Dr DVRIE'S DEFENCE OF THE PRESENT MINISTRY Being compared with the Gospel and Gospel Ministry turnes into smoke and vanisheth As is made to appear in the ensuing Treatise By a Witnesse of the Gospel JOHN BRAINE Gal. 2.14 When I saw they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel I said to Peter before them all c. Printed in the Year 1649. To the Honourable the Committee of the County of South-Hampton The Learned Assembly at Westminster and the Godly and wel-affected of the County aforesaid TO you first of the Assembly I commend these things because you are they to whom the Supreme Authority of the Nation hath committed the care and judgement of these and the like differences that you may judge between us and make publike if you please your dissent from what is not of Gospel proof on either part To you the Honourable Committee aforesaid I humbly present these also that you hereby may see that by this or by the other cries of men of diffeâ—â— judgements Is â—â—â—â—â—e 〈◊〉 â—o be spoyled or wounded by you spoyled of that by your word and hand-writing you have for my Ministeriall labours promised me it being the life of me and my great family or wounded in my name who have lived though in weaknesse according to the testimonies of Christ and give me leave to mind you that of God That the labourer is worthy of his hire To you my faithfull and beloved friends of the Soake the City of Winton and County aforesaid I leave this as my loving remembrance to you advising you to beware of the secret practises of men against the Gospel as of works of darknesse and deep dishonesty in them that do them from whome and from which things keep your selves And 〈◊〉 Mr Doctor Durie I challenge a breach of promise who near twelve moneths since by letter promised me your notes on my booke and you contrary thereunto send my book and your bitter notes on it to my adversaries what hand you had in the private communicating of them I know not but leave to God Sir in obedience to Christ onely I have forborne to returne you railing for railing nor would I have you for this thinke I have forgot any good I have received from you but acknowledge the least thaâ—â—ulnâ—sse Sir I have not wronged you a word as I know in trâ—â—scribing your noâ—es they shall be compared with the Originall at your command bâ— any indifferent man Sir all that I have done herein is for the Gospel my dearesâ— friend for whome I desire to forsake all and althings and yet rest Gladly yours to serve you and al the forementioned according to the Gospel service of God John Braine To the Reader Reader THese Notes of Dr Duries I found written on the margent of a Booke properly mine owne being Intituled The smoke of the Temple cleared by the light of the Scripture lying one Shop-keepers Table where I live which I taking away with me was after sent for to make appearance before two Justices of the County aforesaid who were desired to grant a Warrant to apprehend me Fellon-like therefore but honestly refused it who after on my appearance because I would not surrender the said book chosing rather to obey the Law passively in that point then actively I was and now stand ingaged to make appearance at the next Quarter-Sessions to make Answer before the Bench for thus illegally seizing on my owne proper goods being a book sent Mr Doctor upon his sending to one Mr Ellis for him to call on me to send him one of my Books as the said Mr Ellis told me and not give him one nor was it by me given now that this onely câ—uâ—â— aforesaid must he taken in the businesse I thinke cannot but seem strange to all that read it These Notes made in answer to the Doctor by me were of two dayes making which will plead for their imperfection for thy better understanding the Treatise the letter P. is put for what page of the Book called The smoake of the Temple c. the Doctor drew his observation from and the Scripture added to it shews the ground the Doctor drew his assertions from which I doubt not but will clear many things in Scripture hid formerly to the world and prove profitable to all that read them by beeing compared things with things But to come to the Doctors observations themselves he passeth by the three first pages as having nothing to object and begins with page 4. striving if he had strength enough to remove the Evangelist from his owne into anothers place and so I leave him to his lift and triall of his strength who may as soone by help of a leaver role the round world out of his place as the Evangelist out of his and sooner too so unable is man found to be when he strives against Truth Luke 16.29 compared with Eph. 2.20 P. 4. Doctor WHat is here said of the Apostles is appliable unto Evangelists Resp 1. This is petitio principii or a begging the thing in question Mr Doctor You would have it so 2. The Scriptures were given by Divine inspiration to the Apostles and Prophets but