and brethren with them are one the same publique body to be exercised in one and the same part of their publique communion and to make the officers publick persons and the brethren private in the cōmunion is to make a schisme in the Church and to make the brethren part of the cōmunion in the administration of the word sacraments prayer singing of Psalmes contribution calling of officers censuring of offenders or other Church action whatsoever private and the officers publik is to make it schismatical them in it schismatiks Thus much of the 9. errour objected The tenth foloweth which is that we say Their worship is a false worship For answer vnto this assertion Mr B refers vs to the end of this treatise and there then will wee attend for it yet somewhat will he say against it that is First that they worship no false God 2. that they worship the true God with no false worship We charge you not with the worship of any false God though wee shall see by by how in one particular you will defend your selves But the thing you should have endeavoured is to prove that your divine-service-book framed by man and by man imposed to be vsed without addition or alteration as the solemn worship of your Church is that true and spirituall manner of worshiping God which he hath appointed with which he will be worshiped in spirit trueth Of this you say little or nothing but bycause you seem to your self to say somewhat wee will see what it is The word you say preached is the true word the sacraments true sacraments the prayers we pray whether conceived or set and stinted are such as may be warranted by the word and agreable to the prescript form taught by our saviour Christ. The word preached in popery or in the most haereticall assembly in the world is the true word but the devises of men are not the true word eyther with you or them Yea the divels thēselues preached the true word when they affirmed and published that Iesus was that Christ the sonne of God the most High did they therefore perform vnto God true worship Of the sacraments I have spokē formerly have shewed that in the administration of them they cannot be reputed true It is the word of promise that makes the sacraments except then the parish assemblies joyntly considered in their members have right unto the spirituall promises of God the sacraments administred in and vnto them in that their estate cannot so be accounted true sacraments For your prayers I observe sundry things out of your own words which I may not passe over as first that you speak not properly no nor truely in saying you pray stinted prayers for you read them and who will say reading is praying you pray to God but will you say you read to God or if you so say and do is it agreable eyther to his ordinance or to cōmon reason Mistake me not as though I speak of inward prayer or of the lifting vp of the hart for I graunt a man may pray inwardly or lift vp the heart to God when he reads or preaches or sings or receives the sacraments of such prayer we neyther speak nor can discern but in our selves our speach then being of the outward act ordinance of prayer I do affirm and so marvayl if all reasonable men concurre not with me that the ordinance of reading cannot be the ordinance of praying 3. In your division of prayer wherin you make some conceived and some set and stinted you graunt that the prayers which are set and stinted are not conceived wherein you do as much as graunt that they are not of God nor according to his will The Apostle Iude directeth vs alwayes to pray in the holy Ghost and Paul teacheth that we cannot pray as we ought but as the spirit helpeth vs and begetteth in vs sighs vnutterable by the work of which spirit if our prayers be not conceived first in our hearts before they be brought forth in our lips they are an vnnaturall bastardly and prophane byrth Lastly if your stinted prayer be as you say agreable to the prescript forme of prayer taught by our saviour Christ then must none other form of prayer be vsed but a stinted or set form for none other form may be vsd but that which is agreable to the prescript form of Christ since Christ hath sayd after this manner pray Where you further add that nothing is imposed or done by you for the worship of God but the word read and preached and the sacraments and prayer I demaund of your first in worship or honour of whō are your holy dayes bearing the names of S. Michaels S. Peters S. Iohns day and the rest imposed and kept if in the honour of the Saynts Angels then are you not cleare as you make your selves from the worshipping of false Gods neyther can you exempt your selves from the number of them which in voluntary religion worship Angels if on the other side those dayes be appoynted and so kept holy in the worship and honour of God then do you and that by authority worship God by and put holines in other things then the word read preached and the sacraments and prayer yea and other things then ever came into the Lords heart to sanctify for his worship And so the place Math. 15. 9. and other scriptures to that purpose are truely though you say falsely alledged against you 2. I do demaund of you whether your Apocrypha books namely that which is placed betwixt both testaments causing the Iewes to think the new testament no better then the fables which are ioyned to it as a learned man of our nation hath observed and the other book of Homilies be enjoyned and vsed as parts of Gods worship It is evident they are so held And therefore it is that a great portion of the former is preferred in the most solemn assemblyes before the canonicall scriptures and the reading of them before the reading of the other which they justle out of their place And for the homilyes they are enioyned and so vsed in stead of the preaching of the word which is the principall part of Gods worship wherevpon it followeth that the Apocrypha wrytings of mē being preferred before one part of Gods worship which is the reading of the Canonicall scriptures and vsed in stead of an other part of Gods worship yea and that the principall part as is preaching are imposed and so vsed as partes of Gods worship So that it is not without good cause M Ber that M Ainsworth bids you prove the Apocrypha scriptures and books of Homilies the true word of God Nothing you tel vs is imposed and vsed amongst you for the worship of God but the true word of God read and preached and the sacraments and prayer now these being imposed and vsed for the
worship of God and being neyther the preaching of the word nor the sacraments nor prayer must needs be the true word of God so you must prove theÌ„ or els the truth of your assertioÌ„ is disproved Touching your discourse of the order of Gods worship before in and after the Apostles tyme I observe to let passe other particulars your errour in making the particular Synagogues of the Iewes as the particular Churches are now The Synagogues were not entyre Churches of themselves but partes or members of the nationall Ch neyther could they haue vse of the most solemn parts of Gods worship as were then the sacrifices neyther could the cheif Ministers in the Church execute their office in them but as they depended vpon the temple in Ierusalem so were the people to cary their offerings thither and there to enjoy these ministrations But particular congregations now do stand in no such dependancy they may enjoy within themselves the word sacraments and prayer which are the most solemn services in the Ch now and so by consequence all the rest In deed it is with your parrish assemblyes somewhat as it was with the Synagogues they cannot enjoy the Ministers by and from within themselves nor have the vse of ecclesiasticall government but must depend vpon their Ierusalems the Bishops Chappels and Consistories for these their most solemn and peculiar administrations Mr B in his 2. book to prove their worship true worship pretends 3 distinct ArgumeÌ„ts The first bycause it is according to the word of God 2. bycause it is not forbidden in the scripture 3. bycause it is after the manner of the worship of the true Churches of God set downe in the word An other man would have comprehended these three reasons in one and so might Mr Ber. have done well enough considering his confirmation of them wherein he brings not so much as one scripture or reason from scripture to prove their prescript leyturgy by man devised and imposed of which our mayn quaest on is to be according to the word of God c. onely in the 3. Argument he toucheth an obiection which he calles a conceyt of ours viz that it quencheth the spirit to which he gives a double answer First that it is agaynst known experience 2. that it is the groundwork of Mr Smith casting of reading the scriptures in the assembly Other things he speaks are not worth the insisting vpon let vs consider of his answers To the former of them touching known experience I do reply two things first that the experience of supposed good in a course or by meanes not warrantable by the written word of God is of all godly wise men to be suspected 2 though the experience of good be certayn yet must men take heed they honour not one thing for an other as the means of that good but they must put difference between that which is good and that which is evill in the same compound action Many do avouch they have wrought in them much hatred of murder treason and the like evils by a stage-play others that their devotion is much furthered by organ musick and the chaunting of quiresters yea by the prayers in a tongue they vnderstand not all these will alledge their knâ—wn experience But to leave these things The Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 14. testifyeth that a man speaking a strange language may â—diâ—y himself though not the Church and though he pray in a strange tongue without the vnderstanding or benefit of the Church yet that his spiâ—â—t may pray Might such a man therefore alledge his known experience for prayer in a strange tongue contrary to the Apostles expresse inhibition neyther is it any justification of the service book in the vse we speak of that people do in the reading of it find by experience their affectioÌ„s furthered God may doth therein honor the simple honest affectioÌ„s of his people so far as to receive the request of their heart which he seeth in secret covering in mercy the outward manner of putting vp the same wherein they of ignorance or infirmity fayl And that these stinted and devised forms do quench the spirit of prayer appears in that they deprive the Church minister of that liberty of the spirit of prayer which God would haue the vse stinting the Minister yea all the Ministers in the kingdom to the same measure of the spirit not onely one with an other but all of them with him that is dead and rotteÌ„ and so stinting the spirit which the Lord gives his Ministers for his Church and that so strictly as till the stint be out it may not suggest one thought or word otherwise or when it is out one more then is praescribed The manifestation of the spirit sayth the Apostle is given to every man to profit withall But in the reading of a praescript forme of prayer there is not the manifestation of the spirit of the minister given him to profit the Church withall but the manifestation of of the spirit of him that devised and penned the service book Now for M Ber 2 Answ namely that this conceipt of ours saying that set prayer quencheth the spirit is the groundwork of Mr Smithes casting of reading the scriptures in the assemblyes first he wrongeth M. Smyth who doth not deny the reading of the scriptures in the assembly but that the reading of them is properly a part of Gods worship 2. Not our conceipt but his own ill collection is the groundwork of his errour Let the indifferent reader iudge whither this consequence be good or no. Bycause the reading of the Apocrypha Prayers of the Bishops of Rome or of England or their Chapleyns for prayer quencheth the spirit or is not the true manner of prayer which Christ hath left therefore the reading of the Canonicall scriptures penned by the Prophets and Apostles for reading quencheth the spirit and is no part of Gods worship Other observations M Ber hath in his Answer some nothing to the purpose and others against himself as for example The Iewes in the ould Testament did meet together at set times commaunded by the Lord so did the Churches of Christ in the new or the first day of the week Ergo the Church of England doth wel in meeting at set times yea holy times not commaunded by the LORD and that farre more solemnly then on the first or LORDS day 2. The Iewes had preaching every Lords day in every Synagogueâ— therefore the Church of Engl is in good estate where there is no preaching or as good as none in one parish of ten on the Lords day or at other tymes 3. The Iewish Church had singing of the Psalmes of David and of other propheticall men and Christ himself did vse the same therefore the Church of England doth coÌ„mmendably in singing besides them the Apocrypha songs of men ful of errours and vanities as that the Saints and Angels in
or can as Mr Ber. knoweth right well for the good graces of God in many wee do both know acknowledge them and it is our great grief though their owne fault that we cannot have communioÌ„ with the persons in whom so eminent graces of God are and if there be any of them which are sory for our departure from the assemblies we are much more sory so have more cause for their continuance in the same In which their estate whilst we withdraw ourselves from them we do in no sort condemn their persons which stand or fall to the Lord much lesse any good thing in them or truth amongst them It is one thing simply to condemn that which is good for evill and another thing to forbeare the vse of it in the concrete for the commixture of evil from which in that vse it is inseparable When Paul forbad the Corinthians to eat and drink in the Idol temples 1 Cor. 10. 20. â—1 he did not condemne meat drink Neyther did the same Apostle when he directed the same Corinthians to excommunicate the incestuous person and so to have no fellowship with him 1 Cor. 5. enjoyne them to renounce the fayth which that person professed or the baptisme which they with him had received And as a Church excommunicating an offender for some one scandalous sin and so refusing all communion with him cannot be chalenged for renouncing or reiecting the faith which that person professeth or any other personall good thing appearing in him so neyther may any person or persons forsaking a Church and all fellowship with it for some one or few iust causes iustly be accused as renouncing or disclayming the other good things there remayning Lastly let me ask Mr B. whether he disclayme one God subâ—â—sting in three persons one Lord Iesus God and man and withall the Christian vertues of zeale patience temperance humility meeknes and the like And why not he as well in refusing communion with the Church of Rome where these things are to be found as we in disclayming the Church of Engl. where the same and other the like good things are known to be Thus when a mans eyes are blynded by partiality towards himselfe and his mouth opened by mallice against his adversary it is mervaylous to see what vnequall judgment he will passe But least Mr B. in charging our beginning as he doth as accursed vncharitable vnnaturall and vngodly might seeme to curse where God curseth not he annexeth certayn portions of scripture which he also sets downe at large as though they made largely against vs and our separation and the end why he alleadgeth them is to prove that there is cause of reioycing in the Church of England The scriptures are these Rom. 15. 17. 18. Act. 10. 34. 35. Rom. 14. 17. 18. To which I do answer first in generall There may be oft tymes is cause of reioycing in the events and issues of things by a speciall hand of God determining them though the secundary meanes and instruments which the Lord vseth for the producing and bringing forth of these issues events as of light out of darknes be most accursed Wherein more or els hath a christian heart cause of reioycing then in the death of Christ And yet what can be imagined more abominable then the meanes and instruments of working it But to speak nearer Mr B. purpose If some Iesuite or other sent by the Pope into America amongst the Pagans and Infidels should there perswade any to beleeve confesse one God and his sonne Iesus Christ made man for the redemption of the world that they should also give vp their lives for these truthes there were cause of reioycing in theyr testimony and yet I suppose Mr B. knowing as he doth would be loath to have communion in the Iesuits Ministery More particularly The Apostle Rom. 15. 17 18. in commendation of his Apostleship layes downe the effects of it and how great cause of reioycing he had that God by his ministery had planted the Churches of the Gentiles whom he further describes by theyr obedience in word and deed And how serves this for the Church of England Thus. It serves first to exclude all those word Saynts for whom Mr B. pleads so much in his book Secondly it serves to shew what small cause there is of reioying for the English Churches being planted of such vniversally so still continuing as are indeed abhominable and disobedient to every good work reprobate The second Scripture is Act. 10. 34. 35. Of a truth I perceave that God is no accepter of persons but in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousnes is accepted of him And is it so What sacrilegious presumption then is it in the Church of Enland to compell God to accept of persons and to accept for his people servants such as neither fear him nor work righteousnes but the coÌ„trary to offer vp theyr persons sacrifices to him in the name of Christ in whome they have no portion to seale vp the covenant of his grace and peace vnto them in the sacraments with whom it never came into his hart to strike hand neyther hath he peace with them The third Scripture is Rom. 14. 17. 18. The kingdome of God is not meat not drink but righteousnes and peace and ioy in the Holy G. for whosoever in those things serveth Christ is acceptable to God c. Hence to let passe the drift of the Apostle in this place els where opened thus much must necessarily follow that where righteousnes and peace and ioy in the Holy Ghost are not nor men in those things serving Christ there the kingdome of God is not nor these men his subiects And where Gods kingdom is not there is the kingdome of Satan and they that are not the subiects of the one are the slaves of the other And so I leave it to the godly reader to iudge whither the assemblyes in England gathered at the first and at this day consisting of such persons for the most part as do not thus nor in these things viz righteousnes peace and ioy in the Holy Ghost serue Christ but the contrary can be rightly by the word of God accounted the kingdome of God Church of Christ. Thus the 3. Scriptures which Mr B. stretched out like a threfold coard to hold men in the assemblies are in truth and in their right meaning as a three stringed whip to scourge those that fear God out of them With such a renunciation of the truth must be interteyned much vntruth saith Mr Ber. as first thou must beleeve their way to be the truth of God then condemne our Church as a false Church when themselves have published that the differences betwixt vs and them are but corruptions Nâ—w corruptions do not make a false Church but a corrupt Church aâ— corruptions in a man make but a corrupt but no false man If we beare witnes of
at large by others I do answer that as it was vnlawfull to communicate with Corah or with Vzziah though they burnt true incense or with Ieroboams Preists though they offered true sacrifices so is it vnlawfull to communicate with a devised ministery what truth soever is taught in it Secondly the Lord hath promised no blessing to his word but in his own ordinance though by his superaboundant mercy he oft tymes vouchsafe that which no man can chalendg by any ordinary promise Thirdly no man may partake in other mens sinns but every Ministery eyther devised or vsurped is the sinn of him which exerciseth it And as no good subiect would assist or coÌ„municate with any person in the administration of civil iustice to the Kings subiects no not though hâ— administred the same never so equally and indifferrently except the same person had commission from the King so to do so neyther ought the subiects of the kingdome of Christ to partake with any person whomsoever in the dispensation of any spirituall thing though in it self never so holy without sufficient warrant and commission from the most absolute and sovereigne King of his Church Christ Iesus And where Mr B. speaks of hearing the true word of God onely preached he intimates therin that if we would heare him preach it would satisfy him wel and so teacheth vs with himselfe and others to make a schisme in the Church in vsing one ordinance and not another It is all one whether a man communicate with the Minister in his pulpit or with the Chauncelor in his consistory both of them minister by the same power of the Bishop The Chauncelor may iudge iustly who knowes whither or no the Minister will teach truely And if he do not but speak the vision of his owne heart what remedy hath the Church or what can they that hear him do May they rebuke him openly according to his sin and so bring him to repentance or must they not beare his errors yea his heresyes also during the pleasure of the Bishops even their Lord his And would you Mr B. be content your people should heare a masse Preist or Iesuite though he professed as loud as you do that he would teach the true word of God And think not scorne of the match for you have the selfe same office with a masse Preist though refyned If he be ordayned by a Bishop though it be the Bishop of Rome he may minister in any Church of England by vertue of that ordination And besides masse Preists preach some and those the mayne truthes and the Ministers in England neither do nor daâ—e preach all no nor some which it may be the others do Is it not better then for the servaÌ„ts of the L. Iesus to exercise aedify themselves according to the model of grace receaved though in weaker measure then to be so simple as to come to your feasts though you cry never so loud vnto them thinking that because your stoln waters are sweet and your hidden bread pleasant that they have no power to passe by but must needs become your guests Lastly Mr B. even to make vp the measure of his mallice as he formerly reproached vs by the oppositioÌ„s dissentioÌ„s which he hath heard of amongst vs so doth he here by the vnity and love which himselfe hath seen in vs comparing it page 64. to the love of Familists and Papists and other wretched and graceles companions So that belike whither we love or hate whither we agree or disagree this man wil be sure to fynd matter of reproch vnto vs and of stumbling to himselfe as the Iewes did both from Iohns austerity and from Christs more sociable course of life Math. 11. 18. 19. Our fourth sin is abusing the word of which all are guilty by misalledging and wresting places of Scripture c and this Mr B. proves because some have accused some of the principall of vs with it If accusation be conviction Mr B. needs not speak of some or any other he himselfe hath most mightily coÌ„vinced vs for he hath most hatefully accused vs of any man a live The fifth sin supposed is our wilfull persisting in our schism lightly regarding reverend mens labours and sinfully despising weaker meanes c. It is well knowne that Mr B. how earnestly soever he pleads with vs for the contrary doth himselfe as much neglect save for his owne purposes the iudgment of other men as any other neyther is there one minister in the land I am verily perswaded with whoÌ„ he suiteth but a right Ismael is he lesse or more having his hand against every man and every mans against him Well I deny our separation to be schism as we take the word much lesse do we persist wilfully in it And for the iudgment of other men as we despise not the meanest so neyther do we pin our faith vpon the sleeves of the most learned The other exceptions of shifting and evading the scriptures of perversnes of spirit in conference I pretermit as being both frivolous despitefull onely something must be answered before we passe this poynt to the charge layd vpon vs Pag 98. touching corruptions in the Churches Apostolicall and reformed And first obiect to them sayth he the corruptions of the Churches Apostolicall and theyr answer is eyther that we mayntayn our corruptioÌ„s by the sinnes of other Churches or els they were in a true constitution And how can you with modesty reiect this answer you say we misconstrue your intendement which is that corruption make not a false Church We grant it except they be essentiall but this is that we say that what Church soever alledgeth the corruptions of other Churches with a purpose to coÌ„tinue in the like theÌ„selves which is your estate that Church maintaynes her corruptions by the sinns of other Churches And for the second poynt I do affirme that merely by vertue of a constitution there may be a true Church of God though abounding for the present in sinne and iniquity yet another assembly not rightly constituted or gathered into covenant with God no true Church though lesse impieties be to be found in it The Prophet Ieremy complaines that the iniquity of the daughter of his people namely Ierusalem was become greater then the sinn of Sodom and the Prophet Ezekiâ—l affirmes that Ierusalem was more corrupt by half then Sodom and Samaria And yet was Ierusalem the true Church of God which neyther Samaria nor Sodom were no nor yet any other place in the world where not halfe the wickednes was wrought that was to be found in the better of them This poynt I will further examplify by a symilitude A woman free and separated from all other men and ioyned in civill covenant to a man is his wyfe yea though shee prove very stubborn and disobedient yea and dishonest also till the bill of divorcement be given her but
