travell to bring in Presbyteriall Government Are they richer then before they were Are they to be in greater places then Ministers of the Word Truely I may say something that I have seen Some of them sundry times so exhausted their sickly bodies with pains in this Cause that sundry times they lost their health and fell sick but for worldly profit and preferment I never heard of it How great a fortune made Calvin with it Who as it is known and faithfully related by those who did write his life sundry times refused worldly means in a very fair and honourable way offered unto him and whose Inventory after his death hardly could amount to 40 pounds We had say ye nothing else to do but simply and singly to consider how to worship God acceptably Answ So much may many others say But most truely may as much be said of our first Parents in Paradise yet they gave themselves some other thing to do Besides all this ye are too peremptorious ye five to speak in the name of all the rest for howsoever every one of you may answer for one viz. for himself yet can none of you nor ye all answer for all those of your profession since their hearts are unknown to you and ye have no warrant from them Sect. 6. pag. 4. We were not engaged by Education c. And yet it is a blessing of God by Education to be engaged to good and bred in a true Doctrine and Ecclesiasticall Discipline Neither esteem I that it was a curse to the People of God to have been bred in his Covenant Neither think ye it a curse to yours to have been bred amongst you Ye suppose that other Reformed Churches might not see in all things So suppose we of you and that with greater reason being but five men not comparable with so many lights of the World of whom ye make your selves judges And yet ye esteem wrong in esteeming that their intention was most spent in the Reformation of Doctrine 1. For that is indirectly to accuse them of negligence in reforming of Discipline 2. Because their Consultations and Epistles sent to sundry Churches abroad testifies the contrary 3. Because the French tia vell very much about their Discipline and have reformed sundry things therein 4 And have a great many more helps then ye to frame it to Gods Word for it is expresly injoyned every Church Ruler to read it diligently Once every three moneths it is read in their Consistory and what ever any man findeth defectuous in it is represented to the Synod wherein there are so many of the learnedst most judicious and holy Divines of the whole Kingdom by whom after due Examination by Common-advice in the fear of the Lord at may much better be reformed then by the advice of one Independent Minister and two or three Ruling Elders in their particular Congregation And to think that one of you can see more then so many learned and Godly men gathered in the fear of the Lord cannot be thought without too good opinion of your selves 5. Besides all this a good Discipline may very well be established by men of lesse holinesse of life so be it they have greater abilities for the gift of constituting a good Discipline is not a gift proper to a good man but to a good Church Officer it is not Gratia grarum faciens sed gratis data not a saving gift or grace that maketh us gracious or acceptable to God but graciously given or bestowed upon us not to save our selves but other men as the gift of Prophesie for a man in preaching and ruling may save others and damn himself And a man may be a very good Prophet or Ruler in the Church if he have the abilities thereunto and exercise them well and an ill man if he let not himself be taught and ruled So we may say a man may be a good Citizen a good King a good Souldier or a good Cobler but an ill man Ye grant that In Doctrine they had a most happy hand but wherefore may ye not judge them as well to have had an happy hand in Discipline Was Gods hand more deficient to them in the one then in the other Or had they lesse abilities Or used they not their abilities What reason rather for the one then for the other Had they more Kingdoms to subdue then ye Or any other politicall ayms Or greater temptations then ye In the same Paragraph ye propound your Obtervations viz. That that Government viz. Presbyteriall hath been accompanied with more peace then yours and it is very true for who can tell how many Schismes and Heresies your Government is subject unto What Divisions and immortall hatreds it hath bred in New-England c. 2. If it hath more peace then it is such as it should be and obtaineth its adequate end which is the externall peace of the Church Ye adde That the power of godliness had not bin advanced amongst thē at in this Island From whence ye seem to infer that it is not so good as yours Ans 1. As for your Antecedent it is too bold to make your selves Judges of the power of godlinesse in other Churches and to judge your selves the holiest of all others But ye prove it by their own Confession Answ Brethren ye do not well to take advantage upon other mens