheats and fallacies of the later dayes We add in S. T. 5thly The Priests of Rome must be ordained to their Office according to their Pontifical the Priests of England according to their Book of ordering Priests and Deacons which is taken out of the Popes Pontifical To this Mr. T. returns the same answer that Arch-Bishop Whitgift gave the summe whereof is 1. That what is good in the Popes Pontifical if in our Pontifical our Pontifical is never the worse for having it Answ That nothing but Divine Institution in the Scripture of the Lord renders any thing good consider'd as it relates to the Worship of God as such we have already proved In such cases to talk of things as good for which no precept instituting them can be produced is to talk without book 'T is diabolical saith Theophylact. He proceeds 2dly 'T is most false that the book of ordering Ministers is word for word drawn out of the Popes Pontifical Ignorance and rashness drives you into many Errours Answ 1. Why the Book of ordering Ministers should be called a Pontifical if not from the chief Pontifice of Rome I understand not 2. We say not that the English Pontifical is taken word for word out of the Popes but that it is so i. e. for the substance thereâ—f 3. I have often observed that persons most guilty of ignorance and rashness have been most free in charging their Antagonists therewith Thus fares it with our Animadverter as is evident to the eye of an ordinary Reader from the view of the ensuing parallel Romish Pontifical 1. Tempora ordinationum sunt c. The times of ordination are the Sabbaths in omnibus quatuor temporibus Rom. Pontif. de ordinibus conferendis 2. Ordinationes Sacrorum Ordinum The ordination of holy Orders shall be in the times appointed and in the Cathedral Church the Canons of the said Church being present thereat shall be publickly celebrated in the time of Divine Service ibid. 3. They are taken to the order of Presbytery who have continued in the Office of a Deacon at least a whole year except for the profit and necessity of the Church it shall otherwise seem good unto the Bishop ibid. 4. Episcopus autem Sacerdotibus but the Bishop Priests being adjoyned to him and other prudent men skilful in the Divine Law and exercised in Ecclesiastical functions shall diligently examine the persons age of him that is to be ordained 5. Nullus ad ordinem None shall be admitted to the order of a Deacon before he be twenty three years old nor to the order of Presbytery before the twenty fifth year of his age 6. Archidiaconus offerens The Arch Deacon presenting those who are to be promoted to the order of Deacons each of them being decently habited unto the Bishop sitting in his seat before the Altar saith Reverend Father 7. Pontifex c. The Bishop shall ask Do you know them to be worthy the Arch-Deacon shall answer As much as humane frailty suffers me to know I know and testifie that they are worthy 8. Pontifex The Bishop shall speak to the Clergy and People If any one hath ought against thâ—se persons let him come forth and with confidence speak for
God and before God 9. Postremo Lastly the Bishop takes and delivers to them all the Book of the Gospel saying Receive power of reading the Gospel in the Church of God 10. Pontifex The Bishop shall say the Ministers and Chaplains answering Lord have mercy upon us O God the Father of Heaven have mercy on us O God the Son Redeemer of the world have mercy on us That it may please thee to blesse sanctifie and consecrate these elect ☞ We beseech thee hear us 11. They sing one and the same Hymn only the one is in Latine the other in English Veni Creator Spiritus Mentes tuorum visita c. 12. Pontifex The Bishop shall lay his hands upon the heads of each of them kneeling upon their knees before him saying to every one Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose Sins thou dost retain they are retained 13. Pax The Peace of God be alwayes with you the blessing of God Almighty the Father Son and Holy Ghost descend upon you English Pontifical 1. We decree that no Deacons or Ministers be ordained but only upon the Sundays more heathenishly spoken then the Pope in his Pontifical immediatly following jejunia quatuor Temporum commonly cald Ember-weeks Constit Can. Eccl. can 31. 2. And this be done in the Cathedral or Parish Church where the Bishop resideth and in the time of Divine Service in the presence not only of the Archdeacon but of the Dean ibid. 3. And here it must be declared unto the Deacon that he must continue in that office the space of a whole year except for reasonable causes it shall otherwise seem good unto the Bishop The Book of ordering Priests and Deacons 4. The Bishop before he admit any person to holy Orders shall diligently examine him in the presence of those Ministers that shall assist him at the imposition of hands Can. 35. 5. None shall be admitted a Deacon except he be twenty three years of age and every man which is to be admitted a Priesâ— shal be full twenty four years old The Preface to the Form and Manner of making Priests and Deacons c. 6. The Archdeacon or his Deputy shall present unto the Bishop sitting in his Chair near to the holy Table such as desire to be ordained Deacons each of them being decently habited saying these words Reverend Father 7. The Bishop Take heed that the persons whom you present unto us be apt and meet for their learning The Arch Deacon shall answer I have enquired of them and also examined them and think them so to be 8. Then the Bishop shall say to the people Brethren if there be any of you who knoweth any impediment or notable crime in any of these persons let him come forth in the name of God and shew what it is 9. Then the Bishop shall deliver to every one of them the New Testament saying Take thee authority to read the Gospel in the Church of God 10. The Bishop with the Clergy and People shall sing or say the Litany O God the Father of Heaven have mercy upon us miserable sinners O God the Son Redeemer of the world have mercy on us That it may please thee to bless these they Servants ☞ We beseech thee to hear us good Lord. Come Holy Ghost our souls imspire And lighten with Celestial Fire c. 12. The Bishop shall lay their hands severally upon the heads of every one that receive the order of Priesthood the Receivers humbly kneeling upon their knees and the Bishop saying Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose Sins thou doest retain they are retained 13. The Peace of God and the Blessing of God Almighty the Father Son and holy Ghost be amongst you and remain with you always Amen To which it were easie to adde other parallel particulars but these upon a slight view of the Roman Pontifical offering themselves being sufficient to confute that assertion of Whitgift and Mr. T. that the Book of ordering Ministers and Deacons is almost in no point correspondent to the Roman Pontifical we content our selves with them From whence the ingenuous Reader will soon determine to whom ignorance and rashness may justly be imputed We add 6thly The Popish Priests must kneel down upon their knees at the feet of the Lord Bishop that ordains them and he must say to them blasphemously enough Receive the Holy Ghost whose Sins ye forgive they are forgiven whose Sins ye retain they are retained which exactly accords with the fashion of ordaining the Priests of England To which Mr. T. replies in a long harangue not at all to the purpose giving us an account what Whitgift and Hooker say to this prâ—ctice confesses at last they offer some force to the Scripture to which they allude tells us those words may be used prayer-wise Answ 1. The Question is Whether in the particular instanc'd in there be an exact symmetry betwixt the Ordination of the present Ministers of England and the Priests of Rome This Mr. T. denies not but leads the Reader to the consideration of somewhat else 2. The use of the words John 20. 22 23. he grants to be an offering force to the Scripture and if so it is wicked and abominable to wrest the Scripture to our private interpretation is undoubtedly so 3. That they should be used prayer-wise is a most ridiculous evasion the manner of expression evinceth the contrary 4. Mr. Richard Hooker Eccles Polit. lib. 5. sect 77. as câ—ted by our Animadverter interprets it of the collation of the gifts of the holy Ghost which if we should interpret of the Office of Ministry it belongs as we have said to the Church not to such a thing as a Lord-Bishop to collate We proceed in the Parallel 7thly The Popish Priests are not ordained in and before the Congregation to whom they are to be Priests but in some Metropolitan Cathedâ—al City So the Priests of England To which Mr. T. replies 1. This is not alwayes so Answ I challenge him to give one instance of the contrary for these six or seven years last past 2dly It may be before the Congregation to whom the person is to be Priest Answ What may be is one thing what is another We say not only that it may be but that it ought to be yet we know it is not 'T is added in S. T. 8thly The Popish Priests take the care of Souls though nâ—t elected by them from the presentation of a Patron by the Institution and Induction of a Lord Bishop so the Ministers of England To which our Animadverter This is not always so nor when so Popish Answ 1. The first is most notoriously false and we challenge Mr. T. to make it good if he can 2. the latter remains to be proved by him to assert it is not Popish is a piece of beggary this Animadverter is much used to What he hath before said is