not the ordinary Evangelists 3. Nor are the Evangelists to be proved as the Apostles are to be in any extraordinary way in the Church God in 2 Ephes 20. saith the Apostles and Prophets are of the Foundation but not Evangelists Dr. I say those Prophets who were before Christs time are properly to be understood Eph. 2.20 because they were the foundation upon which the Church was built as appears by Acts 26.22 2 Pet. 1.19 yet I hold that the Prophets which are named Eph. 4.11 are distinct from those Antient ones these are not the foundation of the Christian Church but these were the Apostolicall office 〈◊〉 doth ementer 〈◊〉 comprehend these but not these for these were before the Apostles nor are the Prophets named Eph. 4.11 qua distinct from the Apostles but if at all they are to be â—united the foundation it is onely as in and under the Apostolical office Then besides by the foundation of the Apostles and the Prophets is only meant the doctrine Apostolical and Prophetical whereof Christ is the substance that is the one corner stone and is it not so also in respect of the Evangelists Resp 1. For Answer to this confused masse take my owne words in my Book by Prophets I understand not only those wrot before Christs time but those wrot since also 2. Whereas he saith The Antient ones are not the foundation of the Christian Church It is clear the Prophets before Christ are in the same way a foundation to the now Church as the Prophets that were since 1 Peter 1.12 Not to themselves but to us saith the Apostle speaking to those under the Gospel administrations they did minister these things in a Church administration only they were not in this time 3. He saith The Prophets are not spoken
of qua distinct from the Aopstles Eph. 4.11 How sad a thing is it to see a Doctor so deceived are all the rest spoken of as distinct and doth he dream this is not see then if the Apostle hath in any other Scripture distinguished them if he seeth it not heer 1 Cor. 12.28 God hath placed in the Church first Apostles 2. Prophets see if God hath not distinguished them by a first and second This man would have confounded the Church Ministry mâ—king of two one with the men of his mind it is nothing to make all one 4. He tels us by foundation was not ment the Apostles but their Doctrine I having cited the text Eph. 2.20 this is clear enough expressed that it is the foundation of the Apostles not that the Apostles as the Papists say of Peter are the foundations of the Church there was no foundation for the Doctor to make this learned exception P. 5. Dr. The Church of the Gospel is built on the truths delivered by the old Prophets as is clear by Acts 26.22 Luke 24.27 2 Pet. 1.19 Resp To me it is much to see so grave a man fight with his own shadow for in this he hath not hit me at all I granted this in my Book which might wel have saved him his learned labour Dr. But the Prophets subordinate to the Apostles were no more founders to the Church then the Evangelists Resp For men of reputed learning and esteeme I see it is nothing to say any thing though never so clear against the truth Eph. 2.20 we are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets I provoke you Mr Doctor to shew where it is said that we are built upon the Evangelists Dr. Titus was no where called Evangelist was he therefore none Resp Mr. Doctor How shall I believe he was if the Scripture say not of him he was one I am sure you have no Gospel makes him such that ever he wrote unlesse it be one lately brought from Rome Dr. What need Marke and Luke be called Evangelists seeing their worke doth speake them such Resp You may easily see Mr. Doctor is good at the begging of the question and passing by the matter objected viz. That the Evangelists office 2 Tim. 4 5. is a ministeriall Church worke and not a writing work as I have proved at large in my Letters sent to the Assembly and printed but not Answered because you have not leisure as in your Letters formerly you say concerning this Book Dr. The worke of an Evangalist is not only to Preach but to order matters by Apostolical direction Tit. 1.5 Resp 1. This then shewes your Evangelist was no extraordinary officer in the Church for what he did he did by direction as you and I should do in the Church were we faithful and no otherwise 2. In my forme of Gospel Government for Gospel Churches and in this book you so sift to find chaffe in I have allowed as well Government as Teaching to the Church Ministry according to Jesus Christ and you prove no more for Titus is not for this worke here or any where called Evangelist nor were any where else for that particular act Dr. Is not the writing the history of Christ's life the worke of an Evangelist and if Marke and Luke did this why should they not be called Evangelists Resp An risum teneatis amiei Mr Doctor if they did this why yet should they be called Evangelists unlesse you can canonise