by the Church The two places are Mat. 28. 19. 1 Cor. 10. 16. In the former the Lord Iesus sends his Apostles first to teach or make men disciples and then to baptise them including the children in the parents according to the covenant made with Abraham into which the gentiles were in their time to be gathered Rom. 11. 17. Ephe. 2. 1 2. 13. 14. 3. 6. But on the contrary the Lord Bishops in Engl. having found a readier way send out their parrish priests to baptise all before them that are borne in their parishes whether their parents be taught or vntaught the disciples of Christ or of antichrist and the Divil not passing by the children of recusant Papists others refusing all communion with them whose children they use to baptize by force against the will of their Parents as I could prove if need were by sundry instances And is not here an orderly constitution and a Church truely gathered by the sacrament of baptisme Now 1 Cor. 10. 16. the Apostle teacheth that the bread and wine in the supper are the communion of the body and blood of Christ that is effectuall pledges of our conjunction and incorporation with Christ and one with another and in the 17. vers that all which eat of one bread or one loaf are one mysticall body This place alone if Mr B. and his fellow ministers would seriously con-consider and set themselves faithfully to observe they would rather offer their owne bodies to be torn in peices by wilde beasts then the holy misteries of Christs body to be prophaned as they are And here as formerly I will help the Arguments raysed from the scriptures produced by Mr B. and some other of the same kinde into form thus The sacrament of baptisme is to be administred by Christs appointment and the Apostles example onely to such as are viz externally and so far as men can judge taught and made disciples Mat. 28. 19. do receive the word gladly Act. 2. 41. beleeve and so professe Ch. 8. 12. 13. 37. have received the holy Ghost Ch. 10. 47. and to their seed Act. 2. 39. 1 Cor. 7. 14. But baptisme in Engl. is ministred by a far larger commission then Christs though there be in the parents neyther appearance of faith nor holynes if in stead of them they can procure godfathers and godmothers to cary the children to the font yea will they nil they the parrish priest hath commission to make them Christian soules every mothers childe of them borne within his parrish precincts And therefore the baptism in Engl. is not Christs baptisme in the administration of it For the Lords supper the Apostle sayth 1 Cor. 10. 16. that the bread and wine sanctifyed to that purpose is the communion that is an effectuall symbole or pledge of that communion which the receivers have with Christ. Wherevpon I do turne the point of this scripture into the bowels of the Church of Engl. thus That which ioynes such men in communion with Christ as by his expresse word he excludes from all communion with him that is so far from being the true constitutiō of the Church as it shewes both an vnholy confusion in the Church and a violent prophanation of the ordinance by it But the supper as it is ministred in the Parish-assemblies as they were at the first still are clapt together ioynes them with Christ with whom he expresly disclaymes all communion fellowship as their practise compared with these scriptures doth make manifest to all men 2 Cor. 6. 14. 15. 1 Ioh. 1. 6. Ergo. So that baptisme and the Lords supper are amongst you Mr B. and in your hands handling but as the holy vessels of the temple in Babylon there togeither with the Lords people deteyned by frawd and violence Our 2. supposed errour is thus layd downe They hold our constitution a reall Idol and so vs Idolaters If the constitution of your Church be false and forged like the moneth which Ieroboam forged in his owne heart as hath been formerly proved in part and shal be more fully in the traversing of the 8. errour then it is an Idoll if an Idoll a reall Idol for it is not meerly mentall or notionall but that which hath being and existence without the mind or vnderstanding And where Mr B. affirms this to be contrary to the course of holy scriptures never taking Idol in this sense because neyther he nor Marlorat finds the word Idol so vsed he must know it is as impossible for eyther him or Marl. or any other man to enumerate or reckon vp all the Idols wherof the scriptures speak though not in expresse terms yet by iust cōsequence proportiō as to number all the creatures in heaven and in earth yea all the workes of mens hands yea all the thoughts of their harts for all these may and do in some abuse become Idols And that we may better discern whether there be a like truth and boldnes in this assertion that the scriptures never take idol in this sense let vs consider and compare together a few places The Lord commaunded Moses Exod. 25. 26. 27. to make the tabernacle and sanctuary of the Lord for the place of his dwelling and worship and to this end did appoint both the matter and form of the whol work even to the least pin if Moses had framed it eyther of other matter or of the same matter after an other fashion had not this forgery and devise for the worship of God been a reall sensible and palpable Idoll a sinn against the second Commaundement which forbids nothing but Idolatry It cannot be denyed Hence it followeth that the constitution or frame of the tabernacle or temple of the new testament which is the visible Church 2 Cor. 6. 16. if it be other eyther in matter or form as yours is in both is a reall and substantiall Idoll Secondly Antichristianism is Idolatry and is in that respect called Babylon Sodom and Egypt spiritually so Antichristians are sayd to worship the beast now a devised constitution frame and fabrick of the Church is a part of antichristianism of the apostasy of Antichrist therefore a reall Idol and as Mr Smyth truely affirmeth a greater Idoll then eyther the Antichristian ministery or worship As the temple which sanctifyeth the gold is greater then the gould the altar which sanctifyeth the offering greater then the offering so the temple of the new testament the Church or people of God by whose faith all the ordinances of the Church are sanctifyed is greater then the ministery worship or any other ordinance and so on the contrary being Idolatrous a greater Idoll then they And lastly the Church being the end of the ordinances Mar. 2. 27. 28. is more excellent then they being true and being false a more detestable Idoll then any of them Lastly neyther your bolstring out of a false constitution as a new
sin shal excuse you for not submitting vnto a true nor your prophane scoffing at a true constitution as at the Diana of the Ephesians discourage vs from reioycing in our portion It is with you in this case as it was sometimes with Rechum Shimshay who making a shew as though they would have built the temple Zerubbabel but not being the men to whom this work appertayned laboured afterwards to hinder discourage him the Iewes with him whom it did concerne Ezra 4. 1 2 3. 8. 9. Once you know Mr B. you did separate from the rest an hundred voluntary professors into covenant with the Lord sealed vp with the Lords supper to forsake all knowne sinn to hear no wicked or dumb Ministers and the like which covenant long since you have dissolved not shaming to affirme you did it onely in policy to keepe your people from Mr Smyth Well Mr B. be not deceived God is not mocked neither wil he hold them guiltlesse that so take his name in vayn but as you have sowen so shall you reap To conclude you would have no man blame you for your contumelyes against the planting of the Lords vineyard the building of Gods house the composition of Christs body the constitution of his Church And wherefore because Mr Robinson held as much before into separation And if it were so should myne iniquities excuse yours But it is most vntrue you affirme There never entred into my hart a thought nor passed a word out of my mouth so contumelious against the true orderly constitution of Christs Church though I have and that worthily disliked as I stil doe that hard rash censure passed by some vpoÌ„ the persons of such as of whoÌ„ the Lord by the evideÌ„t work of his spirit gives a better testimony And for the poynt in hand I am perswaded and so professe before all men that I see not by the revealed will of God in his word how to iudge otherwise of any ordinance of the Church or exercise of communion out of a true constituted Church then of the sacrifices out of the tabernacle or temple within whose circle they were concluded by the word of God The third errour is thus set down That such as are not of a particular constituted Church to wit such a one as theyrs is are no subiects of Christs kingdome And since our Church is a particular congregation separated from Antichristianism into covenant with God by voluntary submissioÌ„ vnto the gospel we do avow it for truth that such â—â— are not of a particular c. For since the visible Church is the visible or externall kingdome of Christ which he as mediator collecteth protecteth and administreth he that is not a member of the visible Church is not in this regard a subiect of Christs kingdome Neyther are your exceptions against this doctrine of any force The scripture you say in the first place never sets forth any of Gods people by this mark Yes that it doth and that oft tymes without any other mark How oft doth Moses and the other Prophets with him entreat the Lord to spare Israel when they sinned for their constitution that is for the covenant of his mercy into which he had admitted them with their forefathers Abraham Isaak and Iaakob The Lord protesteth Is. 1. that Israel did rebel against him that they did not vnderstand but were a most sinfid nation yea as Sodom Gomorrah and yet he calls them children his people v. 1. 2. 3. 4. 10. yea passing Sodom in iniquity and yet the daughter of his people daughter Zion Lam. 4. 6. 22. And what do these and infinite other the like places but coÌ„clude that where there was little or nothing els to be seen the Lord marked out his people by this that he had established them a people vnto himself by covenant which though they for their part had broken by their iniquities yet was for the present on his part vndissolved And where it is graunted by Mr B. that the godly ought to ioyn with the visible Church if possibly they can why doth he blame vs which intend no further If men truely desire it but cannot possibly accoÌ„plish it the Lord in this as in other cases accepts the will for the deed And so I answer your 3. ExceptioÌ„ in order touching the martyrs in Queen Maryes dayes and other godly persons there named that some of them were members of the true visible Church actually others actually separated from the false Church and in will which God accepteth ioyneth with the true Church others walking faithfully according to their knowledg whether living or dead are and were Gods people though in Babylon Your second exception is certayn scriptures to which you say this doctrine is contrary The first is Gal. 3. 7. 9. And how to this They that are of the faith of Abraham separate themselves by faith from the world into covenant with the Lord as AbrahaÌ„ did Gen. 12. 1. 2. 3. Heb. 11. â— To the 2. place which is 1 Ioh. 3. 14. I do answer that Iohn speaks of such as were of the true visible Church neyther can any other according to the true visibility manifestation of the love which the Lord requireth love his brother which is not of a true visible Church He that doth not admonish his brother if he offend after that order and in those degrees which the word prescribeth doth not love his brother Lev. 19. 17. But onely he that is of a true visible Church and that furnished with the power of Christ the keyes of the kingdome for the censures can admonish his brother in that order and those degrees which the word prescribeth Mat. 18. 15. 16. 17. And so this scripture Mr B. overthrowes both your opinion and standing The third scripture is 1 Cor. 1. 1. Paul wrytes there onely to visible Churches to the Church of Corinth primarily and so by proportion to all other visible Churches in the world for to them alone the censures sacraments prophesying and other matters there handled do appertayne 1 Cor. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. and 11. 20. and 14. 4. 5. The brother spoken of in the fourth and last place which is 2 Th. 3. 15. was a member of the visible Church and subiect of Christs kingdome though walking inordinately in his calling as appeareth v. 11. and therefore to be discountinanced and made ashamed by the Church that he might the more faythfully apply himselfe to his busines These scriptures then do none of them wash this mark from of Gods people but some of them if not all print it far more deeply vpon them Lastly you ask whither Christs kingdome be not spirituall and invisible also Iob 18. 33. and 10. 16. No man will deny it though the places you alledge do not so necessary prove it But as Christs kingdome is spirituall and invisible also so is it spirituall and visible
also The man which hath receaved the spirit is spirituall and not the soule onely So externall things may be spirituall are in their relatoÌ„ vse and you erre if you think otherwise The word sacraments other ordinaÌ„ces of the Church are spiritual yea all the sacrifices of the faithfull are spirituall more specially as the Lord Iesus is the Preist both of the soul body hath payed a price for both so is he also the King both of soule body and swayes the scepter of his kingdome not onely internally by his spirit in the soule but externally and visibly also by this word in the outward man guyding the same by his lawfull officers depuâ—ed there vnto But what is the cause why Mr B. should move this question Is it not for that himselfe and his Church not having Christ to rule over them by his lawes but other kings and Lords by theyr canoÌ„s he would insinuate that Christ exerciseth none external regiment over his Church nor is the King over the bodyes of his subiects at all thus rather labouring to abolish that part of Christs KingdoÌ„ then to submit to it But as our principall care at all times must be to have the throne of our L. Iesus erected in our harts that he may reigne there so that we may give him his owne entyre that which he hath so dearly bought we must rank our bodyes also vnder the regiment he hath established for the well ordering preservation of his kingdom forever both in soule body not like Nichodemites or Familists presume to submit the outward man we care not to whome or what Our fourth supposed error is That all not in theyr way are without and they do apply against vs 1 Cor. 5. 12. Ephe. 2 12. And since the way is one as Christ is one and we assured that our way is that way of Christ we doubt not to affirme that all not in our way are without in the present respect provided alwayes that we do iudge that other Churches may be and are in our way and we in theirs and both they and we in Christs though there be betwixt them vs sundry differences both in iudgment and practise And that we doe fitly apply against you the scriptures above named I do thus manifest The Apostle 1 Cor. 5. reproves the Church for tolerating amongst them the incestuous person vncensured charging them to vse the power of the Lord Iesus given vnto them for that purpose and that as vpon him for the present so vpon other notorious offenders at other times Now least they should mistake his meaning he shewes how far this his advertisement extends viz to such offenders as were in the Church and to all and onely them And this limitation of the power of Christ to the proper obiect he sets downe in this 12. verse affirmatively to them that are within and negatively to them that are without From this place then I do thus reason They that are within are subiect to the power of excoÌ„munication by the Church gathered together in the name of Christ they without not But you Mr B. and so of the rest are not subiect to the judgement of the Church thus gathered together but to the Archbishop of York Who is not the Church of Workxsop Therefore you are not within but without in the Apostles meaning The second place we apply against you is Ephe. 2. 12. whence I reason thus They that are aliants and straungers from the common wealth of Israel are without But such are you and your whole parrish Ergo. The first Proposition is the Apostles words for to be without Christ as there he speakes and to be a stranger from the coÌ„mon wealth of Israel is all one The second Proposition is thus confirmed The coÌ„mon wealth of Israel was a religious policy consisting of a peculiar people of whom every one was by the word of God separated into the covenant of his mercy Deut. 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. Neh. 10. 1. 28. 29. But to affirme that every person in the Church of England or in any parish Church is admitted by the Lord into the new covenant or testament is both against the expresse word of God Heb. 8. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. and his owne conscience I am perswaded that affirmed it And thus so long as you keep your standing you must be content to stand without in the meaning of the Apostle in the places forenamed neither can you wrythe in your self or corrupt these places to get in by them though you give sundry attempts as 1. These places are ment of such as never made so much as an outward profession of Christ at all What better are men for professing God in word when in deed they deny him They are never a whit the lesse but the more abhominable Tit. 1. 16. And might not any Papist or other heretik make this exception For they make a kind of profession of Christ Iesus And when you Mr B. in your pulpit thunder the iudgments of God out of the Prophets and Apostles against Atheists Papists blasphemers proud and cruell persequuters might not a man serve you as you do us and tel you that the most of the threatnings you denounce were directed against the Heathen which did not so much as make an outward profession of Christ. Lastly the H. Ghost terming Antichristianisme Babylon Sodom Egypt spiritually teacheth vs to apply against it spiritually what the Prophets have civily spoken against them 2. They cannot prove vs without by the scripture expounding this phrase without by the scriptures laying a side the forgeryes of theyr own braynes The cause is playn that whosoever iâ— not a free deniâ—en of the coÌ„mon wealth of Israell and vnder the iudgment of the Church is without and there must stand by Gods appoyntment And that this is your estate is as playne And both these we have proved by the scriptures without forgeryes of our owne brayne all the brayns you have will fynd no forgeryes in our proofes 3 God almighty hath witnessed that we are his people 1 By giving vs his word Psal. 14. 7. 19. 20. and sacraments This scripture proves that God gave his word to Iaakob statutes to Israel but prove your selves the Israel of God shew vs from the word of God the charter of your corporatioÌ„ that your Nationall Provintiall Diocesan and Parochial Churches are that new Ierusalem and your inhabitants the right Citzens of that City enfranchised with her heavenly libertyes and answer the proofs brought to the contrary otherwise though you be never so shameles a begger of the question in hand we may not graunt it you 2 By Gods effectuall working by his word Ier. 23. 22. therefore heard â—â— the voyce of the sonne of God Ioh. 5. 25. and the words of eternal life God forbid I should deny eyther the truthes of Christ you have a
wheat be plucked vp with theÌ„ as though the Lord would have the persons of men respected in judgement yea verily there is more need to look to them in such cases then to any private meÌ„bers whomsoever as whose sinns are more displeasing vnto God more scandalous to them without more pernitious to the Church then of any others Some again wil have this prohibitioÌ„ onely to take place when the multitude of the offenders is so great as that they cannot be censured without danger of schisme and distraction as though the multitude of offenders should priveledge the offence and as though the Lord Iesus by his power given to his Church 1 Cor. 5. 4. should fear to meddle with them for their multitude and might as David feared to meddle with the sonnes of Zeruiah because they were too hard for him The Apostle sayth speaking of the incestious man that little leaven leaveneth the whole lump how much more a great deal which makes all more sower And for answer to both it is apparant the Lord here forbidds the rooting out of any tares whither fewer or more in number whither of high or low growth Let men then cease to draw in by the hayr of the head these parables for the tolerating of the wicked in the Church an intollerable wickednes as most prejudicial to the name of God which is by this meanes blasphemed to the partyes salvation who by this connivency is hardned in his sinne where by due censuring he should be humbled to the health and safety of the body which is hereby corrupted and defyled and to the conversion of them without who by the holy converversation of the Church should be provoked to the love of the truth These things being thus cleared I come in the next place to the true and naturall exposition which I doubt not these scriptures will well bear I do then find two interpretations eyther of both I am assured more agreable to the truth then this forced glosse by me coÌ„futed and neyther of them conteyning in it any thing which the words of the Parable will not beare or which is dissonant to the analogy of faith or any other scripture First admit the feyld be the Church which Christ expounds the world then say I by tares in the feild are meant not notorious offenders but hypocrites not so throughly discovered which by the envy of Satan are foysted into the Church It wil be sayd that tares are easily discerned froÌ„ wheat I answer not alwayes so though oakes may as one of your owne hath spoken upon this scripture and it is certainly reported by such as have travayled Iury those parts to which the Lord hath reference that the weeds we call tares are there very hardly discerned from the true wheat If it be further pressed that the tares are espied I do further answer that it is in parables both curiosity and danger to labour to make all partes meet in every particular and since this particular of spying the tares is omitted by Christ in the exposition wee may well be modest in it But let it be that the tares are seen as the words are the question is who those servants are espying them and so desiring to have them rooted out These servants may well be some speciall persons in the Church endued with a singular spirit of watchfulnes and discerning by which they do discover in some persons this tarish disposition vnder the â—ayl of holynes so Paul spied out that bitter root of envy and pride by which some were set a work to preach Christ such persons notwithstanding must be born till their sinnes be ripe and the Lord lead them forth amongst the workers of iniquity Or by the servants may be here meant the Angels who by conversing much with the Ch both can without doubt do through the subtilty of their nature long experience spy out in the Church much cloked wickednes impiety which as the zealous ministers of Gods justice they are ready to revenge But since the Lord Iesus who best knew his owne meaning calls the feild the world and makes the harvest which is the end of the field the end of the world and not of the Church why should we admit of any other interpretation Neyther is it like that Christ would in the expounding of one parable speak an other as he should have done if calling the feyld the world he had meant the Church As God then in the beginning made man good placed him in the field of the world there to grow where by the envy of the serpent he was soon corrupted so ever since hath the seed of the serpent stirred vp by their father the Divel snarled at the heel of the womans seed and like noysome tares vexed and pestered the good and holy seed which though the children of God both see and feel to their payne yet must they not therefore forgetting what spirit they are of presently call for fyre from heaven nor prevent the Lords hand but wayt his leasure eyther for the converting of these tares into wheat which in many is dayly seen and theÌ„ how great pitty had it been they should so vntimely have been plucked vp or for their finall perdition in the day of the Lord when the Church shal be no more offended by them And that the Lord Iesus no way speaks of the toleration of prophane persons in the 〈…〉 Church doth appear by these reasons First because as hath been observed he doth not contradict himself by forbidding the vse of the keyes in one place which in an other he hath turned vpoÌ„ impenitent offenders Mat. 18. 15. 16. 17. 2. In the excommunication of sinners apparantly obstinate with due circumspection and in the spirit of wisdome meeknes long suffring with such other generall Christian vertues as with which all our speciall sacrifices ought to be seasoned whaâ— daunger can there be of any such disorder as the plucking vp of the wheat with the tares which the husbandman feareth vers 29. Lastly the Lord Iesus speaks of the vtter ruinating destruction of the tares the gathering and plucking them vp by the rootes vers 28. 29. and to this end they are reserved by the husbandman v. 30. ever presupposed they so continued but excommunication rightly administred is not for the ruyne and destruction of any but for the salvation of the party thereby humbled 1 Cor. 5. 5. But to conclude admit of Mr B. exposition that the field here is the visible Church the good seed the good godly the tares wicked and vngodly persons I am contented that the difference in this place betwixt him and me be tryed at the tribunall of this very scripture even thus expounded and I doubt not but it will pronounce a cleare sentence on my side in the thing for which I contend and that is that the Church in the right gathering