Synods yet was he not set over others nor endowed with greater power than the rest cap. conf Helvet prior Arti 15. the French Churches say We believe that all true Pastors wheresoever they are placed are endowed with equal authority under that only head high and sole universal Bishop Jesus Christ and therefore it is lawful for no one Church to claim authority and dominion over another cap conf gal Confes. Art 30. So say the Belgick Churches Bely conf Art 31. So that Mr. T. out of his great love and dutifulness to his Mother the Church of England is not sparing to cast dirt in the face of the Churches planted by the Apostles themselves and most or all the Reformed Churches at this day who own no such inequality as he pleads for and therefore were are all of them not well-ordered Churches in comparison at the least to her and the Church of Rome where the Hierarchie is established To the 16th parallel about holy Vestments he is able to object on-thing worth the considering The 17th is The Popish Priests are tyed to a book of stinted Prayers and a prescript Order devised by man for their Worship and Ministration so are the Ministers of England and that to such a one as is taken out of the Popes Portuis To this Mr. T. replies 1. The Assembly of Westminster prescribed a Directory for Worship Answ 1. Quid hoc ad Rhombum I am not in the least concern'd to justifie all that was done by that Assembly and am apt to think they might in that matter have spared their pains 2dly The same Assembly abhorred the Common-Prayer-Book Service as a most detestable and filthy Idol preached printed against it procured its Abolition 3dly Every one that knows any thing knows that upon various accounts there is no likeness betwixt these two None were compell'd to the use of this or that form of words by the Directory as in the Book of Common-Prayer He adds 2dly Those prayers and portions of Scripture which are holy and good are never the worse because they were in the Popes Portuis no more than the acknowledgement of Jesus to be the Son of the most High God is the worse because the Devil used it Mar. 5. 7. Answ 1. Of the Scriptures and that glorious Truth of Christ's Eternal Deity as the Son of the most High God and the Common-Prayer-Book-Service there is not the same reason They were from the inspiration of the Holy Spirit originally Divine this of man devised upon the prevailing of Apostacy upon the Churches of Christ imposed with threatnings cruelties and slaughters upon the Children of Christ by his professed Enemy abused by a confessed Idolatrous generation of men if there be any such in the world That because the abuse of the Scriptures and the Truths contained in them doth not render them the worse therefore a devised Service that it the best is wicked and abominable in its imposition intolerable used by Idolaters is not the worse I chalenge Mr. T. to make good 2. Though the Scriptures are not the worse because portions of them are read in the Romish Idolatrous Service yet the following the Romish Synagogue in curtailing the Scriptures reading one part of a Chapter at one time another at another and manifestly misapplying them causing them also to give place to the Apochryphal Writings is abominable He goes on 3dly That which is suggested as if the Common-Prayer-Book now in use were little different from the Popes Missal he tells us is untrue Answ 1. The Animadverter is a little mistaken We affirm in S. T. that the Common-Prayer-Book-Service used in King Edward the 6th's dayes and the Popes Missal were not much different And for the proof of that we produced the Testimony of the King and Council which we thought M. T. would never have questioned That the Common-Prayer-Book now in use and that then used is not much different every body knows 2dly 'T is true all that is in the Pope 's Missal is not in the Common-Prayer-Book nor did any one ever assert this but the most that is in the Common-Prayer-Book is stolen out of the Popes Missal The Epistles and Gospels the Prayers or Collects the rites and usages therein joyned are so and this Mr. T. denyes not I had thought to have represented the truth of this to the eye of the Reader by exhibiting our English and the Popes Latine Masse at one view to him which I have by me faithfully collected and compared together But the swelling of this Treatise unexpectedly and the difficulty of printing any thing of this nature that is voluminous through the tyranny of the Prelates makes me wholly to lay aside that intendment to a fitter season if need be The summe of what we have been offering in this matter we say in S. T. is this 1. Those Ministers that in their names office admission into their offices are not to be found in the Scripture are not Ministers of Christ act not by vertue of an Authority Office-power Calling received from him 2. Those Ministers that in their names office admission into their office are at a perfect agreement with the Ministers of Antichrist such are the Popish Priests acknowledged to be are not the Ministers of Christ But such as have been abundantly demonstrated are the present Ministers of England Therefore The Minor Mr. T. saith is manifestly false he hath said nothing to prove it in the main Answ This is soon said had he proved it manifestly false be had done somewhat Whether any thing considerable hath been offered by us for the proof of the Minor others besides Mr. T. and I will now judge Sect. 4. The present Ministers of Engl. proved Antichristian They act from a Power Office and Calling received from a Lord-Bishop whose Office is Antichristian The opinion of the Learned touching them Their Office is not to be found in the Scripture Eph. 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Tim. 3. 12. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5 7. Acts 20. 28. know them not They were not known in the Church for some hundreds of years after The Office of Lord-Bishops wherein it consists Of Diotrephes his asserting Supremacy Our Bishops neither Evangelists nor Pastors nor Teachers nor Apostles proved Mat. 28. 19. explained Of the Rise of Episcopacy The Testimonies of Dr. Hammond Whitaker Reynolds Eusebius c. touching it WE further prove in S. T. The present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by virtue of an Antichrâ—stan Power Office and Calling Because 2dly That they act from a Power Office and Calling received from a Lord-Bishop whose Office is Antichristian This the summe To which Mr. T. replies That neither himself nor any sober Writer judged them Antichristian Answ 1. Whether he once so judged of them his taking the Covenant to extirpate them wherein they are condemned as Antichristian will evince 2. What he or I judge them is not material that no sober Writer or considerate man that
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
Province with them did minister Justice and made his abode there ordinarily Whereupon by reason that men for their business made great concourse thither the Church was wont to furnish it of Godly Polity with the worthiest Bishop eâ—dued with gifts above his Brethren And they reposed in him such assiance that they did not only commit the Presidentship of their Assemblies to him Concil Antioch â—an 20. Chalced. can 19. But agreed also that none throughout all the Province should be made Bishop without his consent nor any weightier matter be done by them without him Concil Nic. can 4 6. Concil Antioc can 9. Now the Roman Empire was governed in such sort that the Circuits of the Lord-Presidents had many Provinces within them and were called Diocesses Through occasion whereof the Bishops of those Cities in which these Lievtenants of the Emperor were resident The state Ecclesiastical following the Civil Wolfgang Luzu Comment Reip. Rom. l. 2. c. 2. did grow in power too Neither were they only named Arch-Bishops and Patriarks of the Diocess i. â— the chiefest Bishops and Fathers of that Circuit which the Lieutenant ruled but also obtained that the Metropolitans of the Provinces in their Diocess should be likewise subject and obedient to them as Bishops were to Metropolitans So the Arch-Bishop and Patriarch of Antioch had Prerogatives given him through the Diocess of the East wherein were seven Provinces Concil Const 1. can 2. Concil Antio in exord So nothing could be done in the Diocess of Egypt which under the Bishop had ten Metropolitans without the consent of the Arch-Bishop and Patriarch of Alexandria Conc. Chalc. Act. 4. so it was granted to the Arch-Bishop and Patriarch of Constantinople that the Metropolitans of the Diocesses of Pontus Asia Thracia within which were twenty eight Provinces should be ordained by him Finally so was it decreed that if a Bishop had any matter of Controversies with the Metropolitan of his own Province the Patriark of the Diocess should be Judge thereof Concil Chalced. can 9. 17. as also if any man did receive injury of his own Bishop or Metropolitan Thus were the Roman Popes as they are called now first Bishops over Elderâ— within their own City next Metropolitans over Bishops within their own Province Then Arch-Bishops and Patriarks over Metropolitans within their own Diocess And this is the Princely Diocess which I meant when I said that the Pope in the time of Pelagius was become Arch-Bishop of the Princely Diocess but he was yet but an Arch-Bishop He was not universal Pope and Patriarch of the whole World For although the Patriark of Constantinople being puffed up because in his City the Emperor himself was resident he would be called the Patriark of the whole world as the Emperor was called the Lord of the world Greg. Regist l. 4. Epist 39. yet the Roman Patriarks Pelagius Gregory did withstand his Pride Rainolds Confer with Hart c. 8. Beza also Thes Geneves tells us that the Fathers in the distribution of Churches under Bishops Arch-Bishops c. followed the type or pattern of the Roman Emperor And the learned Brightman in Rev. 13. 