them for such by authority of the Presbytery that now is Doctor And is not the work extraordinary was it not indited and directed by the Spirit in Mark and Luke as well as in Mathew and John Resp M. Doctor When you wrot notes on my Book and had it communicated in that disgracefull way as this was I thought you had not vented your self into such like Quries as these 2. A man would have thought your reading would have taught you to distinguish between an Apostle and an Evangilist 3. I thought my former letter to you of this point would have made you blot out this dul notion seeing the Gospel you so much talk of Luke 1. was by him but a setting in order things believed amongst us as himself saith and not inspired into him ver 2. As they delivered them to us And here M. Doctor Who were these but Mark and Luke and then by whom but by eie witnsses which were it is likely Matthew and John with the rest of the Apostles and it may be said of the seventy of which Mark and Luke were not but had it from them that were as is plain and clear to him that is not blinded Doctor And is not the hystory of Christ a fundamentall truth of the Gospel Resp And M. Doctor The Amanuenses of many of the Psalms thâ— Prophets the Epistle of the Romans Tertius Rom. 16.22 were not made there by Evangelists yet are their writings not authoritative they being dictated to by the Apostles and Prophets P. 6. Dr. Rom. 10.15 From Esay 52.7 Is not to be understood of the distinct office of the Evangelist as he differs from the Apostle Prophet Pastor and Teacher but to Evangelize there doth comprehend all the testimony of Jesus in all respects but especially of the Apostles worke and if this be so then from the generall denomination of Evangelizing the distinct office of the Evangelist can be no more proved to be ordinary then from the generall name of Messengers 2 Cor. 8.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Apostolical Office is ordinary as Preachers are in some sense Evangelists viz. in respect of the glad tydings that they preach Resp That Evangelizing was applyed to the whole Gospel ministry I granted and thence proved that it was an ordinary Office in the Church yet to teach and apply peace with the good things of the Gospel to the strong men in Christ onely was the proper worke of the Church Evangelist to which Paul applieth that of 1 Cor. 1.17 he distinguishing the Teachers Ministry under the act of Baptizing who taught also and the Evangelists Ministry which Paul in Corinth as an ordinary Minister officiated with other his fellow helpers 2. For your parallel place 2 Cor. 8.23 I would you would take your Bible and see how God distinguished these Apostles from the others 1 Cor. 1.1 Eph. 1.1 Collos 1.1 Paul is an Apostle of Jesus Christ the Apostles 2 Cor. 8.23 are Apostles of the Churches Sir I may say to you of this as Christ to the blind Pharisees ye errre not knowing the Scriptures so that this Scripture proves not any hinderance to my conclusion as you seem to affirme but that thence it appears because the name is given in common to the ordinary Ministry it was but an ordinary office in the Church which oft as Pastors and Teachers to remaine therein to the end Dr. That Timothy and Titus were imployed only about one place is so directly opposite to Scripture that nothing can
that they are so ordinary as to be any where but in a true visible Constituted Church only which hath or ought to have the Evangelist also in ordinary As to the Question I Answer there hath not been this 1240 year a visible Church in which rightly have been the true Church ministry and right Church constitution though there hath been an invisible Church through all the time in the world 1 Cor. 12.28 God hath placâ—d in the Church these but not out of the Church Dr. The warrant we have is a lawful call to the ministry the Apostle James doth forbid a masterly elusorious way of teaching as is clear by the whole sequel of his discourse Resp Sir The smoke of the Temple offends your eyes yet ye cannot see clearly your Church is no true Church nor that it is as you found the Antichrist of Rome leave it and is no better for its constitution then Rome's Church is Now such as your Church is your call is and such your ministry It is true Indeed James forbids a masterly Teaching and such is yours Sir for you Teach in the Church so by your single Ministry as you have no example in the Scripture for it As for James his Church Church ministry there spoke of was the same with yours not a company of Saints but adulteresses and adulterers Jam. 4.4 persecutors and blasphemers James 2.6 7. their tongues set one fire of hel ful of cursing and bitterness Chap. 3.6 9 and no where called a Church in his Epistle Sir it seemes the more I rub your eyes the worse the smoke troubles youâ— John's first Epistle was written to another manner of Society Dr. It is true Paul did all