Humilitie for to depresse them and extoll your selves They do well to think soberly of themselves So do not ye in esteeming so highly of your selves and so meanly of them 2. And the French are very courteous and civill but the more courteous and civill they be the more discourteous and uncivill be ye that take advantage by their courteousnesse and civilitie to depresse them under your selves 3. They have also this defect that they have too many complements But they say also Let compliments ne doibvent point estre pris au pied de la lettre Complements must not be taken literally It seems ye have not much travelled amongst them or remarked well the fashion of the Countrey But put the case your Antecedent were as true as it is false yet your Consequence is naught because of many captions and sophistications it containeth onely I will touch two the first is fallacia non causae ut causae a fallacious argumentation which bringeth a false and apparent cause for the true cause of the effect or a false effect for the true effect of the cause for if there were a greater power of godlinesse amongst you then in other Churches the cause thereof should not be the fault of the Government but of the Divell of those that govern or are governed not because your Discipline is better then ours or ours worse then yours But 1. because the Divell evermore assaults more the true Church the true Doctrine and true Discipline then the corrupted Church her corrupted Doctrine or Discipline to the end that thereby he may calumniate them all imputing craftily to
in case of Non-satisfaction whereas all punishments should be commensurate unto the severall offences 11. And so ye seem to approve the opinion of the Stoicks who held all sins to be equall since ye inflict the same punishment upon them all 12. Not onely this Discipline cannot easily be put in execution in great Kingdoms as England wherein all the Churches offended cannot so easily meet together but also 13. Because the person offended after he hath represented his grievances unto one Church and that Church having received satisfaction it may go to another and that Church likewise having received satisfaction it may go to another and so continually in infinitum to the Worlds end evermore taking those Churches for the Partie that judge it which is most absurde and foolish 14. What if the Partie offended be poor and have not the means to post up and down from Neighbour-Church to Neighbour-Church to pray them to make the offending Church to give an account of her Judgement muchlesse to attend upon their uncertain conveniencie Here will be found true Pauper ubique jacet whereas in Presbyteriall Government the Partie offended may easily be redressed and get satisfaction as not having need so to post up and down to be at so great charges or to attend their conveniencie for by a simple Appeal he may binde the Church offending to appear at the day appointed 15. What if there should fall out an hundred such Offences in a small time Must so many Churches evermore gather together for every one of them apart 16. What if Churches be poor and cannot be at so great expence Then in that case it should seem there is no order to meet with Offences And as for those precepts 1 Cor. 10. and 1 Tim. 5. The first of them is not a Rule of Government or ruling of the Church but a generall command common to all Christians whereby the Apostle forewarnes the Corinthians in things indifferent not to give any occasion of Offence unto the Church of God or to any other but therein to comply with all men as he doeth himself From whence ye cannot draw a Rule or Law of ruling the Church or how the Church should take order with such Offenders so that it sheweth indeed every mans dutie towards the Church in things indifferent but not the Churches dutie towards every one of them in judging or ruling Ye might as well have proved it from this Principle Fly from all evil or from that We must love God above all things and our Neighbour as our selves neither see I any greater connexion that it hath with the one then with the other And truely I cannot sufficiently admire how out of that Principle Give no offence ne to any man ye can inferre this conclusion Ergo a Church offended may make a Church offending to give an account of her judgement before all the world and in case of impenitency pronounce a Sentence of withdrawing and renouncing all Christian Communion with her and further to declare it to all other Churches No more can it be inferred of the other viz. Be not partakers in other mens sins for the Apostle there giveth rules about the Vocation of Ministers forbiddeth Timothy to receive any man rashly into the Ministery least in so doing he be the cause of an unlawfull Vocation because saith he vers 24. their sin and incapacity will soon appear to all men But how is it possible out of this to spin out the former Couclusion § 18. Pag. 17 ye prove your former Conclusion thus 1. For that ye saw no