the Sabbath Baptism Lord's Supper c. and I do so in this dispute Answ Egregie dictum excellently said indeed as if because we affirm that whatever is to be practised in Instituted Worship in the time of the Gospel is to be wholly bottom'd as to the Law and Precept instituting it upon some Commandment of Christ in the New-Testament therefore we assert that no use may be made of the Scriptures of the Old-Testament treating thereabout by way of prophecy or otherwise which is a Consequence this learned Animadverter will never be able to make good 'T is true many learned men do make use of some places of the Old-Testament to prove the morality of one day in seven or the seventh part of time not as I remember except Psa 118. 24 which some conceive by way of prophecy speaks of the Lord 's honouring the first day for the confirmation of the observation of the first day which they conceive Christ's resurrection on that day the practice of the Primitive-Church meeting together for the solemn Worship of God 1 Cor. 16. 2. Acts 20. 7. the appellation the Lord's Day which they judge is given to it c. is a sufficient warrant for their observation thereof in Gospel-times They plead not for Baptism or the Lord's Supper upon any other bottom than Gospel-Institution or their preception by Christ in the New-Testament Though 't is true as touching the subjects of the one and the other they judg they may by way of analogy argue somewhat from Old-Testament-Scriptures from which apprehension they see nothing so weighty in what is tendred by Mr. T. notwithstanding his brag and immodest Assertion pag. 18. Sect. 14. that such a way of arguing is irrational as if wisdom rested with him and he had the measure of it and a man could not differ from him but he must be a block or bruit to influence their departure That because the granting the Assertion would be disadvantagious to the Author and the Separatists therefore it should be in Mr. T. his opinion an unreasonable postulatum to devolve the question upon the Scriptures of the New-Testament I understand not He takes not a measure I presume of the reasonableness or unreasonableness of requests from their advantagiousness or disadvantagiousness to such contemptible creatures as we and should he do so he were much to blame as to infer from hence therefore I see no reasonableness in his Postulatum which is introduced not as the natural issue of any thing premised which he knows it is not but meerly for pomp and shew Sect. 3. The judgments of the Antients no sufficient substratum to build my practice upon in the Worship of God The opinion of the Antients â—hemselves in this matter None but the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures can satisfie the consciences of any dissatisfied in matters relating to Worship Our Faith not to be resolved into the Testimony of men which is a principle decryed by the Antients and Protestant Churches The consciences of none can be satisfied in what is written by the Ancients before they are assured 1. that what they read as or are told is theirs be indeed so and not counterfeited nor adulterated 2. That in their Writings they were as the Apostles and Prophets guided by an unerring Spirit The true use of the Testimony of the Ancients Congregational-Principles owned by them Of Councils and Schoolmen THe fourth Section is fronted with this The judgement of the Ancients not useless in this Controversie as if the Author of the Sober-Testimony had asserted it to be so which Mr. T. knows he no where doth This indeed the words of the Author not perplexing our selves nor the consciences of any with the judgments of men in generations past wherein they cannot acquiesce fairly intimate 1. That the judgment of none of the children of men though never so famous in their generation since the Apostles fell asleep is a sufficient Substratum to build my faith and practice upon in the Worship of my God In which we have the concurrence of the Ancients themselves Basil tels us that it is necessary and consonant to Reason that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scriptures both for the fulness of Godliness and lest they be inured to humane traditions Regul contract 95. p. 902. And Austin Epist 112. ad Paulin. saith If a matter be grounded on the clear authority of the holy Scriptures it is to be believed without all doubt but as for other witnesses and testimonies upon whose credit any thing may be urged unto us to believe it it is lawful for thee either to credit or not to credit them according as thou shalt perceive them of weight to deserve or not to deserve credit Origin saith Homil. 1. in Hierem. We must of necessity call the Scriptures to witness for our senses and interpretations without them are of no credit Famous is the saying of Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem Catech. 4. p. 15. We must not deliver any thing though never so small without the holy Scriptures neither may we be led away with probabilities and shews of words neither yet believe me barely saying these things unto you unless you also believe the demonstration thereof from the Scriptures for the security of our faith ariseth from the demonstration of the holy Scripture 2dly That not the sayings or judgment of the Ancients but the clear Testimony of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures is sufficient and efficacious for the satisfying persons that are dissatisfied in any thing relating to Faith or Worship Come to a poor soul under real scruples of spirit with respect to these and tell him this Father is of this opinion and that Father of that you do but oleum operam perdere when you have said all he remains as he was dissatisfied and so will do without evidence from Scripture More than these two things the Animadverter cannot righteously infer from the expression he discants on What saith he to these not a word more or less And I am apt to believe of Mr. T. that he is a man of greater modesty than to oppose them He tells us indeed that it may be of good use to satisfie mens consciences that no such separation as now is from the present Ministers of the Church of England was allowed of by the first Fathers and Writers what truth there is in this suggestion shall by and by be manifested He will not say surely of what good use he supposeth it to be that the faith of any is to be resolved into their testimony which it must be if what they say satisfie the scrupling conscience i. e. I must believe what they say is true because they say it else that they say it will never tend to my satisfaction which yet is an homage and duty that we owe to none but the Lord. A principle decryed and abhorred by the Ancients themselves The saying of Austin Epist 48. is known
people of weak judgements did satisfie themselves in these things in the judgement of their faithful learned wise and holy Teachers and Rulers Answ Bravely spoken had it been at Rome our English stomachs can scarce away with such Coleworts O dura Messorum ilia 1. The Animadverter all along takes for granted that which we expresly told him Chap. 5. 7. of the S. T. pag. 41 62. we denied viz. That there are any circumstances or particularities of Worship relating to it as such undetermined by the Lord. 2dly Under the notion of particularities of Worship undetermined he shrouds the many Popish toyes and Antichristian inventions as Cross in Baptism Ring in Marriage Surplice yet retained in the Church of England These he would not have persons too careful about But seriously Sir those that know the Lord know him to be a jealous God and that he hath manifested his jealousie in such terrible rebukes against some of the sons of men as Nadab and Abihu Levit. 10. 1 2. Vzza 2 Sam. 6. 