Church and exercise of the communion are they therefore alone to do al things They if there be any of them in the Church are to govern in every election and choyce of ensuing Officers are they therefore alone to chuse excluding the Church They are to govern in preaching prophesying and hearing the word and receiving the sacraments singing of Psalmes distributing vnto the necessities of the sayncts are they therefore alone to prophesie to sing Psalmes to contribute to the poor the rest with as little reason can it be affirmed that they alone are to have cōmunion in the censures to admonish judge because they are to govern in the carying administring of those matters These things thus cleared it wil be very convenient for the purpose in hand and wil give much furtherance to the truth in a few words to consider of the nature of Ecclesiastical government and governours which whilst politik men through either ignorance or contempt of the gospels simplicitie do neglect they labour to transform the Church into a wordly kingdome and to set over it a kinde of kingly and lordly government and such scriptures as give libertie and power unto kings and other civile officers over their subjects and people for the making and altering of lawes and for the passing and ordering of judgements these they pervert and misapply to Church governours and government then which nothing is more monstrous Math. 20. 25. 26. 27. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 3. I. For first civil officers are are called in the word of God Princes Heads Captaines Iudges Magistrates Nobles Lords Kinges them in authority principalities powers yea in their respect Gods and according to their names so are their offices but on the contrarie Ecclesiasticall officers are not capable of these or the like titles which can neyther be given without flatterie unto them nor received by them without arrogancy neyther is their office an office of Lordship Sovereigntie or Authoritie but of Labour and Service and so they the Labourers and Servants of the Church as of God 2. Magistrates may publish execute their owne lawes in their own names Ezra 1. 1. 2. c. Est. 8. 8. Math. 20. 25. But Ministers are onely interpreters of the lawes of God and must look for no further respect at the hands of any to the things they speak then as they manifest the same to be the commaundements of the Lord. 1 Cor. 14. 37. 3. Civill administrations and their formes of goverment may be and oft tymes are altered for the avoyding of inconveniences according to the circumstances of tyme place and persons Ex. 1◠13. 14. 15. 16. 17. c. But the Church is a kingdome which cannot be shaken Heb. 12. 28. wherein may be no innovation in office or forme of administration from that which Christ hath left for any inconveniency whatsoever 4 Civill Magistrates have authority by their offices to judge offēders vpon whom they may also exequute bodily vengeance vsing their people as their servants and ministers for the same purpose but in the Ch the officers are the ministers of the people whose service the people is to vse for the administring and executing of their judgemēts that is for the pronouncing of the judgments of the Church of God first against the obstinate which is the vtmost execution the Church can perform And what difference can be greater In the cōmon wealth the people fewer or more yea somtimes whol armies the ministers of the officers in the Church the officers the ministers of the people 5. In civill government obedience must be performed for the authority and will of the commaunder who is Lord over the bodyes and goods of his subjects Mat. 20. 25. 26. 1 Pet. 5. 3. yea though his commaundements being with them bodily domage yea be they never so vnjust vnholy yet must obedience be given in meek and pacient sufferance though not in active performance ◠Pet. 2. 13. 14. 3. 14. 15. 16. but in Church matters not so The officers may neyther exact obedience nor the people perform it further then the goodnes profit and aedification of and by the thing commaunded doth enforce 1 Cor. 14. 26. Gal. 1. ◠Col. 2. 16. 1◠And the reason is because civil Magistrates have authority annexed to their office and order and though both they and their commaundements be most vnjust yet do they still reteyn their authority which their subjects may not shake of but ministers and Church governers have no such authority tyed to their office but merely to the word of God And as the peoples obedience stands not in making the Elders their Lords Soveraignes Iudges but in listening to their godly counsels in following theyr wise directions in receiving their holy instructions exhortations consolations and admonitions and in vsing their faithful service and ministery so neyther stands the Elders govermēt in erecting any tribunall seat or throne of judgement over the people but in exhorting instructing comforting improving them by the word of God 1 Tim. 3. 16. in affoarding the Lord and them their best service But here it wil be demaunded of me if the Elders be not set over the Church for her guidance and government Yes certaynly as the physition is set over the body for his skill and faithfulnes to minister vnto it to whom the pacient yea though his Lord or Maister is to submit the lawyer over his cause to attend vnto it the steward over his family even his wife and children to make provision for them yea the wachmen over the whole city for the safe keeping thereof Such and none other is the Elders or Bishops government Now to conclude this point All the scriptures which Mr B. brings as the reader may see serves to prove that the governers of the Church must be in and of the Church they govern but the governers of the Church of Worxsop are not of it neyther would Mr B. I dare say be well pleased they should But where it is further affirmed that during all the Apostles dayes the body of the congregation attempted nothing of themselves but that alwayes Church matters were begun governed and composed by the Apostle◠as it made nothing against our matter though it were even so as is sayd since w◠hold that where there are officers in the Churches those faithfull in all things as th' Apostles were there things are not to be attempted without them so is it not true which is affirmed neyther do the scriptures alledged prove any such thing The three first places Act. 1. 15. 23. 24. 25. and 6. 3. 6. and 14. 19. 20. 23. do onely prove that the Apostles being general men officers of all Churches did when they were present with the Churches govern and assist them faythfully in all things which we also affirm to be the duty of al Elders in their particular charges whom the people are accordingly to obey More particularly The two
former places speak of the Church at Ierusalem where some of the Apostles were ever present what marveil then if the congregation attempted nothing without them But touching the last scripture which speakes of the Churches of and amongst the Gentiles and of the ordination of Elders there Act. 14. 23. the case is otherwise Of these Churches some were converted to the Lord by the Apostles and other by private brethren scattered thither there publishing the Gospel Act. 8. 12. 10. 36-44 47. 48. 11. 19. 20. 21. 23. 13. 2. 12. 48. 14. 1. 2. that some certaine yeares before any ordination of Elders amongst them And can it be conceived with any reason that all this long space during the Apostles absence these Churches never assembled together for their edification and comfort in prayer prophesying and other ordinances were there no other coÌ„verted al the while which desyred to be admitted into their fellowship or had they no use of excommunication for the preserving pure of their communion for sundry yeares But to let passe these more generall things and to come to the speciall busines mentioned Act. 14 23. The same rules which were after left in writing to Timothy and Titus for the choyce of Bishops or Elders were then in use amongst the Churches amongst other qualifications it was required of them that they should be apt to teach able to convince as also to manage the publique affaires of the Churches which were to depend on them whither in cases of controversie or otherwise and such they both then were and now are by good tryal and experience to be known to be and those also no young plants for such fruits And as it did most specially concern the brethren to know certainly by good experience that those officers were so qualified whom they were to set over them and unto whom they were to coÌ„mit their soules to be fed unto life eternal so could they onely take sufficient tryall of them their gifts and faythfulnes for the publique ministery by due experience The Apostles came but occasionally to visit the Churches and to comfort them making in many very small or no continuance and fynding fit men for officers in the Churches where they came and the same known testified and commended to be such by the peoples election they ordeyned Bishops or Elders over them and so departed Act. 14. 21. 22. 23. And what reason can be given why the Apostles did not at the first planting of the Churches but so long a space after ordeyn officers as also that Paul did not perform that busines himself in Creta but left Titus the Evangelist for that purpose Tit. 1. 5. save onely that men of gifts might be trayned vp in prayer prophecying and carrying of such other Church affaires as fell out and so due tryall made of theyr gifts good knowledg taken of their faythfulnes in and by the Churches whereof they were and over which they were to be set being found fit for that service Now the fourth scripture which is 1 Cor. 5. doth directly oppose that for which it is brought It was the Churches fault not to have purged out that sower leven the incestuous person before they eyther heard from Paul or he of that evill amongst them and for theyr negligence herein the Apostle reproveth them as all men see that are not willingly blynd And for Paul he in generall as a penman of the Holy Ghost wrote scriptures for the direction of the Corinthians and all other Churches to the worldes end and in speciall as a chief Officer of that Church by determining for himself discharged his owne duety but did neyther begin govern nor compose the action being at Philippi or rather at Ephesus for the present from whence he writ the Epistle to the Church vnto which he commended the busines in hand both for the beginning and ending of it But what of all these and many other the like scriptures to be alledged because the Churches are in all things to be guided by theyr officers ministring faythfully and according to the word of God and theyr duety that therefore if eyther there be no officers or if they be absent or fayl in their duety the Church may do nothing eyther for information or reformation The scriptures record that after Stevens death all the Church aâ— Ierusalem was dispersed save the Apostles and that they which were dispersed went to and fro preaching the word the effect of whose preaching amongst the Gentiles was the fayth and conversion of a great number vnto the Lord. Here were not onely Church matters but even Churches begun preaching to and fro turning and ioyning of multitudes to the Lord that where neyther Apostles noâ— other officers were present for this is too grosse to affirm that during al the Apostles dayes nothing was begun but by them And what if the Lord should now rayse vp a company of faythfull men and women in Barbary or America by the reading of the scriptures or by the wrytings conferences or sufferings of some godly men must they not separate themselves from the filthines of the heathen to the Lord nor turn from Idols to the true God nor ioyne themselves vnto him in the fellowship of the gospell nor have any communion together for theyr mutuall aedification and comfort till some vagrant Preist from Rome or England be sent vnto them to begin theyr Church matters with his service book And yet this would not serve the turne neyther for he would be vnto them a barbarian and they barbarians vnto him 1 Cor. 14. 11. Some yeares must be spent or ech could vnderstand others language Nay if this were a true ground that Church matters might not be begun without officers it were impossible that such a people should ever eyther enioy officers or become a Church yea I may safely ad that ever there should be in the world after the vniversal visible apostacy of Antichrist any true eyther Church or officers and so we must hold with the Arians that except ther should come new Apostles to gather the Churches and so a new Christ to call those Apostles that there can be to the worlds end neyther true Churches nor true officers The reason is because * no man takes this honour vnto himself but he that is called of God aâ— Aaron Now God calls no man ordinarily but by the Ch for I suppose you will not deny but that the choyce of officers is a Ch matter not a matter of the world And the Church must chuse none but such as of whose knowledge zeale and vtterance they have taken tryall by the exercise of his guifâ—s as you truely affirme els where in this book and you will not say but this exercise of his guiftâ— after this manner and for this end is a Church matter Whence it followeth that both Church matters yea and Churches also may and in cases must
cheiftayns onely in the power of Christ as the Apostles successours excluding himselfe and the rest of his rank that he may advance the throne of Antichrist in his cheife ministers the Lord Archbishops Bishops whose chayre he thus stoutly laboures to vphold with both shoulders Secondly I deny that eyther the Evangelists such as were Timothy and Titus succeeded the Apostles in their office or that any other ministers in the Church did or do succeed eyther the Apostles or Evangelists as they were such as we speak They were extraordinary officers in the first plaÌ„ting of the faith amongst the gentiles theyr qualifications extraordinary and miraculous as the gift of tongues and the like and so theyr offices were determined in theyr persons And yet I deny not but the true Ministers of the gospell the Bishops or Elders in theyr particular Churches do succeed the Apostles though not in office yet in theyr ordinary ministration of the word sacraments censures prayer ordination all other ordinances of the Church whatsoever according to the order Christ hath left but that the Apostles and Evangelists have by any order committed theyr power or any part of it to any such Cheif Ministers or rather Lords yea spiritual tyraÌ„ts as the Lordbishops Archbishops in Engl. are that I deny withall my power There are no such cheifteyns in the Church of Christ or communion of saynts The Apostles did by the Churches free choyce ordeyn in every particular assembly a company of Elders or Bishops whome they charged with the particular flockes in and to which they were to minister the holy things of God and none other Act. 14. 23. and 20. 17. 28. 1 Tim. 3. 1. 2. 4. Tit. 1. 5. 1 Pet. 5. â— 2. Much lesse are the great Antichrists of Rome the Popes and Cardinalles the Apostles and Evangelists successours in any right by the word of God or capable in that theyr estate of Apostolicall or other ministeriall power of Christ as you Mr B. will make them of which your Popish errour more in place Now for the scriptures cited they serve well to prove that which no man denyes in which kynd of disputing Mr B. hath a speciall faculty The scriptures are 1 Tim. 1. 3. and 3. 14. 15. and 5. 21. 22. Tit. â— 5. which places prove thus much in effect that Timothy was to see false doctrine suppressed in Ephesus that men gifted according to the word of God should be choseÌ„ into the office of Bishops and Deacons that he should deale vnpartially in all things that he should not partake in the sinns of other men by laying hands suddaynly vpon any that Titus was left in Crete to redresse things amisse and to ordayne Elders in the Churches And what followes vpon this I know well what Mr B. infers namely that the cheif Ministers alone in the Churches whether pure or impure by which latter he meanes the Church of Rome as he expounds himself pag. 145. that is that Popes Cardinalls Archbishops Bishops Suffraganes Chauncelours and the rest of the triumphant Clergy and they alone should medle with supressing errour rectifying things amisse calling and ordayning ministers and that all others are absolutely inhibited any medling with these things Well to let passe your fearefull retyring Mr B. into the battered bulwarks of the Papists for succour and the discharging of your selfe and all the inferiour ministery that these cheif ministers might reigne alone the scriptures do not debarâ—e the members of the Church from medling in those things in their place and order nor impropriate them to the cheife Lords as is pretended onely they declare that the officers are to do theyr own duetyes in those businesses and to put the brethren in remembrance of theyrs to commaund teach and speak those things exhorting rebuking with all authority by the word of God as occasion serves 1 Tim. 4. 6. 11. Tit. 2. 15. And if Mr B. will conclude any thing for his purpose by the scriptures he alledgeth he must take this position for graunted that whatsoever Paul wrytes to Timothy or Titus touching the Church about that onely they theyr successours the cheif ministers are to medle which presumpteous affirmation is sufficiently refuted by the very recitall of it He that reads over the Epistles but with a pece of an ey may see the contrary There is no greater force in this collection then in that Mar. 13. 34. bycause the porter is to watch therefore he alone and not the rest also which is coÌ„trary to the expresse words immediatly following where all are coÌ„maunded to watch v. 37. And thus the conclusion which Mr B. would make that the place 1 Cor. 5. though generally spoken must be vnderstood of the cheife officers of the Church is without prâ—mises It must be vnderstood as it is spoken though both he the Pope say nay to it and of the meaning of it we shall speak hereafter at large when we come to handle the censures of the Church as also of your pretended proof 2 Cor. 2. 6. Onely I must needs take knowledge of that part of the truth which Mr B. being set vpon the rack of his conscience in reading this 1 Cor. 5. is compelled to confesse and that is that from v. 5. â—â— may be gathered for the body of the Church that the offender must be delivered to Satan with their knowledge publiquely when they meet together in the open assembly Towching which his graunt I observe these three particulars First it overthrowes the practise in the Church of England where the offender is excommunicated by the Chauncelour or Officiall it may be fourty miles off from the body of the congregation whereof he is a member and that most what without the presence of any one of the body yea or their privity eyther till such tymes as eyther the Parish Preist or Church dore signify the matter vnto them 2. If the officers must judge and excommunicate in the open assembly then can they alone in no sense be the Church For the Church is nothing but the assembly And it is all one to say the officers in the assembly are the Church as to say the officers in the assembly are the assembly which is a senseles affirmation And if the Officers alone be the Church to which complaint is to be made and which is to reprove the offender and judge him they must do it in a distinct assembly from the body and not in the assembly compounded necessarily of the officers and the body as your Courtkeepers doe in their Consistories the Elders in the reformed Churches in their private Chambers 3. It is most vntrue which you say that no more can be gathered from this place but that excommunication was performed in the presence of the body of the Church and with their knowledge being gathered together it is apparent that they which were gathered together were by the power of Christ to deliver to Satan the offender to purge out the
old leven to iudge and to put out from among themselves that wicked fornicatour v. 5. 6. 7. 12. 13. of which more hereafter And so I come to the 4. Reason against Popularity as you term â—t but in truth against Christian liberty which is grounded vpoÌ„ Ephe. 4. 11. 12. Your words are these It is most apparant that Christ ascending vp gave gifts for preaching administration of sacraments and government vnto some sorts of men who 〈…〉 e set out there and plainly distinguished from the other saynts the body of the Church Against this hitherto I take no great exceptioÌ„ though the Apostles meaning may be better layd down thus that Christ Iesus the King and Lord of his Church hath set in it certaine sorts and orders of officers rightly fitted and furnished with graces for the reparation of the saynts and aedification of his body to the worlds end This we affirme as lowd as you and with more comfort And therfore after I have observed in a few wordes how little this scripture serves for your present purpose I will in as few more make it appeare how directly it serves against you in many other mayn matters and that you in bringing it have onely lighted a candle whereby to discover your own nakednes This then is that which you would conclude that bycause Christ hath given power and charge to the sorts of ministers here set downe for the reparation of the saynts and aedification of the body that therefore no brethren out of office may medle with the reparation and aedification of the Saynts or Church I do acknowledge that onely Apostles Prophets c. by office and as works of their Ministery are to look to the reparation and aedification of the body but that the brethren out of office are discharged of those duâ—ties I deny any more then the rest of the servants were of watching though out of office bycause the Porter alone was by office to watch Mark 13. 34 37. Yea look what is layd vpon the officers in this place after a more speciall manner by vertue of their office that also is layd vpon the rest of the brethren els where in the same words to be performed in their places as a duty of love for which they have not onely liberty but charge from the Lord. The officers are here charged with the reparation or knitting together of the saynts the same duty in the same words is imposed vpon every brother spirituall and I hope you the Ministers will not be the onely spirituall men in the Church Secondly the officers are here given to aedifie the body the same duety in the same termes is layd vpon every one of the brethren in their places 1 Thes. 5. 11. and vnto these few might be added an hundred places of the same nature Why then should the Ministers of the Lord or any other for their sake envy vnto the Lords people eyther their graces or liberty or thus arrogate all vnto theÌ„selves as though all knowledge were treasured vp in their breasts all power given into their handes as though no drop of grace for aedificatioÌ„ or comfort of the Church could fall from els where then from their lips Moses in the place of numbers before named wisht that all the Lords people were Prophets and that the Lord would put his spirit vpon them and Paul gives liberty to the whol Church and to all in it women excepted ver 34. to prophesie one by one for the instruction edification and comfort of all but with Mr B and his Church I perceive neyther Moses prayer nor Pauls graunt nor Gods spirit must be avayleable or find acceptance for aedification by any save the Ministers The subjects of Kings vse to complayn much of Monopolyes but the subjects of the Lord Iesus have greater cause of complaint that he himself his power presence and graces wherewith he honoureth all his saynts are thus monopolized and ingrossed The similitude which here you borrow froÌ„ the body of man wherein you say the special members have their speciall vertues in themselves given of God and not bestowed vpon them by the body as the eyes to see the tongue to speak c. for the confirmation of the power of the Lord Iesus or liberty to teach admonish and censure in the hands of the officers alone is faulty in both parts of it and conteynes in it sundry errours both theologicall and phylosophicall And first I do here most justly except against your shuffling together and confounding of the personall gifts graces and vertues of the Ministers and their ministeriall power or office The first in deed they have from Christ and not from or by the Church at all as their knowledge zeale vtterance wisdome holynes and the like with which the Church findes them furnished so appoints them vnder Christ to vse these gifts in office of Ministery whereof out of office they have erst given knowledge this power or appointment which they have from or by the Church thus to vsâ— these gifts is another thing then their personall gifts and qualifications themselves which you Mr B. do very fraudulently confound Secondly it is ignorantly affirmed that God enduâ—s certayn members of the body with speciall vertues and properties as thâ—â—y with seing and the like that they have thes properties not from the body but from God For first the very vertue or faculty of seing is not in the ey but in the soul which vseth the ey onely for the instrument of seing so other parts in their kind Oculus non videâ— sed anima per oculiâ—â— And that not immediately neyther but with the help of the spirits naturall vitall and animall diffused throughout the body which the soul vseth most immediately as the instruments of all life sense motion And so it comes to passe not onely in death where the soul and body are separated but in sundry diseases also of the body that the ey fayleth in seeing and so other members in their service Thirdly as the Elders of the Church I confesse may be compared to eyes in the body and the Deacons to hands in a respect so I deny the similitude to hold absolutely Similitudes as they say do not run vpon four feet to streyn them above that which is intended by the holy Ghost in vsing them is a course full both of vanity and errour The Deacons are the handes of the Church for the distribution of her bodily things to them that need yet I trow you would not have the Church suffer the poore to starve where the Deacons are wanting to minister or fayling in their ministration so are the Elders the eyes mouth of the Church for her government and ministration of spirituall things yet must not the Church perish spiritually for their want or negligence no the Lord is more mercifull to his people then so and doth nor ty them so short in
