the Elders of Jsrael often meant I answer 1. First this being granted it disprooveth not our argument for it may be often so used elswhere and yet not here When we reason from Heb. 1.8 O God thy throne is for ever to prove Christs Godhead the Arians object that Princes and Magistrates are often caled Gods Psal. 82. Exod. 21.6 but is that a sufficient answer 2. Secondly that which these say is here true but not the whole truth 〈◊〉 Elders are meant as principals but not they to be al the congregation which I thus manifest The Levites now to be ordeyned Ministers were taken in stead of al the firstborn of Israel and not in stead of the first-born of the Elders onely Num. 3.40.41 The Levits were now to be offred before the Lord as a shake offring of the children of Israel Num. 8.11 being freely given as a gift of theirs unto the Lord to doo the service of the Tabernacle of the congregation Num. 18.6 8.16 Al offrings were by those that offred them to be presented at the dore of the Tabernacle with imposition of hands Levit. 1. verse 2.3.4 c. For as much therfore as these Levites were offred by al the Congregation and not the Elders or officers onely in sted of their own firstborn it is evident that not the Officers onely but the other people also are here meant Num. 8.10 the rather also for that before verse 9. and after verse 11. others besides Elders are intended 2. Secondly they object how should so many hundred thowsand of Jsrael eyther at once hear or doo the things there spoken of I answer as wel as they heard and did other publik affayrs in the Tabernacle unless they think that al the people never heard or did any thing there When the whole Congregation of Israel synned al the Congregation was to bring a sacrifice Num. 15.24 25 26. wil they ask how so many 100000. could doo it By this reason nothing at al should ever be doon in Israel by the multitude eyther for word prayers sacrifices c. And so by their proportion of the Church now let the people be exempted from word prayers sacraments as wel as from ordination of officers and censuring of synners and let the Eldership be al in al. 3. Thirdly they except if it be sayd some did it for the rest first who were those some but the Elders secondly under whom did they it but under the Lord who set them over the people to minister and govern in his sted I answer first the multitude not the Elders onely were assembled Secondly the multitude and not the Elders onely gave these Levits to the Lord both these are before proved Thirdly for the order and manner of giving Moses governed the action to him it was sayd thou shalt sprinkle water thou shalt bring them before the Lord c. and then the children of Jsrael imposed â—ands this I understand not of every particular man but of some of the cheif for the rest as the Elders heads of tribes cheif fathers of families c. as when aâ— the multitude brought an oblation for their syn the Elders put their hands on the head of the sacrifice Lev. 4.14.15 Accordingly have wee practised in our ordination of officers as these our opposites wel know some of the cheif of the Church the ancientest and fathers of families imposed hands in name of the rest Now to their secoÌ„d questioÌ„ I answer they did it under the Lord and for the other people But this wil not satisfy them for they say they were over the people to minister and govern in Gods sted Exod 20.12 Num. 11.16 30. Deut. 1.9 18. 16.18 17.12 19.12 17. c I answer admit that al they which imposed hands were governours though that cannot be proved neyther dooth honour thy father mother Exod. 20 12. I am sure shew any such thing yet they did not this thing as a work peculiar to their office of goverment neyther do any of the scriptures alledged shew so much but the contrary may be manifested For if they did it as governours then was it eyther as governours ecclesiastical and ministers in the sanctuarie but so were not they for Aaron and his sonns had peculiarly that charge Levit. 8. Or they did it as governours civil Magistrates of the coÌ„mon wealth Which if it be affirmed then first Christian Magistrates now which have civil authoritie equal with the Magistrates of Israel may ordeyn and impose hands on church ministers and so men need not run to Rome to borow a Ministery from Antichrist as many now doo fansie Secondly if civil Magistrates may impose hands on Ministers it wil folow that the Church wanting Magistrates may also by the Fathers of families or other fittest members impose hands For it is not properly a work tyed to the magistrates office 1. because then the churches in the Apostles times wanting Magistrates could not have had Ministers but they had and yet never intruded into the Magistrates office 2. Because the Magistrates sword and office is not subordinate to Christ as he is mediatour and head of the Church for so ther should be no lawful magistrates but Christians meÌ„bers of the church but Magistrates have their office next under God to be heads of the Common weales whether they be meÌ„bers of the church or not as Christ hath his office under God to be head of the Church and these two goverments are so distinct as they neyther may be confounded neyther doo one take in hand the work peculiarly belonging to another Christ professed his kingdom not to be of this world neyther medled 〈◊〉 with the outward sword nor civil controversies neyther on the other side might the Kings of Israel medle with the Preists work to burn incense or the like 3. Because the works of the civil Magistrates office in Israel might be performed by hetheÌ„s when they ruled over that nation as appointing of officers judging of controversies punishment of malefactors c. So Nebuchadnezar the Babylonian lawfully as concerning God reigned over the Iewes and did set over them a governour and put some of them to death for adulterie other evils And the Iewes were bound to obey him and his substitutes and to pray for his coÌ„mon wealth But to the Babylonian Preists they might not be subject Neyther doo I think that our opposites wil say Nebuchadnezar and his Princes might give office of Ministerie or impose hands on the Levites in the sanctuarie Wherfore I conclude that the cheif fathers of Israel imposed hands on the Levites not because of their office of magistracie if they had such an office as if it could not ells have been performed but because they were the principallest members of the Church therfore by order to doo it before al other and in the name of al other which for the