6 7. whom he slew in his fury for their Worshipping him otherwise than he had determined that be they never so weak they tremble and abhor to draw nigh to God in a way they have no Scripture-warrant for 3dly They desire to be satisfied in the authority of the Children of men in their attempts to impose upon their Consciences and make those things the necessary parts of Worship which they themselves acknowledge Christ hath left as particularities undetermined 4thly They would also be directed by Mr. T. to those faithful learned wise and holy Teachers he speaks of for they can find few or none such in a whole County And yet 5thly One thing more they would be satisfied in Whether an implicite Faith in matters of Worship be any more tolerable and justifiable than in matters of Doctrine And whether this will ever be a satisfactory answer to their mighty Sovereign the Lord of Hosts when he shall demand of them Who hath required this at your hands Why truth Lord we never read that thou didst ever do so but our faithful Teachers told us we might yea ought notwithstanding to practise these things and believe it will never be accepted as such 6thly His scurrilous reflections they can freely pardon though they know that the brood of Ranters c. he speaks of have not been produced by the inquisitiveness of any after the mind of God with respect to Instituted Worship but persons taking up with such slight thoughts of the Worship of the Holy God as such expressions as these used by him are apt enough to beget in the minds of men together with the instability and inconstancy of persons whom they have it may be owned as their Teachers and Rulers being ready to imbrace and shake hands with whatever is uppermost in the world labouring to support uphold and draw others to the imbracement of that now which not long ago they Prayed Preached against and with hands and eyes lift vp to Heaven they swore to seek to the uttermost of their power to root out and demollish Sir these things are some of those occasions through the subtilty of Satan and the corruption of mans nature of that Raâ—tism Atheism c. that is in the world And blessed be the Lord the Congregations of his People have been but little emptied hereby they are a brood issuing for the most part out of the Womb of the Church of England and are such as it 's known that little enquired into these matters taking all for Gospel that their Preachers taught them The next attempt of the Animadverter is the exatnination of the Arguments advanced in the S. T. against hearing the present Ministers of England The first is That which there is no warrant for in the Scripture â—eing part of Instituted Worship is not lawful for the Saints to practise But there is no warrant in the Scripture for hearing the present Ministers and Heariug is part of Instituted Worship Therefore To which he answers Sect. 2. Chap. 1. The sum is There is a Twofold Warrant by Command or by Permission Of Instituted Worship there are two Parts 1. Essential without which it is not or is not rightly called Instituted Worship 2. Accidental which may be present or absent and yet the Worship be or righteously be so called If the Major be meant of Warrant by Command and part accidental of Instituted Worship it is denied and so is the Minor Hearing the Word from this or that person is a part accidental of Instituted Worship undetermined and hath a warrant by Permission as being not contrary to any Precept or Rule in Scripture about such Worship Answ 1. This Animadverter continues still his old trade of begging and dictating without proof which doth not become him and being in matters wherein our souls are so nearly concerned we cannot bear it in him 1. He teâ—ls us That with respect to Instituted Worship there is a twofold warrant by Command or by Permission but would he had thought it incumbent upon him to have proved what he asserted This we deny Whatever hath not a warrant of Command in the Scripture is plainly interdicted and forbidden therein Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Rev. 22. 18. punished with no less than death upon those that have adventured to act exorbitantly without such a warrant as we but now manifested 2dly He tells us That there are two Parts of Instituted Worship Essential and Accidental but this also is false and untrue we expect his proof of it A part Accidental of Instituted Worship is a sort of gibberish that as it is unscriptural so it is little less than down-right-nonsence Instituted Worship is such Worship as is appointed by command from Christ or that is by Christs institution saith Mr. T. in answer to the Preface of S. T. Sect. 2. How any part of instituted Worship can be an accidental part i. e. such a part of Worship as though enjoyned by Christ which if it be not it is not instituted as may be done or not done without sin I must profess I understand not And desire Mr. T. would inform me not in a Dictator-like way as if he were a second Pythagoras but from Scripture-evidence And lest he should mistake this is that which is incumbent upon him to prove That a part of instituted Worship which is a Worship commanded by Christ may be accidental i. e. performed or not performed without sin 3dly That hearing the present Ministers of England preach the Doctrines and Traditions of men as he must do at some time or other that constantly attends on their Ministry or according to Mr. T. the Word of God hath Warrant in Scripture by permission as being not contrary to any Precept about Worship is another dictate of his that he will make good ad Graecas Calendas 'T is true the Light of Nature dictates That God is to be heard by whomsoever he speaks and 't is as true that God having
in S. T. reflects sadly upon its authority and perfection which is the next thing we affirm to evidence the truth of the major Proposition This M. T. saith is true with respect to all Doctrinals of Faith and Manners and Worship in respect of Essentials but not of Accidentals thereof undetermined in the Scripture Answ 1. The unscripturalness and vanity of that distinction we have already discovered 2ly We had thought that the perfection of the Scripture had consisted in this that the whole of that obedience that God required of us had therein been stated and enjoyned for which end we conceive it was at first commanded to be written and hitherto by the wonderful gracious providence of the Lord continued to us The Accidentals of Worship are either part of that Obedience we owe to God or they are not If not how come they to be such parts of Worship as without them we are interdicted to perform it or indeed whence is it that we are tendring them up to God when all our Worship is nothing else but the solemn tender of that Obedience that we owe to him if they are then there is some part of our Obedience that is not prescribed in the Scripture then is the Scripture imperfect and that with respect to the main end for which it was given forth viz. to indoctrinate and direct us in the whole of that Obedience that God requires of us and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Aristotle l. 2. de Coelo c. 4. But this is contrary to 1. The testimony and witness of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures 2 Tim. 3. 15. Prov. 2. 1 9. Isa 8. 20. 2 Pet. 1. 19. Luke 1. 4. John 5. 39. 20. 31. 2 Cor. 4. 6. Lukâ— 10. 26. 16. 29. Deut. 12. 8 32. Prov. 30. 5. Mat. 22. 29. Gal. 1. 8. Eph. 2. 20. Heb. 4. 12. Rev. 22. 18. 2dly To the Witness of many of the Worthies of the Lord in their day The renowned Waldenses or the Church of Christ in the Wilderness some hundreds of years ago declare and attest that nothing is to be admitted in Religion but what only is commanded in the Word of God that all mens Traditions are to be rejected and therefore this singing and superfluous chanting in the Chancel to be left It is necessary and consonant to reason that every man learn that which is needful out of the Scriptures both for the fulness of Godliness and lest they be inured to humane traditions saith Basil Regul contract 95. pag. 502. God will ask no more of a Christian Believer in this life but only to obey the Precepts of that most blessed Law If any Prelate of the Church require more or else any other kind of obedience than this to be used he contemneth Christ exalting himself above God and so becâ—meth an open Antichrist saith the Lord Cobham in the Confession of his Faith offered to Hen. the 5th about the year 1413. Chrysostom calls them a most exquisite rule and exact square and ballance to try all things by Augustine expounding Gal. 1. 