4. tells us that they are the worshipers of the Dragon in the Beast who wonder at the Pâ—imacy for the Political Majesty of the Dragon granted by the Councel of Chalcedon Act. 16. Indeed in Clements Constitutions we find if possible a more filthy source from whence their original is asserted In the place where they were before first-Flamines Petâ—r commanded Patriarks to be placed and in Cities where before were Arch-Flamines Arch-Bishops the rest were only Bishops That we had hâ—re in England twenty eight Head-Priests which they called Flamineâ— and three Arch-Priests among them which were called Arch-Flamines which had the oversight of their manners and were as Judges over the rest is known hence the pattern of our Arch-Bishops and Bishops Sect. 5. The office of Lord-Bishops contrary to express precepts of Christ Mat. 20. 25. Mark 10. 42. Luke 22. 25. 1 Pet. 5. 3. considered Of the titles of Dr. of Divinity c. The office of Lord-Bishops derived from and only to be found in the Papacy The Popes of Rome the head of Antichrist No Lord-Bishop till after Constantine Of the first Nicene Council whether there were any Lord-Bishops before what difference betwixt Lord-Bishops then and now Of the retention of the same office in the Greek Eastern Russian Churches The difference betwixt the Superintendency of the Lutheran Churches and our Bishops An Objection answered The Bishops of England act not in the matter of Ordination as Presbyters THat the office of Lord-Bishops is contrary to express precepts of Christ in the Scripture is the second part of our Minor Proposition which in S. T. we prove from Mat. 20. 25. Mark 10. 42. Luke 22 25. 1 Pet. 5. 3. To which Mr. T. answers 1. That we shoot wide of the mark Answ This we have already replied to His instance of the Titles of Doctor of Divinity in the Schools is not at all to the purpose They pretend not to any Ecclesiastical jurisdiction over Elders and Churches by vertue of their being invested into such titles as our L-Bishops do 2dly He considers the particular Scriptures instanced in to which what to reply he seems to be much at a loss 1. He would have the words of the Evangelists not to be a precept shewing their duty but a prediction manifesting the event of what should be Answ 1. This is expresly contrary to the letter of the Text. 2. The Lordship Supremacy Superiority call it what you please is a Lordship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst themselves over one another that is interdicted and forbidden by Christ that it was lawful for them to exercise such a Supremacy this Animadverter will not say now this must be supposed if the words be not a precept but a prediction 3dly He expresly tells us in his Romanism discussed Art 7. Sect. 8. p. 174. l. 14. That Superiority is in these words plainly forbidden 2ly He is inclined to think that if it be a precept it is a precept to the Apostles only not to others Answ 1. Then not to the Pope then Mr. T. palpably abuseth this Scripture in his Roman discussed Art 7. Sect. 8. p. 173. where from hence he argues and enveighs against the Pope's Supremacy But 2ly as good he may say that the great Doctrines of Self-denial frequently pressed by Christ upon the Apostles is a precept only to them 3ly We find the Apostle charging the same thing upon the Elders 1 Pet. 5. 3. who knew the mind of his Lord in this matter it 's to be thought as well as Mr. T. He tells us 3dly If it be a precept to others besides the Apostles whether to all Christians or only to Ministers of the Gospel and whether it forbid simply Dominion at all or tyranical Dominion is doubtful Answ And yet the first he positively affirms within ten or eleven lines
common consent Which that it was observed by the Apopostles of Christ the sacred History testifies Acts 15. And this is the Opinion of the most famous Doctors of the Canon-Law saith Durandus De Sanct. Minist Lib. 1. c. 11. He saith more truly perhaps than he was aware That as the whole Kingdom is said to meet in the Parliament so the whole Church may be said to meet in their Synod and no otherwise Now we know that the meeting of a company of Knights Gentlemen at Westminster is not the Parliament the Representative of the Kingdom Their free Election by the Body of the People of the Nation renders them so In like manner the Convention of a company of Prelates and Priests make not a Synod by our Animadverters own Argument but their Election by the People to meet and sit in Council together as their Representees which the Synod so called at London One thousand six hundred and three nor any National Synod ever since had not the Choice of the People was never minded never was their consent required So that in the sence he takes the word Church which yet is forreign to the Scripture as we say in S. T. the Church of England was never yet concerned In what follows in this Section Mr. T. himself will acknowledge I am not further concerned Sect. 2. The present Ministers oppose the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ whilst they own Laws contrary to the Revelation of Christ That they do thus evinced by the induction of particular instances Acts 8. 27. â— Tim. 6. 15. Jer. 51. 26. Luke 11. 2. Mat. 6. 7 8 9. Whether Christ there instituted a form of Prayer Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. Mark 14. 18 22 23. opened That Christ sate with his Disciples in the celebration of the Ordinance of breaking Bread evinced Of Kneeling The reason of its first institution It s opposition to 1 Thes 5. 22. manifested Of forbidding to Marry and commanding to abstain from Meats IN Sect. 6. Mr. T. proceeds to the examination of what is further produced in S. T. for the manifestation of the guilt of the present Ministers in their opposing the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ which we further prove because they own submit and subscribe to Laws Constitutions and Ordinances that are contrary to the Revelation of Christ This we prove by particular instances They own and acknowledge 1. That there may be other Arch-Bishops and Lord-Bishops in the Church of Christ besides himself Which is contrary to 1 Pet. 5. 3. 1 Cor. 12. 5. Ephes 4. 5. Heb. 3. 1. Luke 22. 22 25. 26. To which our Animadverter replies 1. They do not acknowledge them in opposition to these Scriptures Answ But that is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr. T. may be ashamed of such pitiful beggery He adds 2ly They do not acknowledge Arch-Bishops over the whole Church as the Pope but in their own Province Answ This is not at all material the authority of Arch-Bishops over a Province is as much against the Texts mentioned as over the whole Church 'T is not the extent of Authority Lordship that is therein condemned but the thing it self 3ly He further tells us They have no such dominion ascribed to them over the Church they oversee as is forbidden 1 Pet. 5. 3. Luke 22. 25 26. Answ 1. This is again to beg the thing in question 2ly We have proved the contrary He adds 4ly They are not Lords in the Church but in the Kingdom and Parliament Answ False and untrue I wish he speak not against knowledge in this matter 1. When invested into their Episcopal Sees they are stiled Arch-Bishops of such a place or Province Lord-Bishop of such a See 2. The Priests submit to them pray for them as their good Lords 3. They have Power Authority Precedency as such over the rest of the Clergy give forth Laws and Canons to rule and guide them to whom they promise obedience at their Ordination 4. They exercise jurisdiction authority over their respective Diocesses in their Ecclesiastical Courts and Consistories as such all evident Ensigns and Demonstrations of Lordly Dignities even in and over that which they call the Church That which he 5ly adds of the Eunuchs being called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 8. 27. without contradiction to 1 Tim. 6. 15. where Christ is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frivolous 1. The Eunuch is not said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Potentate with respect to the Church of God over it he was not such but with respect to the Kingdom of Aethiopia where he was a Noble Man a Governor under Candace the Queen Our Bishops are Potentates in and over that which they call the Church of Christ 2. That any other besides Christ should exercise Lordship and Authority in the World is not interdicted as is their so doing in the Churches of Christ in the Scriptures mentioned He saith 5ly He hath not shewed that what is acknowledged is a Law Constitution or Ordinance nor the Ministers own it by subscription Answ True indeed I did not do so for I thought it needless to demonstrate that the Sun shines at noon-dayes Are not the Offices of Arch-Bishops Lord-Bishops Constitutions and Ordinances Have they not their Foundation and Establishment by Law Doth not Mr. T. know it Is he onely a stranger in our Israel Of the Truth of this there are not many in the Nation that are or can be ignorant That the Ministers own these whether by subscription or otherwise is not considerable Mr. T. deals injuriously whilst he suggests I say they own these with the rest of the particulars mentioned by subscription when I assert onely That they own submit and subscribe to i. some of them they manifest they own by Subscription others other wayes but they own submission to them all is too notorious to admit of a denyal They do so in their Ordination when they promise Canonical Obedience to them in their prayers for them subjection to their precepts from time to time transmitted to them which they dare not transgress 2ly That men may and ought to be made Ministers onely by these Lord-Bishops is we say in S. T. owned by the present Ministers which is contrary to Heb. 5. 4. John 10. 1 7. 13. 20. Acts 14. 23. with 6. 3 5. What Mr. T. adjoyns hereunto touching Ordination by Suffâ—agan Bishops hath already been removed out of the way How much they own a Presbyterian Ordination of which he speaks many good men in the Nation feel and find Of these things we have already spoken That Ordination by Lord-Bishops is established by Law is known and that exclusively to any other without them Hereunto the Ministers subscribe Can. 36. The Scriptures instanc'd in prove this to be contrary to the Revelation of Christ Heb. 5. 4. John 10. 1 7. 13. 20. manifestly evince That who-ever undertakes to be a Minister of the Lord in his Church must