further authority in Scripture in proceedings purcly Ecclesiasticall of one or many sister Churches towards another whole Church or Churches offending 2. Because no other Authority can rationally be put in execution without the Magistrates power Answ 1. Ye saw no more in Scripture yea but saw ye your own Conclusion in Scripture 2. Truely we see no Word of God for it and if we take it not upon your word we shall never take it 3. If ye see no Scripture for it yet others may see 4. Ye may if ye will see it in the ordinary Practice of the Church of the Jews in the old Testament which is not abrogated in the New since it is not Ceremoniall but grounded in the Law of Nature Ye may see it in the History of the New Testament in the judgement given out at the Synod of Hierusalem concerning the businesse of Antiochia which I hope ye shall see cleerly demonstrated to you by a better hand before it be long 6. It may be proved by the Law of Nature which is a praecognitum to Scripture and supposed by Scripture for Grace is not destructory of Nature but a Superstructory above Nature So that when Scripture containeth nothing contradictory to the Dictats of Nature we are bound to believe them unlesse we will misbelieve God who is no lesse the Author of Nature and of the Dictats thereof then of Grace 2. Because no other Authority can rationally be put in execution without the Civill Magistrates power Answ 1. Our Brethren here as every where else stand very stiffly to Negations They never prove any positive Doctrine and it is known in the Schools how easie a thing it is to deny all things and to prove nothing If they had that to prove wherein they agree with us I suppose they should have more to do then we to prove that wherein they disagree from us But to take away all mistakes and captious Evasions we suppose that our Churches arrogate to themselves no Imperiall or Magisteriall but onely a Ministeriall Power or Authority 2. That it is meerly Spirituall consisting 1. in the Creation Suspension and Deposition of Church-Officers 2. in determining matters of Doctrine 3. in making of Ecclesiasticall Laws concerning things indifferent 4. in Ecclesiasticall Censures as in Suspension Excommunication c. They prove That no more can rationally be put in execution viz. then to call an offending Church to an account and in case of her impenitency to declare it to all other Churches Answ We deny the Assumption They prove it for that Christ gave no power to Churches to excommunicate their neighbour Churches Answ 1. This is again another mistake in our Brethren for they suppose that we excommunicate whole Churches which we never do 2. Neither believe I that they can bring us any examples of it The reason why we do not so is Because whole Churches ordinarily amongst us contemn not the superiour Ecclesiasticall Power viz. of Synods being bound by their Oath and Covenant to observe and maintain the Order of the Church 3. And therefore we have no Ecclesiasticall Laws concerning such cases for Lex est ordinatio rationis and Laws are not made of things that never fall out or of things that fall out extraordinarily but of things that are ordinary 4 Much lesse think I that ever any such case did fall out in any one of the Reformed Churches Item it is
you or of your or our Reformation but of the coming of Christ and the vocation of the Gentiles for howsoever the Fathers in the old Testament received the Promises yet received they not the accomplishment or performance of them viz. Christ manifested in the flesh who is that better thing reserved unto us whereof the Apostle speaketh there otherwise we should have perished § 23 24 25 26 27. Containeth an Enumeration of our Brethrens grievances whereof they have mentioned many heretofore 1. The mistaking and misapprehension of their Opinions wherein they might seem to differ We have answered already 1. It is not a mistake nor misapprehension to take and apprehend an opinion as it is propounded by the Partie as we have done 2. We answer That if we mistake or misapprehend any opinion it is not that of all Independents 3. It is a great mistake in you to imagine that ye be all of one opinion For ye five who are the Authors of this Book cannot agree among your selves how muchlesse with others 4. And we are assured that ye cannot but mistake one another 5. Here also must be noted your Parenthesis wherein we might seem to differ Then your differences from us were not reall but apparent If so wherefore then will ye not really agree and joyn your selves in Union and Communion with us And truely so it is either they are not reall or they are really ridiculous Pag. 23. Your second grievance is that ye are grievously calumniated with reproaches of Schisme Schisme is a Pertinacious Separation from the true Church after sufficient conviction And as Heresie as Heresie is repugnant to Faith so is Schisme to Charitie the one quitteth the unitie of the Faith the other the union in Charitie And as Heresie