tvvo former orders vvhich are Apostles and Prophets are ceased as being temporary how can there be superioritie in the third which is but one Your third and fourth Argument you draw from the superioritie ordayned by God in the old testament amongst ecclesiasticall persons and the consequence of this Argument you prove two wayes first bycause this order is not forbidden in the new testament 2. bycause the ground of superiority is alike in the new testament as in the old which is to preserve order But do you not consider Mr Bernard that the old testament or law is abrogated and disanulled as having the shadow of good things to come and so every order and ordinance in it which is not plainly renued by Christ in the new And where you seem to make the Chief Priests besides the high Preist a superiour order to the other formally differing it is more if I be not deceived then can be proved by the word of God I know no diversity of administrations amongst them but that any of the Priests might in their course and order offer sacrifice performe other the most solemne duties of preisthood But where you further adde that onely the high Priest did type out Christ and not the other Preists so you are much mistaken The whole preisthood of Aaron vnder which the law was established was a type of Christs Preisthood though the high Preists in a speciall manner and their sacrifices of his and being a part of the law which was a shadow or first draught whereof the gospel is the lively portrature it must needs be ceremoniall and so a type to affirm otherwise is a grosse Iewish errour Lastly as I graunt one end of the subordination of Ministeries to have been the preserving of order so I deny that same order is to be preserved in the nevv testament and in the old The order of the old testament was the order of a nationall Church but the order of the new testament is the order of a particular Church wherein there needs no such subordination of Ministeries as in the other which was nationall the ey of common sense sees this difference The law of nature whether written in the hart of man or to be seen in the workmanship of the world from which you draw your fift Argument doth not prove superioritie amongst officers in a particular assembly but onely that there must be government in all societies which may well be though the governours be of one order and rank Lastly they against whom you deale doe mainteyne as you say an inequality in their government in making the Pastor superiour to the Teacher c. and if they do so why deal you against them and why do you labour so carefully to prove against them their own practise to be lawful though if they had not better warrāt then you bring they were ill bestead But this is the point Mr B. which you never touch do they which hold two kindes of officers teaching and governing Elders or they which hold three orders Pastors Teachers and governing Elders eyther of them both hold such a superioritie as gives the superiour jurisdiction over the inferiour Ministers do they make a Bishop of Bishops or a sheepheard over a flock of sheepheards or do they set vp any such ravenous creature as devours the liberty and power both of the people and other officers as your Bishops do even as the leane and evill favoured kyne which Ioseph saw in his dreame ate vp the fat kyne and welfavoured And for the erroneous exposition of Luke Luk. 22. 25. 26. by D. Downame and D. Dove of which you boast it hath been confuted both before and since they gave it Now howsoever I purpose not the refutation of every particular in Mr B. second volume which he might have drawen into as few lynes well nigh as he hath done leaves had he not rather desired to have vttered many words then many things yet seing how he labours even till sweating to trouble the mindes of his young students and seely countrymen especially about the government discipline of the Church not caring how absurd expositions of scriptures he admits of nor how contrary one vnto an other so he may weaken the faith of any that way I will not therefore altogether hold off myne hand but will open as I goe his vnsound dealing in this case especially about Mat. 18. 15. 16. 17. which he will no way have meant of the piscipline or censures of the Church the order of proceeding therein but that Christs meaning there is to direct the Iewes how to prosecute their suits in matter of injury before the heathenish Magistrates And this he labours p. 218. 219. and so on to prove by many obiections answers yet as borrowed from other mens books so put out as other mens sayings that by this meanes he himself may avoyd some part of that iust hatred by the better sort of people which he knowes will ly vpon this odious and vngodly glosse First then Mr Bernard graunts pag. 212. that Christ hath left a government in his Church and so consequently an order for the censuring of offenders and he accounts the contrary opinion but a familisticall conceipt and yet this truth he cannot let passe without some vntruth at the end of it and therefore he addes that to this familisticall conceipt the seely Brownists are drawn by force of their own grounds which are because they will have all in the Church to be voluntary professours where voluntarynes is taken away by being vnder any government to be subiect ruled is an estate far frō freedome Christians loose thereby Christian liberty c. And say in good sooth Mr B. would you haue men vnvoluntary professours against their wills their profession must eyther be voluntary with their wills or vnvoluntary and against them Noah prophesying the calling of the Gentiles of Iaphets line foretells that God will allure or perswade them to dwell in Shems tents And the scriptures do expressely affirme that the Churches were gathered by perswasion voluntary submission vnto the gospel And it is a strange thing even above wonder that any man should have preached so many yeares and written so many books about religion and yet not know that the nature of religion is not to be constreyned but perswaded And tell me Mr B. did you subscribe the last tyme vnto your Bishops government sponte ex animo according to the Canon yea or no Of if you think that to curious a quaestion answer me whether you be vnder the Kings goverment voluntarily or against your will If against your will it is a treacherous disposition in you if voluntarily or willingly how seelely then do you which are thus rife in imputing seelines vnto others argue that voluntarines is taken away by being vnder any government as though all government were tyranny and all obedience slaverie but reason why Mr
Prophet must first haue his hand vpon him whom the rest of the people must follow in putting him to death The last words Publican and Heathen do not declare that Christ speakes of the Iewes at that time eyther onely or civily but serve for other purposes as I shall presently manifest taking Arguments from these words as from all the rest to prove that Christ here speakes of sinne and of excommunication for sinne My first Reason I draw from the cohaerence wherein I have formerly manifested Christ speakes not of private injuries onely but of all such scandalles as are to be found in that streyt way to heaveÌ„ no nor of injuries at all as they hurt the outward man but as they are sinnes and hurt and hinder the soul in the way of godlynes and so by the consequence of cohaerence if Christs words hang one vpon an other he speaks v. 15. 16. 17. of sinne and the carying of it 2. I reason from the terme brother which since it apperteyned at this tyme froÌ„ the disciples to many which might not be brought before the Iewish Synedrion as to the beleeving Romaynes Samaritans and the like cannot be meant as is pretended but speaks of a religious fellowship to which any brother may be brought of what country or condition soever As the word haâ—artáno turned offend is of generall signification by your own graunt and so cannot be restreyned to that particular kind of offence so is it most properly vsed for sinne and that vsually by this Evangelist Mat. 3. 6. 9. 2. 12. 31. and 26. 28. and which is specially to be observed when Luke would speak of trespasses or offences as sinnes against God he vseth this word but when in the same place he speaks of them as of injuries against men he vseth another word Ch. 11. 4. And see how soundly Mr B. deales when he should shew that the word turned offend is not meant of sinnes but of injuries he brings in foure principall writers varying as he sayth about the word and yet the vnadvised man considers not that all four of them as he himself alledges them vnderstand it of sinne and not one of them of injuries so speak against him If Christ here spake of injuries where he sayth if he heare thee thou hast wonne or gayned thy brother he would haue sayd thou hast wonne or gayned thy goods or good name wherein he injuryed thee If these words be meant of injuries and wrongs then Christ commaunds his disciples not to suffer wrongs at their brethrens hands but to deal with them in the order here prescribed for Christ expresly commaunds to tell the Church and so Christs doctrine and Pauls teaching the suffring of wrong should contradict the one the other By this exposition one Iew might account an other as an heathen which was vtterly vnlawfull he might not refuse religious communion with him in the temple into which no heathen might come he might not deny him a portion in the land of Canaan the type of the kingdome of heaven he might not account or call him other then a brother whatsoever he were till the time came of the Iewes defraction or breaking off for vnbeleef Act. 7. 2. 22. 1. 33. 1. Rom. 11. 17. This interpretation confirmes a point of Anabaptistry namely that it is not lawfull for brethren so remayning to sue at Caesars barre where it is most evident that brethren alwayes might and may yea such a case may fall out ought to sue without any alienation of affection or such heathenish thought one of another as Mr B. would have Christ in this place to commend vnto them for even these last words let him be to thee as an heathen and publican are a commaundement as let your speach be yea yea nay nay hundreds others delivered in the scriptures vnder the same form of words And to conclude Christ our Saviour in these words describes excommunication by the effects of it which are withdrawing from the brother obstinate in sinne both in religious and civile fellowship and familiaritie as the Iewes did withdraw both froÌ„ the Heathens and Publicans in both Ioh. 4. 9. Act. 10. 3. 31. 28. Luk. 15. 2. 15. 10. 11. And this very phrase Paul most clearely expounds when he directs the Church 1 Cor. 5. 11. not to be commingled with obstinate offenders nor to eat with them this ever provided that no excommunication or other act in religion whatsoever may dissolve eyther civil or naturall societie The next Reason is drawne from verse 18. where Christ ratifying in the hands of his Church this his power speaks in expresse terms of binding and loosing not onely in earth but in heaven also which words me thinks alone should satisfie the conscience of any godly minded man yea and stop the mouth of the most shameles that Christ speaks of sinne and sin onely Yet is Mr B. neyther satisfied nor silent but replyes that binding and loosing in this place is not properly or onely to be vnderstood of Christs Ministers but is allowed to private persons and for this pag. 223 he brings sundry reasons Consider Reader this severe censurer of Mr Smythes vnstablenes Mr B. in his former book pag. 95. will have this power of binding and loosing spoken of in this place to be in the officers of the Châ— two or three and at no hand in private persons and for this there he brings sundry reasons in this his next book this power is â—lâ—tâ—ed to two or three private persons and must not be drawne to the Ministerie onely and for this he brings as many reasons Observe further the very sum of Mr B. answer is that Christ speaks not here of binding and loosing in the office of Ministerie So we affirm that by two or three having this power cannot be meant two or three Ministers considered severally from the body which alone are not the Church for any publick administration but the officers of the Church but by two or three are meant the meanest coÌ„munion or societie of saints whether with officers or without officers And is this a sufficient answering of an adversary to bring sundry reasons to prove the very thing which he affirmes Adde to all these that where the injuries offred to Christs disciples and such as would respect his direction were vsually for the profession of Christ it had been a most idle course to have complayned eyther to the Iewish Synedrion or Romish Magistracy which would have added injurie to injurie Lastly where Christ v. 23. in his answer to Peters quaestion makes the protasis or first part of his comparison the kingdom of heaven which is the Church he shewes plainely that all the while he hath spoken of Church affaires and the carying of them And thus much to prove that the Lord Iesus the King of his Church hath left in this 18. of Math a rule order
for the punishment of offenders in it But this tedious matter is not yet ended For Mr B. marshals in eight fresh reasons to force all the reformed Churches in the world with vs to give over this hold of Mat. 18. pag. 224. 225. 226. of this his last book the best is they are of no great strength The first is a bare affirmation that the former exposition by me confuted is true His second Reason is bycause Christ hath erected no government in his Church for why he should adde by publick doctrine I see not except he would insinuate that Christ taught this point privately and in a corner but for this brings he no one scripture or reason as if his bare vvord vvere enough to stablish an Idoll King in his Church vvithout officers or lavves Where notvvithstanding in his former book pag 90. 91. 92. 93. he proves by many scriptures that Christ hath given officers for the government of his Church which no man denyes but himself In the third place he affirmes that Christ by the Church meanes not the Iewish Synedrion wherin I assent vnto his saying for reason brings he none Touching the nature of the Churches government which he gropes at in the fourth place I have spoken els where The 5. Reason followeth which comprehends vnder it many petty Reasons and amongst other the 6 7 and 8 in order which save for the shew in the margent of 8. distinct numbred Reasons might vvel enough haue ben spared The sum is that this 18. of Mat. is no perfect rule of discipline the reasoÌ„s are bycause neyther all sorts of sins are here brought in nor all the parts of discipline here comprehended And hovv do these things appear First bycause a man is here to proceed onely for trespasses or as it is better turned for offences against himself but not for sinne against God against the Magistrate or against an other But here you should have remembred Mr B. that sin being the transgression of the law is onely against God to speak properly and therefore David notwithstanding his defiling of Bath sheba and murdering of Vrijah confesseth that he had sinned against God onely But as the same transgression is so coÌ„mitted as man scandalizeth or takes offence at it so it is a sinne against him whether the deed done respect God or man yea man or beast publick or private person a mans self or others in the object and so he may forgive it after the order prescribed by Christ. And where by way of exception you demaund how one man can remit trespasses done against an other it is true it cannot be if by trespasses be meant personall injuries but considering the same trespasses as they are sinnes against God at which a brother takes offence so the brother offended may forgive them vpon the offenders repentance And asking how men can forgive rebellion against God you seem to haue forgotten yourself for in the very leaf next before going you both graunt and prove that not onely Ministers by vertue of their office but private persons also may bind and loose sinnes The thing it self you grant and for the manner of it it is as they save by manifesting and making knowne outwardly salvation and the forgivenes of sinnes To your third objection concerning the keeping secret of publick crymes against the Magistrate vpon the offenders repentance you answer yourself for if they be publick or of publick nature they may not be kept secret neyther are they capable of the order of secret dealing in them And here falles into consideration your seventh Reason which is that if discipline be grounded vpon Mat. 18. then the Church must iudge in civil affaires and enter vpon the bounds of the Magistrate And are you ignorant Mr B. that civil actions as they draw scaÌ„dalous sin with them may be censured ecclesiastically as may also religious actions be punished civily by the Magistrate which is the preserver of both tables so to punish all breaches of both specially such as draw with them the violation of the positive lawes of kingdomes or disturbance of common peace Take your own instance of murder The Magistrate is to punish it civilly in all his subjects whether the parties repent or no the Church is to censure it ecclesiastically in her members yea though the Magistrate pardon or passe by it except the parties delinquent repent for then they are to be forgiven And what vsurpation is here vpon the Magistracy you to suppress Gods ordinance do flatter the Magistrate and accuse the innocent Next you except that this of Mat. is a rule for sinnes private and more secret but not for publick and open sinne You might as well say that the patterne of prayer prescribed by Christ Mat. 6. is not perfect nor a rule for private prayer or for things concerning our selves onely bycause it teacheth vs to say Our father forgive vs our sinnes But who knowes not that generalls include their specialties vnder them The Lord Iesus in teaching his disciples to say forgive vs our sinnes ioyntly teacheth them in the same place to ask forgivenes eyther of their own sinnes or the sinnes of others severally as occasion serves so in teaching here all the degrees of admonition ioyntly he implyes also the dealing in any one of them severally if there be occasion And this exposition of Mr B. can I not fitlyer resemble then to the practise of some silly pursevant that being sent to attach some traytour or other malefactour dwelling in Barwick and so to bring him to the Court if he should meet the party by the way would refuse to medle with him and would say that he was sent to Barw to fetch him and would eyther bring him from thence or would let him alone And it seems if Mr B. might construe his coÌ„mmission he would so advise him But would not common sense teach a man that the nearer he met with the party he â—ought the more labour were spared and that he were to apprehend him where he found him So where Christ sends his disciples to deal with sinne a farre off as it were and in the first vtmost degree but if it be come nearer and be found in the 2. or 3. degree it is to be taken where it is found If it be secret and yet rest betwixt the brother offeÌ„ding offended it must there be dealt with if it become nearer the court and be wrought before two or three or more it must there and in that order be vndertaken the first degree is over and that labour spared if it be of publick nature or publikly coÌ„mitted the two former degrees are past and the labour in them spared the sin must be dealt with accordingly And the Church eyther by information from any brother or brethren or by immediate notice taken may convent or call for the offender that he which sinned publikly may publiquely be rebuled And this may serue for answer to the