8. saith If we or an Angel from Heaven declare unto you either concerning Christ or his Church any other matter belonging to our Faith or Life any thing but that which you have received in the writings of the Law and the Gospel let him be accursed Cont. Lit. Petilian Don. l. 3. c. 6. de unitat Eccles cap. 11. Et honos praeter mandatum est dedecus God is dishonoured by that honour that is ascribed to him beyond his own prescription saith Hierome Yea 3dly our Protestant Divines disputing with the Papists about an universal Head of the Church Cardinals Purgatory Mass c. have ever thought this one good Argument against them that they find them not commanded in the Scripture and to assert them needful or lawful to be used in the Church of Christ they affirm to be derogatory to the perfection of the Scripture Suppose a Papist â—o say 'T is true the Scripture is perfect with respect to the essential parts of Worship not so with respect to Accidentals such as are Cross Spittle Salt in Baptism Holy Water Pope Cardinals Crosses c. What would Mr. T. answer hereunto 'T is a thousand to one but the same Answer would stop his own mouth in the reply to the Argument undertaken to be refuted by him We add in S. T. as a further confirmation of the truth of the Proposition under debate 7thly That God condemns not only that which is done against the warrant and direction of the Word but also that which is done beside it Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Mat. 15. 9. Lev. 10. 1. Prov. 30. 6. Jer. 7. 31. To which Mr. T. replies 1. That the Assertion understood of Accidentals of Instituted Worship is false Answ 1st Very good It seems then it is lawful to add what we please as accidental parts of instituted Worship for God no where condemns our doing so Altars Candles Crucifixes Baptism with Spittle Salt c. Dedication of Churches to He-Saints and She-Saints with the Inscription of Laus Deo S ta Helena of the Popes make Baptism of Bells the whole Farrago of Popish Inventions may by Mr. T. his arguing be introduced for these are but Accidentals of Worship and no where expresly interdicted Secondly The Protestant Divines have ever thought this a sufficient convincing Argument against these fooleries of the Papists That Christ hath no where commanded them therefore they may justly reject them as unlawful Christ being the alone Pastor Eccl. 12. 11. Master Mat. 23. 8 10. Prophet of his Church Acts 7. 37. Who shall dare to speak where he is silent or can do so without an open undervaluing and contempt of his Authority 'T were easie to fill many Pages with citations of Protestants to this purpose in whose Writings nothing is more frequent than this Nihil sine nihil extra nihil praeter nihil ultra Divinam Scripturam admittendum esse Peter Martyr on 2 Sam. cap. 6. pag. 212 213 saith From this History we may see that the true Worship of God he speaks of Uzzah's touching the Ark is not to be deduced from the Palestines or Ethnicks but the Word of God For God will be worshipped according to his own Praescript not our Inventions But as touching what pertains to the Worship of God nothing is to be sought without the Word of God It went ill with Uzza that he would imitate the Palestines with Nadab and Abihu that they would offer profane fire with Ozias the King that he would offer Incense in the Tabernacle when he was neither Priest nor of the Tribe of Levi. But Thirdly The Scriptures produced abundantly manifest the truth of the Assertion Let the judicious Reader seriously peruse them and they will lead him captive to the belief of it Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. Pro. 30. 6. Strictly interdict mans adding to the Word of God which if it be not a condemnation of
what is practised in his Worship without any warrant from him I must confess I know not what is Is not You shall sign with the Cross in Baptism kneel at the Sacrament wear the Surplice c. an adding to the Word of God when he is altogetheâ— in the Scriptures silent in these matters Mat. 15. 9. speaks of the Inventions of men with respect to accidental parts of Worship as Mr. T. accounts them The essentials of Worship as praying hearing c. they had from the Lord these things were not what Christ condemns in them as the Doctrines of men What was it then Mr. T. in his Fermentum Pharisaeorum on Mat. 15. 9. shall answer for me But in this place saith he that which our Saviour objects to them is That they sought to establish the Traditions of men chiefly that they taught men to observe things praeter Legem besides the Law in stead of Gods Law as the washing of hands before meals the washing of Cups and Potts with many such like Traditions inveâ—ted by men And afterwards Sect. 5. tells us That Bowings Duckings and such like Gestures Usages and Rites invented by men to express Humility Devotion and Reverence to God he contemns as Childish Apish Theatrical and ridiculous And Sect. 7. he adds That this teaching for Doctrine the Commandments of men intrencheth on Gods Prerogative who is the only Law-giver to his Church Jam. 4. 12. for his Worship and that with respect to the fashion and way of Service 'T is an injuring God whilest we conceive him to be so childish as to be affected with pomps and shews gestures and carnal Rites which he never appointed It opposeth Gods Word his Law his Gospel because it brings in another Rule of Worship than God's Law viz. Tradition of Elders Custom Example contrary to Deut. 4. 2. Pro. 30. 6. It opposeth the manifestation of the clear light of the Gospel as shadows the light of the Sun Look into the places where there is so much preaching of Ceremonies and Church-orders and such a regular observation of them as in places where the Cathedral and Canonical Preachers and officiating Priests do bear sway there is little spiritual understanding and lively feeling of the Doctrine and Grace of Christ to be found Sect. 8. with much more to the same purpose Lev. 10. â— Jer. 7. 31. expresly assert that their sin lay in doing that which God commanded them not which had he done it had been lawful Let Mr. T. shew where the offering of strange fire was expresly forbidden and he may be supposed to say somewhat that is pertinent Mr. Ainsworth whom he cites on Lev. 10. 1. is against him Strange fire he tells us is other fire than God hath sanctified on his Altar fire not commanded And the Assembly upon the place say rightly In God's Worship his Command not man's wit or will must be our rule The citation of Josh 22. 34. 2 Chron. 20. 3. 30. 23. Esth 9. 27 31. by this Animadverter is impertinent Josh 22. 34. gives us an account of their building an Altar but they expresly affirm it was not for burnt-offerings nor for Sacrifices not for an Ecclesiastical but a Civil use v. 22 23 24 26 28. Had they built it for the Worship of God it had in the judgment of the whole Congregation of Israel been Rebellion against him ver 16. So that this Scripture instead of supporting cuts the throat of his dying cause nor can Mr. T. ever satisfactorily answer this Argument 'T is great wickedness to commit a trespass against to turn away from following to rebel against the Lord But the doing or practising any thing in his Worship besides what God hath enjoyned to be done is to commit a trespass against him to turn away from following to rebel against him Therefore The Major no sober Christian will deny The Minor is evident from v. 16 18 19. Nor will Mr. T. his old shift of Essential and Accidental parts of Worship serve him in this case For 1. The erection of an Altar he supposeth to be but an accidental part of Worship 2. He produceth this Scripture to prove the lawfulness of mens orders in and about the Accidentals of Instituted Worship As for his other Scriptures 2 Chron. 30. 23. hath been already considered and answered in our Answer to Prof. Sect. 5. 2 Chron. 20. 3. Esth 9. 27 31. speak only of the Proclamation and Decree or Purpose of the King and People to observe and keep certain dayes unto the Lord upon the account of such signal providences that the Lord had brought them under wherein they judged he was calling them thereunto To what is added in S. T. touching the judgment of the Ancients Mr. T. replies but so jejunely that it deserves not to be taken notice of As for Cyprian's testimony 't is full up to the matter in hand the foundation upon which he dealt against the Aquarii being no other than what we are pleading-for that Christ alone is to be heard in matters of Instituted Worship as Mr. T. will grant the Sacrament to be I stand amazed at the confidence of the Animadverter in asserting that Beza's words on Phil. 1. 1. are to be understood of things determined in the Scripture when he expresly speaks of giving the title of Bishop for Polities sake peculiarly to him that did preside in the Assembly whereof he tels us the Devil began to lay the first foundation of Tyranny in the Church of God and then he adds Behold of how great moment it is to decline from the Word of God though but an hairs breadth if it be but in giving titles peculiarly to persons which are not so given to them in the Scripture And much more do I wonder if he did without blushing write that Luther is to be understood of Doctrines and Decrees if he oppose these to Church-Ceremonies which if he do not he yeelds his Cause when he expresly saith he means that nothing with respect to external Rites which he calls Traditions and the mixing the Worship of God with foolish Gewgaws is to be taught without the express words of God for our warrant 'T is true Dr. Whitakers words are meant of the Popish use of Oyl in their Sacraments but the ground of his opposing it is plainly the same with that we are contesting about viz. That nothing is to be added to the Instituted Worship as a part thereof without warrant from the Scripture for saith he we acknowledge no Oyl because we read nothing of Oyl in the Scriptures To these I say many may be added Take a few instances instead of many Whatsoever things men find and fain without the Authority and Testimony of the Scripture as if they were from Apostolical Tradition are smitten by the Sword of God saith Hierom Comment in Hag. c. 2. And again Men are saith he set to eat their meat without Salt when they are commanded any thing that hath no relish from the
act as Ministers of Christ when they prophesie for the edifying the Body of Christ by vertue of any Office-power so that they need not any such Election What follows is a Rhapsody of words that the ingenuous Reader knows proves nothing introduced to cast the â—dium of Irreligion-upon the men of his Contest The best is the Nation knows him to be at least in this matter a false Accuser He tells us 3dly That it may be doubted whether Christ be meant by the Door John 10. 1. Answ But why it should be doubted when Christ expresly tells us v. 9. that He is the Door I cannot tell That the Door v. 1 v. 9. is not the same Door is not probable and less probable that by the Door v. 9. should be meant the Scriptures of the Prophets who although they foretold of Christ yet can in no sense that I know of be said to be the Door through which he entred But this he is unwilling to abide by He adds 4ly That if the door be the same Joh. 10. 1 9. the entering in v. 9 cannot be entring into the Ministry by the lawful election of a particular Church for then it would follow that every one that so enters in shall be saved but that is manifestly false Answ 1. But if by saved he mean everlastingly saved this doth not at all follow he knows right well that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not alwayes to be restrained to such a signification 2ly The whole expression he shall be saved and shall go in and out and find pasture seems to intimate no more than this that he may expect the blessing of God with him the defence of God upon him in his Ministry that thus enters into it according to his mind according to Deut. 28. 6. So the Assembly Beza c. interpret the words which I think is so far from being manifestly false that nothing is more true Of immediate Calls to the Ministry and the wayes whereby men may prove themselves to be so called I shall not now turn aside to speak nor in what sense I asserted that persons receiving Commission immediatly from Christ to preach the Gospel will never be made good without the working of miracles it not being pleaded as I know of that the present Ministers have any such Commission nor do they pretend to it Of Petrus Waldo and other Reformers I think as honourably as this Animadverter They were worthy and eminent witnesses for Christ in their day no small part of their Testimony was against the Abominations pleaded for by Mr. T. in his Theodulia They admited nothing into their Church but what is written in the Bible no Decrees no Epistles Decretals nor the Legends of the Saints nor the traditions of the Church They held that the Preaching of the word of God is free to every man that hath received abilities from the Lord for that work That the Priests Vestments are little worth That no day a man may cease from his labour except the Lords day and not the feasts of of Saints Zanchy introduceth a certain Orthodox man speaking thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and afterwards adds the Churches are to be reformed according to the best form a better from of the Church cannot be invented than that which Christ and his Apostles in the beginning of the Church did constitute and appoint And afterwards all Doctrines of Worship and Discipline are to be examined not by the Lesbian rule of humane judgment but by the Touchstone of the Divine Word Zanch. de ver Eccl. reformand ration Johannes Gerson affirms That the authority of the Primitive Church was greater than now it is for it is not in the power of the Pope or Council or Church to change the Traditions taught by the Evangelists and Paul as some dream de vit Spirit animae Budaeus saith Canonum canities vel caries potius nulli jam usui est sed velut anus delira è foro explosa est de ponte enim jam diu comitiorum paracleti dejecta est disciplina Canonica ut annis sexaginta major atque etiam sexcentis de Translat Heclerismi lib. 2. And afterwards Navis nobis disciplinae à servatorâ— relicta est Ecclesiae conditore quae Cantico Ministerio instrumento miraculisque instructa fuit ab ipso aut ejus auspiciis These were some of the Witnesses of Christ in their day whom we honour as such that bear their Testimony against what Mr. T. thinks good for the present to espouse to himself 5ly This Animadv speaks of the proof of our Assertion that those that receive authority to preach the Gospel mediately from Christ have it from some particular instituted Church of Christ to whom power is solely delegated for the electing their own Officers according to Acts 6. 5. 14. 23. as weak and impertinent He tells us 1. That though this should be granted yet power may be given to others to choose send and ordain Preachers for the unconverted who are and may be heard as Ministers of the Gospel Ans 1. This we deny the Keys being given to the Church by Christ Mat. 16. 19. with 18. 17 18. we cannot conceive how any can legally choose or send forth persons to act by vertue of an Office-power in the preaching of the Gospel but the Church 2dly We never yet understood that Interrogations were sufficient Answers his may not for all this is no evidence that it may He adds Yea may not some others ordain Elders for particular Instituted Churches Answ 1. Without the Churches consent Election c. they may not 'T is true Titus was left by Paul in Crete to ordain Elders in every City Tit. 1. 5. but that he might do this without the choice election and concurrent act of the Church as a Diocesan Bishop as some fondly imagine is a fancy that as it hath over and over been confuted by many Godly Learned so Mr. T. will never be able to make it good 2ly Should it be granted which yet is most false contrary to the practice of those times and many years after that Titus ordained by himself without the knowledg counsel and approbation of the people Elders it doth not in the least follow that any persons may do so now For. 1. He had express warrant and direction from the Apostle to do what he did 2. He was an extraordinary Officer an Evangelist not limited to a certain Church the continuance of which office we have no direction for in the Scripture 3. The officers that were to be continued in the Churches are said to be Elders or Bishops which were not names of distinct officers but of the same Tit. 1. 5 7. to be confined or limited to oâ—e particular Congregation not having or exercising jurisdiction over many Phil. 1. 1. Acts. 14. 23. 20. 17 28. Tit. 1. 5 6 7. so that this instance makes little to his purpose When he proves his suggestion that there are any