be called of sent by him So was Aaron Acts 14. 23. 6. 3 5. manifest that the Way of the Lord's mission is not by Lord-Bishops but by his Churches and People What he tells us he hath said in answer to any of these Scriptures we have replyed to Chap. 2. We add in S. T. 3ly That Prelates their Chancellors and Officers have power from Christ to cast out of the Church of God is owned by them contrary to Mat. 18. 16 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. To which our Animadverter subjoyns He finds no such Law Answ It may be he is willingly ignorant hereof This he cannot but know that in the Name of Christ the Officers mentioneâ— do excommunicate out of the Church so call'd of Christ Do they do this without Law Is it not one of their Church-constitutions that they may do so Do not the present Ministers own them herein Whilst they cite present persecute their Neighbours for not coming to Divine Service as they call it it may be for refusing to pay them a four-penny-due in the Ecclesiastical Courts even to an Excommunication whose Act therein they afterwards publickly denounce and declare once and again in obedience to them What more evident The weakness of his answer to Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. we have already manifested We say further in S. T. That they own 4ly that the Office of the Suffragans Deans Canons are lawful and necessary to be had in the Church contrary to 1 Cor. 12. 18 28. Rom. 12. 7. Ephes 4. 11. The Officers instituted by Christ are sufficient for the edification and perfecting of the Saints till they all come unto a perfect man v. 12 13. In what sense the forementioned being not one of them of the Institution of Christ may be owned as lawful and necessary without an high contempt of the Wisdom and Sovereignty of Christ I am not able to conceive this is the sum Mr. T. replies 1. He knows not where this imagined Ordinance is Answ That there are such Officers and Offices in the Church of England established by the Laws thereof he cannot be ignorant To say They are Antichristian or repugnant to the Word of God is censured by the Canons thereof Can. 7. That the Ministers own submit to some of them is known The vanity and impertinency of Mr. T. his pleading for them not to mention his perjury therein is discovered in our present Vindication of Chap. 3. from his exceptions against what is by us therein argued We say they own 5thly That the Office of Deacons in the Church is to be imployed in publick Praying administration of Baptism and Preaching if licensed by the Bishop thereunto contrary to Act. 6. 2. Ephes 4. 11. Mr. T. replies 'T is not contrary to Christ's Revelation that they should be imployed in those works Ans 1. But when Christ hath instituted the office of Deacons for this end to attend Tables or look after the provision and necessities of the Saints That any persons may own an Office of Deacons in the Church to be imploy'd by virtue of Office-power in any other work than that for which they are intrusted by Christ and called unto Office without an advance against that Institution of Christ is absurd to imagine 2. That the present Ministers own such an Office he doth not deny 3. What he speaks of Stephen and Philip he had said before and to it we have replied already and need noâ— add more A sixth Law or Ordinance that we say they own is this That the Ordinance of Breaking Bread or the Sacrament of the Lords Supper may be administred to one alone as to a sick man ready to die Which is diametrically opposite to the Nature and Institution of that Ordinance 1 Cor. 10. 16. and 11. 33. Mat. 26. 26. Acts 2. 42. and 20. 7. To which Mr. T. This is not easily proved from the Scripâ—ures instanced in Answ Whether it be or not is left to the judgment of the judicious Reader to determine I am weary in pursuâ—â—g him in his impertinencies He grants a Communion is proved in that Sacrament 1 Cor. 10. 16. but vers 17. and 1 Cor. 12. 13. prove the Communion to be rather with all Christians Of which yet there is not one word in either of the places In vers 17. He speaks of the Church of Corinth that was one bread one body The other Scripture speaks nothing of Saints Communion one with another in this Ordinance 1 Cor. 11. 33. Acts 20. 7. he confesseth prove That it should be administred when all the Communicants Church or Brethren he should say are come together Whether its administration to one alone be not diametrically opposite hereunto as also to the very first Institution of this Ordinance Mat. 26. 26. let the Judicious judge Though it be said Act. 2. 46. that they brake bread from house to house it doth not follow there was none beside the Minister and the sick man the words import the contrary We manifest further in S. T. That they own 7thly a prescript form of Words in Prayer that a ceremonious pompous Worship devised â—y man and abused to Idolatry is according to the will of God and may lawfully be used under the New Testament Dispensation contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. John 4. 23. Deut. 12. 32. Jer. 51. 26. Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. By this prescript form of Words this ceremonious pompous Worship the Common-Prayer-Book Collegiat-Worship and Service is intended This I say is devised by man the owning whereof is contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. Deut. 12. 22. abused to Idolatry The owning hereof is opposite to Jer. 51. 26. It is Ceremonious and Pompous the abetting whereof is adverse to Joh. 4. 23. as is the owning of a prescript Form of Words to Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. To which our Animadverter replies 1. He should have told us what part of the Common-Prayer-Book was abused to Idolatry Answ The whole of it is so being Worship not appointed by the Lord and used in that Church that is the most Idolatrous Church in the world What he hath said in this Chap. Sect. 3. or in Chap. 3. Sect. 4. We have already answered His great out-cry of our abuse of Jer. 51. 26. produced to prove it unlawful to use any thing in the Worship of God abused to Idolatry will soon be evinced to be an empty sound Vox praeterea nihil 1. We have for our Companions in this Exposition persoâ—s not contemptible for wisdom and holiness who make conscience of applying Scriptures and abusing the Reader 2. Of all men Mr. T. iâ— the most incompetent for the management of this charge who most egregiously perverts Scriptures in this Treatise contrary to former Interpretations given by himself to them and to the plain intendment of the Spirit therein As we have in part manifested and may do further in our Appendix 3. He egregiously abuseth the Reader in this very passage whilst
he bears him in hand that we expound the words of a prohibition to the Jews That they should not use the stones of Babylon to build a Temple to God at Jerusalem because abused to Idolatry which we do not Nor was it likely they would ever have gone about to do so Babylon was too remote for them such a prohibition had been altogether needless and vain But 4. That Chap. 50 and 51. are one entire Prophesie that reacheth farther than the Destruction of Literal Babylon even to the ruine of all the Scripture calls so is evident For 1st This Prophesie relates to the restauration of all the Tribes Israel as well as Judah vers 4. 5. which to this day hath not been fulfilled The ten Tribes represented by Israel being in a dispersed state ever since they were carried away Captive by Salmanasser 'T is true Judah after the 70 years Captivity did return but what is that to Israel when this Prophesie is accomplished they must also be brought to their habitation which is again repeated vers 19. And I will bring Israel again to his habitation and he shall feed on Carmel This Carmel was the portion of the half Tribe of Manasseh belonging to the ten Tribes Jos 19. 2dly When God doth this the iniquity of Jacob shall be sought for and there shall be none vers 20. 3dly He will then make use of Israel as his Battle-Axe and weapon of War to destroy and break in pieces Kingdoms and Nations vers 20 21. 4thly The Deliverance and Vengeance here prophesied of is the issue of the groans and cries of the Inhabitants of Sion against Babylon vers 35 36. But against Literal Babylon the Children of Israel were not to cry but the contrary Jer. 29. 