speach to the 2. person not saying what it but what you shall bind and loose c. In so saying you give the cause though you presently eat vp your own graunt For you affirm that by the Church ver 17. is meant the whole body of which Christ speaks in the third person and what say wee more But where you adde that the authoritie is not given till the 18. vers and that then Christ turns his speach to his Apostles it is your own devised glosse For first it is evident that Christ establisheth the power of binding and loosing in the hands of the Church speaking in the 3. person v. 17. that so firmely as what brother soever refuseth to heare her voice is to be expelled from all religious cōmunion Vnto this the 18. v. is added partly for explanation and partly for confirmation For where as the party admonished might say with himself well if the Church disclaim mee I shall disclaym it if it condemn me I shall condemn it again the Lord doth here back the Churches censures for her incouragement and for the terrour of the refractary despising her voice and that vnder a contestation that what she bindes and looseth vpon earth namely after his will he also will bind and loose in heaven And for the change of persons in the 17. and 18 verses it is merely grammaticall and not naturall It is common with the Holy Ghost sometimes for elegancy sometimes for explication sometimes for further inforcement of the same thing to and vpon the same persons thus to vary the phrase of speach in the first second or third person grammatically as the reader may take a tast in these particulars Psal. 75. 1. Is. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. c. Math. 5. 10. 11. 12. c. and in this very Chapt. v. 7. 8. Rom. 6. 14. 15. 16. 8. 4. 5. 12. 13. c. Your 3. Reason that bycause Christ speakes of a few two or three gathered together therefore he meanes the officers of the Church and not all the body is of no force if the body consist but of two or three as it comes to passe where Churches are raysed in persecution as the most true Churches are Yet if Christ do speak of two or three officers of a Church gathered together in his name he speaks against you where all the power of the keyes over many 1000. Churches are in the hands of two Arch-Prelates and from them delegated and derived to their severall vnderlings But the truth is that gratious promise which Christ here layes downe for the comfort of all his saints you do engrosse into the hands of a few Elders You might aswel affirme that onely two or three officers gathered together have a promise to be heard in their prayers and not a communion of two or three brethren for Christ v. 19. 20. speakes principally and expressely of prayer though with reference to the binding and loosing of sin which as all other ordinances are sanctified by prayer The very scope of the place and reason of the speach is this The Lord Iesus had v 18. enfranchised the Church with a most excellent and honourable priveledge now the disciples did already see with their own eyes and were more fully taught by their Maister that the Church should arise from small and base beginnings and that it was also by reason of persequution subject to great dissipation Math. 7. 14. 10. 17. 18. 22. 23. 13. 31. 32. least therefore their harts should be discouraged and they or others driven into suspition that the Lord would any way neglect them or his promise towards them for their paucity and meannes he most gratiously prevents and frees them from that jealousy telles them and all others for their comfort that though the Church or assembly consist but of two or three as such beginnings the true Church of God had and have though your English Church begū with a kingdome in a day Act. 16. 14. 15. 17. 34. 19. 7. yet that should no way diminish their power or prejudice the accomplishment of his promise And the reason hath been formerly rendred bycause this power for binding loosing being given to the fayth of Peter depends not vpon the order of office multitude of people or dignity of person but merely vpon the word of God And hence is it that Christ thus gratiously descends even to two or three wheresoever assembled in his name yea though it be in a Cave or Den of the earth of which most gratious and necessary priveledge you would bereave them Now in your 4. Reason out of v. 19 you do most ignorantly erre in the grāmaticall construction for you make a change of the person agayne where there is no change at all Christ speakes onely in the third person as the originall makes it plaine though the English tongue do not so distinctly manifest it to an ignorant man Christ sayth not whatsoever you two shall agree of shal be given to them that is to the Church but whatsover two of you shall agree of or consent in they two that so agree shall obteyne it of God Which words Mr B. you do most vnsufferably pervert to the seducing of the ignorant as if Christ had sayd if two or three of you officers or you two or three officers shall agree together of a thing whatsoever they that is the Church shall desire namely of the Officers for so you expound the words it shal be givē them where it is most evident that they which are to agree vpon the thing they are to ask it and that of God who will give it them And where the scripture sayth that the brother offended speaking indefinitely of any brother and so of the Officers themselves must complayn to the Church M B. on the contrary as if he would even beard the Lord Iesus tells vs the Church must complayn to the Officers Your 5. Reason followes with many litle ones in the womb of it which you bring forth in order to prove that Christ speakes here figuratively and that by the Church he means the governours The first is It agrees with the practise of the Iewish Church frō whence it is held that the manner of governing in the Church is fetched And is this the necessary proof you speak of whatsoever is so held is so in truth And yet in your second book as hath been shewed you bring in sundry men holding contrary things as if contraries could be true Well I confesse it is so held and that by many with whom I would gladly consent if the scriptures taught me not to hold otherwise It had been good here the authour had shewed vs what the government of the Iewish Church was and not thus sleightily to have passed over things of this moment For the purpose in hand thus much The Church of the Iewes was a nationall Church the Lord separating vnto himself the whole natiō
contention as they and a thowsand worse evils could not but fall out in a Church gathered as yours is of all the prophane rable in a kingdome so when they do arise in a true Church there is power to voyd them out and the persons with them in whom they reigne But if the vnlawfulnes of a Church government might be proved by the pryde contention the like evils arising in it then surely M B. you that know so well how these and other mischeifs reign in your own should lay your hand on your mouth for shame and be affrayd to provoke any man to medle in that mattâ—â— Besides it is apparent both in the scriptures and ecclesiasticall writers that not onely pride and contention but herely and almost all other evils haue sprung from the officers governours in the Church And surely nothing hath more in former dayes advanced nor doth at this day more vphold the throne of Antichrist then the peoples discharging themselves of the care of publique affaires in the Church on the one side and the Preists and Prelates aâ—rogating all to themselves on the other side Lastly the word Church you say must be expounded figuratively to avoid the absurdâ—tâ—s which eâ—s would necessarily follow out of the text viz that the whole Church must speak ioyntly which were confusion contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 40. that women must medle in Church affaires which the Apostle forbids ver 34. that children must speak which were impossible so then it must needs â—e taken figuratively the part for the whole and if one part must be left out why not an other till the cheif of the Congregation be taken who are chosen by the rest as their mouth Touching the exception of confusion I desire the reader to remember what hath been formerly answered adding further that Mr B. herein doth not oppose vs but the Apostles and Apostolicall Churches governed by them yea the H. Ghost it self propounding their examples for our imitation The Apostle Peter Act. 1. 15. c. standing vp in the middest of the disciples which were about an hundred and twenty spake to them about the choise of one to succeed Iudas and it is sayd ver 23. that they that is these brethren to whom he spake presented two as also that the whole multitude Act. 6. 5. presented the seaven for Deacons to the twelve Apostles who are sayd v. 2. to haue called the multitude and to have spoken vnto them v. 6. to have prayed and layd hands on the elect Deacons Now might not any prophane spirit take vp M. B. words and insult over the holy Ghost himself and say what did all the disciples that were in the place an hundred and twenty present Ioseph and Mathias They must needs speak in presenting these two and spake they ioyntly or all at once this were confusion contrary to 1 Cor. 14. 14. did the women speak they must not medle in Church matters â— 34. did children speak it is impossible So for Act. 6. did all the twelve Apostles speak at once v. 2. and pray at once v. 6. did the whole multitude speak ioyntly when they presented the 7. Deaconâ— v. 6. here were the like confusion and besides here were women and children in the Church also Now let the indifferent reader judge what M. B. hath sayd more against vs then any Lucian or scoffing Atheist might obiect against the spirit of God himself and his holy pen-man the Evangelist Yea further by these and the like consequences women and children are vtterly excluded from the Church as no parts of it Luke sayth Act. 15. 22. that the whole Church sent messengers to Antiochia and Paul 1 Cor. 14. 23. speakes of the whole Churches comming together in one to exercise themselves in prayer prophesying and the like parts of Church communion but children neyther could send messengers nor pray nor prophesie nor the like and women might not speak in the Church and therefore both they must be left out of the Church and if one part why not an other so till we come to the cheif of the congregation that they alone may be the Church and all in all as it is iust with God that he which opposeth the truth should oppose himself also so doth Mr B. in this very place intaÌ„gle himself in the same absurdities wherin he would ensnare vs. First he affirms the Church Math. 1â— must be the principall of the congregation Then Mr B. is not your congregation the true Church of Christ for the principall of your Church namely your self hath no power to excommunicate And say not for shame the Archdeacon or officiall are principalls or lesse principalls of your congregation Again which is the cheif thing I desire may be observed you say these principalls must be chosen by the rest of the Church be their mouth and stand for the whole And how chosen must the whole Church speak joyntly when they chuse them that were confusion must women speak that is contrary to the scriptures Yet are they members of the congregation and so are young youthes childreÌ„ and servants I adde further the Church you say is two or three principall members Well then they two or three must speak to the party how can he els heare but for two or three to speak together is confusion and contrary to the coÌ„maundement 1 Cor. 14. 31. for all must speak by one one And by this time I hope you are ashamed of such tristing as here you vse I do therefore answer in few words it is not necessary that every one of the people should speak to the offender no nor of the officers neyther If but one officer do sufficiently evince and reprove the party what needs more speak The rest both Officers people may manifest their consent eyther by voice signe or silâ—nce yet so as liberty be preserved for any in place and order to speak eyther by way of addition limitation or dissent And for women they are debarred by their sâ—x as from ordinary prophecying so from any other dealing wherin they take authority over the man 1 Cor 14. 34. 35. 1 Tim. 2. 11. 12. yet not simply from speaking they may make profession of faith or confession of sin say Amen to the Churches prayers sing Psalmes vocally accuse a brother of sin witnes an accusation or defend themselves being accused yea in a case extraordinary namely where no man will I see not but a woman may reprove the Church rather then suffer it to go on in apparent wickednes and communicate with it therein Now for children and such as are not of yeares of discretion God and nature dispenseth with them as for not communicating in the Lords supper now so vnder the law for not offering sacrifices from which none of yeares were exempted neyther is there respect of persons with God in the common duties of Christianity And for that so oft reinforced objection of authority given to
two or three and therefore not to all I have answered and do that to two or three and yet to all when there are but two or three in all as vsually comes to passe in the raysing and dispersing of Churches Your 6. Argument to prove that the word Church must be taken figuratively is first that els the Corinthians had offended who being all commaunded did but some of them proceed against the incestuous person 1 Cor. â— 13. 2 Cor. 2. 6. 2. that els Paul had offended who vpon the complaint of Cloes house did himself without wayting for the Churches consent being absent iudge and determine the matter and sâ—nt to them to execute â—â— sentence These two Arguments Mr B. are in your hands like the two witnesses that came against Christ they neyther agree one with an other nor eyther of them with the truth In the former you plead for the Presbytery in saying that some of them did proceed against him in the latter you vtterly overthrow that and step in for the Bishops sole power where you make Paul alone iudge and determiner of the busines I am verily perswaded Mr Smyth hath felt your pulse in this place and found directly what blood runs in your â—eynes to him therefore do I leave you for iudgement in the case And for answer to the particulars In the first argument you do most sinfully corrupt the scriptures knowing that if they be soundly alleadged they will give no countenaunce to your errour For where Paul sayth it is sufficient for the same man that he was rebuked of many you for the word many put sâ—me where some doth import a part and but a part for where some are sayd to do a thing it followes that other some do it not where the word many is oft times put for all as being opposed to one or a few as in this place many rebuking to one rebuked Take for this phrase of speach these scriptures Dan. 12. 2. Mat. 13. 17. Luke 12. 7. Rom. 5. 19. and 8. 29. 12. 4. 5. 1 Cor. 10. 17. 12. 12. 14. But mark I pray thee wise reader when this man expounds Math. 18. 19. 20. where mention is made of a few two or three having the power of Christ there by two or three are meant the officers and Christ hath established the authority of a few for the good of all and again two or three officers and a few have this authority and yet notwithstanding when he comes to expound 2 Cor. 2. 6. where mention is made of many rebuking the offender there by many must be meant the officers also What Mr B are two or three Officers in respect of the whole body many Doth the holy Ghost speaking of a few in the Church mean the officers and speaking of many mean the officers also It were good you awoke out of your dream that you might spy your contradictions and how one peice reproves an other To the obiection I do answer that first it doth not appear that the party was excommunicated it may be vpon admonition he repented and so the extremity spoken of 1 Cor. 5. 5. was prevented and 2. if he were eyther by many may be meant all as I have formerly shewed or otherwise it is sufficient if some reprove the Elders or some of them specially by their office and so of the brethren in the second place if they see necessary cause wherevpon with the silent consent of the rest iudgement may be given or the party delivered to Sathan The 7. Reason to prove the Elders the Church is the iudgement and practise of all reformed Churches As the reformed Churches do abhorre from your practise as intollerable yea almost incredible that the power of excommunication should be in the hands of one man and that a forreyn Prelate or Officiall that most like never so much in his life as once came in the congregation whereof the offender is a member as may be seen in one for all Beza Epist. 12. so bycause you will needs thus beare over all with all the reformed Churches I will a little step out of my beaten way and call in a few well-deserving audience of the reformed Churches to testify what their judgement is in the case joyning vnto them also a few of our own men seeming to be of the same mind whatsoever the practise is eyther of the one or of the other To omit then the judgement and practise of the more ancient times whether whole councels or particular persons as of the Council of Nâ—ce where Paphuâ—tius no Church officer both had vsed such liberty of speach as he perswaded the whole assembly touching the maryage of Ministers of Tertullian before that who Apol chap. 39. makes the officers onely Praesidents in the assembly where manners are censured of Ciprian who would never do any thing in his charge without the consent of the people lib. 3 epist. 10. and in particular thinks it specially the peoples right to chuse or reiect worthy or vnworthy Ministers then which what power is greater Of Austin that thinks it helps much to the shaming of the party that he be excommunicated by the whole Church lib. 3. contra epist. Parmen and lastly of Ierom ad Demetr which affirms that the Church it self hath right in excommunication as the Elders have in other Church censures the first is Zwinglius who artiâ— 8. explanat speaking of the contention which hath been what a Church is acknowledges none other Churches but 1. the coÌ„pany of sure firm beleevers scattered through the vniversal world which we call the catholik Church 2. severall congregations which â—oÌ„veniently meet together in some one place c. and of these he affirmes Christ to speak Math. 18. Tell the Church and Paul 1 Cor. 1. To the Church which is at Corinth And answering an objection touching a Church representative he saith of this I find nothing in the scriptures out of mens devises any man may feyn any thing Next Perter Martyr in his comon places pant 4. chap. 5. sect 9. making the Church a Monarchy in respect of Christ an Aristocracy in respect of the Elders addeth also that bycause in the Church there are matters of great weight and importance referred vnto the people as excommunication absolution of choosing Ministers the like it hath also a consideration of popular government and vpon 1 Cor. 5. 4. The Apostle as great as he was would not excommunicate alone but did take counsel with the Church that the thing might be done by common authority Which notwithstanding the Pope and other Bishops dare do The Apostle indeed goes before the rest which is the duty of the ancients of the Ch that the more ignorant multitude by their suffragation before going may be directed in iudâ—ing With him ioyn Bucer who in his first book chapt 9. de regno Christi affirmes that Paul accuses the Corinthians for that the whole Church
have therefore power for officers also which they may chuse and so enjoy all their liberties by their help so in the spirituall corporation the Church there is alwayes the whole power of Christ residing which therefore may call officers for the vse of it to which it is sufficient that it can without officers vse this power for things simply necessary as for the receiving in of members by profession of faith and confession of sinnes for the aedifying of them by exhortations coÌ„forts in the ordinance of prophecying and so for casting them out by excommunication which fall from their former profession or confession The sum of the 11. and 12. Reas is that this power or liberty of the multitude to judge in Church matters overthrowes the power authority of Christian Magistrates in the Church to whom the people are commaunded to be subiect both in the old and new testament And doth not the ill advised man consider that his own opinion making the officers of the Church alone the Church and giving them power to judge in Church matters without the rest of the body doth as much overthrow the authority of Christian Magistrates as ours in making the officers and body with them the Church having power to judge together yea much more for if the ecclesiasticall officers alone be the Church Math. 18. and so must judge and censure sinnes which is the thing he pleads for then â— the civil magistrate simply excluded where wee reputing the whole body the Church do necessarily include the Christian Magistrate as being one of the Church Secondly is Mr B. and his brother Bell whom he quotes in the 〈…〉 gent to ignorant as they cannot distinguish betwixt civil authority and judgements in Church matters and that authority and those judgements which are ecclesiasticall The Christian magistrate as he is a brother may be censured ecclesiastically by the Church whereof he is a member and yet the same person as a magistrate whether of the Church or not of the Church or cast out of the Church may censure and punish civilly the whole Church and every member of it if there be cause whether in matters of the Church or common wealth In the 17. reason Mr B. would fasten vpon vs an absurdity in making the body both to govern and to be governed and so to be both Lord and servant Prince and subiect c. It is your self Mr Ber. that commit the absurdity which I thus manifest The Church must be governed sayth the scripture and coÌ„mon sense But the Church is the officers Math. 18. sayth Mr Bernard Wherevpon it followeth that the Officers must be governed And to your reason whomsoever you count Lords and servants and whosoever are Lords and servants in your Church I know by the scriptures that in the Church of Christ the officers are servants in that relation the Church may be called a Lord and if Christ truely call the sonne of man Lord of the sabbath bycause the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath may we also call the Church in a respect Lord of the Officers for the Officers are for the Church and not the Church for them And yet we hold the same officers which are servants to be governours also for the government of the Church is merely a Church-service as all not carnally blinded with ambition or superstition will graunt with me Now where you affirm Reas 18. that the people are never termed by any name insinuating soveraignty but that the Ministers are you speak partially on both sides would you have the Ministers that is the servants of the Church to be her soveraigns The names you bring as most advauntageable argue no such thing They are Overseers as the watchmen are for the citie Elders for thâ—ir gravity Fathers in respect of the seed of the word by which they bâ—ge to conversion and therefore Paul makes himself he onely father of the Corinthians bycause he had been the instrument of their conversion notwithstanding all other teachers whomsoever to whom in that respect he opposeth himselâ— as not being their fathers And so men out of office may be as wel the fathers of others as they in office However fatherhood argues no soveraignty And yet the holy Apostles Prophets thought not much vpon all occasions to account the saints their brethren and themselves theirs And I would you wist whose names Iohn Bale in his Paraphrase vpon the Revelation ch 17 vers 3. thought your Grace your Lordship your Fatherhood to be And where further you name the brethren sheep the household of faith the wife or spouse in respect of the officers for that is the consideration in hand therein you deal very deceiptfully for the brethren or saynts are not the Officers sheep houshold wife or spouse but Christs betwixt whom and them the comparison is not Lastly your affirmatioÌ„ that the saynts are called Kings Rev. 1. 6. not for any outward power over meÌ„ but for the inward power of Gods spirit saÌ„ctifying the elect by which as Kings they rule over their own corruptions is an ill glosse corrupting the text For in the same place they are called Preists also Now as they are not Preists only for themselves but for their brethreÌ„ for whom they are to offer vp the spiritual sacrifices of prayer thaÌ„ksgiving so neyther are they Kings for themselves alone but for their brethren also having the power of Christ whereby to iudge them the keyes of the kingdome to bind and loose them in the order by him prescribed These things thus layd down occasionally I return to the point And first against the figurative exposition of these words Tell the Church I do alledge two approved Rules and Canon in divinity for exposition of scriptures The former is that scriptures must be expounded according to the largest extent of the words except there be some apparent restreynt of them The second is that they must be expounded simply and according to the letter except necessity compell to depart froÌ„ the litterall sence to a figurative And therefore since there appeares not any such necessity as is pretended eyther of figure or restreynt the words must be taken in their largest and simplest meaning With these rules I desire the reader to beare in mind that which hath been formerly observed to the purpose in hand and amongst other things that the officers are to govern the Church in the ceÌ„sures as in all other actions of communion and therefore cannot be the Church that every true Ch hath or is capable of a ministery over it and so there should be a minister of ministers that the order of officers in the Church is an order of servants and the order of saynts an order of Kings which is the highest order in the Church fitting vpon the thrones of David for judgement whom the ministers are to serve in guiding going before them in and