give us a distinction between the sentence of excōmunication and between the execution therof As in Jsrael the Elders Preists had a rightful power to giue out the sentence of death of leprosie according to the law without asking the peoples consent yea though it should have been without and against it Deut. 1.16 17.8.12 24.8 with 2. Chrō 26.16.20 Levit. 13. c. and then it was for the people to perform the execution accordingly so the Elders now may by office give out the sentence of excōmunication according to the law of God the people should accordingly put it in execution by avoiding the excōmunicate persons til they repent I answer this comparison is faulty many wayes First it speaketh onely of a rightful power wheras the thing they should answer to is both rightful and able power as themselves once distinguished or let them say whether the Church that Christ sendeth to for redress of syn hath not able power to excōmunicate 2. Secondly it matcheth the power of the Ministers in spiritual things with the power of the Magistrates in civil things which what is it but to make the one Lords spiritual as the other are Lords temporal according to the Popish hierarchie 3. Thirdly it misseth in the proportion of the Preists judging leprosie for Gods law in Lev. 13.2 is that the suspected person should be brought to Aarō the Preist or to one of his sons the Preists and the Preist should look and pronounce him unclean or clean as he discerned it The proportion hereto now is one Bishop or Minister rather than a Church of Ministers for if one Preist might judge then why may not one Minister judge now Doe not the Papists which allege this very example and apply it to one Preist make a fitter proportiō then they that deny this power unto one and yet apply it unto many 4. Fourthly thus farr I grant this proportion that as every Preist then might according to the law declare what was leprosie so every Minister now may and ought by the law to declare what is syn and heresie and this though it be without and against the consent of the Church of all the world Ezek. 3.17 21.2 Tim. 4..1.2 Tit. 1.9 But as then not the preist onely but the children of Israel put every leper out of the host so now not the minister onely but the childrē of Christ the church are to put the wicked out frō among them as the Apostle sheweth 5. Fiftly if the Elders the Magistrates might as these men say give sentence of death against a man though without and against the peoples consent then it was for the people to perform the execution then that people I say were in great subjection and servitude to their Elders that must execute that man to whose death they cōsented not and to shape the Ministers power now accordingly is to make them Lords and the Church their subjects and servants yea the Pope himself never had men in greater slaverie I know when Gods law condemned a man if it were shewed by all or any one of the Iudges or Preists or Prophets yea or Israelites the people should in order have executed him but oft times the heads of the people judged for rewards the Princes as Lions the Iudges as Wolves devoured them the Preists polluted the sanctuarie and wrested the law And then the people of the land whose duty also it was to look to open wickednes were neyther to folow the many nor mighty in evil And that the Iudges had power to put any man to death whom the people judged innocent I find not but would see it proved I find how in Naboths case though it were a wicked fact ther was a solemn fast and assemblie of the people with the governours how in Ieremies case he was accused to the Princes and people made his defense to princes and people and was acquitted by princes and people When King Saul sware that Ionathan should dye the people sware the contrary saved him from death when the high preists scribes would have kylled Christ they feared the people Luk. 20.19 22.2 and the people as wel as the rulers were caled before Pilate about Christs death Luk. 23.13 and by their voices prevayled Mat. 27.20.22.25.26 Luk 23.23 So that to prove the Ministers sole power now for to cut off a man from the Church by the Magistrates power then to cut off a man from Israel neyther is the proportion just if it were so neyther yet is it manifested that so it was in Israel 6. Sixtly the proportion which they here make is so misshapen that I marvel wise men would ever bring it forth to the view of the world For they make the avoiding of the excommunicated person by the people to be the executing of the sentence of excommunication wheras this censure is properly executed by him that in the name of Christ and with consent of the Church delivereth the wicked man to Satan as the Apostle willeth 1. Cor. 5. which being doon the man is certaynly excommunicated whither the people avoyd his company or not And if they otherweise here understand the word execution they doo but deceiv the reader with an aequivocation This their other example of the sentence of death and the execution therof wil plainly manifest For Pilate gave sentence of death upon Christ the souldjers that kylled him with nayles and spear they executed the sentence of death as we commonly speak and understand Then Ioseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus embaulmed him with myrrh wound him in a sheet and layd him in grave shal we say that these two now were the executioners of Christ because they caryed themselves towards him as towards a dead man Or if any refreyned from touching a dead man that had been hanged least by him they should be polluted did they here by execute him No more doo they properly execute the sentence of excommunication which avoyd the company of one excommunicated 7. But because al the weight of their wrested proportion frō Israel is couched herein let us look upon it a litle more In their Treatise on Mat. 18. there they say in Jsrael such as would not hearken to the Preists and Judges were to dye by the hands of the people Deut. 17. Agayn they say delivering to Satan in 1. Cor. 5. is in sted of death in Jsrael Levit. 20.11 By this one would think that the people now should deliver a wicked man to Satan when the Elders have judged him worthy otherweise how stands the proportion But they mean nothing less for a litle after they tel vs in the Churches excommunication ther is the giving of a sentence judiciarie which perteyneth to government and authority there is also in particular a delivering to Satan by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ c. which likewise