parts of the Argument we premise 1. That there is a twofold denial of the Offices of Christ 1. Verbal and professional of this the Jews not the Papists noâ— the Ministers of England are guilty 2. Real and actual when persons do that which enwraps in the bowels of it a denial of the Offices of Christ Thus the Papists the present Ministers are guilty To this Mr. T. replies I allow the distinction but it is false that the Papists are not guilty of the verbal professional denying of the Offices of Christ for though they acknowledge Christ to be King yet their doctrine overthrows all the Offices of Christ as he that ascribes Kingly power to a Subject doth make another King and so doth unking him Thus the Papists do while they will have unwritten traditions to be received Answ 1st To dispute about words with any man living I shall not by a verbal professional denying of Christs Offices I mean express and down-right asserting that he is not King of his Church this I say the Papists do not they own preach up all the Offices of Christ i. e. they acknowledge him in their discourses of his Offices to be King to his Church which Mr. T. knows they do Their ascription of Kingly power to any but Christ in assertions mentioned I make a real and actual denyal and oppugning the Offices of Christ It being a doing what enwraps in the bowels of it such a denial of them 2dly This Animadverter hath already asserted what will in part at least make good our charge in this matter against the Ministers of England The ascription of Kingly power to any but Christ is a denying his Kingly authority the Papists Prelats and Ministers of England do so in asserting that traditions unwritten are to be received That the Pope a Convocation or Assembly of Prelates and Priests can make Laws to bind the Conscience by vertue of his their authority can dispense with Gods Laws incestuous Marriages by granting a License for a good Spill prohibited by God therefore the Papists the Ministers of England do deny the Kingly authority of Christ We premise in S. T. 2dly That a verbal professional acknowledgement of Christ is nothing when contradicted in practice To which we subjoyn that such as really oppose or deny any of the Offices of Christ are not to be heard but separated from which we prove 1. Because such aâ— do so are the Antichrists 1 Joh. 2. 22. and 4. 2 3. 2 Joh. 7. 2dly To hear such is to strengthen and encourage them in that their denial of and opposition to the Offices of Christ and thereby to become partakers with them in their sin Of which we treat more at large in S. T. chap. 4. p. 29 30. Whereunto Mr. T. replies 1. That a verbal professional acknowledgement of the Offices of Christ when contradicted by practice is nothing to the salvation of the person so professing his plea shall not be admitted before God or mans Ecclesiastcal censure i. e. he may be suspended excommunicated for his so acting notwithstanding his profession yet all this doth not prove that his doctrine may not be heard Answ 1. It seems then its lawful to hear persons not waâ—king exorbitantly but under Church censure for so doing which pours forth most fearful contempt upon that institution of Christ Excommunication To what purpose is it that any one is cast out of the Church if it may be lawful to hear them notwithstanding i. e. own them as the mouth of God to me and my mouth to God whom the Church thought not meet to be continued as a member in the body 2dly In vain then are all the exhortations of the Apostle to the Saints with relation to their withdrawment from such as these 1 Cor. 5. 9 10 11. Ephes 5. 11. 3dly To no purpose did Paul write to the Corinthians to receive the incestuous person had they but known their liberty they might have done so before for if his doctrine did not oppugn the Offices of Christ it might have been heard to their profit according to our Dictators dictates they might not only have received him but as a Preacheâ— amongst them Nay 4thly In vain is the charge of the Apostle 2 Cor. 3. 5. for if they profess to own the Offices of Christ i. e. Have a Form of Godliness though they contradict it in their walk i. e. deny the Power thereof they may be joyned with Poor Paul understood not so much of our Christian Liberty as rich confident Mr T. who is driven to such pittiful shifts and gross absurdities in the management of this Controversie that I really pitty him He adds 'T is not true that Christ saith the false Prophets are to be descried by their vitious Life only Nor do I say in this place he doth I say he saith they are to be known by their fruits Preaching and practising what invelops in it a denial of the Offices of Christ though attended with a visible holy Conversation I am contented that he make the fruits mentioned to be His discourse of Judas and false Prophets being so called not in respect of their outward Calling or vitious Lives but of their Doctrine that upon the least occasion he runs frequently forth into we have already answered Nor say we that teaching something through ignorance and inadvertency as is appointed by Christ which is not or denying something to be instituted which was so appointed is what doth denominate a man a false Prophet The Animadverter forgets what it is he attempts to answer we are not talking of false Prophets but of such as deny the Offices of Christ nor do we say that this as thus proposed by him doth render a man guilty of real denying the Offices of Christ or is a sufficient ground of separation from him much less then an opposing in heart any of the Offices of Christ is so as he suggests afterwards we do but that those that do really oppose any of the Offices of Christ viz. by setting themselves against the most if not the whole of Gospel-Institutions by owning a power in others to constitute Laws for the Family and Houshold of Christ even contrary to his Institutions and acknowledging another Head beside him of his Church is such a real denial of the Offices of Christ that upon whomsoever it is found 't is the duty of Saints to separate from them and that for the reasons before mentioned which Mr. T. may disprove when he can The rest of this Section being spent in railing and sorry impertinencies I come to his second Section were he sets himself to consider our Minor Proposition viz. That the present Ministers of England do oppose and deny the Prophetical and Kingly Offices of Christ Which we prove thus Those that hearken not to the Revelation Christ hath made and as Supream Lord and Lawgiver hath enjoyned to be observed touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of
might rationally have inferred from hence That that upon the doing whereof relating to the Worship and Service of God of which we were treating Saints have no promise of a Blessing nor ground to expect it is not lawful for them to do for when they are attending â—pon God in his own way he hath promised to meet them and bless them Isa 64. 5. 3. What he writes of Ezekiel's being told that Israel â—ould not hearken is very frivolous and impertinent 1. He had in his going forth to act for God in that Work a promise of his presence and Blessing though Israel abode obstinate Ezek. 3. 8 9 19. 2. There were a Remnant that attended upon the Word of the Lord from his Mouth to whom God made it a blessing But he is upon second thoughts willing to wave this and denies the Minor He tells us That the Saints have a promise of a Spiritual Blessing by hearing these men while they preach the Gospel which he proves from Isa 55. 3. Luke 11. 