is evermore accompanied with pertinacy after sufficient conviction So is Schisme also If therefore the Synod or any other Assembly or any of your Brethren should convict you sufficiently and afterwards ye should separate your selves or desire a separation from us I think that no man could deny you to be Schismaticks neither beleeve I in such a case that ye would or could honestly deny i◠your selves But so long as the Synod or some others does it not I dare say nothing As for my self I beleeve truly that ye be very Learned Pious and honest Men and howsoever ye may fail by infirmitie yet beleeve I not that ye erre out of malice and consequently that ye are no Schismaticks hitherto And I hope and am consident that God will not permit that so good and godly men fall away from his Church And this I say by morall probabilitie because of the good opinion I have conceived of you by good mens relations and some observation of your carriages in the small conversation I have had with some of you If therefore any men out of too much zeal or others out of malice have uttered any such aspersion it is in your power by entertaining of a Fraternall union with us to give them the ly as I hope in Gods mercy ye will do § 24. Pag. 24 25. But ye prove That ye are not or cannot be Schismaticks by three Reasons The first is If ye be Schismaticks or culpable of Schisme Either it must relate say you to a differing from the former Ecclesiasticall Government of this Church established and then who is not involved in it as well as we Or to that Constitution and Government that is yet to come and untill that be agreed on established and declared and actually exist there can be no guilt or imputation of Schisme from it But none of these are true as ye have confirmed it Ergo. Answ Howsoever I hold you not yet for Schismaticks yet can I not think that ye prove it well For that dis-junctive proposition may be denyed as not containing a full enumeration of all the Causes or Reasons of Schisme for a Church may be Schismaticall not onely for her Separation from this or that Church but much more for her Separation from all Churches as your Accusers may say of you viz. That ye have quitted the Communion of all other Churches as well Protestants as Papists and that in case ye could not or would not joyn in union with Churches ruled by Episcopall Government ye might have joyned your selves with other Reformed Churches with which the Church of England entertained Union and Communion so that the greater your Separation was the greater was your Schisme Yet can it not be said that it was a Schisme formally but materially for it had not the essentiall forme or that which we conceive as the essentiall forme of a Schisme viz. Conviction and Pertinacy without the which Schisme no more can be made up then Heresie For it is Forma quae dat esse rei the Forme that giveth being to a thing Onely it had the matter or materiall cause of a Schisme viz. The Separation from all Churches which cannot make up a Schisme formally no more then a mans body alone which is his matteriall cause can formally make up a Man 2. Men may yet be called Schismaticks Materialiter Dispositivè matterially and dispositively or as having the disposition to Schisme when they cannot actually resist an actuall Government but are resolved without any sufficient cause to resist or controle that Government that they judge will be established by them who according to Gods ordinary Providence have power to do it And so your Partie may yet say that ye be culpable and guiltie of Schisme materially and by way of disposition if they see you aym at any Toleration which is the next way to Separation So they may Answer unto the confirmations of both the parts of your dis-junctive Proposition in denying both your Assumptions for many there be who separated not themselves from all Protestant Churches and that are not minded to oppose the forme of Government that is to be established much lesse to be suiters for Toleration Your second Reason to free your selves from the calumny of Schisme is this in substance § 24. Pag. 24. If ye had been guided by the spirit of Schisme ye had made up a Partie when ye had the occasion But so did ye not when ye had the occasion Ergo. Ye prove the connexion of your first Proposition Because such are practises of those that are led by the spirit of Schisme Ye prove the Assumption 1. Because that howsoever ye had great provocations viz. 1. Misunderstandings of your opinions 2. Incitements to this State not to allow you the peaceable practises of your consciences which the Reformed Churches abroad allowed you 3. Calumnies in Print 4. Heightned with this prejudice that ye were ashamed of your opinions or able to say little for them 5. Books printed against your opinions yet ye did it not 2. Because that having the occasion of manifold advantages to make and increase a Partie ye have not in the least sort attempted it Ye prove that ye had manifold advantages