sayd let al the congregation stone him and al the Congregation brought him without the host and stoned him Now by M. Iohnsons own grant they whom the Iudges condemned did dye by the hands of the people who is it then that cannot see the Congregation here to mean both Elders and people So in the other place Num. 27.2 when they stood before Moses and Eleazar the preist and before the Princes and al the Congregation this distribution of the persons togither with the place the dore of the Tabernacle of the Congregation may shew that the Elders onely were not meant besides in the same chapter Iosua being there ordeyned over the Congregation c. it cannot with any colour be gathered that the Elders onely were the congregation Num. 27.16.17.19.20 c. Wherfore when one scripture mentioneth the Elders Jos. 20.4 and an other the Congregation Num 32.12 Jos. 20.6 we should not restreyn it to the lesser but let the scripture have the largest sense unless apparant reason doo urge a restreynt which is not here but the contrary For if they were to dye by the hands of the people conscience required the people to hear their cause tryed also seing the law charged every one thou shalt not slay the innocent and the righteous and it was not safe for them to trust their Iudges which so often and so many wayes corrupted judgment as al the prophets doo complayn It is therfore an evil argument to say in Israel by one scripture men were sent to the Elders by an other to the Congregation therfore it was the congregation of Elders and not of the people also For by such wrested reasons one might prove that the Elders onely were bound to keep the passover because in one place it is sayd speak to all the Congregation of Israel that every man take to him a Lamb Exod. 12 3. and in an other place it is sayd Moses caled al the Elders of Israel saying chuse out take for every of your howsholds a Lamb Exod. 12 21. therfore it was meant of the Congregation of Elders and so the other people were not bound to this service Agayn it was coÌ„manded Exod 19 3 5. tel the children of Jsrael if ye wil hear my voice and keep my covenant ye shal be my chief treasure c. afterwards it is sayd Moses caled for the Elders of the people and proposed unto them al these things shal we now conclude therfore the covenant was made with the Elders onely Who seeth not the weaknes of such consequents and that it is usual in scripture to name but the principal of a company and yet to include others with them Notwithstanding between Israel and us there were two mayn differences the one that Church ministers now have not such ecclesiastical authoritie over the people as is proportionable to the Magistrates autoritie then for this is forbidden Mat. 20 25. vvher Christ sayth the rulers of the nations have domination over them and they that are great exercise authoritie over them but it shal not be so among you And 1. Pet. 5.2 3. Feed the flock of God c. not as having domination over his heritage The other is that they vvere a national Church the Magistrats in the gates of Ierusalem the Preists in the Temple being for the whole Realm it could not be that al the people should be present at the dayly judgements of the Magistrates or sacrifices of the Preists And therfore it vvas not required so of them as novv it is of us vvho are but particular Churches to be present at al publik administration of Christs kingdom and preisthood Yea even in their most solemn assemblies they could not doo as vve ar bound to doo For they did eat the passeover in their private hovvses because al the thovvsands of Israel could not eat it in one room but vve are bound to eat the passover now I mean the Lords supper in the publik Church and not otherwhere Wheras therfore they next except that the people were 600. thowsand men and would we have them to think that they came togither to hear examine and judge the cases of syn c. I answer no neyther al the Elders For I have before shevved there were divers officers for several causes And Boaz took but ten of the Elders of BethleheÌ„ to hear his cause The Elders also did meet by themselves as ther was occasion and so are they to doo now Secondly for this exception of so many thowsands in the wildernes that could not come to hear and judge they should mind how the same lyeth against the execution When God sayd of the blasphemer let all the Congregation stone him wil they say six hundred thowsand men came together to doo it yet themselves grant this vvas to be doon by the people It vvas as easy for them to come to hear his cause tryed as to come and stone him and care of equity taught them to doo the first as vvel as the last as before is shevved Next they except against our expounding the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 18.1 c. to be the church under the gospel since Christ this they say is not sound because the same phrase is spoken of the church of the Jewes Mat. 22.2 c. I answer this their reason is unsufficient for I could so except against the exposition almost of any scripture by shewing a diverse use and meaning of the words When th'Apostle proveth Christs excellencie above the Angels because of his name the Son of God the Iewes might allege that the Angels are also caled Sonns of God yea holy men have the like title but were this a sufficient answer Wel I wil not stâ—ive with them about the phrase although in some places they may see the Kingdom of Heaven opposed to the state of the Iewes church as Mat. 11.11 but as the prophets tel us of new heavens under the Gospel so wil I distinguish and cal the Iewish church the old heaven as that which is shaken and removed and the Christian church the new heaven of which the Gospel usually speaketh as Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand Mat. 3.2 4.17 Now vvhen the disciples asked Iesus who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven ther might be reason of their demand touching the Christian church then to be planted but to ask such a thing about the Ievvish church I see litle reason They knevv already the state of it and vvho vvas cheif therin Secondly Christs ansvver leadeth us hereto for ther being great expectation of that Kingdom and an erroneous persuasion that it should be a glorious vvorldly state Christ tells them the contrary that it vvas for the converted and humble sovvles to enter into that many scandals and offenses should arise herein both from the vvorld and from mens corruption in them selves and from