28. Answ 1. The former place relates not at all to a meer external hearing or an outward attendment upon that Ordinance nor doth the latter but an obediential giving up our selves unto the Word of God Yet 2. they both imply an hearing according to the appointment of the Lord which if we do not but go out of his way atâ—ending upon a false Ministry as we have proved the present Ministery of England to be these words import not the least promise of a blessing 3. They may be as well urged to prove an attendment upon the Ministry of Rome and that upon our so doing we had ground â—o expect it He adds 2dly The experience of former times tells us that more have been converted strengthened by Conformists yea Bishops themselves than by the best of Separatists Ans 1. Of this the Animadverter is no competent Judge Reformation to civility is not Regeneration Conversion to Christ and Holiness 2. Should it be granted all that could be inferred from hence were this that God did of meer Grace honour his own Word for the conversion of sinners not that we have any ground to expect a blessing upon our attendment on that false Ministry by whâ—m 't is dispensed We say in S. T. To prove a promise of a blessing upon our attendment on the present Ministers we conceive is no easie task for any to do for these Reasons 1. The blessing of the Lord is upon Sion Psal 87. 2. 78. 68. There he dwells Psal 9. 11. 74. 2. Jer. 8. 19. Isa 8. 18. Joel 3. 17 21. The presence of Christ is in the midst of his Golden Candlesticks Rev. 1. 12 13. 2. 1. 'T is his Garden in which he feedeth and dwells Cant. 6. 2. 8. 13. And we are not surer of any thing than we are of this that the Assemblies of England in their present constitution are not the Sion of God his Candlestick his Garden but a very wilderness and that Babel out of which the Lord commands his People to hasten their escape Rev. 18. 4. 2. God never promiseth a Blessing to a people waiting upon him in that way which is polluted and not of his appointment as we have proved the Worship of England to be 3. The Lord hath expresly said concerning such as run before they are sent that they shall not profit the people Jer. 23. 32. 4. He professeth that such as refuse to obey his calls to come out of Babylon shall partake of her plagues Rev. 18. 4. 5. Where the Lord is not in respect of his special presence and Grace there is no ground to expect any blessing But God is not so in the midst of the Parochial Assemblies of England Where are the Souls that are converted comforted strengthened stablished by their Ministry To which Mr. T. answers 1. The first reason is a fond application of what is said of Gods dwelling in Sion meant of his special presence there in that his Temple and Service was upon that Hill in the time of the Old Testament to the Congregational Churches exclusively to the Assemblies of England who in their present constitution are not the Sion of God Answ 1. Will Mr. T. stand to this that by the Lords dwelling in Sion we are to understand nothing more than his presence in the Temple with his people of old worshipping there This he seems immediately to retract whilst he cites the Assembly in their Annotations on Heb. 12. 22. making Mount Sion a Type of the Gospel-Church with approbation 2. That the People of Israel were Typical of the Saints in Gospel-dayes we have already demonstrated Sion was so 1st Their Assemblies are call'd the Assemblies of Mount Sion Isa 4. 5. 2dly The solemn investment of Christ into the exercise of Kingship and regal Authority over them is call'd The Lords setting his King upon Sion or over Sion the Mountain of his Holiness Psal 2. 6. 3dly Saints Believers are call'd Sion Psal 146. 10. 147. 12. 149. 2. 4thly The New-Testament Churches are call'd his Temple 2 Cor. 6. 16. with allusion to the Temple that was built upon Mâ—unt Moriah one of the Mountains of Sion to which the true Worship of God was affixed not only in opposition to the Heathen Worship of the Nations but the Worship of the Apostatick ten Tribes under Jeroboam the infamous head of their Apostacy as to these the true Worship of God is fixed in opposition to the Antichristian worship of the Mother-Church of Rome and her Daughters 5thly Mount Sion is call'd the Holy Hill the people that Worship there an holy People evidently expressive of the qualifications of the Church-Members in the times of the Gospel as we have proved 6thly As Sion was typical of Gospel-Churches so was Babylon of false Antichristian-Churches who are her very Picture the Church of England is so as 't were easie to demonstrate That Old Babylon was given to superstiaion and self-invented-worship Jer. 50. 38. 51. 44. Isa 46. 1. bottom'd upon no better Authority than tradition and antiquity compell'd others to Uniformity in her false worship under Penal Laws and Statutes Dan. 3. 3 6. was cruel and tyrannical against the People of God Jer. 51. 25. Isa 14. 17. 47. 6. Jer. 50. 33. and would not permit them to build the Temple at Jerusalem and worship God there according to his appointment that in anâ—wer hereunto the false Antichristian Church or New-Babel is described as given to superstition and self-invented-worship Rev. 13. 14. 17. 5. compelling others to uniformity thereunto under Penal Laws and Statutes Rev. 13. 15 16 17. 17. 2. 18. 3 9. most cruel and tyrannical against the Saints who cannot conform to her Inventions Rev. 13. 7 10 15. 16. 6. 17. 6. 18. 24. is so evident that none can deny it So that 7thly except Mr. T. can prove the Assemblies of England in their present constitution to be Gospel-Churches they are not
did not enjoyn no not so much as permit we suppose may be clearly demonstrated from the ensuing considerations To which Mr. T. Sect. 5. 1. If by attendance on their Ministry be meant a constant and ordinary hearing of them as their ordinary Shepherds doubtless neither Christ did command nor permit his Disciples such an attendance Answ 1. Very good a constant attendment upon the present Ministers of England cannot be proved from this Scripture Christ did not permit his Disciples so to attend on the teaching of the Scribes and Pharisees 2. Own them as our ordinary Shepherds we may not for so the Scribes and Pharisees were not to be own'd by the Disciples of Christ as Mr. T. grants Wherein how much the greatness of Truth hath prevailed upon him others will judge But 3. hearing being an institution of Christ to be conformed to according to the directions given forth by him thereabout I am not able to divine by what Law or Rule I may hear a man rarely upon whose ministry if by providence I have an opportunity afforded so to do I may not more frequently constantly attend Nay 4. I am apt to think that Mr. T. by this one concession hath given away the whole of his concern in this Argument The Scribes and Pharisees might not be heard as their ordinary Shepherds by the Disciples the present Ministers of England should it be granted it were proved by this Argument lawful to hear them are not then to be heard as our ordinary Shepherds or Ministers because of any thing that is contained in this Scripture or can be deduced from it Now as such for the most part we must hear them or not at all they being imposed on us as our Parish Ministers our hearing required of us by Law is hearing them as such This by this Argument Mr. T. grants cannot be proved We produce several reasons in S. T. why we suppose Christ neither commanded nor permitted his Disciples to hear the Scribes and Pharisees 1. There are not a generation of men of whom he speaks more contemptuously and chargeth with greater enormities than he doth that generation of Scribes and Pharisees and that in this very Chapter see v. 5 23 25 27 28 29. and v. 6 7. and v. 13 15 16 19 24 26. and v. 16 17 18 33 34. And can it be imagined that Christ should have no more tenderness to poor Souls than to direct them to an attendance upon such persons as these for teachings are they likely motives to perswade or enforce any thereunto 2. Yet this is what he immediately subjoyns having said Whatever they bid you observe that observe and do To which Mr. T. These personal evils were not sufficient motives to keep them back from hearing Gods Law expounded by them Answ 1. But their exposition of Gods Law was abominable intollerable had they been guilty of no personal evils not to have been born a sufficient ground of it self to have forborn hearing them they corrupted perverted it by their expositions 2. We are in the mind Mr. T. hath not his second in the World of sober-minded men who will aver that such personal evils as those mentioned are not a sufficient Bar to hinder the attendment of Saints upon preaching or expounding of the Law by those upon whom they are to be found 3. 