Church though cast out for notorious wickednes for many of them hold these mayn truthes and many more yea more then Mr B. himself doth Then is the true matter of the world and lims of the Divell for such are all wicked persons whatsoever truth they professe Ioh. 8. 44. and 15. 19. Rom. 6. 16 2 Tim. 2. 26. 1 Ioh. 3. 8. 12. true matter and members of the Church They that are Christs have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts of â—â— Gal. 5. 24. therfore persons visibly wicked are not visibly Christs and so not visibly or in respect of men true matter of the Church or members of his body That which destroyes the Church makes it become eyther a false Church or no Church at all cannot make a true Church or be the true matter whereof it is made for these things are contrary But wicked men whatsoever they professe in word make the Church a Synagogue of Sathan and very Babylon which is an habitation of Divils and hold of all foul spirits Rev. 18. 2. provokes God to remove the candle-stick that is to dischurch a people and to spew them out of his mouth Rev. 2. 5. and 3. 16. Mr B. had need be a skilful workman which can make a true Ch of Christ of that matter which makes the true Churches planted by the Apostles themselves eyther false or no Churches at all They which are true visible matter of the Church or true visible christians have Christ for their King visibly or in outward appearance and so far as men can judge for by visible we mean that which may be seen of men opposed to invisible which onely God seeth for Christ is not devided but look to whom he is a Preist to save them a Prophet to teach theÌ„ to the same persons he is also a K. to reign rule over them but he is not a King to any ungodly ones neyther doth he but Satan and their lusts reign over them If profession in word with a wicked conversation make true matter of the Church then an apparantly a flat contradiction a known sinne that which makes men more abhominable makes them true matter of the Church For he that sayth he hath fellowship with God or beleeves in Christ and yet walkes in darknes doth ly and doth not truely 1 Ioh. 1. 6. He that professeth Christ to be his saviour and doth wickednes contradicts himself for Christ is not a saviour of the wicked sinns against the 4. coÌ„mandement in taking Gods name in vayn Other reasons might be brought for the â—â—iction of this soul prophane errour for truth vnanswerable for nuÌ„ber sufficieÌ„t to make a volume but these may suffice for the present some other I will intermingle as occasion shal be offered in the examination of that which Mr B. brings for the confirmation of his assertion For which end he sets down 4. Reasons The sum of the three first is thus much viz that Christ his Apostles preaching the gospell such as beleeved the same and made profession of it and of their faith were without stay or let received into the Church as true matter We are as farr from denying this order of gathering Churches as you are from enjoying it Mr B you needed not to have made three distinct proofs of this which no man denyes nor to have brought so many scriptures as you do for the confirmation of that which wee graunt with you and practise without you But herein you deceive the simple reader in that you separate and disioyn those things which then were and alwayes should be ioyned together and they are faith and repentance These two ioyntly did Christ himself preach and Iohn Baptist before him and the Apostles after him and these two were preached to and required of every one both man and woman which was admitted into the Church Mat. 3. 2. 6. Mark 1. 15. Act. 19. 4. Luke 13. 3. 5. 24. 47. Act. 2. 28. 8. 37. 19. 18. But now bycause faith repentance are inward graces resydeing in the hart and known to God alone which knoweth the hart and that the profession and confession of them are the ordinary meanes by which these hidden and invisible graces are manifested made visible vnto men there was no cause but they which made this profession to men in sincerity so far as men could judge should by men be deemed and acknowledged for true members of Christ and fit matter for the Lords house And so if by any other means men manifested themselves to have fayth and holynes wrought in them though they made neyther profession of faith nor confession of sinnes yet were they and so ought to be intitled and admitted to the liberties of the Church as appeareth Act. 10. 44. 46. 47. And vppon this very ground also it is that the children of the faithfull are of the Church and baptised though they make no profession of faith at all bycause the scriptures declare them to be within the gratious covenant of Gods mercy and love and vnder the promises of the gospel and so by vs to be reputed holy Gen. 6. â— 17. 7. 8. 9. 10. Deut. 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. Act. 2. 39. Rom. 11. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 14. so that it is not for the profession of faith ex opere operate or bycause the party professing vtters so many words that he is to be admitted into the Church but bycause the Church by this his profession and other outward appearances doth probably in the judgement of charity which is not causlesly suspitious deem him faithfull and holy in deed as in shew he pretendeth But that a man of a known lewd conversation appearing still to remain in his sinne whatsoever in word he professeth should be received into the Church out of which he ought to be cast though he were one of it or should have baptism administred vnto him which is as Mr B. rightly confirms from the scriptures the seale of the forgivenes of sinns of new birth of salvation being judged not to have the forgivenes of sinns nor to be born a new nor to be in the estate of salvation were a most desperate and prophane practise then which I know not whither the Divel hath brought any other into the Church more derogatory to Gods glory or prejudiciall to mans salvation This were to make the way of the kingdome of heaven broad enough by which al the Atheists in the world might enter into the Church and certaynly would every one of them if the Magistrate should vse his compulsive power as it is in Engl at this day yea a parrat might be taught to say over so many words yea the Divel himself though he were known so to be would not stick for his advantage to vtter them and so might be true matter for Mr Ber Church The material templi was to be built onely of
lawes of men but Pauls word even the preaching or publishing of the gospel is the proper means which the Lord hath sanctifyed for that purpose though I doubt not but there both hath been and is great vse of the Magistâ—â—â—â—â— authority for the furtherance of the gospel that way When the Lord Iesus purposed to advance the scepter of his king â—â—me he sent out his Apostles not furnished with sword and â—pâ—â—â— noâ— yet backed with humayn lawes or authority but with châ—â—ge and commission to publish and declare his holy commâ—â—ndâ—ments and the things which he had taught them and thâ—reby to 〈◊〉 Disciples or gayn subiects vnto his kingdom Math. 2â— 19. 2â— which they also practised admitting and initiaâ—ing mâ—n into â—â—â— Church vpon their voluntary submission vnto and 〈◊〉 of the â—ayth of Christ. Nâ—â—â—â— vnto â—â—â— be added a second consideration namely where and to â—â—â— a the Apostles were first to preach and to 〈◊〉 th◠〈◊〉 commission received from Christ it wil both gâ—ve lighâ— to the â—oâ—nt in hand and discover the vanity of a distinctâ—â—n in Mr B. â— book to which he trusteth much and therefore â—â—th oâ—t â—â—r the gathering and establishing of Churches after the P 〈…〉 by fyâ—â— and sword without any further respect then the magistrates authority the summe whereof as also of that he infeâ—reth upon it is that to a Church in the fâ—â—â—t 〈◊〉 that iâ— as â—â— eâ—poundâ— himselfe gathered of inâ—iâ—els and of such a people â—â—â—re no Church 〈…〉 there is required preaching and 〈◊〉 going bâ—fore with the word and profession of the name of Christ but for a people that are not infidels but Christians hâ—â— corrupt soever aâ—â— a Church â—â— suâ—h preachiâ—â— on the one side nâ—◠〈◊〉 of â—â—yth on the other is râ—qâ—ired 〈…〉 compel with the feare of the swâ—â—â— the Magistrate authority is sufficient in such a case Let the Reader behold this bold mans grosse ignorance and contradiâ—tions and if he wil not open his eyes to see them he mâ—y feel them with his hand so palpable are they I wil lay them down in these particulars â—â—â—st he affirmeth pag. 176 that the Lord taâ—â—s a peâ—ple to be 〈…〉 and that commâ—â—â—dements are for his people to â—â—â—â—â—â—â—m and nâ—t to make them 〈…〉 maâ—s commaâ—ndemeâ—t makâ—s not a servent but declâ—â—es such a one to be â—is â—â—â—vant already and so he gives God not more power to commaund the wicked and vnbeleevers then a man hath to commaund another mans servant and yet here he tells vs that before a people can become a Church Paul must goe with the word and expresly pag. 277. that the Lord to make mâ—n his people gives tâ—em his word and quoâ—es Math. 28. 19. to prove it Secondly by this his distinction and his inferences vpon it he makes all the Iewes to whom Iohn Baptist Christ and the Apostles preached and which were baptised by them or any of them to have been Infidels before and nâ— Church no Christianâ— And â—â— he affirms directly pag. 262. though I suppose he considerâ—t not where in answer to a proposition of Mr Aynsworthes that the Churches of Christ were established of saynts onely men visibly 〈◊〉 confirmed amongst other scriptures by Math. 3. 6. he pâ—â—emptorily avouches and so builds vpon it that that pâ—oposition scripture amongst the rest is to be vnderstood of a people which is no Church no Christians so the Church of the Iewes at that tyme must be no Church and they no Christians with this man for of them that scripture speaks whatsoever Peter and Paul say to the contrary Thirdly since the Apostles being sent by Christ to teach and make Disciples were to begin their ministration amongst the Iewes in Ierusalem Iudea and else where which is the consideration I formerly mentioned and so by the publishing of the gospel of fayth on their part and by the profession of fayth and confession of sinns on the peoples part to gather and establish particular Churches and that the Church of the Iewes was at that tyme the Church of God in respect of which the establishing of these particular Churches was no new plantation but a continuation of their former ingraâ—â—ing in the same root wherein they formerly were planted not differing from it essentially but being onely reformed perfited and otherwise ordered then before it appeareth most vntrue which Mr B. affirmâ—th that the preaching of the gospel is onely necessarily required for the planting of Churches of such people as were formerly infidels and no people of God Fourthly and lastly even that which he most freely graunts in one pag. namely that at the first the word must be preached and by that means men brought to a voluntary 〈◊〉 without compulsion that he vtterly reverses and denyes in the very next pag where pleading the proclamation of Hezechiah and compulsion of Iosiah he annexeth to the same purpose as cunningly as his wit wil serve an insinuation that Mordecai for feare of whom he sayth many of the heathen for such the people were became Iewes procured of the King proclamations and other statutes for the compelling of his subiects to the Iewish religion wherein he both perverâ—s the words as the reader may see and the meaning also of thâ— scripture which is that the heathen observing the myghty and mervelous hand of God for his people and against his and their enemyes many of them became Iewes and separated themselves vnto them from the 〈◊〉 of the heathen of the land to seek the Lord God of Israel as also in alleadging to the same purpose Luke 14. 23. as he doth in another place borrowing as it seems the corrupt exposition of that scripture from the Ministers whom â—e drawes in with him in his former book of which more in due place But that I may not be caryed too far in this my digression I do first deny that the reformation by Queen Elizabeth though great in it selfe and she for it of blessed memory did in any measure equalize the reformation made by Hezechiah Iosiah and Nâ—heâ—yah in whom you most insist Mr Bernard For whereas all reformation respects eyther persons or things that which was wrought by these godly Kings and governours receives testimony from the H. Ghost himselfe to have been most full and intyre both wayes And to let passe for brevityes sake the things themselves with referring the reader to these and the like scriptures which handle that part I wil insist a litle vpon the persons about whom the question here is between Mr B. and me in whom the other parte of reformation is to be considered which wil better appear if we compare together officers with officers and people with people And first it is evident in the scriptures that those Kings Princes of Iudah did not apoint any other Preists eyther for the purging of the temple or for any other Preistly work whither of reformation or administration
then the Leviâ—es whom the Lord had chosen to stand before him to serve him and to be his Miniâ—â—ers and to â—â—â—â—â—ncense 2 Chr. 29. 4. 5. 11. And therfore when some that pretended they were Levites could not by searching find the writing of their genealogy they werâ— put from the Preisthood for the Preists of the high places which had gone astray after Idoles in the tyme of Apostacy served theÌ„ caused the people to fal into iniquity if they were not Levites and called of God but of Ieroboams institution they themselves were sacriâ—iced vpon the altars with which they had so provoked the Lord and though they were Levites and the anoynted of the Lord and so had their lives spared vpon their repentance yet were they deposed from their holy ministration and came not near vnto the Lord any more â—er vnto any of his holy things in the most holy place but were to bear tâ—â—â—r shame and their abhommâ—tions which they had wrought But what answerable vnto this can be brought forth in the reformation of the English Iudah wherein the Preists of as ill an institution or worse then Ieroboams even the institution of Antichrist were continued in the most solemn administrations yea both those which had been ordeyned and made in Queen Maryes dayes for their breaden God and those which had falâ— back from that profession of the truth they made in King Edwards dayes and caused the people to fal into iniquitie which makes the mischeif much the greater both they of the one kynde of the other being for the most part ignorant prophane and popishly affected as though eyther the sacrifice of the masse had been no Idol or that the Lord had layd no shame or other burthen vpon such Idolatrous Apostates and seducers Now for the people entreating the reader to bear in mynd what I have formerly manifested as that neyther the whole English nation ever was the Lords true visible Church as the Iewish nation was nor if it were at the first could so remayn in the deep Apostacy of Antichrist I do adde that no man can by the word of God affirme the same things in any measure of the people of England in the beginning eyther of King Edwards or Queen Elizabeths reign which the scriptures dâ— of the people of the Iewes in the tyme of Hezechiah Iosiah Nehemiah and other the like godly instruments of reformation First for Hezechiahs tyme it appeareth that after the Levites â—ad sanctifyed themselves and the house of the Lord they offred after al solemn manner â—sâ—â—n offering for the kingdome and for the sanctuary and for Iudah the King and the congregation laying their hands vpon the sacrificâ—s thereby confessing that they were guilty of death and deriving their guilt vpon the goats in figure but vpon Christ in truth whom they figured and afterwards when the congregation was to â—â—â—â—g sacrifices and every one that was willing in hart burnt offerings it is sayd the burnt offerings â—â—re many yea so many as the Preists were not able to sâ—â—â— them all and that all the people reioyced that God had made the people 〈◊〉 Adde vnto this that which is written chap. 30. v. 11. 12. that dâ—â—â—rs of Ashâ—â— Mâ—nasseth and Zâ—bulun did submit themselves vnto the counsel of Hezechiah and that willingly for he had no authority over them at all and came to Ierusalem of whom the Lord also testifieth that they prepared their whole heart to seek the Lord God c. and for Iudah that the hand of God was with them â—â— that he gave them one hart to do the commaundment of the King and of the rulers according to the word of the Lord and lastly that the whole assembly kept the passeover with ioy and that all the congregation both straungers and those that dwelt in Iudah reioyced with the Preists and Levites who also blessing them had their voyce heard in heaven and their prayer in the Lords holy habitation And for Iosiahs tyme it is written that he the Preists and all the people from the greatest to the sâ—â—lest went vp into the house of the Lord that he read in their eares all the words of the book of the covenant and that he stood by his piller and made a covenant before the Lord to walk after the Lord and to keep his commaundments and his testimonies and his statutes with all his heart c. caused or appoynted for the word signifieth no more all that were found in Ierusalem and Beniamin to stand vnto it and that the inhabitants of Ierusalem did according to the covenant of God the God of their fathers Thirdly for the estate of the people in Nehemiahs tyme with whom also I ioyn Ezra in the work of reformation first it appeareth that none were constrayned to return to Ierusalem for the building of the Lords house but such amongst the people as would and with whom their God was were by the proclamation of Cyrus to return and secondly that * Ezra and such as went with him did before their jorney humble themselues by fasting before the Lord for direction and that when they were come to Ierusalem there was much weeping and wayling by him for the sinns of the people especially for that great trespasse they had committed in taking strange wives of the people of the land together with great manifestation and practise of repentance by all the congregation and afterwards in the book of Nehemiah when all the people were assembled together in the â—â—ry street the same Ezra and the Levites with him read and expounded the law â—â— to them to the great humbling of all the people at the first and afterwards to the great reioycing of them all when they vnderstood the words which were taught them and thus they practised every day even from the first day vnto the last all the seven dayes whylst the fâ—â—st 〈◊〉 and in the last place and for the shutting up of all confessing their sinâ—s and the iniquities of their fathers with fasting sackcloath and earth vpon them they made a sure covenant and wâ—â—â—â—e it sealed it and swore vnto it the Princes Levites Preists and people all that were separated from the people of the â—â—â—d vnto the law of God their wives sonnes and daughters all that could vnderstand the cheaf for the rest that they would walkin Gods law which was given by Moses the servant of God to observe and dâ—e all the commaundements of God and his iudgments and statutes Vnto these former scriptures I wil annex one other of the same nature with them and respecting the case of reformation It is recorded therefore of Alia a godly King of Iudah having in the beginning of his reign abolished idolatry â—â— the monuments of it and commaunded Iudah to seâ—k the Lord God of their fathers c. that afterwards vpoÌ„ the exhortation of the Prophets
by which God makes a people his people whereas notes and testimonyes do not make that to be which is not but do shew and declare it to be already I do answer that as it is true that where God sends his word there â—e testifieth his love and is desirous that is in respect of the outward offer of the meanes to make such a people his Church so is it most vntrue that to whomsoever God sends his word and testifyes his desire outwardly to make them his people and Church that those he makes his Church and people or vnites himself visibly unto them The vniting of God vnto men is an effect of the word which it alwayes hath not vpon them to whom it is sent Externall efficients do never prove argue their effects necessarily except they work naturally and infallibly also which the worâ— doth not but morally and according to the good pleasure and blessing of the Lord vpon it It is as you truely say Mr B. the outstretched hand of the Lord in it self but it doth not vnite the Lord to any except he take hold of them with it it is in it self hat immortall seed but may fall vpon the very high way and so have no good effect at all eyther in truth or appearance the messengers of it are the Lords mouth vnto them to whom it is sent but all receive not this message to whom it comes some make light of it neglect it others do evilly entreat them that bring it hating reviling and persequuting both them and it Act. 13. 45. and 17. 18. Now will you say that God strikes hands with these men on his part enters covenant with them actually bycause his word is published amongst them The inward and invisible hand of the spirit must not onely be stretched out by the Lord but must seaze and take hold of the heart and be effectuall invisibly and internally before this invisible vnion be made on the Lords part so must the Lords outward and visible hand his word not onely be stretched out but also seaze and take hold of the outward man at the least and be effectuall visibly and externally vpon him before the Lord can be sayd on his part to haue contracted any visible vnion In the next place comes the visible hand of man by which he on his part câ—tracts with God enters covenant with him visibly that Mr B. makes the open profession of faith vnto the doctrine taught which such as make he sayth have visibly taken hold of the word strucâ—en hands with God You make much of nothing Mr B. or of that which is worse theÌ„ nothing Even now the profession of faith made the true matter of the Church and here it must make the true form of the Church and yet the truth is that in the forming of your nationall English Church by a new covenant from that wherein it stood in Popery which was by your own graunt with Saints and Angels in stead of God I adde with Antichrist in the stead of Christ no such profession of faith was made as your self here do both require and prove necessary for the forming of the visible Church or her vniting with God And that I manifest in two particulars The former is that the profession of faith required for a peoples vniting with the Lord their God must be made both freely and particularly by the persons themselves so vniting And this appeares both by that which you haue sayd of Gods giving or sending his word which is his visible outstretched hand by which he offereth reconcilation vnto men personally and so by consequent requires that they stretch out the hand of personall profession to him and also by the scriptures alledged by you all which do give witnes of such a confession of faith and sinnes as was freely made by the persons themselves particularly which were ioyned to the Church Let the reader take knowledg of these scriptures amongst the rest Mat. â— 6. Act. 2. 38. 1 Cor. 1â— 1. 2. the profession of faith noted in the scriptures by you produced was not made by men of lewd conversation or apparantly vnsanctified of whom alone and their vnion with God our question is but by men visibly and externally holy and such as all of them were visibly and so far as men in charity could judge iustified sanctified and intitled to the promises of salvation and life eternall The scriptures are besides the th 〈…〉 last named Math. 3. 6. Act. 2. 38. with which compare vers 3â— 41 47. 1 Cor. 15. 1. Mat. 10. 40. 41. 32. Act. 8. 12. 13. 37. 38. 1 Cor. 6. 1â— Col. 2. 11. 12. Tit. 3. 5. Who but you Mr Bernard would thus wrong eyther these scriptures as iustifying the admission of lewd persons desâ—rving to be excommunicated into the Ch or the Apostles of Christ for admitting or baptizing such And yet these persons are the true bad matter for which you pleaded so much formerly and which here by these scriptures you would bring into a true bad vnion with God For of these for the most part hath the nation alwayes consisted and of these your Ch was gathered at the first when it became national so hath stood formed ever since The 3. last thing for the perfecting of this visible covenant vnâ—ing of the meÌ„bers one to another M. B. makes the holy sacrameÌ„t of the L. supper which aâ— it is a seal of our faith so iâ— iâ— a testimony of that visible comâ—â—â—ioÌ„ of love also of one member with another 1 Cor. 10. 16. 17. You confound all things in saying the sacrament makes the covenaunt which is a seal of it and praesupposeth both the covenant and the Church whereof it is an ordinance The covenant must be before the Church and the Church before the sacrament how then can the sacrament make the Church And where you further call it an holy sacrament a seal of â—aith a testimony of the visible coÌ„munion of love of one member with another you speak the truth but not truly such it is in it self in the right administration use of it but not in the prophane abuse of it vpon wicked men of whom wee speak and for whom their vniting with Christ you here plead VpoÌ„ whom whilest you the rest of the ministers of your Church do prophane it as you do the more holy it is in it self the more vnholy is your fact the more heynous your sin It is as you say the seal of faith and of the forâ—ivenes of sinns through faith to the penitent beleevers but is it therefore so such to apparantly impenitent vnbeleeving persons it is in it self a testimony of the coÌ„munion of love but is it so vnto among the wicked or is it not in that abuse made a lying witnes to testifie witnes love where apparant hatred and malice reigns against God good