7. 5thly Many material passages in this Prophesie are applied by the Spirit of the Lord to Mystical Babylon as Chap. 50. 8. Rev. 18. 4. vers 29. Rev. 18. 6. Chap. 51. 6. Rev. 18. 4. 6thly The Babylon mentioned in this Prophesie and the Babylon spoken of in the Revelation is one and the same Babylon differing at most but as Type and Antitype Babylon is a Type of the City and Seat of Antichrist saith the Learned Ainsworth on Psal 137. v. 1. This is evident to the eye of the understanding Reader from the ensuing Scheme Jeremiah's Babylon Jer. 50. 8. Remove out of the midst of Babylon And 51. 6. Flee out of the midst of Babylon and deliver every man his soul be not cut off in her iniquity for this is the time of the Lords vengeance he will render unto her a recompence Jer. 50. 29. Recompence her according to her work according to all that she hath done do unto her for she hath been proud against the Lord against the Holy One of Israel Jer. 50. 39. The wild beasts of the desart shall dwell there and the owls shall dwell therein and it shall be no more inhabited for ever neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah Jer. 51. 7. Babylon hath been a golden cup in the Lords hand that made all the earth drunken the nations have drunk of her wine therefore the nations are mad Jer. 51. 8. Babylon is suddenly fallen and destroyed howl for her John's Babylon Rev. 18. 4. Come out of her my People that ye be not partakers of her Sins and that ye receive not of her Plagues for her sins have reached unto heaven and God hath remembred her iniquities Rev. 18. 6 7. Reward her even as she hath rewarded you double unto her double according to her works in the cup which she hath filled fill to her again How much she hath glorified her self and lived deliciously so much sorrow give her Rev. 18. 2. Babylon the Great is fallen is fallen and is become the habitation of devils and the hold of every foul spirit a cage of every unclean and hateful bird Rev. 18. 22. The voice of harpers and musicians shall be heard no more at all in thee and no crafts man shall be found any more in thee vers 8. she shall be utterly burnt with fire Rev. 17. 2. With whom the Kings of the earth have committed fornication and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication And 18. 3. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornications Rev. 14. 8. Babylon is fallen is fallen Rev. 18. 2. Babylon the Great is fallen is fallen vers 9. And the Kings of the earth who committed fornication and lived deliciously with her shall bewail her saying alas alas for in one hour is thy judgement come vers 11 15 19. The sum is the Prophesie not being confined to Literal Babylon but eminently relating to Mystical Babylon or the false whoâ—ish Church in the Revelation the not taking a stone of her for a foundation having no respect to the Jews not using the stones of Babylon in building the Temple which it is not like they had the least intendment to do points out the duty of the spiritual Jew or Christian Believer in his departure from the Antichristian Church not to introduce any of her things once abused to Idolatry into the Worship of the House of God which we cited this Scripture to prove Mr. T. proceeds and tells us 2dly That external words and gestures are not contrary to John 4. 23. Answ Nor do we say they are this we affirm That a form of words enjoyned the Ceremonious pompous Worship of England managed and carried on in our Collegiat Churches and Chappels with outward pomp and state is so That which he saith in answer hereunto viz. That this Text excludes the Legal shadowy-Worship of the Law establisheth what we say For if a pompous shadowy-Worship once of the Institution of the Lord be excluded by this Scripture much more that which is so and of the devising and establishment of Antichrist In what he saith 3dly That we conceive a form of Words prescribed and devised by man to be contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. Deut. 12. 31. he openly prevaricates For though as commanded in the Worship of God it be so yet we rather refer those Scriptures to the whole of their humane devices in their Worship and Service viz. Surplice Organs Cross in Baptism c. that have not the least foundation in Scripture and are therefore contrary to them What Mr. T. dictates That if no prescript form of Prayer devised and imposed by penal Laws to be used by man for thus he must speak if he speak pertinently may be used then conceived forms of Prayer may not be used I desire him not to attempt the proof of because t is such an imposible task that he will never be able to make good That Christ hath commanded a set form of Prayer Luke 11. 2. Mat. 6. 7 8. is first false For 1st If he had done so it were utterly unlawful to use any other than the
leisure In allusion to the Priests of old the Porters or New-Testament Officers are commanded to watch Mark 13. 34. viz. that as much as in them lies they hinder persons morally unclean from entring into Gospel-Churches 2. He tells us That none but Saints are to be admitted thereinto 3. Threatens those Ministers that shall be careless and negligent in this matter with a deposition from their Office Ezek. 44. A Prophesie though in Old Testament-clothing expresly relating to New Testament dayes as is acknowledged by most And to any that shall compare what is there spoken with what is recorded of the New Jerusalem Rev. 20 21 22. Chap. 't will manifestly appear so to do 4. Acts 20. 28. is most impertinently alledged and wretchedly abused by the Animadverter It only preacheth forth thus much That the Gentile Nations were not so unclean as the Jews fondly imagined but that persons might go unto them and preach the Gospel amongst them as vers 28 29 34 evince But that Adulterers Drunkards should not be accounted unclean and common so as not to admit them into Church-Communion or if admitted that they ought not legally to be ejected Mr. T. attempts not the proof of The Scriptures fully manifest that they ought so to be Whether every single Minister hath power to keep any professing the Faith from the Lords Supper is not of our present disquisition if Ministers of Christ they with the particular Church to which they relate have power so to do The constant practice of the present Ministers in admitting the visibly wicked and prophane to the participation of Church-Ordinances and Priviledges is a manifest discovery that they symbolize with the Priests of Old of whom the complaint of the Lord is That they put no difference betwixt the holy and prophane The 10th Character of false Prophets instanc't in is this that they do not exercise pity to the weak broken scattered sheep of Christ nor shew bowels in their recovery but with force and cruelty rule over them Ezek. 34. 4. This we say is evidently true of the present Ministers with force and cruelty they rule over us in stead of exercising pity towards us threaten us with Excommunications Imprisonment dispoiâ—ing us of our Goods yea condemning us to Death if we stoop not to their lure All that can be called an Answer hereunto Sect. 9. is this 1. The Shepherds mentioned in Ezek. 34. are Civil Rulers for the Prophets did not rule over the People with force and cruelty but with lies and deceit Answ 1. Junius the Marginal Notes of the Geneva Translation Diodati the Assembly in their Annotations on the place the most of Interpreters expound it of false Ecclesiastical Shepherds or Ministers That this is the intendment of the Spirit of the Lord is evident 1st He speaks of such Shepherds whose special duty it is to feed the flock the neglect whereof he condemns them for v. 2 3. But this is the duty of Ecclesiastical Shepherds Cant. 1. 8 John 21. 15 16 17 1 Cor. 9. 7. 1 Pet. 5. 2. 2dly They are condemned for ruling over them with force and cruelty vers 4. The like condemned in Ecclesiastical Rulers 1 Pet. 5. 3. 3dly It s a Prophesie that runs down to the times of the Gospel and speaks of such Shepherds in opposition to whom Christ is said to be the true Shepherd vers 23 24. John 10. 11 12 14. The Reason alledged by Mr. T. to prove Civil Rulers are here meant being weighed in the Ballance is found wanting They may righteously be said to rule over the flock of God with force and cruelty when they provoke the Magistrate to do so as the Woman or Antichristian Church is said to be drunk with the blood of the Saints Rev. 17. 6. And in her 't is said was found the blood of all that were slain upon the earth Rev. 18. 24. because she prompted and provoked the Civil Magistrate to pour it forth That the present Ministers of England are not righteously charged with ruling over us with force and cruelty he saith not thinks there are some to whom this evil may be imputed 'T is added in S. T. What should I mention 13thly that â—hey come u out of the Earth Rev. 13. 11. i. e. are raised up by men of earthly spirits and principles To this after an harangue of words Sect. 10. that I might leave him upon second thoughts to correct himself for As 1st Thaâ— the Book of the Revelation is obscure which in it self is not but a Lanthorn a Light 'T is a horrid disparagement to any part of the Scripture so to speak of it The Sun is not dark though blind men discern not the lighâ— and brightness of it The obscurity is in us not in the Scripture 2. That sober men have wished it were less read Which wish whatever the men are I am sure is not over sober being directly opposite to the advice of the Spirit for the reading of it with an encouragement thereunâ—o Rev. 1. 