excoÌ„munication Fourthly if some would thus cavil against Moses lavv which requireth the hands of al the people to stone a wicked man and ask whether women also and children must be present cast stones he might have as good colour for his question as have these if not better For these say in Jsrael such as would not hearken to the Preists judges were to dye by the hands of the people and the proportion that they cast for the people now is that they shal put the sentence in execution by avoiding the excoÌ„municated persons Now I think they wil have women yea and children also to avoyd excoÌ„municated persons so then by proportion women children in Israel must cast stones at malefactors Yea this may be further urged against them by reason of a pregnant note which they give in their Treatise on Mat. 18 that that is such a church as where women may speak are to be heard in their cases and pleas as wel as men but it is not permitted to women to speak in the Churches of the saincts c. wher eyther they aequivocate with this word speak using it in divers senses a coÌ„mon practise of such as would deceiv or they must permitt women to have voices and suffrages as wel as men in al their churches of Elders and so by their proportion women were to cast stones in Israel For if women are to do execution now why not then also 5. Now wheras they intimate to the reader as if we vvould have al men examine rebuke admonish in the presence of the Elders they doo but labour the disgrace of the holy order in the church wher the Minister as the mouth of the congregation propoundeth examineth and carieth matters and then the people if there be defect or default may speak in due order but if in matter or manner they transgress they are to bear their rebuke Al things in the publick judgments of the church being caried holily peaceably and by the government of the Elders even as in elections of officers in prophesie or any other thing wherin men have libertie for to speak And when the Ministers cary things well we commonly find it as in Act. 15.12 that al the multitude keepeth silence otherwise strife and sometime disorder dooth often arise by the evil dealing of the Elders 6. It is also to be observed how these our opposites wil require by their proportion from Israel children to stone their parents wives their husbands and servants their maysters by avoiding their coÌ„munion yet wil they not have theÌ„ to be of that church which is to hear examine judge of the causes why their parents c. should be stoned and excoÌ„municated not bound to be present at the trial of their case Did ever any coÌ„mon wealth in the world require such execution at the hands of wives children and servants and yet teach them so little to honour and regard their parents as not to think themselves bound to hear their case tried but upon the Elders report to stone their own fathers husbands maisters which doo take it on their death that they are innocent Against 1. Cor. 12.21 26. which was by some alleged they except 1. that the Apostles purpose is not to speak of cases and pleas about syn and of the manner of dealing therin but of the diversity of gifts and functions given for the help and service of all to the building up of the body of Christ. I answer 1. the Apostle speaketh generally of the diversities of gifts Ministeries and operations in the church as they are given to to every man to profit with all and nameth in particular the gifts operations and ministeries and among the rest the governours or governments and ther is no church action which the Apostle purposeth not in that his dispute to comprehend their first exception therfore is not true 2. Neyther dooth it agree with it self for if he speak as they confess of the diversity of gifts and functions given for the help and service of all to the building up of the body of Christ then can he not but speak of cases and pleas about syn seing they are to be judged by the gifts and functions of the church they are for the help and service of all they help to build up the body of Christ. Vnless they would have us think that the Elders prelacie which they strive for is none of those gifts or functions nor for the help and service of all nor for the building up of Christs body but of Antichrists this we wil grant them to be true 2. Secondly they except the Apostle sheweth it by the similitude of the natural body and faculties and applieth it to the feeblest members even the yongest children newly baptised vers 13 â—22 to whom he appointeth not the cases of syn to be brought to judgment and censure as we hereupon would inferr I answer in thus speaking they injurie us and the truth it self Would we inferr that the judgmeÌ„t of syn should be brought to infants newly baptised because we say not the Elders onely but the church is to judge as Paul teacheth And would th'Apostle also inferr think they that infants should rebuke and judge unbeleevers because he sayth when the whole church is come togither in one if al prophesie and ther come in one that beleeveth not he is rebuked of al is judged of al. And did Iosua also mean that the yongest children newly circumcised threw stones at Achan because he sayth al Jsrael stoned him we had not thought wise men would ever have made such inferences And what vveight is in their reasoning from infants that if other besides Elders may judge synners then infants if not infantes then no other but Elders Might not men thus elude al Pauls arguments As when he sayth the manifestation of the spirit is given to every one to profit withal they to conclude therfore the yongest children newly baptised can manifest the spirit to the profit of others We have bene all made to drink into one spirit therfore infants also were partakers of the Lords supper Jf one member be had in honour all the members reioyce with it therfore even the sucking babes for they also are members But did not these men think to find babes of us that they have given such an answer to our allegations 3. Thirdly they except that this similitude might likewise be applied to Jsrael which we grant Also we acknowledge that it may not eyther then or now pervert Gods ordinance about the Elders hearing c. They say the governours are set in the Church for that use I answer not the governours onely this is that which they should prove They are to govern the Church in al actions but not to doo them alone Also they say al members have not fit gifts for examining of persons deciding of questions c.