because every officer of a superiour degree hath authority to do the actions of the inferiour but where are we forbidden to teach must not a minister be chosen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 3.12 Resp 1. He did them all until the Church was constituted where he was but when he had others to Teach and labour with him he took not their worke out of their hands 1 Cor. 1.14 thus Peter Acts 10.48 2. That ye are forbidden to Teach without a lawfull call that is Anticristian 〈…〉 yeâ— you are forbid to Teach as you doe 2 Cor. 10.13 we that is Paul Silvanus Timothy 2 Cor. 1.19 in the name of the full Church ministry Paul saith we wil not boast of things without our measure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr Doctor pray observe in one Church every minister hath a measure allowed him to Teach by which is laid out as by a rule of which in ministry every man is not to take what he wil as you do but God hath parted to each ministry his doctrine in the Church yea to the Apostles when they taught as ordinary Teachers and to those that taught with them to which Paul alludes 1 Thes 2.4 as we were allowed of God there is a Gospel allowance to Teachers what they should Teach and yet Bishops chosen by teaching that doctrine he was to be called to teach in the Church and not by others P. 10. Dr. Here is no mention of an Evangelist at all how then is it proved hence that he is a perpetual and assistant minister in the Church and if as he saith The Apostle doth speak here of publique Church Ministry and doth not name an Evangelist in it then the argument is strong against him that an Evangelist is not an ordinary publique minister Resp Mr Doctor seems profoundly to argue in this place against nothing pray consider it 1. That in this Scripture Rom. 12.6 7 8. is not mentioned the name of Prophet Pastor or Teacher which he cannot deny but yet are implyed here but because the Evangelist is not set down therfore he hath no place at all though the other may have having the Doctor 's leave 2. The Prophet in prophesy which was before him is implyed and the Pastour in his work of exhortation that comes after him and the Doctor in teaching is implyed And there is Ministry for one in the Evangelist's place but he must not be there unlesse he be set down an Evangelist though all teaching and his emmenter may be called Ministry Sir here cannot be understood any other Church-Teacher whatever nor your Church-Deacon or supposed Elder these follow in vers 8. in giving and ruling Sir I pray take heed of your taking too much liberty in making the Scripture speak against themselves if you forbear that I am sure they will not speak for you at all here Dr. This is a silly and irregular thought for how can a Church be constituted before God give gifts Shall we make Evangelists before God makes them All Pastors and Teachers are in a generall sent Evangelists that is publishers of the Gospel but not in a peculiar sent as he would have the Evangelist to be Resp Reader the cause of the Doctor breaking out into this silly cry is for that in my Book pag. 10. is written whereas the Apostle saith there be divers gifts from this Rom. 12. I think if ever a Church were rightly constituted greater gifts would be bestowed on men then since the Apostles 1. The Doctor understands not that God hath distinguished the Church gift from the Heavenly gift the Church gifts are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are given to men by the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the divine gift God had given them to minister the Church gift by which is the severall cals of the Church ministry Evangelists Pastors Teachers and thus indeed the Church is not to make before God hath made them but after 2. For what cause the Doctor troubles himself about Pastors and Teachers being Evangelists having before written of it and so few unworthy observations of a Doctor and up with it so often shews he wanted matter to object and that the man is mightily troubled about the Evangelist in his mind Dr. This Paragraph is to me a piece of nonsense for I knew not what he would say in it or how it is coherent with this former discourse Resp If the Doctor be silly as he makes himself I wonder he would take upon him in so unworthy a way to send down his notions in so secret a way to disgrace me and my writings privately amongst the ignorant multitude it had been more honour having been provoked to the presse or print to have published some worthy work in defence of their Presbyterian Government set out in the Propositions which I printed against or against that form of Church Government I added to it or prove their Government by the practice of the Primitive Church and disprove that in my Treatise of the resurrection of faln Churches and not in seeking to correct truth for errour in a Book make ten errours when he proves none but the not understood nonsense he talks of is in this The Church ministry is set out oft times by one word in