3. He answers 1. That the first and second Beast Rev. 19. are differently conceived Answ Who the first and second Beast are we have already explained which Mr. T. may confute when he is able That the second Beast and the false Prophet Rev. 19. are the same we have but now demonstrated The Hierarchy of England and Rome are the same Antichristian Hierarchy their Original the same the Canon Laws by which their Jurisdiction is supported their Courts Officers c. the same He further acquaints us 2dly With horrid consequences that attend this Principle that the second Beast is to be interpreted the Hierarchy and Ministry of England 1. The first we own with this limitation The first Beast is the Antichristian Civil Powers who if at the coming of Christ are found such and in actual rebellion against him shall be cast into the Lake burning with fire 2. The second about worshiping the first Beast if understood of the Pope as he saith may be truly affirmed of the present Hierarchy who cause the Earth and them that dwell therein so to do whilst they cause them to own bow down subject to his Canon-Laws in their Consistories Ecclesiastical Courts 3dly That all who subject to the Image of the Beast or Ecclesiastical Government shall drink of the Wine of the wrath of God Without general or particular repentance being no more than this That those that die in any one sin unrepented of shall do so as Mr. T. will grant we affirm and challenge Mr. T. to prove these things to be horrid consequences monstrously uncharitable an argument of dotage the speech of a furious Bedlam Sir you will one day know that your tongue is not so your own but you must give an account of these hard speeches with which you are beating your fellow-servants I pray may not be laid to your charge He asks 3dly How doth it appear that to come out of the Earth is to be raised by men of earthly
so great the action it self casting contempt upon the Institutions of Christ they are guilty hereof And thus far in Reply to Mr. T. his Answers to Arguments and Questions proposed His next attempt is to make good the Catasceuastick part of this Dispute how well he dischargeth that Province shall be considered in the next Chapter CHAP. XI Sect. 1. Mat. 23. 1 2. explained Mr. T. his two Arguments drawn from thence to prove the lawfulness of hearing the present Ministers refuted Whether the Scribes and Pharisees were Teachers and Expounders of the Law Mr. T. his proofs thereof examined The Titles of Rabbi Doctor Master Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not peculiar to Ecclesiastical Officers Of their paying Tythes Mat. 12. 18. If they were Ministers they were lawful Ministers proved Christ doth not command or permit his Disciples to hear them demonstrated Of the true reading of the words Mr. T. his mistakes manifested THE first attempt of Mr. T. in his 10th Chap. is to vindicate the Arguments produced by others mentioned in S. T. as Objections against the Truth contended for therein from the Answers we have given thereunto The first whereof is thus proposed Object 1. Christ commands or at least permits his Disciples to hear the Scribes and Pharisees who were men as corrupt in their Doctrine as vitious in their Lives as the present Ministers of England can be supposed to be Mat. 23. 1 2. Therefore its lawful to hear these The Animadverter after many words which our present hast admits not our stay to consider of nor is it at all necessary that we should do so draws up a twofold Argument from this Scripture Arg. 1. That hearing of Ministers against which there is no more just exception than was against the hearing the Scribes and Pharisees is lawfull for Christian Saints now But there is no more just exception against hearing the present Ministers of England than was against hearing the Scribes and Pharisees Therefore Answ 1. We deny the Major Proposition to the proof whereof we say That Christ allowed not his Disciples to hear the Scribes and Pharisees as we prove in S. T. 2. The Minor also is short of Truth to the proof where of we say That the Exceptions against the present Ministers are upon some accounts greater and more just than against the Scribes and Pharisees Neither of which he attempts the proof of but prays it may be granted him which upon these terms will never be the contrary we afterwards manifest Arg. 2. That which warranted Christs Disciples hearing the Scribes and Pharisees notwithstanding other defects warrants the Saints hearing the present Ministers of England notwithstanding other defects But the Scribes and Pharisees preaching the will of God warranted Christs Disciples hearing the Scribes and Pharisees notwithstanding other defects Therefore Answ 1. By the very same Argument the lawfulness of hearing the Priests of Rome the Friars may be evinced for they preach some some Truth 2. We deny his Minor and to the proof thereof say 1st That sitting in Moses Chair is their teaching the observation of Gods Laws is begg'd by him without the least tender of proof So is 2dly That Christ therefore permitts the Disciples to hear them because they so taught And 3dly That he allowed the hearing them a◠all Each of which is denied by us and fail he in the proof thereof his Argument sinks of it self as he himself knows To the Objection as proposed by us which contains the sum of Mr. T. his two Arguments we answer in S. T. That there are some things which the Objectors take for granted which are the very Basis upon which the stress of the Objection lies that will never be proved As 1st 'T is supposed that the Scribes and Pharisees here spoken of were in the Ministerial Seat Teachers and Expounders of the Law Some of them 't is granted were these here mentioned are said to sit in Moses Seat which was the Magistratical Seat to the Posterity of Aaron the Office of Priesthood did appertain and are condemned for neglecting Judgment and Mercy things most nearly relating to the Office of Magistracy Now 't will not in the least follow that supposing Christ enjoyned his Disciples to attend upon the Scribes and Pharisees acting as Magistrates and conform to what is justly and righteously prescribed by them as such that therefore 't is lawful to attend upon the present Ministers To which Mr. T. Sect. 2. 'T is supposed that the Scribes and Pharisees here spoken of were Teachers and Expounders of the Law which he attempts the proof of 1. Because vers 4. 't is said They bind heavy burdens and lay them on mens shoulders Answ But Mr. T. should have proved that they did this as expounders of the Law and not as Magistrates by civil sanctions till when he saith nothing 2. They affected to be called of men Rabbi Masters Fathers Leaders vers 8 9 10. Answ What then This is no proof that they were Ecclesiastical Officers 1. They might affect these Titles and not have them 2. Others besides such who were Expounders of the Law had them given to them 1st The very words that were spoken at the time of the Investment of any into the Title of Rabbi viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Behold thou art promoted and there is power given to thee of exercising capital Judgments which I am sure appertained not to them as Expounders of the Law abundantly evince that that Title was given to those that had authority in things Civil As is the Title 2dly Of Master Exod. 1. 11. 1 Sam. 26. 16. 2 Sam. 2. 7. 2 King 10. 2 3 6. 1 Sam. 29. 4. 2 King 9. 31. 19. 4. 1 Chr. 12. 19. 3dly Of Father 1 Sam. 24. 12. 1 King 5. 13. 16. 7. In which sense Machir is said to be the Father of Gilhad i. e. the Prince of that Country 1 Chr. 2. 21 23. And David is called the Father of the Jews Mark 11. 10. Nor 4thly Is it necessary that we restrain the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Leaders to Ecclesiastical Leaders or Guides when it may as propperly be referred to Civil Rulers 5thly The Title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doctors or Teachers he tells us is translated Master in Israel Joh. 3. being applied there to Nichodemus who was a Ruler of the Jews i. e. a Civil Ruler amongst them The other Title 6thly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Blind Guides or Captains there is no necessity that we refer to Ecclesiastical Rulers so that hitherto he fails of the proof of his Assertion He adds 2dly They were not Priests for they paid Tythes vers 23. Answ 1. This upon the present supposition makes rather for than against us If they were not Priests 't is the more probable they were not Teachers of the People who were to seek the Law at their mouthes Mal. 2. 7. And if his Argument be good they were not Priests because they paid Tythes whereas the Priests