'T is sure a bad cause he hath undertaken the defence of that in the pursuit thereof he is forced to assert the lawfulness of heâ—ring persons that we infallibly know to be Hypocrites for Christ having told them so they knew it to be infallibly true proud men whom the Lord abhors such as shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men will not go in themselves nor suffer others such as make their Proselites worse than themselves either by their evil example or by making them more zealous for their Traditions and more bitter against the Preachers and preaching the Gospel than themselves who are blind guides preverters of Scripture such as make void the Commandments of God by their Traditions that are Serpents a Generatâ—on of Vipers that cannot escape the damnation of Hell that kill crucifie scourge persecute the Messengers of the Lord. To repeat â—o absurd a Position is confutation sufficient and honour more than enough I wonder if our Animadverter could write it without blushing Jeroboam was not to be blamed who made Priests of the lowermost of the people Our Animadverter thinks if the scum of the World and Hell get into a Pulpit with a Bible and Common-Prayer-Book in their hand and a Surplice on their back they may lawfully be attended Tush Paul was too scrupulous and almost a Phanatick who talks of qualifications in Bishops 1 Tim. 3. 2 Tim. 2. Tit. 1. 'T is no great matter what they are so they read some Scripture and interlâ—ce it with the traditions of men persons may lawfully hear them witâ— out more adoe This is some of that Hay and Stubble that Mr. T. his Theodulia is stuft with that will one day be burnt up We add 2. 'T is not likely that Christ would command or permit his Disciples to attend upon the preaching of the Scribâ—s and Pharisees because they preached false Doctrine viz. justification by the works of the Law which was diametrically opposite to the Doctrine he preached and the work he was upon To which our Animadverter replies Christ doth not permit them to hear the Pharisees teach all the Doctrines of their Sect touching some of which he forewarns them Mat. 15. 14. 16. 12. but as they taught them the duties of Moses Law Answ 1. But if Mr. T. calls this an answer I am afraid he will not find a second in his Assertion it being indeed nothing like one The Question is Whether Christ commanded or permitted his Disciples to hear the Scribes and Pharisees We prove he did not because they preached false Doctrine another Gospel to what was preached by Christ Mr. T. answers He did not permit them to hear all the Doctrines of their Sect. But Sir the Question is Whether he permitted them to hear any at all to attend upon their preaching who were every way such Anti-Gospellarians that he should do so we conceive is not rational to imagine when the very scope of their preaching tended to the overthrow of that he came to promulgate But 2. if they were to attend them only as they taught the duties of Moses Law as he saith they were so seldom to attend them that upon search it will be found they were not to do so at all since they had so foully perverted it that upon the matter they made it another thing 3. By Mr. T. his Argument 't is lawful for persons to hear such as preach another Gospel for so did the Scribes and Pharisees Paul was out when he wisheth such accursed calls them Dogs Gal. 1. 8. Phil. 3. 2. and bids them beware of them i. e. not attending upon their preaching We add as a third
dissenting Brethren say they are For 1. there was never yet any heretical Preacher in the World but he preached some truth 2. The Devil himself 3. The Popish Priests did do so yet who will say 't is lawful to attend upon their Ministry To which Mr. T. 1. All that preach some truth are not to be heard yet all that preach the great truths of the Gospel notwithstanding some errors non-fundamental may be heard 2. 'T is no sin to hear either Heretical Preachers or Popish Priests who preach errors which overthrow the Foundation preach truth 3. The Devils we are to have no communion with God having put an enmity between the Serpent and the Seed of the Woman To which briefly 1. The two first assertions are meer Dictates without shew of proof and therefore fit to be rejected So abhorred by the Saints and contrary to all the solemn cautions given by our Blessed Lord with respect to this duty of hearing touching which we have already spoken that it were frivolous to take further notice thereof 2. To the third we answer If we may not hear the Devil because we are to have no communion with him God having put an enmity between him and the Seed of the Woman then may we not hear a wicked Priest the Lord having said We must not have communion with the wicked who are the Seed and Children of the Devil Mat. 23. 33. 1 John 3. 10. John 8. 44. betwixt the Righteous and whom God hath put an enmity Gen. 3. 15. 'T is added in S. T. 3. That the present Ministers preach truths but by halves and dare not preach any thing they are inhibited by the Bishop to meddle with though never so clearly revealed in the Scripture To which our Animadverter The Bishops allow them to preach truths necessary to Salvation and if they forbid them to preach things disputable as Church-Constitution they have the same reason as Christ had for not acquainting his Disciples with many things he had to say to them and is agreeable to the Apostles rule Rom. 14. 1. and practice Acts 15. 28. If they preach those truths by halves it 's lawful to hear those halves Answ 1. That it is lawful to hear such as are such perfect Servants and slaves of men upon the account whereof they cannot be the Servants of Christ that they dare not for fear of a Lord-Bishops Inhibition communicate what of the mind of God they have received from him is intollerable confidence to impose on us without proof 2. Their so doing is direct rebellion against Christ in whose Name they pretend to act who hath charged all that so act to publish and declare whatever he reveals to them 3. There is no truth that Christ hath revealed but is for the comfort stablishment peace edification or direction of the Saints that he is to be heard as a Minister of Christ who will suffer his mouth to be muzzled by a sorry thing called an Arch-Bishops Prohibition is the first-born of absurdities to imagine 4. The Scriptures cited are most impertinently alleadged by him John 16. 12. Christ tells his Disciples He hath many things to say which they are not able to bear Rom. 14. 1. Paul adviseth That the weak Christian be received but not to doubtful disputations It seems good Acts 19. 28. to the Holy Ghost and to the Apostles to lay upon the Gentiles no greater burden than those necessary things Therefore an Arch-Bishop may interdict persons to preach any other truth than he hath a mind they should is some of Mr. T. his Lempster Logick which a young Sophister would laugh to scorn What follows is already answered 'T is added in S. T. 2. The main truths they preach at least many of them are contradicted in their practice conforming to Institutions and Laws that are not of his prescription This we have abundantly demonstrated What Mr. T. tells us he hath replied hereunto we have already removed out of the way We say 3. With the truth they preach they mix many errors Instances of this kind have been already exhibited to which may be added many more We name several in S. T. the very truth is they are grosly erroneous in most of the chief heads of Divinity as a man may run and read in the following Particulars 1. Concerning the Scriptures they hold 1. That they are not the certain exact and alone rule of all things which appertain to Religion and Worship but that humane additaments make it more decent and amiable 2. That traditions that have no foundation in the Scripture are to be believed received practised 3. That Apocryphal Books which have in them Errors 2 Mac. 12. 44 45. 14. 41 42. Eccles 46. 20. Wisd 19. 11. Untruths 2 Esd 14. 21 22 23. 2 Mac. 2. 4 8. Tob. 5. 11 12 13. with 12. 15. Judith 8. 33. 10. 9. with v. 12. 11. 6 12 13 14 15. 2 Mac. 1. 13 to 17. 9. 1 5 7 9 28 29. Blasphemy Tob. 12. 