deed is the surest argument of al save that it is a fayr begging of the quaestion For the thing they should prove is that their constitution is according to Israel or Apostolik For if Israel or the primitive Churches before they had officers did or might receiv in and cast out members and if the people might set up and depose officers by power from God then are these mens errors overthrown If not but that the thing is unlawful for any then or now so to doo then is the constitution of their Church overthrown as that which did grow up to such estate without power from heaven and they are to let it fal and be rooted up and come to a better if they can find it according to the scriptures Whether therfore our exception or their defense be more vayn frivolous as they speak let the prudent judge The 3. point of difference in the Letter 1. WE had learned that every Christian congregation hath power and coÌ„mandement to elect and ordeyn their own Ministerie according to the rules of Gods word and upon such default in life doctrine or administration as by the rule of the word depriveth them of the ministerie by due order to depose them from the ministerie they exercised yea if the case so require orderly to cut them of by excommunication But now it is by some mainteyned that the Congregation can neyther put into office nor put out of office unless they have officers to doo both and can neyther for heresie or other wickednes excommunicate or depose their Eldership With this they joyn the first out of the printed copy which is as the former These things are confirmed in our Articles by Act. 6.3.5.6 14.23 15.2.3.22.23 2. Cor. 8.19 1. Tim. 3.10 4.14 5.22 Num. 8.9.10 1. Cor. 16.3 Tit. 1.5 c. Eph. 4.11.12 1. Cor. 12.7.8.14.15.28 Levit. 8. ch Rom. 16.17 Phil. 3.2 1. Tim. 6.3.5 Ezek. 44.12.13 Mat. 18.16 And in our Apologie by 7. reasons deduced froÌ„ the Scriptures Hereunto they say 1. That the church may excommunicate an officer as wel as any other member I answer they yet touch not the point We speak of the churches ministerie or Eldership in general they tel us of one in particular who because ther ar other ministers he may be censured by them Bur if a church have onely one minister and he prove a wolf they can neyther put him out of office nor excoÌ„municate him by their doctrine 2. Secondly they say if al the officers jointly transgress and so persist then the church which did chuse theÌ„ may also depose and refuse them from being their officers any longer and may separate themselves from them But that the people may excommunicate al their officers they desire to see it shewed from the word I answer though they can not deny the Article yet they seek covertly to cary the reader aside The article speaketh of chusing and ordeyning and so putting into office they answer onely of chusing the other they pass by But let them shew ever any church where men were chosen and not also ordeyned and put into office or that God committed the beginning of such a work to any people and not the ending also And why wil they sever the things God hath joyned In the law the church had authoritie to make them that is as the Greek version sheweth constitute or ordeyn which word Paul useth Tit. 1.5 Judges and officers in al their cities and not to elect them onely 2. The article speaketh of deposing from ministery and putting out of office they answer onely of deposing and refusing from being their officers any longer That is to say as men that have left the church of Rome have deposed the Pope for in separating from him he is their officer no longer But is he not trow we a Pope stil And shal not an Eldership when the people have doon al this that they speak of reteyn a ministery stil The separation which they tel us of is thus opened by their own comment that it implieth the power we have over our selves wheras excommunication implieth power and authoritie over others Thus they allow not the body of the Church power and authority over their heretical Eldership though it be but 2. or 3. wicked men to cast them out of the Church in Christs name and power or to depose them from office but from being their officers Even thus they themselves hâ—ve deposed al the Bishops of England long agoe But whether this be not to aequivocate with the word depose let wise men jâ—dge for a litle after they ask whether it can be shewed by any scripture that any did ordeyn or depose officers but Governours Now wheras our 〈◊〉 Apologie is confirmed by many scriptures reasons deduced from them they answer them not as is meet they should seing they wil abrogate their former profession and bring in a new neither doo they as they then wrote must be doon shew some other manner of entrance into the ministerie ordeyned by Christ but thus they labour to confute themselves 1. The particuculars of the 23. Article of our Confession being found true in the churches of Jsrael and of the Gentlies since Christ the exception made hereabout can not be of weight against this or any other Church established according to the word of God as those were but must be also against those Churches withal What to make of this their answer as yet I cannot tell my slendernes coÌ„prehendeth not the depth of it That the particulars of that 23. article were found true in the Churches of God I doubt not of it that is the thing we stand for That exception should be made by us hereabout against this or any Church established according to the word of God as these were is farr from our thought What is it then that they have sayd but an ostentation of the name of Jsrael their mayn colourable argument which yet is against them not for them at all as our CoÌ„fession and Apologie sheweth In Israel the whole Congregation was assembled at the ordination of their ministers and the childreÌ„ of Israel imposed hands upon them This rule we folow but these our opposites wil not allow churches unless they have ministers before to doo thus they wil rather have their ministerie from the great Antichrist of Rome as after shal be manifested for which they have no shew in the scriptures For did Israel ever take Egyptian or Babylonian preists to minister in their sanctuary or did the primitive churches ever take any Bishop of the Antichrists that were in there time set them by vertue of their Antichristian ordination over the flock of Christ why then doo these men so ofteÌ„ tel us of Jsrael and the primitive churches unless they think their very names would make us afrayd But they except against Num. 8.9.10 saying by the children of Jsrael c. are