hath not given his holy sacraments to your congregations And where you further adde that God hath moved the harts of all the people of your congregations outwardly to receive both the word and sacraments it is one amongst the rest of your bold but bare affirmations Are there not many thowsands amongst you that vnderstand not the doctrine of the beginning of Christ the very first principles of christiaÌ„ religioÌ„ And hath God perswaded the harts of these to receive the word sacrameÌ„ts in any sence The Lord Iesus teacheth vs in the gospel that every man that doth evill hateth the light neyther commeth to light least his deeds should be reproved And yet you will haue vs beleeve that God hath perswaded the hearts of all the evill-doers amongst you not onely to come to the light but also to receive it Let your own parish Mr B stand for instance There were in it to myne own knowledge when you wrote this book that held most blasphemous errours touching the very Trinity and there are at this day as I am certaynly informed who are so moved to receive the word as that your Church-wardens are driven to spend a great part of the Lords day in hunting them from the ale-house to the temple And if this be your case what is the condition of the most congregations in the Land to which the word of God hath not so much as been offered in any indifferent measure for the moving of their harts to receive it The truth is the people are drawn in the most congregations the most of them and many in all by compulsive lawes to keep their Parish Church to heare divine service to communicate at Easter and to receive the sacraments and other rites as is commaunded in the communion book but how farre the most are from having their harts thus moved as is pretended of all to receive the word of God appeareth too evidently in that great contempt and hatred wherein they have such amongst themselves as do in any sinceritie eyther preach or professe the same To these things I may further adde that since the Lord hath given his word and sacraments to be dispensed to no people but by the meanes which he hath prescribed in his word except the English Preisthood and leitourgy were prescribed by the word of God for these ministrations even in this respect God cannot be â—ayd to have given his word and sacraments to the congregations spoken of Now although this which hath been sayd in answer to your grounds be sufficient to disprove the form of your Church as you your self Mr B. rayse it yet for your further conviction I will adde certayn Arguments to manifest and make playn that wicked and vngodly men and women are vncapable by the word of the Lord of his covenaunt and of all spirituall visible vnion with him so consequently your congregations gathered of such persons at the first and of such still consisting generally with a handfull godly minded scattered amongst them to remayn vnformed by the Lords holy covenant The Arguments are First bycause godly and wicked men are contraries as being guided and led by contrary causes the one sort by the spirit and the other by the flâ—sh which are contrary one unto another Now two contraries are not capable of one and the same form Wicked men and such as hate to be reformed are forbidden by the revealed will of God from medling with his covenant or ordinances and therefore are not by the revealed wil of God received into covenant with him or to the participation of his ordinances which are both one Since wicked men are by the word of God as you your self graunt to be excommunicated that is to be cut off from the visible vnion with Christ and his Church how can they be sayd by the same word of God to be capable of this vnion with Christ and his Church nothing can be eyther more vnreasonably affirmed or more vngodlily practised Lastly the scriptures do expressely debarre men of lewd and vngodly conversation of all fellowship vnion and communion with God If wee say that we haue fellowship with him and walk in darknes we ly and do not truely sayth the Apostle Ioh. 1. Ep 1. 6. and what fellowship sayth Paul hath righteousnes with vnrighteousnes what communion hath light with darknes and what concord hath Christ with Belâ— ill or what part hath the beleever with the vnbeleever or infidel c. 2 Cor. 6. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. The former of these scriptures is so directly against you as if it were recorded by the holy Ghost with particular respect to your errour You say that men though of a lewd conversation that is walking in darknes have visible fellowship vnion and communion with God if they professe they beleeve in Christ or so say Iohn on the contrary teacheth that they which walk in darknes have no fellowship with God though they so say but are lyars The other scripture must be further opened and inforced considering how you charge vs in your 2. book with the wretched abuse of it and labour by a long discourse to wring it out of our hands as being our speciall weapon as you say to fight for separation and to defend the same The four heads vnder which you reduce all the particulars about it I will prosequâ—te in order as they are by you layd down 1. the occasion 2. the scope 3. the matter intreated of 4. the persons spoken of For the first it is true you affirm of the Christian Corinthians going to the idol feasts in the idol temples at the bidding of their freinds and kinsfolks the heathen Corinthians which I also acknowledg to haue been the mayn and most immediate occasion of the Apostles writing as he doth but not the onely occasion There was a former occasion of that namely their marying with the vnbeleevers their vnequall yoking with them that way by which the other mischeif was occasioned amongst them as it had been with other the servants of God before them from the beginning of the world Gen. 6. 2. In which respect therefore the Lord in the law forbad the Israelites to take of the daughters of the heathen vnto their sonnes least they provoked them to go awhoring after their Gods which when they neglected and mingled themselves with Idolaters in mariage they presently fell into that monstrous mixture in religion against which the Apostle dealeth Numb 25. 1 King 11. 1. 2. 3. 4. Ezra 9. 1. 2. But where for the clearing of your selves of the very occasion you do adde that you dwell not in civill society with idolaters but vnder a Christian King and with a people professing Christ where no publick Idols are set vp nor any feasting in honour of them you follow your old fashion of bold boasting without measure or modesty Do you not live in civil society with the Idolaters Haue you
no Papists in your kingdom I may say in your Parish or are Papists become no idolaters with you as Rome was right now no false Church nor Iesuites false subiects The face of your charity Mr B. is so full set towards Rome and Papists as no marvayl though you be so vnequall towards vs as you are The truth is you are in the most streyt bond of civil society with Popish idolaters that may be Ther is nothing more common amongst them of your Church then to ioyn in mariage with them neyther is there to my knowledge amongst all your canons any one against this prophane commixture Neyther is it any thing you speak of living vnder a Christian King or with a people professing Christ for idolaters may live vnder a Christian King and professe Christ too in a measure as both many others and all antichristiaÌ„ idolaters do Yea I have formerly manifested that you live not onely in civill but even in religious society with Papists and you your self graunt as much of Atheists in the beginning of your book and will you say that visible Atheists are true visible matter of the Church and capable by the word of God of true visible fellowship and communion with Christ and the true members of his body The scope of â—e scripture followeth which say you iâ— that the beleeving Corintâ—ians may have no fellowship with the infidels and vnbeleevers to their evill works but that they reprove condemn hate and avoyd them Belike then they might haue had fellowship with them in any good work and so if any of the heathen or infidell Corinthians would haue communicated with the Christian Corinthians in the sacraments or prayer they might not haue refused their fellowship or communion herein For by your exposition the Apostle onely forbids partaking with them in evill works the works of darknes Of which more hereafter And here in our names you frame an obiection the sum whereof is that if all the godly would separate from all the wicked then there should be no wicked of the Church Vnto which you answer sundry things but how sufficiently will appear in the particulars First you say God commaunds not his to separate wholly from all the wicked but from Infidels Gentiles Idolaters Iewes Turks Papists whose very societies are to be left as no people of God Well then I perceive all religious fellowship with Papists is vnlawfull and that their societies are no people of God And how agrees this with your other affirmations that Rome is a true Church Papists true Christians though under corruptions as it was true Iob though vnder soars baptism there a true sacrament and seal of the covenaunt yet here the societies of Papists are no people of God that is in no covenant with him Or how doth this separatioÌ„ thus wholly to be made from Papists agree with that you write pag. 91. of ioyning in prayer with such Papists as though they be of the Church of Rome yet sorrow for the abhominations and as are come out from it in their soules the best part though not so in their bodyes The distinction you put between Infidels and idolaters and men of prophane life wee shall consider of in due place for your speach of all the Church falling into the estate of infidelity and so â—â—dged of the Church eyther it is without sense or I which vnderstand it not Now to that you adde of separating from the private familiarity of the wicked living in the society of the godly and that if they will not be reformed other courses are to be taken with them as their sin of obstinacy deserves I answer these things First that as there is a case wherein private withdrawing from a brother is warrantable namely when his offence is private and he privately obstinate that his sinne eyther cannot be or is not yet made publick publiquely â—vinâ—â—d so to separate from men privately and that onely for publick offences is a course without ground either of scripture or rea son You say pag. 144. that alvin so expounds 1 Cor. 5. 11. and therevpoÌ„ do take an occasion to accuse our practise as Brownisticall vs of Luciferian schisme Pharisaicall pride As I leave your raylings to be iudged by the Lord so do I give the reader to vnderstand how you grossely abuse Calvins authority who expounds that scripture as all men know it is meant of excommunicates and of mens private cariage towards them with which publick separation is also to be joyned I suppose you your self will not deny it And where you speak of an other course to be taken with wicked men that wil not be reformed you should also shew what that course is and what is to be done if that course be not taken but you have thought it a point of your wisdome to be silent in these things least by opening them too particularly you should discover your own shame The course to be taken is the censuring of such incorrigible offenders by the particular congregation whereof they are being gathered together in the name of Christ by the power of Christ with which power divine and heavenly priviledge he hath furnished his Churches every one of them as well as that one of Corinth neyther doth any true Church of Christ want this power or neglect the vse of it without sinne And if any Church of Christ would neglect to vse this power against scandalous sin manifestly proved and coÌ„vinced would obstinately continue notwithstanding all good meanes vsed to the contrary this sower leaven vnpurged out the whole lump were levened and with leven might not the Passeover be eaten And as the Church if sin do arise is first to endeavour the casting out of the sinne by the sinners repentance and if that will not be in the last place to cast out the sinne and sinner together so if the Church do wickedly bear out and boulster iniquity amongst themselves such as are faithfull are first to quit themselves of that Church-sin by testifying against it and reproving it and in the last place to quit themselves of the Church if it remayn incurable Now here you bring in certayn differences distinctions of separation but without application The first I omit as being before handled so much as concerns the present purpose The 2. difference is between the wicked remayning amoÌ„g the godly the godly being of the felowship of the wicked this differece I acknowledg withall affirm that the latter part of it notes out the estate of your nationall Church wherein a few godly mynded in comparison live in the fellowship of a wicked and sinfull nation And if persons excommunicate by the Church be not of her fellowship then certaynly the number of the godly in your fellowship is very small since your nationall Church representative the convocatioÌ„ house whose Act also pag 147. you avouch to be the Act of all the Church so to be
he so much as commaund them any thing and here the Lord sets a people apart to be his and separates them from others in respect of some special peice of service appointed them The things you speak are contrary but neyther of them true The Lord never did nor will take people vnto him but by their submission and obedience vnto his commaundements and for that speciall service of God enioyned the Israelites it was an effect of their separation from other people and covenaunt with God and no cause by or for which they became the Lords separated people We must alwayes consider the Church of God principally and properly in the persons of men and secondarily in their works as we must first consider the vineyard in the trees and afterwards in the fruites they bring forth And so was Israel separated and set apart from other people Your addition thaâ— by other people is meant such as worshipped nâ—â—â—he true God which is nothing to you which worship Iesus Christ c. and that there is no place to prove that Israelites were to separate from other Israelites for their corruptions as false matter is like that which goes before For first Papists and Anabaptists with Idolaters and Heretiques many mo do worship Iesus Christ from whose societies notwithstanding you professe separation 2. The Ismaelites Edomites did worship the true God though not after a true manner and yet the Israelites were a people separated from them so as an Edomite though he had voluntarily joyned himself to the people of God might not beare any publick office amongst them to the third generatioÌ„ which you too ignoraÌ„tly expound pag. 248 of his admission into the Church Yea I do further adde that even Israelites and those which came of Israel or Iaakob were coÌ„maunded to separate themselves from Israelites and that for an vsurpation in the ministery as the scriptures make it playn Num. 16. as afterwards also vpon Ieroboams defection in the ministery worship holy dayes which he forged in his own hart 2 Chron. 11. 13. 14. 15. 16. with â— King 12. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. And thus is the exposition cleared against your frivolous exceptions of such scriptures in Levit and els where as make mention of the separation of the Iewish nation from all other nations which do fitly also serve to confirm justifie the separation of all the Churches in the new testament from such people and assemblies in all nations as of whom the Lord by his revealed will cannot besayd to accept as I am sure he cannot prophane and godles persons Now bycause the yssue of all controversies depends vpon the true exposition of the scriptures whose letter men will bring on both sides and that Mr B. takes speciall exception in this place against the expositions we give of such scriptures as seem to vs most materiall for our separation I wil therefore take in his exceptions as I return whence I came and make manifest as God inableth me the insufficiencie of them The next place that comes into coÌ„sideratioÌ„ is Act. 2 40. where â—ayth Mr B. Peter speakes to the Iewes of such Iewes as denyed Christ renounced the very foundation even Iesus Christ which is if we will beleeve him nothing to them that profesie him to be the true Messias It seemes then that separation is not to be made from the Papists for they hold Iâ—sus Christ to be the true Messias the very foundation yea even the merit of their works do they found vpon the merit of Christs obedience derogating lesse in truth though far too much from theÌ„ vertue of his Preisthood then you do in the constitution of your Church from the dignity of his kingdom in the outward government administration of it 2. Your nationall Church is so farre from being separated from them that deny Christ as it is indeed for substance compact and gathered of such to wit of impure and prophane persons who whatsoever they do professe â—â— word do deny in deed and visibly both God and our Lord Iesus Christ as the scriptures do expresly testifie And to deny that apparant wicked and prophane men or Churches do rayse the foundation of religion is a prophane errour tending to libertiuism and which foundeth all religion and Christianity in the brayn and nothing in the heart Lastly Peters exhortation vpon the occasion in hand was that the faithful Iewes should separate from that froward generation wherevpon the generall doctrine is rightly raysed that the faithfull at all tymes must be separated from all froward generations And of this duty wee are to make the greater conscience considering the words of the Apostle which are that we save our selves from such froward generations as indeed considering the duty we ow vnto our brethreÌ„ for their humbling if they be froward in sinne the discomfort wee haue in continuing communion with them the want of that godly furtherance wee should haue by our brethren in our holy communion and lastly the daunger wherein wee stand eyther to be corrupted by them or at least to haue our zeal and other graces of God decayed in vs our salvation doth not a little consist in our departure from the assembly of the prophane as Beza rightly notes vpon this scripture Of the same nature with the former place is the next in order where the Apostle Paul both departs himself separates the disciples from such as were hardened and would not obey but spake evill of the way of the Lord before the multitude Act. 19. 8. 9. But this you say proves not our purpose and your exceptions are First that our way is not the way of God 2. that if is were yet wee have not spoken to all your Church made it known to all nor haue found all hard hearted and 3. that the place teacheth separation from such obstinate wicked which will not bee wonne to the Church and that here is a departing of some true members of the Church from such as be not the Church but not of members of the true Church forsaking meÌ„bers of the true Church That our way is the way of God appeareth by this very scripture amongst many others wherein also wee haue both the reformists at home and reformed Churches abroad giving testimony with vs for the substance of it But put the case ours be not yet if the way of the reformed Churches be the way of God our separation is justified by this scripture For first your convocatioÌ„ house Church representative is hardened against the way of the reformed Churches blaspheming and persecuting it and all them that eyther seek or plead for it And their act being the cheif is by your own graunt to be accounted the act of all though the rest come not to consent so that you are all by your own words to be acounted a disobedient and hardened people vpon the former praemises namely that the way of the
haretiques may not be heard â—herefore vsurpers may You might as sensibly argue thus bycause a fornicatour must not be eaten with but iudged by the Church therefore a covetous person an idolatour a rayler may be eaten with and must not be judged contrary to the Apostles expresse writing In your 9. charge namely that we hold it not lawful to ioyn in prayer with any of you and in your comment vpon it you do vs a double injury first in saying we approve not of any of your praying for vs 2. That wee pray for you onely as wee do for Iewes Turks and Papists For as wee are perswaded we fare the better for the prayers of many amongst you and so both approve of and desire the same so do wee also pray for many as for the Lords people in Babylon and that they may at the Lords call go out of her and that as they are holy in their persons so they may be also in their Church communion and ordinances Now for the poynt it self first for your Reason by which you would prove it erroneous If say you wee hold any of you the childreÌ„ of God then our Saviour hath taught vs to ioyn with you in prayer and to say Our father with you You do wryte in another place of this book that a man justly excommunicated cast out is to be held a brother so consequently a child of God for the brethren of the Saynts are the children of God wherevpon if your Argument in this place and Position in the former place be good it must be lawfull to joyn in prayer with a man justly excommunicated I do answer then that it is true you say we ought to coÌ„municate both in prayer in al the other ordinances of God with all Gods children except they themselves hinder it or put a barre which we are perswaded they in the Church of Engl. do in chusing rather the coÌ„munioÌ„ of all the profane rowt in the kingdom vnder the Prelates tyranny then the coÌ„munion of Saynts which Christ hath established vnder his government So that it is not we which refuse them but they vs binding vs eyther to practise as we do or to coÌ„municate in one spirituall body with all the graceles persons and vile miscreants in the kingdom For as he which hath hold of any one member of the naturall body iâ— not separated from the body but holdeth the whole every member by cohaerence so he which is joyned in coÌ„munioÌ„ with one meÌ„ber of the Church is by cohaerence joyned with the whole Church and every member of it We do professe it is not in neglect of the graces of God which we acknowledge to be eminent in many that we deny coÌ„munioÌ„ with them but onely in conscience of the order which Christ hath set in testimony against the disorder which Antichrist hath brought into left in the world The order which the Lord hath set is that those which fear him should be of a true visible Church rightly gathered that any such should be out of the true Church or coÌ„mingled with all the prophane Atheists in a kingdom is a mayn part of Antichrists confusion Now if God hath set vs in the orderly coÌ„munioÌ„ of a Church we must not break our order for other mens disordered courses CoÌ„munion is a matter of order relation standing in the orderly combyning of the graces of God in two faythfull persons or more And how far order ought to praevayl with men in this case let these particulars manifest One of the Church coÌ„mits some notable sinne known to me alone which being dealt with by me he denyes and without two or three witnesses the Church may not proceed against him I must therefore still coÌ„municate with the Church and so with him as a meÌ„ber of it til God so far discover him as he can be orderly dealt with till the Lord lead him forth with the workers of wickednes And as I am to coÌ„municate with an vngodly man with whom I am orderly joyned in the Church till I can be orderly disioyned from him so by proportion I am to forbear communion with a godly man out of the Church vntill I be orderly joyned vnto him Further put the case a man be excoÌ„municated in mine absence vpon the testimony of tvvo or three witnesses and that I know he is injuryed am able to manifest his innocency to all men yet will I for order sake so am bound forbear communion with him for the praesent till his iÌ„nocency be by me sufficiently cleared Now if for order I must refuse coÌ„munion with him which is put out of the Church for weldoing by the sinne of others how much more with him that keepes out himself by his own default and sinne So that the holines of a mans person is not sufficient for coÌ„munioÌ„ but withall it must be ranged into the order of a Ch wherin both his persoÌ„ actioÌ„s must coÌ„byne vnder whose censure they must come whereas this other vnorderly course destroyes the censures which by Christs appointmeÌ„t do exteÌ„d to every brother whosoever These thinges I do desire the godly Reader indifferently and without offence to take knowledge of and to rest in this our defence if it be found according to the word of God if not to give vs knowledge by the same word of the contrary wherein we shall willingly rest and by the grace of God so practise Our 10. reckoned Errour is that ministers may not celebrate mariage nor bury the dead And this M. B affirmes we say but without scriptures First you that charge our opinioÌ„ with errour should so haue proved it by the scriptures or some Reasons from them 2. You speak against your own knowledge having seen our wrytings especially our Apology where in the 3. Petition to the KING and the fourth braunch of the sixth Position there are almost twenty severall scriptures and nine distinct reasons grounded vpon them to prove that the celebration of mariage and buryall of the dead are not ecclesiasticall actions apperteyning to the ministery but civill and so to be performed You your self M B both affirme and prove in this book from 1 Cor 12. 4. that the Lord onely praescribes the dutyes to be done in every distinct office of ministery in the Church And the Apostle testifieth that the scriptures being divinely inspired do make perfect and fully furnished the man of God or minister to every good work of his calling Now I suppose M. B will not be so ill advised as to goe about to prove that the celebration of mariage and buryall of the dead are duetyes praescribed by the Lord Iesus to be done in the Pastours office or that the scriptures lay this furniture vpon the man of God for the proper workes of his office They are then other spiritual Lordes then the Lord Christ that prescribe these