communion with God getting ready trim'd for the coming of Jesus That any of these directions are such as weak Christians are not able to make use of that they would be dangerous to them as Mr. T. speaks causing them to decay in the exercise of Godliness grow barren and lifeless in Prayer occasioning them to fall into errors enthusiastick conceits to turn Seekers is absurd to imagine How far publick hearing is required for hallowing the Lords Day when and how not we have but now declared and need not add more CHAP. XII Sect. 1. Mr. T. his Arguments for hearing the present Ministers answered Some things are unlawful in which is no sin There is sin in hearing the present Ministers Nothing relating to instituted Worship as such but is necessary Against hearing them lie Exceptions that are not meerly extrinsecal but essential to the duty of hearing Gods cautions restrain us from hearing them 'T is no characteristical property of Christ's Sheep so to do but the contrary John 8. 27. 10. 27. considered Not to hear them is no sign of one that is not of God No such prophanness that is condemned in Esau No refusing the Pearl of great price Of the efficaciousness of the Word We have no ground to expect the present Ministers preaching should be made effectual to us The neglect of which is no occasion or reason of mens condemnation John 3. 20. opened They have not the words of eternal life John 6. 68. explained The words of eternal life what they import MR. T. closeth his Theodulia with no fewer than 40 Arguments Sect. 15. whereby he endeavours to prove the lawfulness of hearing the present Ministers which are briefly to be considered Arg. 1. That is lawful in which is no sin In hearing the present Ministers preach the Doctrine of the Gospel is no sin Because it s no breach of any Law of Nature or of the Scriptures and sin is a transgression of the Law and where there is no Law there is no transgression 1 John 3. 4. Rom. 4. 13. Answ Both Propositions are liable to exception The Major is not universally true There are some things unlawful in which there is no sin per se as the eating the Idolothite which was only per accidens so in respect of the offence of the weak brother and yet utterly unlawful to be done how much this concerns the present case we have shewed already 2. The Minor is notoriously false 1st In hearing the present Ministers is sin 't is a violation and transgression of the Law of Nature the voice whereof is That God must be served and worshâ—pped according to the revelation of his will That nothing be done herein but what he gives direction and commandment about so say the Scriptures as we have proved Chap. 2. Now Mr. T. is not able to produce one Scripture wherein God commands us to hear them VVhat he replies hereunto is frivolous He saith 1. That a command is not necessary to prove a thing lawful but to prove it a necessary duty Answ But there is nothing relating to Instituted VVorship as such of which we have proved hearing to be a part that is lawful but is our necessary duty viz. necessary necessitate praecepti instituting it 2. That as express command may be shewed for hearing them as he saith as for hearing the Congregational Ministers is his mistake The hearing these is shewed to be a positive duty by command from Christ The other contrary to many solemn commands given forth by him all along this Treatise So that His Argument may be Retorted upon himself That which is a breach of the Law of Nature and Scripture moral or positive in express tearms or by good consequence is sinful and unlawful to be practised This Mr. T. grants But such is the hearing the present Ministers this we have already proved Therefore He adds Arg. 2. Those Ministers may lawfully be heard against the hearing of whom lie no exceptions but such as are extrinsecal to the duty of hearing as it is a part of Gods Worship But so it is concerning the hearing the present Ministers Therefore Answ 1. We deny his Minor and to the proof thereof we say that the duty of hearing consists not only in this that we apply our selves to learn the mind of God but that we do this lawfully and according to the mind of God when he hath appointed Officers of his own and given his Spirit unto his Children to inable them to communicate his mind and will to the Sons of Men to imagine that an attendment upon those to learn the mind of God whom he hath not deputed to dispense it charged us as Antichristian-Officers persons that walk disorderly to have nothing to do with but separate from is extrinsecal to the duty of hearing is a fearful contempt and disvaluation of the soveraignty and authority of Christ His 2d Argument may easily be Retorted upon himself thus Those Ministers may not lawfully be heard against the hearing of whom â—e exceptions that are not meerly extrinsecal but essential to the duty of hearing as it is a part of Gods Worship But so it is concerning the hearing the present Ministers 'T is not extrinsecal but essential to the duty of hearing Ministers that I hear the mind of God not from such as act from an Antichristian Call that walk disorderly oppose Christ in his Offices but such as are deputed by him to dispense it Therefore His 3d Argument is thus formed That is not unlawful from which Gods cautions restrain us not But from hearing the present Ministers Gods cautions restrain us not for they only restrain us from hearing such as teach false Doctrine Deut. 13. 3. Mat. 7. 15. Mar. 4. 24. Answ 1. We deny his Minor 1. Every command enjoyning us not to attend upon have communion with Antichristian Ministers such as walk disorderly are cautions against hearing them As are 2dly the Scriptures produced by him since we prove that they are false Prophets who labour to draw the People off the pure Institutions of Christ to the putrid Inventions of men Whence we argue 3dly That is unlawful for us from which Gods cautions restrain us But Gods cautions restrain us from hearing the present Ministers for they restrain us from having to do with a false Ministry false Prophets who mingle their own Dreams and Humane Inventions with the Word and Truths of the Lord which we have proved true of the present Ministers Therefore He adds Arg. 4. That is not unlawful which may be a duty and characteristical property of one that is of God or Christs Sheep But to hear the present Ministers being supposed to teach the Word of God and the Voice of Christ may be a duty and characteristical property of one that is of God or Christs Sheep John 8. 47. 10. 27. Therefore Answ We deny the minor the Scriptures produced prove not that it is the duty of one that is of God to hear
every one that teacheth somewhat of the Word of God but onely such as teach it according to Christs appointment nor will Mr. T. say it is the Devil did so Women may do so yet he saith they are not to be heard much less that it is the duty of one that is of God to hear the present Ministers of England who preach Christs Word from Authority humane Antichristian and that mixed with a multitude of humane Inventions We may better argue that is unlawful which is not a duty and characteristical property of one that is of God or Christs Sheep but to hear the present Ministers of England is not a duty and characteristical property of Christs Sheep as we have proved And have yet to add 1. They preach not the Word of God lawfully from Authority in his Name of which the Scriptures mentioned are to be understood 2. They preach the Commandments traditions of men in the stead of Gods Word 3. They hinder oppose persecute such as have authority to preach it 4. They are the stangers mentioned John 10. from whom 't is the property of Christs Sheep to flee 5. Many of them preach not the Word at all nor can they so do Therefore He adds Arg. 5. That may be unlawful which may be a sign of one thaâ— is not of God nor of Christs Sheep But not to hear the present Ministers when they teach the Word of God may be a sign of one that is not of God John 8. 47. 10. 26. A. This is answered in what was replied to the former Argument i. The minor is denied for the same reasons of our denial of the miâ—or in the precedent Argument 2. This Patron of charity at once rejects the many thousands of England precious in the sight of the Lord and beloved of him as persons not of God not of Christs Sheep because they hear not the present Ministers 3. We may more righteously argue To hear those that pretend to teach the Word of God as Ministers intermixed with the traditions of men but are not commissionated by him so to do is unlawful for 't is a rejection and contempt of Christs Authority who alone hath power to appoint his own Officers by whom he will communicate his mind and will But to hear the present Ministers is to hear such as pretend to â—each the Word of God intermixed with the traditions of men buâ— are not commissionated by him so to do as we have before demonstrated Therefore Arg. 6. His sixth Argument is thus formed To refuse to hear the Word of God though delivered by the present Ministers is such prâ—phaneness as is condemned in Esau Heb. 12. 16. for it is the rejecting or neglecting of an holy thing Matth. 7. 6. therefore it may be unlawful to shun hearing them and consequently lawful to hear them Answ 1. Very good It seems then that all that refuse to hear the present Ministers are prophane Esaus this he will have so much ingenuity as to retract in his next 2. He supposeth that the non-hearing of the Ministers is a refusing to hear the Word of God which is a most nefarious and diabolical accusation We refuse not to hear the Word of God in the way of his own appointment but to comply with and abet a false Antichristian-Ministry 3. The People of God conceive it to be one part of their birth-right as Men and Christians not to be compelled to hear those who come in their own names in the name of Antichrist which they refuse to sell for advantage in the World with prophane Esau and therefore judge it irrational a contradiction to be accused as if prophane like him for not dâ—ing that upon the account of his doing whereof he was branded by the Spirit of the Lord as such 4. They judge they may more rationally argue To hear the Word of God as delivered by the present Ministers is an Esau-like prophaneness because 1. 't is a rejection of their birth-right as Men and Christians 2. 