we take your words to be divine Oracles it is enough but methinks it were more like your selfe to say thus saith the Lord not I as faithfull Paul said or else say thus saiâ— I and not the Lord but you will say I say this now and anon you will say God said but if God had said so you would not have weakened your cause so as to say I say 1 Pet. 4.10 as every man hath received the gift that is the ministerial call from the Church so minister the same not other gifts by your leave of this I writ fully in my Letters I wonder I do not hear from you I fear some private papers in the darke as this are sent abroad by you to catch silly soules withall Dr. If God send forth fellow-labourers 〈…〉 they are to do their work joyntly and distinctly according to their Talent which they shall have and shall make them fittest for service the Apostle 1 Tim 3. Tit 1. where he expresly doth institute the appoyntment of Church Officers doth name none but Presbyters and Deacons and under that name comprehends Pastors and Teachers not in distinct but in the same persons although if God send forth more labourers then are in a particular Vineyard they may apply themselves distinctly more to one then to the other as their Talents make them fittest for service but if there be no more then one alone sent forth he is to deal as the severall objects and occasions require his service Resp Sir your joyntly which you allow to the Gospel labourers is of necessity you cannot deny that for the Scriptures are so clear but your leaven lyeth hid yea you allow they must do it distinctly also but joyntly in a Nationall Church distinctly in a Parochiall otherwise it cannot be understood in your societies Did Paul Sylvanus Timothy do their work thus Nationally Mr Doctor You have not these in any Church who should have them in all And after again you say the word Presbyter comprehends Pastors and Teachers not in distinct but the same persons I hope when you read this again you will be ashamed of it As for your conceit of a particular Vineyard and applying themselves more to one then another hath no ground or proof from Scripture and then you tell us of the sending out of 〈◊〉 Labourerâ— Scripture speaks of no such thing P. 25. The true and false ministry are distinguished from the differing materials 1 Cor 3.12 Dr. This is your ordinary fault to lay too much weight upon Metaphoricall and Allegoricall speeches Resp Sir the Kingdom of God was set out in Allegories and is in especiall manner if ever to be known to be known from them Satan now to keep this Kingdom hid hath taught men a long time to deny any argument to be deduced from them to prove any thing at all by But Sir why not from them Is it not the Word of God And is not the Kingdom and mysteries thereof laid up in them It cannot be denied but thence a discovery comes to be made against the present practice Indeed if you will say because they are not understood we cannot argue from them it were something and so may be said of all the Scriptures Dr. You stretch the matter beyond the Apostles scope and so you do continually in all this discourse Resp Mr Doctor Lis coram judicibus est Dr. It is clear the Apostle doth presuppose that the same man may at one time build hay at another stubble and at another wood and the same man may build gold and silver and precious stones at different times nay and this is clear that at one time a man may build gold and silver and at another hay and stubble You stretch the Apostles words beyond his scope and rack them to another purpose then the Holy Ghost doth intend and then in all this following discourse you make upon this sandy ground a building of fantasticall conjectures to prove your poynt Resp Mr Doctor your single stubble ministry may some of them not at one time build gold and silver and at another hay and stubble but gold silver hay wood and stubble at oâ—â—â— teaching for ought I know Sir the question hangs on these 1. Where there were a single ministry at Corinth to do this or not or your supposition is nothing and your doctrine false and Antichristian that is worse 1 Cor 1.12 and chap 4.6 15. chap 12.9 2. Where Paul in his Epistle doth not endeavour to describe the false Church ministry and their work from the true and their work both ministring in Corinth or not as in his second Epistle written from Philippy as the first was in which this is opened clearly 2 Cor 11.4 where the Teacher of each society is applyed unto who is said to teach Jesus the foundation yea and the Gospel which Paul taught but in a corrupt way as vers 3. He was afraid lest their minds were corrupted from the simplicity of Christ And now lest the Apostle should be thought to aim at one individuall person in the word he vers 3. compares vers 13 14. Satans Ministers to the Ministers of Christ for number order way of ministry as Paul in the Gospel had taught to be Or who knoweth not that the Church of Corinth could not so easily be seduced by them 3. But that this is not meant of a single ministry as the Doctor dreams I commend to his consideration 1 Cor 3. vers 13. The fire shall try every mans work of what sort it is 1. Here is every man not one mans work then is applyed to 2. Every mans work is of one of these sorts and not one mans of all of these sorts as Mr Doctor I will not say fantastically conjectures 3. Vers 14. If any mans work abide Vers 15. If any mans work shall be burnt See Reader how corrupt the Doctors exposition is and contrary to the Scripture by his doctrine no mans work shall abide his ministry builds hay wood anâ— stubble nor no mans work be burned for again his ministry builds gold silver precious stones Mr Doctor your doctrine is wooden doctrine at last you will suffer losse by it P. 26. 1 Cor 4.6 These things have I transferred to my self and Apollo Dr. The Apostle transferred the things he spake of his Stewardship of the Apostleship received of God and of his faithfulnesse therein to himself and to Apollo to teach the Corinthians not to be puffed up so one against another and that they should not esteem more of any man then they ought But you run out into endlesse mistakes and mis-applications of the Apostles meaning and confound the places together which have quite different scopes Resp 1. If the Doctor writes two leâ—â—es for refutation to help fill up the margent of my Book he writes two or three of bombast railing accusations without giving reason as here you confound places together but noâ— shew where Sure he had no leisure to shew in
what but he hath leisure to reproach as if he were angry at this doctrine of the Gospel 2. He transfers the things of the Stewardship of his Apostleship to himself and Apollo as if Apollo were an Apostle as Paul was or as if the Stewardship of an Apostle were transferrable to a ordinary Church minister other way then in their ordinary Church ministry as they had been joyned in their ministring to the Church of Corinth in an ordinary way of ministry 3. The puffing up one against another with the Apostles adding here these things must relate to something preceding and what then but that in which Paul and Apollo are mentioned or at least concerned 1 Cor 1.12 Every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollo I of Cephas In this these of Pauls society boasted themselves against those of Apollos those of Apollos against those of Cephas and those against the Catecumerii And thus and no way else could every one of the Church be puffed up Now these were distinguished in themselves as well as ministers 1 Cor 3.5 where the believers are divided under their severall ministry as the Lord hath given them to believe vers 9. Paul and Apollo are co-workers in the work of the Gospel Now Paul transfers these things from them which succeeded them in their place of ministry the ministers to himself and his fellow labourers who wrought with him in the Gospel there for the Churches sake that they should not think of men above that is written Now if any men should have been admired by them it had been Paul and Apollo 1 Cor 3.5 Who is Paul or Apollo Now if these were not to be looked on more then instruments much lesse their own ordinary Church ministry residing amongst them who were far inferiour to the Apostle and the rest but look on God and the Ordinances P. 26. Of Aaron his sons the Priests and Levites Dr. Truly in all this discourse from the beginning to the end I can see nothing you do but hunt after shadows Resp 1. Mr. Doctor might have seen by what is said before that the Assembly in their propositions did not place the Evangelist rightly in putting him before the Prophet against expresse Scripture Eph. 4.11 I fear there was corruption in it enough to shew he will never see if he can choose an Evangelist is an ordinary Minister â—â—ought 〈…〉 the Church and therefore put him before the Prophet that none should once question it Did not God foresee this and shew this was of great concernment when 1 Cor 12.28 he set down first Apostles secondly Prophets not Evangelists it is clear And thus on intreaty ye cannot see to mend as if it were not so or no error though ye have been called on to do it 2. Mr Doctor I use this as a shadow only as is in words expressed but you in your propositions for the Pastor confirm your ministry by theirs as by Gospel-authority and you confirm your Governours and Government by them as in the secâ—â—â—â— for Church Governours 3. You confesse they have a representation of spirituall things why did you not tell where of the ministry or not you were afraid To say it did not lest every child should descry either your weaknesse or wilfull corruptnesse and therfore you say very warily Dr. Now it is not to be denied but