vnto them ever by how much the more superstitiously bent by so much the moâ—e devoutly addicted vnto them And so farre is that from truth which you say Mr Bernard that the godly and Church of God have in Popery kept possession of those buildings for the godly which should follow them that as they were erected by such as were most superstâ—tiously seduced so haue they been ever since the proper possesâ—ions of the most dangerous seducers in the Romish Synagogue the Praelates and their Clergy So that the morall equity of those commaundements in the old testiment touching the demolition and subversion of idolatrous temples and other the like superstitious monuments doth as well bynd now as then Which commaundements are also in effect renued in the new testament where the faythfull are charged to touch none vncleane thing to keep themselves from idols which they cannot do except they keep themselves from their appurtenaunces to hate even the garment spotted by the fâ—â—sh not to receive the least mark of the beast but to go out of Babylon which is also called Sodom and Aegypt spiritually as for other sinns reigning in her so for her idolatry amongst the rest which I the rather note that men may se it is not we but the holy Ghost that compares together Paganish AntichristiaÌ„ Idolatry Lastly where Mr Bernard bids vs prove that their Churches were built by Antichrist their records as Mr Ainsworth observeth vvill prove it so will their situation directly East and West with the Quyer or Chauncell alwayes at the East end and the rood-loft in the midle to separate it from the body of the Church the prophane layity their vacant places for Images abolished and their popish pictures still remayning and lastly their names even the names of the Apostles Saynts and Martyrs in whose honour they were built and to whose peculiar service thy were consecrated Thus much of the temples which is the last difference betwixt Mr B. and me and I confesse the least and this much also of his book Something remayns to be spoken of the Ministers Positions but very breifly both bycause the things in them for substance have come formerly into consideration and also bycause Mr Bernard affoards them no confirmation in his 2. book being shaken by Mr Ainsworth as they are ANd to omit the bloody doom which these Ministers passe vpon vs all contrary I am perswaded to their own consciences that wee are cut of from Christ for our separation from the Church of England I will consider breifly of their reasons to prove it a true Church THe first is bycause They enioy and ioyn together in the vse of those outward means which God in his word hath ordeyned for the gathering of an invisible Church which are preaching of the gospell and administration of the sacraments which they will prove by the vnfâ—yned conversion of many by the scriptures Math 28. 18. 20. Eph. 4. 11. 14. First the Church of Engl namely the nationall Church under a nationall government and Ministery is a popish devise the Lord having appointed none other Church vnder the new testament but a particular congregation as these Ministers truely vnderstand Mat 18. 17. with a government Ministery correspoÌ„dent 2. Before men joyne together as a Church in the fellowship of the gospell and communion of Saynts in the ordinances of God they should be prepared by the preaching of the word and fitted as spirituall stones for the Lords building so joyn in covenant by voluntary personal profession of faith confessioÌ„ of sinns from which how far the body of the nationall Church of Engl both is and ever hath been all know 3. As the sacraments are no meanes to gather eyther the visible or invisible Church but do praesuppose a CHVRCH gathered already into covenant with God of which covenaunt they are seales so doth not the Church of England ioyn together in the preaching of the doctrine of sayth which is the outward meanes for the gathering of the Church The greatest part of the parishes as they have onely the service book for prayer so have they onely the homilies for preaching And even in the Parishes where the word is best taught and the sacraments most orderly administred yet do not men joyn in the vse but in the abuse of these ordinances considering the confused coÌ„munion wherein the vsurped authority by which and the book-service according to which they are dispensed If the Ministers had onely affirmed that they had taught amoÌ„gst theÌ„ such truths of the gospel as by which the Lord might and did sanctifie save his elect or gather an invisible Church as they speak I should not contend with them but should further ad that I doubt not but such truthes are even in many assemblies of Papists and Anabaptists and to hold otherwise is a fowl cruell errour but where they speak of enioying the outward meanes and by them vnderstand the offices of Ministery which Christ hath given vnto his Church for the gathering and feeding of the same for which purpose they alledge Math. 28. 18. 20. Ephe. 4. 11. 14 I deny they enioy the outward means ordeyned for the gathering of the Ch neyther shall they ever be able to prove it except they can prove themselves lawfully and according to Christs testament possessed of some of the offices there spoken of In the 4. place I would the cause why these ministers speak of the outward meanes of gathering an invisible Church not of a visible since both the quaestion betwixt them and vs is about the visible and not about the invisible Church and also that the scriptures they bring for the justification of these meanes amongst them do speak of the meanes ministeries given not to the invisible but to the visible Church and if it be not bycause they know that if they had spoken of the means of gathering the visible Church we would and that justly have excepted that they do not enjoy nor have not so much as taught amongst them those doctrines of the gospell and that part of Christs Testament which teacheth the right orderly gathering of the visible Church by separation of the saynts from the vnsanctified world into the covenant and fellowship of the gospell by free and personall profession of fayth and confession of sinns Lastly as the preaching of the gospell is the onely outward means to gather a Church so though this meanes be vsed never so fully and men enioy it and ioyne in it never so ordinarily yet except withall they ioyne in the vnderstanding fayth obedience of and submission vnto it and that in the order which Christ hath set they are not made a Church by it according to the right vse of it but do make themselves by abusing it a conventicle of prophane vsurpers howsoever M. B. and these ministers and many others do indeed make the
our selves in psalmes and to teach and admonish our selves in Psalmes and himnes and spirituall songs What greater difference In prayers wee speak onely to God in psalmes to our selves mutually or one to another Neyther had Mr Giffard any advātage in the words following where wee are taught to sing with a grace in our harts to the Lord for by singing with a grace is meant such singing as ministreth grace vnto the hearers contrary to that corrupt or rotten communication Eph. 4. 29. And in this as in all other things we must propound the glory and honour of God vnto our selves 3. There are very many both of Davids and others Psalmes wherein there is no title of prayer but they are merely to be sung for doctrine instruction and meditation as Psal. 1. 2. and many more The Ministers write that the most Psalmes that David made were sung not onely as meditations and doctrines for the instructions of the Ch but as prayers to God bycause they are sayd to be sung vnto the Lord for which purpose they instāce in one onely which is Psal. 66. 2. 3. Well not to fall to reckoning with them wherein they and I should not agree for I would except against their picked instāce Ps. 66. 2. 3. which all mē may see was not sung for prayer nor vnto the Lord as they mean but for instruction and provocation of the Church to prayse God if they consider it they should have proved not that some but that all psalmes are prayers otherwise they may not be confounded made one ordinance as by them they are But to come to that which is specially to be observed even those Psalmes whose matter is prayer are not prayers neyther is the singing of them the outward ordinance and exercise of praying And this is the very state of the controversy Which that it may be vnderstood the better it must be considered that the very same matter of prayer may be vsed diversly and so formed into divers externall ordinances It may be read preached heard written sung or prayed Now who is so simple as to say herevpon that reading preaching hearing writing singing praying are all one If a man read Davids prayer that the Lord would turn the counsayl of Ahitophel into foolishnes or eyther read or sing the 6. Psalm where in his prayer he professeth that he causeth his bed every night to swim and waters his couch with teares or Psalm 42. that he remembers God frō the Land of Iorden c. doth that man therefore pray to God that he would turn into foolishnes the counsel of Ahitophel or doth he professe that he waters his couch with teares every night remembers God from the Land of Iorden or is it not evident he reads and sings those prayers onely for instruction of himself others And so wee read in the inscription of the last named psalm that it was committed to the sonnes of Corah not to pray it which they could not do without folly but for instruction And as truely may it be sayd that the reading of Noahs curse or Schemies is cursing as that the reading or singing for singing is but a reading in tune of Davids prayers is praying But it will here be asked is it not then lawfull for a man in the singing of Davids psalmes consisting of prayer to lift vp his hart and to have it affected accordingly as he can apply the matter in them to his present state occasions yes certaynly it is both lawfull and godly but withall it must be remembred that the quaestion here is not about the inward affection of the heart but about the outward ordinance and 2. that a man may so lift vp his heart and have the affection of prayer and thanksgiving in preaching hearing writing reading and yet not perform the outward exercise and outward ordinance of prayer of which our quaestion is Lastly in psalmes there is of necessity required a certayn known form of words that two or more may sing together according to the nature of the ordinance wherein many joyning vocally do make a concent or harmony But who will say there is such simple necessity of a set form of words for prayer wherein one is to utter a voyce according to the suggestions of the spirit in his heart and the rest to consent by silence with saying Amen By which it appeareth how vnadvisedly these ministers and others do thus agayn and agayn vrge set formes of psalmes to prove set formes of prayer Thus much of the first head the second followeth in which such scriptures are to be considered of as are brought to prove a set stinted form of words to be imposed for prayer The principal scriptures for this purpose and vnto which the rest may be reduced are Numb 6. 23. 24. Math. 6. 9. Luk. 11. 2. It is a troublesome thing that that these Ministers thus vrge the letter of the scriptures as if the quaestion were not about their sense and interpretation which they should prove to be for their stinted service as they should also disprove our reasons to the contrary But herein they are vtterly silent and think it sufficient to inculcate the words Thus shall ye blesse the children of Israel and say vnto them c when you pray say thus Our father c. even as the Papists vrge these words this is my body First then wee do acknowledge these words to be in the scriptures by them cited 2. wee hold it lawfull to vse those very words in our-prayers all or any part of them if wee be therevnto guided by the Holy Ghost in whom we must alwayes pray and by whose help we must make our requests vnto God But the quaestiō is whether Moses tyed and stinted the Preists to that form of words in blessing the people and whether Christ tyed and stinted his disciples to that very form of words for prayer so to be vsed by the one and other without alteration addition or diminution And that this is not the meaning of the holy Ghost I do manifest by these Reasons First these particles thus or on this manner say do not vsually in the scriptures designe or note out the form of words but the substance of the thing spoken of Take an instance or two When the Lord sent Moses vnto Pharaoh King of Aegypt it was vnder these terms Thou shalt say to Pharaoh thus sayth the Lord Israel my sonne my first born wherefore I say to thee let my sonne go that he may serve me c. But when Moses came to deliver his message in the next chapt ver 1. 2. he doth not ty himself to the self same words nor vseth them He did not vnderstand thou shalt say to Pharaoh thus sayth the Lord of the form of words but of the substance of the thing The same in effect may be sayd of Abrahams servant going about a wife for Isaak
who relating to Laban the prayer he made for direction in the buesines doth not vse the same words when he tels him what he sayd in his prayer It seems in his vnderstanding a man might say thus thus in prayer though he vsed not the same words if he spake to the same purpose Many more scriptures might I bring as others have done before me to prove that these words and particles upon which these men vvould recken the words of their prayers do no way enjoyn any such stint of words and sillables but onely a similitude of matter and are for direction therein It is evident in the scriptures that neyther Moses nor the Preists or other holy men stinted themselves to these words 1 Sam. 1. 17. and 2. 20. Deut. 33. 1. 2. c. 2 Chron. 6. 3. 4. c. Thirdly why do not the ministers now ty themselves to this form of words in blessing the people they being the Lords Preists and Levites the Ch the Israel of God This blessing was no ceremony or shadow to be abolished but moral perpetual 4. If the Lord Iesus in directing his disciples to pray praescribe them a certayn form of words to be vsed when he bids them pray thus or after this manner when they pray say then eyther Mathew or Luke misse in Christs intendement for they as all may see record not the same certayn form of words If defence be made that they speak of two severall tymes wherein Christ gave this direction I answer such a man that if that be graunted it makes against him for Christ inteÌ„ded the same thing in both places at both times wherevpon it followes that the vse of a certayne form of words was no part of Christs intendement It is evident that these words of Christ pray thus and when you pray say are a commandement binding his Church to the worlds end in all places and at all tymes and that when you pray say is as much as whensoever or â—â— what tyme soever you pray say as when they deliver you up Math. 10. 19. when one sayth I am Pauls c. 1 Cor. 3. 4. when ye come together c. Chap. 14. 26. is as much as when or at what tyme soever they deliver you when soever one sayth I am Pauls whensoever yee come together And to let passe all other scriptures in the 6 of Mathew where Christ delivers this form speaks of this and the like matters when thou givest thine almes v 2. when thou prayest v 5. when ye fast v 16. that is whensoever thou givest almes fastest or prayest Wherevpon it followeth necessarily that if Christ the Lord intended a set form of words when he directed his disciples to pray and bad them when ye pray say then whensoever we pray we must vse that very form of words none other For the words of Christ are not a permission as the Ministers insinuate but an absolute commaundement neyther is the quaestion as they vntruely lay it down whether it be lawfull to vse these very words in prayer but whether it be necessary and that when or whensoever we pray for that which Christ intends he commands and what he commaunds he coÌ„maunds to be done when or whensoever wee pray And these things considered it is no absurd obiection as these Ministers make it that we never read the Apostles did use this prescript form of words in prayer For reading of many formes of prayer they vsed and never of this wee are assured that Christ did not stint them to this form of words nor coÌ„maund them when they prayed to vse them for then they had sinned when they prayed and vsed them not Christ Iesus in the same place teacheth his disciples as well touching almes fasting as prayer and in particular that when they fast they should annoynt their head and wash their face Now who is so ignorant as to affirm that Christs purpose herein is to bind them to these ceremonies and why not as well as to ty them to these very words He sayth as well when thou fastest annoynt thine head and wash thy face as when thou prayest say Our Father c. yea touching prayer it self he as well directs and teacheth his disciples what or how to do as what or how to speak He sayth as well when thou prayest enter into the Chamber shut the dore as when thou prayest say Our Father As then the purpose of Christ in teaching his disciples when they fast to annoynt their head and wash their face and when they pray to enter into their chamber and to shut the dore is not to ty them to that very form of ceremony but to advertise them to beware of all hypocrisy vain-glory in these things so when he teacheth them to pray on this manner his purpose is not to ty them to the very form of words but to admonish them to beware of all vayn bablings and superstitious repetitions and to ask in fayth of God the father who knowes their wants beforehand v 7. 8. Lastly as wee are commaunded to pray the Lords prayer as it is called so are we to preach the word of God But as if a man take the scriptures and read them or some part of them vnto the people or commit the same to memory and so vtter it this is not preaching so neyther is the reading of this praescript or repeating it by memory praying Indeed in preaching we must ever make the scriptures our text and groundwork and must speak according vnto them and may take a verse two or more vse them even word for word as they fit our occasion and may be applyed to our purpose so in praying we must make this praescript ever as it were the text and groundwork of our prayer must pray according vnto it and may vse a petition two or more or all in or of it even word for word if so the holy Ghost by whose immediate teachings and suggestions all our requaests must be put vp do direct vs and that wee can apply the same words to our present occasions and needs The same which I have sayd touching the preaching of the word may be added in respect of the administration of the sacraments The Apostle writing to the Corinthians about the Lords supper advertiseth them that he received of the Lord that which he delivered vnto them Now he that looks into the 3. Evangelists that mention this institution and compares eyther one of them with another or Paul with any of them he shall finde that the ordinance stands not at all in the prescript form of words wherein they all differ ech from others It is evident that the Lord administred this supper but once that in a certayn form of words And that which the Lord delivered vnto his disciples these four pen-men of the Holy Ghost delivered to the Churches Now the great
196. 197. 198. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207. 208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 213. 214. 222. 223. 224. 225. 226. 227. 228 229. 230. 231. 232. 223. 234. 238. 229. 240. 241. 242. 243. 244. 245. Of popish ceremonies conformity vnto them p. 25. 27 65. Of circumstances p. 21. 2â— 33 37. and the manner of doeing things pa. 369 370. The communion in the Church most entyre p. 233. 234. Great care to be taken that it be holy and lawfull pag 133. 254. 255. Of Compulsion to religion how it hurts it pag 275. 298. 299. 300. 301. 302. 459. The Ch of Engl so therefore not rightly gathered after the Romish Apostacy pag 292. 300 301. 302. 303 304. Of Collections and Consequences p. 32. 45. Contentions alwayes in the Clâ—â— pag 55. 56. E Of the power of the Lord Iesus for excoÌ„munication the reformation of abuses pa 32 â—3 Given to every true particular Church pag 267. An essentiall property pag 347. 348. 349. 350. 351. Persons not vnder it with out p. 100. 101 Difference between it and separation p 124. F Fayth and repentance not to be stinted pa. 23. 24. All things must be done in fayth pag. 18. 28. and in things doubtfull suspend pa 19 34. Of Fundamentall truthes such as are necessary to salvation pa 31. 32. 376. 448 449. 450. 451. G The difference betwixt civil and ecclesiastical government and governours p 135. 136 137. 164 165. 166. 168. See Christs kingdom Church-government a mere Church-service p. 217. 137. 225. I. How wâ—e the Iewes one pa 196. 211. Their extraordinary priveledges p 248. No separation from that Church p. 250. Their government no pattern for ours p 174. 194. 195. 196. 197. 198. Their Synagogues not as our Churches now pa 427. Excommunication or dissynagogueing amongst them no divine spirituall and distinct ordinance p 187. 188. 189. 190. Of things indifferent p. 25. 27. their vnseasonable vse p. 36. 37. K. Keyes of the kingdome of heaven given to the whole Ch pag. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 152 153. in what order 399. 400. â—â—5 L. Lawes ecclesiasticall in Engl pag. 20. 21. binde and loose the conscience pag 264. 265. 39. M. Ministery left by Christ p. 192. 356. Vnlawfull Ministers not to be coÌ„municated with what truths soever they teach pa 17. 79. 80. 162. 163. Difference in the administring of doctrine and disciplyne pa 165. 151. 234. 238. The Ministery of Engl disproved and the Reasons for it answered pag 162. 163. 173. 174. 175. 265. 266. 346. 356. 357. 358. 359. 360. 361. 362 363. 364. 370. 377. 378. 379. 385. 386. 389. 390. True ordinary Ministers tyed to a particular assembly pa 393. 394. 395. True Ministers cannot be in a false Church pa 360. 361. Conversion of men to God no note of a true Minister pa 10 11 51. 69. 379. 380. 381. 382. 383. 384. 385. The Ministers in Engl all of the same constitutioÌ„ pa 351. 352. Theires and the Romish Ministery the same in respect of the office power to administer it and most of the works pa 358. 359. 411. Preaching of the gospel no part or property of the Ministery in Engl but a thing casuall p. 353. 354. 355. Of the calling of Ministers wherin the peoples right is pro ved Mr B objections answered p. 144. 145 146. 360. 361. 365. 367. 371 376. Ministers by their office not to celebrate mariage nor buâ—y the dead p. 438. 439. Their maintenance p. 439. 440. O. Of offence p. 18. 19. 37. 39. Officers not simply necessary for the publique administratioÌ„s in the Church pag 137. 138. 139 144. 165. 166. 167. The brethren out of office not mere private persons p 423. 424. Of the officers vsurpation p. 367. 368. 367. 132. 133. Ordination may in cases be performed by such as are no officers pa. 400. 401. 402 423. Ordination Baptism vnâ—â—tly compared p 413. See Baptism P Praetence of peace pa 13. 14. 15. Of pollution by other menns â—â—nns and how it comes pag. 244. 245. 249 254 256 259. Of preaching or publishing the gospel pa 70. 71. 72. 73. The true Church gathered by it onely See Church How a note of the Church See word The coÌ„stitutioÌ„ of the Church it deceitfully opposed p. 37. See Church Of profession of fayth prosessours p. 7. Profession makes not a Church pag. 452. The profession of fayth required by the scriptures p 90. 91. 270 271. 272. 274. That in Engl compared with it p. 58. 91. 274. 275. 316. 450. 451. Of prophesying out of office p. 235 238. R Reformation to begin at our selves so to passe to others p. 24. 133. Praeposterous reformation in Engl made and desired pa 300. 301. The people interessed in the reformation of publique scandalls in their Church in their places as well as the officers p. 142. 143. 164. 165 170. 242. 343. as also in other Church affayres p. 190. 200 201 204. See OrdinatioÌ„ Mat. 18. 17. exp S. Sacraments do not constitute a Church but presuppose a Ch constituted pa 91. 283. 284. how notes of the Church p. 317. 342. 343. 344. not given by the Lord to any parish Ch in Engl p. 319. 320 Of their Ministration in England p. 91. 92. 93. 425. Of Saints saintship p. 107. 108 1. 1. Of succession see Ordination T Of the Temples by Mr Bern called their Churches p. 440. 441. 442 443. 445. 446. W. How the Word of God makes notes out the Church p. 89 315. 447. Of the Worship in the Church of Engl p. 424 425. 426. 427. 429. 430. The vse of their devised leitourgy is not the true manner of worshipping God neyther can Mr. Ber or the Ministers justify it pa 425. 426. 428. 429. 466. to the end Errata  pag. l. For contradictions read contraries pag. 42. l. 20. For approbation read exprobration 62. 15. for svvord read head 89. 21. read with Zerubbabel 94. 29. for discharged read dischurched 107. 6. for discharging read dischurching 128. 19. for Ioseph r Pharaoh 175. 17 for of read or 176. 27. for quality r quantity 195. 36. for endeavours r endeavourers 209. last line for false read true 359. 1. for Eph r Epist 422. 25. r be in the 433. 16. for the read your 435. 9. r would not allow 435. 16. for praeservation r prevention 443. 14 r would know the 446. 26. for converted r vnconverted 457. 34. for Papists r popish 465. 12. The Printer to the Reader I Gentle Reader Sundry other faults in the printing are escaped in words letters poynts wherof some shal be amended to thy hands the rest in the reading help thy self by the sense or otherwise Impute not the Printers faults to the Authour but recken the most and greatest myne and the least and smallest his Rev. 3. 16. †Levit. 9. 24. 1 King 18. 38. †◠Thes. 5. â—1 I. II. * Ier. 24. â— 2. 3. two baskets III. †Prov. 24. 23. * â—â—m 2.