Ministerie though with corruptions how wil they be able to bear out such as are excoÌ„municated for so great contempt and errour 3. Thirdly as Antichristians doo excoÌ„municate such as they should not so doo they baptise such as they ought not even open impenitent Idolaters and their seed the generation of Vipers which Iohn Baptist would refuse Yea Mr Iohnson himself hath sayd of a better estate then Romes that Gods covenant is sacrilegiously violated whiles it is sayd to the open wicked in delivering them the seals of Gods covenant Thou art righteous Therfore if the Popes excoÌ„municatorie bulls are but bubbles because they are unjustly executed his baptisme also will be found but a fiction no true seal of salvation to such as receive it of him Finally touching circumcision I think it cannot be manifested that any people 's fallen from God and his Church using it colourablie for a religious action as al Antichristians and heretiks doo baptism at this day did or were bound to cutt their foreskin the second time if they came unto the truth of God as for example the Colchians Aegyptians and Aethiopians whom histories mentioÌ„ to be circumcised or the Samaritans whom Mr Iohnson acknowledgeth to have stil vsed circumcision Hereunto we may add out of the Iewish records how they hold that Al have leav to circumcise yea though it be an uncircumcised person or a servant or a woman or a child circumcising in the place where ther is no man But an hethen may not circumcise at al yet if he doo circumcise ther is no need to return circumcise the second time If this rule stand we shal not need to repeat our outward washing in baptism though given us by Antichrist or any other aliants from the church covenant of promise Of the Church of Rome The Church of Rome being acknowledged by al that fear God to be the throne of Antichrist Mr Iohnson himself having professed that the hierachie and Church-constitution of Antichrist is the most detestable anarchie of Satan that ever was yet imitating now M. Gifford M. Bernard and other professed enemies of the truth he pleads for that Church after this manner The Apostle expressly teacheth that Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God 2. Thes. 2 4. And by the Temple understanding the Church of God it wil folow that Antichrist should sit in the Church of God and is there to be sought and found and not among Jewes Turks Pagans c. neyther that Antichrist takes away wholly the church of God and every truth and ordinance of the Lord c. I answer truth errour are closely couched togither in this their plea for the discerning wherof we are to consider first how Antichrists church is described in Gods word secondly what the state of the church of Rome is at this day The Antichristian synagogue is by the holy Ghost caled a Beast which signifyeth a kingdom it is named also a great citie which noteth the largenes of that politie and kingdom It cometh up out of the earth as being of this world which Christs kingdom that coÌ„meth down from heaven is not and therfore is caled a man of syn and a great whore whose head is Abaddon or Apollyon the destroyer of others and himself the son of perdition and they that follow him are the children of damnation This wicked generation warreth against the Lamb Christ and against the saincts blasphemeth Gods name tabernacle and them that dwel in heaven â—hat is the true Church whose conversation is heavenly Yet doo they all this mischeif under shew of Christian religion therfore this beast hath horns like the Lamb Christ this whore is arayed with purple skarlet guilded with gold precious stones and pearles as if she were the Queen and spowse of Christ she hath peace offrings Vovves as if she were devowt in Gods service bread and waters as ready to refresh the weary sowls Her doctrines sweet amiable lyeâ— spoken in hypocrisie but yet confirmed with signes and miracles as if they came from heaven her power and efficacie great prevayling over the many and the mighty the Kings Princes of world deceiving al nations with her inchantments and if it were possible Gods very elect her continuance and outward prosperitie long her end miserable consumed with the spirit of the Lords mouth and abolished with the brightnes of his coÌ„ming and for her destruction the heavens shall rejoyce and sing praises to God Now for to find the accomplishment of these things we are directed by the now Romish religion to a Catholik or Vniversal church one part wherof lives on earth an other under the earth and a third part in heaven 1. On earth is the whole multitude of such as are named Christians through the world united as a catholik body under one visible head the Pope who with his 2 horns like the Lamb pretendeth to be Christs Vicar in the Kingdom Preisthood and is professed of his vassals to be that triâ—d precious corner stone that sure foundation in Sion Jsa 28.16 and it is declared defined and pronounced that it is of necessity to salvation for al men to be subject unto him Vnder this Captain are three bands of souldiers the first clergie men as Bishops Preists Deacons Subdeacons and the rest of those shavelings the second Lay men as Kings Pinces Nobles Citizens and Commons of al sorts and vocations the third sort is both of the Clergie and Laitie caled Monks or Regulars 2. Vnder the earth or in Purgatorie fyre are the sowles they say of al such as dye with venial synns whose payns are to be holpen by prayers and masses sayd for them by such as are alive on earth 3. In heaven are the sowls of men departed in the popish fayth and delivered from purgatorie some of which the Pope canonizeth for Saincts whom the people on earth are religiously to honour and pray unto as their mediators with God This church on earth cannot err in things which it commandeth men to beleev oâ— doo whither they be expressed in scripture or not therfore men must beleev in her and trust her in al things for the truth of the faith as touching us relyeth upon her authoritie and she hath power to make lawes which doo bind and constreyn mens consciences These things premissed I come to our Opposites arguments Their first reason from 2. Thes. 2.4 is unperfectly alledged for the text there sayth of the man of syn that he dooth sit as God in the TeÌ„ple of God wherupon their conclusion must be that Antichrist sitteth as God in the church of God And if they can prove that he is the true God I wil yeild that his temple is the true temple his Church the true