these things have some signification and representation of spirituall things but I am sure they do not near your purpose Or if they relate to the work of the ministry in some sense yet they will not evince that Evangelists in your sense are to be perpetuall and ordinary Officers and that there must be in every Congregation such distinct Officers as you imagine Resp 1. Mr Doctor do you come with an if they relate to the work of the ministry you do learnedly to question that 2. You are sure not to my purpose that is you are conceitedly sure but arâ— not sure from the word if you are why did you not set down from what Scripture that I may be made sure or as well as you Sir think you I may not as well say for any ground you have set down to the contrary sure the Doctor is deceived in this poynt 3. But if they do relate to the ministry yet they will not evince that Evangelists are to be c. Mr Doctor I told you it was but a shadow I hunted not for it to prove the Gospel Government by it as you do I used it only to illustrate and shew the ministry in the Jewish Church in some kind did resemble this under the Gospel in such things as are morall that the Church was to be ministred to other waies then by a single ministry Sir in the margent of my Book pag 27. at Rom 2.20 that babes are the Teachers Congregation you set your mark of C upon it but durst not stay there nor say a word lest you should open a gap for it You have touched but little of my Book and that you have done is to as little purpose as ever Doctor did undertake to do a thing as every rationall unprejudiced man will say that seeth it and here 's the cry you make with it P. 27. Not to baptize but to Evangelize Dr. It is proper to all that preach the Gospel to baptize such as did receive their commission for the one the other is joynt Math 28.19 I think it should be did for the other Resp 1. _____ which is properly to make Disciples and signifieth that teaching that went before baptizing as in the order of the words is to be observed 2. Thâ— Disciples here sent out had by 〈◊〉 extraordinary call to do all which we have not 3. Baptisme brought them into the Church after which the Apostle distinguisheth again by another kind of teaching called Evangelizing which differed from that went before baptizing in Math 28. Col 1.17 and from his teaching baptized Dr. To baptize was no more proper to the Doctor then the Evangelist Resp This you only assert on your own word but Sir in that there are to be in the Church Evangelists Pastors Tâ—achers how are these in the Gospel distinguished for ministry and administrations If one have to do in the Church as much in all ordinances as the other then all are Evangelists all Pastors all Teachers if nothing be proper to eithers ministry but all alike Sir though the Smoke of the Temple hath blinded your eies yet the light of the Gospel may let you see other things Sir by this you would make God the Author of Confusion who is the God of Order and that you so oft call confusion in my Book is Gospel order in Gods Book Rom 2.20 He that was the Teacher of Babes was the Baptizer of Babes but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the Teacher Ergo Dr. To baptize was not the main work for which the Apostles were sent nor for which ministers are appoynted to preach the Gospel
is the main work and the principâ—ll And this is all that the Apostle in the place doth intend and not to distinguish preaching and baptizing so as if they did belong to severall offices and administrations You do in this as in most of your other allegations rack the Scriptures and make it speak that which it never meant Resp 1. Mr Doctor At the close ends still with some Monstrum hor rendum intending that when this prog in the dark was carried up and down the Reader wherever he opened the Book and perused his notes should apprehend that and all the rest to be abominable stuffe without more looking after it as some of late formerly my Friends told some of my Congregation that the Mininisters made but a mock of my Books chiefly occasioned doubtlesse through the Doctors silly notes and notions 2. Whereas you say to baptize was not the main work for which the Apostles were sent nor for which ministers are appoynted I know none denies it But Mr Doctor the Question is where it were to be done or not 2. Where it were to be done but by ministers ordinarily that were sent or called to do it or not 3. The Apostle saith he was not sent to do that 1 Cor 1.17 that is ordinarily and then where others were not sent thereto the Apostle baptized few 1 Cor 1.14 16 and yet in Corinth Act 18.8 many hearing believed and were baptized Your Countryman Rutherford a man of judgment saith in his Treatise of Church-Government some other hence in Corinth did baptize beside Paul and can you think he did it in the same Church with him without Commission And did not this Commission