12 15. with Rom. 8. 34. 1 Tim. 2. 5. Rev. 8. 3 4. Magick Tob. 6. 6 7 8. 9. 2 3. with 3. 7 8. 11. 10 11 13. with 2. 9 10. and contradiction to the Canonical Scriptures Judith 9. 2 3 4. with Gen. 49. 5 6 7. Esther in the Apochrypha Chap. 12. 5. 15. 9 10. with Esther Canonical Chap. 6. 3. 5. 2. Eccles 46. 20. with Isa 57. 2. may be used in the publick Worship of God Mr. T. replies This is not preached as I know of by any of them Answ 1. Their pactice in readiâ—g them according to their Calender-directions in their publick Worship is a loud preaching that they may be so used What the Animadverter adds in this matter is inconsideroble 1. We charge them not with owning them as part of the Canonical Scripture 2. Nor say we that they are all read but this we crave leave to add That it is most wretched and accursed dealing to have such Writings as these so full of abomination to be used in the Worship of God to the justling out of a great portion of the Canonical Scriptures which are not read at all which we are apt to think is a fearful contempt and undervaluation of God and his Laws 3. What was once resolved by Arch-Bishop Abbot I am not at all concerned with notwithstanding which they are still appointed to be read 4. That any of the places instanced in are capable of an easier censure than I put upon them he may demonstrate when he is able so to do 5. That they are read when and where we need not be present signifies little they are read in their Worship to the shutting out the Canonical Scripture which we account a notorious error 2. Touching God and Christ they own 1. That it 's lawful to bow down before that which is not God in Religious Worship as the Altar the repetition of the Name of Jesus the Bread and Wine in the Sacrament of
every one that teacheth somewhat of the Word of God but onely such as teach it according to Christs appointment nor will Mr. T. say it is the Devil did so Women may do so yet he saith they are not to be heard much less that it is the duty of one that is of God to hear the present Ministers of England who preach Christs Word from Authority humane Antichristian and that mixed with a multitude of humane Inventions We may better argue that is unlawful which is not a duty and characteristical property of one that is of God or Christs Sheep but to hear the present Ministers of England is not a duty and characteristical property of Christs Sheep as we have proved And have yet to add 1. They preach not the Word of God lawfully from Authority in his Name of which the Scriptures mentioned are to be understood 2. They preach the Commandments traditions of men in the stead of Gods Word 3. They hinder oppose persecute such as have authority to preach it 4. They are the stangers mentioned John 10. from whom 't is the property of Christs Sheep to flee 5. Many of them preach not the Word at all nor can they so do Therefore He adds Arg. 5. That may be unlawful which may be a sign of one thaâ— is not of God nor of Christs Sheep But not to hear the present Ministers when they teach the Word of God may be a sign of one that is not of God John 8. 47. 10. 26. A. This is answered in what was replied to the former Argument i. The minor is denied for the same reasons of our denial of the miâ—or in the precedent Argument 2. This Patron of charity at once rejects the many thousands of England precious in the sight of the Lord and beloved of him as persons not of God not of Christs Sheep because they hear not the present Ministers 3. We may more righteously argue To hear those that pretend to teach the Word of God as Ministers intermixed with the traditions of men but are not commissionated by him so to do is unlawful for 't is a rejection and contempt of Christs Authority who alone hath power to appoint his own Officers by whom he will communicate his mind and will But to hear the present Ministers is to hear such as pretend to â—each the Word of God intermixed with the traditions of men buâ— are not commissionated by him so to do as we have before demonstrated Therefore Arg. 6. His sixth Argument is thus formed To refuse to hear the Word of God though delivered by the present Ministers is such prâ—phaneness as is condemned in Esau Heb. 12. 16. for it is the rejecting or neglecting of an holy thing Matth. 7. 6. therefore it may be unlawful to shun hearing them and consequently lawful to hear them Answ 1. Very good It seems then that all that refuse to hear the present Ministers are prophane Esaus this he will have so much ingenuity as to retract in his next 2. He supposeth that the non-hearing of the Ministers is a refusing to hear the Word of God which is a most nefarious and diabolical accusation We refuse not to hear the Word of God in the way of his own appointment but to comply with and abet a false Antichristian-Ministry 3. The People of God conceive it to be one part of their birth-right as Men and Christians not to be compelled to hear those who come in their own names in the name of Antichrist which they refuse to sell for advantage in the World with prophane Esau and therefore judge it irrational a contradiction to be accused as if prophane like him for not dâ—ing that upon the account of his doing whereof he was branded by the Spirit of the Lord as such 4. They judge they may more rationally argue To hear the Word of God as delivered by the present Ministers is an Esau-like prophaneness because 1. 't is a rejection of their birth-right as Men and Christians 2. 'T is a compliance with encouragement of those who trample upon the Sovereignty Authority of Christ 3. 'T is a departing from the appointments of Christ to the Ordinances of Antichrist which is no small undervaluing of the Grace of Christ of the Gospel whereof Esau's prophaneness was a Type Therefore 't is unlawful to hear them Arg. 7. The seventh Argument advanced by him for this good service is The Word of God is a Pearl of great price Mat. 7. 6. 13. 44 46. Therefore to be heard and received by whomsoever held forth and consequently it's folly and sin to refuse hearing it because of personal exceptions against the bringer Answ 1. We deny the consequence nor will Mr. T. affirm it out of the heat of dispute to be true he hath asserted the contrary in his Theod. 2. 'T is wisdom not folly to refuse to meddle with the Pearl of the Prince when brought us by the hands of those from whom he hath charged us not to receive it who were never authorized by him to bring it to us especially when it is to be had from persons of his own authorisement 3. We have found the present Ministers such merchandizers for their own profit in the World that they put off dross for Gold and stones for Pearls at the best mix it with the dirt and gravel of the Antichristian City the traditions of the great Whore which they also impose upon us 4. We think we may more justly argue The Word of God is a precious Pearl Mat. 7. 6. 13. 44 46. therefore they ought not to hear the present Ministers who spoil corrupt it with their traditions and thereby offer violence to it who contemn despise tread underfoot much of the Contents thereof who huckster and make merchandize of it who prefer the Canon-Law of Antichrist before it so debaseing it to their lusts and wills of their Lords and Masters lest they should partake of the guilt of those injuries they offer thereunto whom they see many of them more zealous and nice in the punctual observance of an Edict or Institution given forth by their Masters the Bishops as bowing the knee uncovering the head or the like than the Institutions of their Lord Christ So that we may too truly say of them as Theodoricus Niemensis once said As the Priests of the Jews were at last possessed with that madness that they cried out We have no King but Caesar So I have a long time feared and do fear that our Priests may say We have no other King but the Prelate He adds Arg. 8. If the Word of God preached by the present Ministers may be effectual for that good which is the end wherefore it is preached then it ought to be heard from them according to James 1. 21. 1 Pet. 2. 1. But the Word of God preached by the present Ministers may be thus effectual Therefore Answ 1. If he understand the Major of a may be of possibility with