'T is a compliance with encouragement of those who trample upon the Sovereignty Authority of Christ 3. 'T is a departing from the appointments of Christ to the Ordinances of Antichrist which is no small undervaluing of the Grace of Christ of the Gospel whereof Esau's prophaneness was a Type Therefore 't is unlawful to hear them Arg. 7. The seventh Argument advanced by him for this good service is The Word of God is a Pearl of great price Mat. 7. 6. 13. 44 46. Therefore to be heard and received by whomsoever held forth and consequently it's folly and sin to refuse hearing it because of personal exceptions against the bringer Answ 1. We deny the consequence nor will Mr. T. affirm it out of the heat of dispute to be true he hath asserted the contrary in his Theod. 2. 'T is wisdom not folly to refuse to meddle with the Pearl of the Prince when brought us by the hands of those from whom he hath charged us not to receive it who were never authorized by him to bring it to us especially when it is to be had from persons of his own authorisement 3. We have found the present Ministers such merchandizers for their own profit in the World that they put off dross for Gold and stones for Pearls at the best mix it with the dirt and gravel of the Antichristian City the traditions of the great Whore which they also impose upon us 4. We think we may more justly argue The Word of God is a precious Pearl Mat. 7. 6. 13. 44 46. therefore they ought not to hear the present Ministers who spoil corrupt it with their traditions and thereby offer violence to it who contemn despise tread underfoot much of the Contents thereof who huckster and make merchandize of it who prefer the Canon-Law of Antichrist before it so debaseing it to their lusts and wills of their Lords and Masters lest they should partake of the guilt of those injuries they offer thereunto whom they see many of them more zealous and nice in the punctual observance of an Edict or Institution given forth by their Masters the Bishops as bowing the knee uncovering the head or the like than the Institutions of their Lord Christ So that we may too truly say of them as Theodoricus Niemensis once said As the Priests of the Jews were at last possessed with that madness that they cried out We have no King but Caesar So I have a long time feared and do fear that our Priests may say We have no other King but the Prelate He adds Arg. 8. If the Word of God preached by the present Ministers may be effectual for that good which is the end wherefore it is preached then it ought to be heard from them according to James 1. 21. 1 Pet. 2. 1. But the Word of God preached by the present Ministers may be thus effectual Therefore Answ 1. If he understand the Major of a may be of possibility with
suggestion His 39th Argument is composed of unproved Dictates to which we have over and over answered in this Treatise Touching his last Argument we say in the general 1. There is not one of the absurdities he saith are consequent on the Opinion of non-hearing of the present Ministers but is as much the consequent of the Opinion of the unlawfulness of going to Mass or hearing a Popish Ministry were it established by Law 2. Particularly 1. We cannot consider'd in their present state as an Antichristian Ministry set up in opposition to the Ministry of Christ rejoyce in or pray to God that they may or praise God for their preaching 2. It follows not that 't is then better that Barbarism spread among the people There is no necessity of the one or the other Barbarism and rudeness may call them their Fathers or foster-Fathers since whose return barbarity and rudeness is broken in like a mighty torrent upon us Who were the promoters the Book of Sports in dayes past a great piece of barbarism and rudeness Mr. T. knows Who are more the encuragers of persons lying at an Ale-house than their fudling Priests who by their practice strengthen the hands of their drunken Parishioners therein There are other meetings in most places within a small compass whither they may go to hear so that they need not lie at an Alehouse nor sit at home idle 3. We think the Magistrates do evil to compel people to hear them 4. In respect of their Antichristian calling non-preaching Readers and their preaching Ministers are alike tolerable Their Pedigree is the same their opposition to Christ and his People the same 5. The less they preach in respect of their Antichristian standing and Office the less they sin Though 6. they accounting themselves Ministers of Christ and receiving wages from the people to preach to them 't is open injustice and unrighteousness for them rarely or not at all so to do as it is Lordly Papal pride and arrogancy in the Prelates to usurp Authority over those they accoâ—nt Ministers of the Gospel and hinder them from preaching who they say are rightly ordained thereunto Of the seeming contradictions Mr. T. hath found in some Writings of J. G. to the Book Intituled Prelatical Preachers none of Christs Teachers I am not concerned to take notice Though they might easily be reconciled And the Judicious Reader can do it himself 'T is separation from a true Church and Gospel-Ministry not a false Antichristian-Church and Ministry upon the account meerly of some difference about the subject of Baptism that he condemns which that it riseth up in opposition to what is asserted in the forementioned Treatise I am not able to discern If Mr. T. dreams that a man cannot speak against separation from a true Church without condemning separation from a false he will scarce find his Rival amongst persons of Learning and Judgment CHAP. XIII Sect. 1. Serious advice to Saints that worship with the Nation and cleave to the Ministry thereof The ground of their present practice to be considered The thoughts of their hearts in dayes past For what Saints then and now suffer hard things Their aims and ends in this matter to be pondered with the present temper of their Spirit A solemn Call out of the Parochial Assemblies The Renowned Husse his Prophesie touching Reformation HAving through Divine Assistance examined and fully answered what Mr. T. was pleased to object in his Theodulia against the S. T. I desire the patience of the Christian Reader for one moment longer whilst I open my heart in a few words 1. To the precious Children of God who are yet worshipping with the Nation and cleaving to the Ministry thereof would I humbly offer these seven things 1. Seriously weigh without prejudice in the ballance of the Sanctuary what we have been tendring to you in this Treatise and think not what you read to be the words of an Enemy they are the counsels of a Friend of one who hath through wonderful grace so far learned Christ that he cannot but love you pray for you should you account him and use him as an Enemy 2. Strictly examine by the Scriptures of Truth the bottom and ground of your present practice Where is the word of Institution by Jesus Christ that warrants your attending on the present Ministry Mr. T. hath written a large Treatise thereabout but is not able to produce one Scripture to warrant your practice in this matter 3. Recollect the thoughts of your heart in dayes past Should any one have told you when you were for a godly preaching praying Ministry for Gospel-Reformation that there would a day come when an Episcopal drunken Common-Prayer-Book dumb ignorant Clergy should be set over you to the casting out of the godly sober and judicious and that you would side with them attend their Ministry would your answer have been other then that of Hazael But are we dead Dogs that we should do thus 4. Remember what it was youâ— Brethren lost their Ears Libertys Lives in days past for what they and you covenanted against was it not for witnessing against utterly to extirpate this present Hierarchie and Worship Did you not rejoyce in its extirpation and will you again encourage or comply with the building of that you once endeavoured to evert and demolish 5. Consider soberly of your aims and ends in your present attendment upon the Ministry and Worship of the Nation Whetâ—er they are such as you can comfortably own in the great Day of Assize that is now ready to spring in upon the World 6. Observe the present temper of spirit whilst attending upon the present Ministry and Worship Have you grown in grace is there not rather a spirit of declension formality deadness earthiness seising you do you meet with Christ in the Publick Assemblies Are you not rather with respect to them forced to say He is not here he is risen 7. Hasten your escape from Parochial National Churches anâ— Assemblies and get into the Assemblies of his Children where he hatâ— recorded his Name will meet with you and bless you The Vials of written vengeance are ready to be poured forth upon false Worship and Worshippers And ere long the subject of our present contest will be removed Not an Arch-Bishop or Lord-Bishop nor any of their Hierarchy shall be known in the Nation or Nations of the World none spoken of but with loathing and abhorrency Their nakedness insolency pride and contrariety to the true interest of Christ and Nations shall be so discovered that they shall be the hissing and reproach of the People insomuch that they shall be ashamed to own their function I have many times thought of that Prophesie of John Huss cited in Foxes Martyrologie Vol. 1. pag. 830. Moreover saith he hereupon note and mark by the way That the Church of God cannot be reduced to her former dignity or be reformed before all things first be made new The truth whereof