saying of God to Moses they wil forsake me c. and J wil forsake them And as for that which is cited from Levit. 26.45 it was a promise of the Gospel upon their unfeighned repentance and perteyneth to the Iewes also at this day as Paul sheweth us Rom. 11. for this rule is general he that confesseth and forsaketh his synns shal have mercie Although therfore God useth sometime more forbearance of evil men than at other time and often giveth space to repent yet if they repent not they shal assuredly perish and their boasting of the covenant shal not save them 3. Touching their application of things to Israel not putting difference between their state when it was one and when it was rent asunder therin also they fayl Whiles Israel were one they continued Gods Church for though they often synned yet by his word afflictions he soon brought them to repentance as is noted Judg. 2.4 5. and 3.8 9.15 and 4.1.2 3. c. But when after many other synns ten tribes fel from the Lord and rent themselves from the Kingdome of David and Preisthood of Levi both which were sacramental types of Christ and his Church when they left the other testimonies of Gods presence the Temple and Altar at Sion where God had sayd he would dwel for ever and builded them new Temples and Altars to syn forgetting their maker when they set up Calves and Divils to worship God by then presently God sent his Prophet to them with a denunciation of judgment which being done he was to avoid them as Hethens Publicans not eating or drinking in the city which because he did though drawn in by the lye of another Prophet the Lord slew him with a Lion And all that feared God both Preists people left the country and went to Iudah and the rest wer stil caled upon by the Prophets to forsake them as not being Gods wife that is his Church and their estate shewed to be without the true God and without Preist and without law and they were unto God as the Aethiopians Now wheras our Opposites allege God did not presently cast them off it is true in respect of caling them to repentance and of their dwelling in the land or as the scripture saith of putting out the name of Jsrael from under heaven for his covenant was to punish them by degrees at last if they repented not to scatter them among the Hethens til their uncircumcised harts should be humbled and they rewed their former syn and then would he remember his first covenant so receiv them agayn to grace in Christ. And as for not casting them presently out of the land the Lord dealt with them as he had before dealt with the Hethen Canaanits which were spared therin for a time because their wickednes was not yet full Gen. 15.16 If this patience towards them wil not prove them a true Church no more wil Gods like patience towards apostate Israel And how they in their impenitent estate hardning their necks dayly more more could be sayd to be the true Church of God though they cōpassed him with lyes and in the covenant of his grace unto salvation I leave for them to judge that are wise in hart As for these mens double respects they are not al of them syncere They would have it said in respect of the Israelites and not of the Lord that they were without God without Preist without law none of his wife having children of whordoms and the Lord is not with Jsrael c. agayn in respect of the Lord and not of themselves that he is caled their God and they his people and their children borne to him and Israel not to have been a widow forsaken c. I answer whatsoever was syn was wholly their own and whatsoever was grace was wholly Gods this is true in the best Churches in the world But whatsoever was a reproof and punishment for their syn respected both Gods justice and their demerit and whatsoever acceptation of grace was in them respected both Gods mercy in Christ and their faith If therfore they were in any sence a true Church at that time actually it must needs be by mutual referēce to the covenāt on both parts God offring they taking his grace offred through his holy Spirit working in them otherwise it is a mere fiction in religion to make difference where none is Now let them shew that they accepted the grace of God caling them to repentance we shew the contrary by the Lords own testimonie who for their unbeleef and stubborn disobedience did put them out of his sight in wrath And if men accept not the grace of God his caling upon them to repent makes them no more his Church then the Hethens unto whom he doth the like Agayn it is not sound to say that in respect of themselves onely it was spoken by the Prophet the Lord is not with Israel with any of the children of Aephraim For he there dissuadeth Amaziah from having the army of Israel to help him his reason is the Lord is not with Jsrael this most directly respecteth the Lord and his withdrawing of his presence from that people Even as Moses sayd Got not up to warr for the Lord is not among you did not the event shew when they fled before their enemies that is was meant in respect of Gods presence and help now withdrawn from them Also when it is sayd in other scriptures the Lord was with the Iudge and the Lord is with me I wil not feare and I am with yow al dayes many the like who ever would dreame that these things could be spoken in respect of the men onely and not of God and Christ Finally the Prophets speech to the Iewes the Lord is with yow while yow be with him but if yee forsake him he wil forsake yow doth evince manifestly that it is an evil glosse when the text sayth the Lord is not with Israel to turn it by respects as if nothing were meant but Israel is not with the Lord. So in the other speech Israel hath been without the true God the words folowing but had he turned to the Lord God of Israel and sought him he would have been found of them these manifest that it was in respect of Gods forsaking them also and not onely of their forsaking him No better if it be not worse is their citing of Hos. 2.2 she is not my wife that this respected Israel in themselves be it so but what foloweth neyther am J her husband and if the former branch respected Israel then this respecteth the Lord especially seing he testified by Ieremie J cast her away and gave her a byll of divorcement unless they wil say this also