he had in some kind give the Apostle cause to say being in ordinary Church-fellowship with the other he was not sent to Baptize but Evangelize and cals him co-worker with him working in the same Church Paul taught in prove the contrary if you can 4. I distinguish not teaching from baptizing but the Teachers by their administrations the Teacher teacheth as well as the Evangelist though not the same doctrine nor to the same people 5. The Apostle not I distinguisheth Evangelizing from Baptizing Baptism being a peculiar act of the Teachers ministry and in a especiall kind distinguishing him 6. If this were so common to all why did not Peter baptize the first Gentiles men that received the holy spirit but comand others to do it Aâ— 10.48 P. 28. In saying he was not the Apostle implyeth some are sent to baptize Dr. Do you think that any are sent to baptize and not to preach Mr Doctor have you my Book to read and do you ask that question Or did you send to Mr Ellis to answer you for me Do you find any such thing in all my Book Is not the contrary set down in many places Sir it seems you would beg me say so because you cannot make my Book do it Are things at this ebb with you Mr Doctor Dr. If the purpose of sending is primarily to preach and secondarily to baptize then the Apostle saith right that his commission was rather to intend the preaching work then the Baptizing of Disciples Resp 1. Mr Doctor What if this be not the purpose what then doth the Apostle say wrong it's 〈◊〉 no wrong to me if you say so of my writings if you are so saucy to say so of the Apostles but Mr Doctor we know your mind which is this That if the Apostles or any else say otherwaies then you would have them say they say wrong but when they say as you would have them say then they say right yea right or wrong 2. It was primarily to preach but it was to men without the Church before Baptism and secondarily baptize and yet Mr Doctor the Apostle is wrong in your sense 1. Here he speaks of Baptizing first as the first and Evangelizing after 2. This was to a Church constituted even Corinth and tended to perfect them after the Church admission in the faith of the Gospel being baptized already Dr. In your paragraph foregoing you say that baptizing was and the Doctrine of Bâ—ptism the Doctors work as appears Heb. 6.1 and why not the Pastors and the Evangelists or the Apostles do all that either of these do Resp Mr Doctor Your why not hath no cause in it why they yea or the Apostles themselves should do it ordinarily yet for these causes not 1. Because God for edification and order ordered it otherwaies 2. By a Gospel law God hath committed to each one his dispensation in his proper place Sir if a man had asked Moses why may not the Levites do that the Priests do the Priests do that the high Priests do would he not have said it was otherwaies in your pattern God will not have it so and what else could he have said for who hath been his Counsellour Dr. Heb 6 1. The fundamentals of the Doctrine of Christ are reckoned up and hath the Evangelist nothing to do with them to publish them I wonder at this weaknesse and at the whole sequel of this discourâ—e Resp Mr Doctor The Evangelist hath to do with them as a beleiver but to teach these to the society of strong men in Christ he hath not I do not know where you will say the Apostle saith right or wrong in saying so as you did before but so he saith Heb 6.1 Leaving therfore the word or Doctrine of the beginning of Christ let us be carried on unto perfection and after _____ Mr Doctor what is here meant by this not again laying the foundation if not that they were not to be taught again to perfect men by the Evangelists as they before had been by the Teacher to his babes P. 29. Nicodemus John 3.12 Dr. What although Christ doth speak of earthly and heavenly things in respect of the maâ—ter doth it therfore follow that he who teacheth the one may not meddle with the other These consequences are so senslesse that a man doth not know what to say of them Resp Mr Doctor See Joh. 3.3 1. There is mention of a man one that is in the condition of all mankind before regeneration meerly naturall 2. Regeneration is required of him as the means 3. Before this he cannot see the Kingdom of God in himself or in Church communion as the end for these are aimed at as â—n vers 5. is set out by water for the visible Kingdom or administrations of that Kingdom and then the Holy Ghost for the inward 1 In the former estate he is of the earth earthly as the first Adam was 1 Cor. 15.47 to whom Christ sheweth what that estate is and what is required to come out of it 2. In the Kingdom estate are Heavenly things ministred which Christ doth not minister to them not born again and shews why not because if they could not believe that Doctrine or teaching did so mediatly concern their state and condition how should they believe that concerned the