ministred until the Pastors or Teachers were chosē ordeyned into their office now it is held by some that seing al the holy things of God are the churches people without officers are a church therfore they may without officers have the use of the sacraments and al the holy things of God and consequently may receive in by baptisme confirm by the Lords supper cast out by excommunication c. And in this writing sent unto yow it may be observed how they inferr that people without officers may cast out and therfore may receiv in ther being one power for both I answer they wrong us and abuse their readers 1. There is not to my knowledge as before I testified any one man amōg us that held or holdeth that people without officers may have the use of the sacraments but we all continue in the same profession that we made before 2. It is frawd and abuse of the reader and injurie to me when they first speak of receiving in by baptisme and then allege from my letter that the people without officers may receiv in as if they would bear the world in hand I therfore hold they may baptise Wheras first the scripture sheweth that persons uncircūcised and consequently unbaptised may pass into the Church-covenant of the Lord Deut. 29.10.11.12.13 compared with Jos. 5.2.5 Secondly the children of the faithful are born members of the Church and are in the covenant before they are baptised Thirdly a man excommunicated may be received into the Church yet not by baptising of him And 4. we heretofore in our Confession when we denyed the sacraments in a Church without officers yet professed they had then power to receiv in members Wherin now are we contrary to our former faith Doo not these things rather show how they seek to make strife where none is The 5. article We had learned that none may usurp or execute a ministerie but such as are rightly caled by the Church wherof they stand ministers unto such offices and in such maner as God hath prescribed in his word now it is held by some that people out of office may execute al the works duties of the ministerie for baptisme Lords supper censures c. And these men in their second exceptiō here write there is one power for receiving in and casting out and that people without officers may doo both as is observed before I answer their frawd and wrongful dealing is also observed before and here to make their syn the more remarkable they proclaym it the second time Of ministring the sacraments and of receiving in and casting out of members and against usurping or executing a ministerie without due caling we hold as alwayes heretofore they repete the same things but to their own further blame for our professed enemies doo not ordinarily more wrest our words The 6. article 6. We learned and used heretofore to apply to our estate and use the things that the scriptures teach concerning the governours and people in Israel Now we ar excepted and opposed against if we doo so with these exceptions and the like that they had civil authority and government which the church hath not that they could not in Israel forgive one an others syn as we can now that the people now have more power then in Israel because now we folow Christ into heaven wheras the people might not folow the high Preist into the most holy place c. I answer the right applying of our estate to Israel we alwayes have and stil doo approve but these mens wrested proportions and making the Church in Mat. 18. to be the same with the Iewes Synedrion or Sessions of civil Magistrates we doo reprove and so have doon in our more ancient writings Refut of M. Giff. pag. 76. c. so that no new thing is doon by us 2. That private men forgave not synns in Israel so absolutely touching the Church order or politie as Christians doo now is evident by the Law which bound the offender not onely unto repentance and faith in Christ as also to confess his syn and satisfy his neighbour offended but withal to bring a trespass offring to the Preist the minister of the Church that so the Preist making an attonement for him before the Lord it should be forgiven him Levit. 6.2.5.6.7 Now under the Gospel the Law is if thy brother trespass against thee rebuke him and if he repent forgive him Luk. 17.3 neyther is such a man bound to goe to a minister that he may pray for or forgive him as the Papists by proportion doe gather 3. That th'Apostle also sheweth a difference of our Church estate from the Iewes politie Heb. 9.7.8.9 c. 10.19.20 compared with Gal. 4.1.2.3 c is manifest neyther can our opposites deny it onely they cast stombling blocks in the readers way saying thus 1. what if any other would say that Elders and Kings now should have more power then they had in Jsrael because they now folow Christ into Heaven c. To omit their yll framing of the reason for their most advantage I answer they that would so say should shew their ignorance or a worse humour Because Christs Kingdom is not of this world neyther medled he with Magistrates power but left it as it was authorized of God his Father and not subordinate to his Mediatorship as before is shewed and therfore Magistracie hath neyther more nor less by him now then in Israel and former ages But his Church and so the Magistrates therin as they are Christians are advanced to a further degree of grace then they were in under the rudiments of the Law Gal. 4.3.4 c. 2. The Second block is a marginal note that yet the people were typically caried in by the high Preist in the precious stones on his shoulders and brest as the most holy place it self was a type of Heaven I answer this is true and confirmeth that which I sayd for if into the earthly sanctuary the people could not freely enter in their own persons at any time but figuratively although they had so much as by faith in Christ did save them then is our estate now as touching the outward Church order and politie better then theirs which are not restreyned from any place whither the ministers of the Gospel may them selves enter but we are the Preists of God and of Christ and may be bold to enter into the holy place into the type wherof onely the high Preist under the Law might enter sometimes and the people not at al personally And in every place we may offer incense unto the name of God and a pure oblation Mal. 1.11 and are freed frō those legal prohibitions touch not tast not handle not and other worldly rudiments under which Israel in their childs estate were in bondage Gal 4.3 Therfore the Apostle which sheweth their estate and ours to