Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	christian_a	church_n	unite_v	1,404	5	10.2542	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27046	A third defence of the cause of peace proving 1. the need of our concord, 2. the impossibility of it, on the terms of the present impositions against the accusations and storms of, viz., Mr. John Hinckley, a nameless impleader, a nameless reflector, or Speculum, &c., Mr. John Cheny's second accusation, Mr. Roger L'Strange, justice, &c., the Dialogue between the Pope and a fanatic, J. Varney's phanatic Prophesie / by Richard Baxter.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1681 (1681)	Wing B1419; ESTC R647	161,764	297

a Church and I take not Heathens for the Church XIII I believe that in this Universal Church are thousands of particular Churches and this by Christs Institution XIV I believe that there is no particular Church or Christian on earth who is not respectively as Visible or Mystical a part of the Universal Church XV. As every worshipping Assembly is a Church in a larger sense so a Church in a political sense is essentially constituted of the Pastor and People or the Sacerdotal guiding and the guided parts and of such a Church it is that I am speaking XVI As such meeting in transitu are an Extemporate transient Church so fixed Cohabitants ought to be a Church accordingly fixed related to each others as such for longer than the present meeting XVII Every such Political fixed Church should consist of a Pastor at least accordingly fixed to a cohabiting people and as their Pastor more specially related by obligation and authority to them than to strangers or neighbour Churches He is not bound to do that for all as he is for them nor may go into other Pastors Churches with equal power nor officiate where he please XVIII If there be no Church but the Universal than there is neither Parochial Diocesan or National nor are Assemblies Churches Nor is our King the Royal Governour of any Church for of the Universal he is not XIX Christian Princes must do their best to settle faithful Pastors in all Churches that is according to the Laws of Christ but not against them But as they must do their best that all their Subjects may have good Phycisians Schoolmasters Wives or Husbands Servants Dyet Cloathing c. but yet are not trusted by office to choose all these for every one and impose them on Dissenters because the same God that made Kingly power did first make personal and paternal power which Kings cannot dissolve so every man is so nearly concerned for his own Salvation more than for Wife Servant Dyet Phycisian c. that though he must thankfully accept of all the Rulers lawful help he is still the most obliged chooser Nor is it any part of the office of a King to choose and impose on every Subject a Guide or Pastor to whom only he shall trust the Pastoral conduct of his Soul any more than a Physician or a Tutor for him XX. Parish-bounds are not of Primitive or Divine Institution but cohabitation or propinquity is a needful qualification of setled Members gratia finis And Parish-bounds are a useful humane determination according to the general Rules Do all to edification and in order XXI No one is a Church-member merely because he dwelleth in the Parish for unbaptized Infidels Heathens Atheists may dwell there XXII Nor is a stranger a Church-member for coming into the Assembly for such as aforesaid or Jews Mahometans may come in XXIII A Pastor oweth more care and duty to his flock than to the rest of the world as a Physician to his Hospital Therefore he must know who they are better than by knowing that they dwell in the Parish nor may he Baptize them or give them the Lords Supper only because he seeth them in the Assembly or in the Parish else Jews and Heathens must have it XXIV Nor is he to give it to every one that demandeth it for so may Jews and Heathens that take it in scorn or for by-ends XXV Yet a Christian having a valid Certificate that he is such hath right to transient Communion with any Church of Christ where he cometh but for order the antient Churches used not to receive them without some Certificates from the Churches that they came from lest Hereticks and Excommunicates unknown persons should be every where received XXVI No man can be an adult Christian without signified consent nor a stated member of any particular Church without such consent no nor a lawful transient Communicant without consent For so great benefits none but consenters have right to nor can such relations be otherwise contracted XXVII Consent not signified nor known is none to the Church XXVIII A man may be obliged to consent that doth not but that makes no man a Christian or member of the Universal Church else Millions of Infidels and Heathens are Christians And so it maketh no one a member of a particular Church that he is obliged to be one nor am I a Pastor over any men as a Church because they are obliged to take me for their Pastor no more than that is a Husband Wife Servant who is obliged to be so and will not To say that I am a Pastor to Heathens as a Church is a contradiction or that I am their Pastor as my special Christian flock and particular Church-members that consent not XXIX But the same man that liveth among such may be to consenting Christians a Pastor and to Refusers Infidels or Heathens a Teacher The Church ever distinguished the Audientes and Catechumene Candidates from the Fideles who were the Members of the Church XXX No Pastor or people should impose any Covenant on any adult to be Christened but consent to be Christians signified by Baptism nor on any in order to transient Communion among strangers but just notice of their Christianity and understanding consent to that Communion nor on any in order to their being the stated Members of this or that flock and particular Church but due notice of their Christianity and of their understanding consent to what is essential to such members that is to the relation as essentiated by the correlate and ends XXXI No one should be obliged by covenant to continue one year or Month in the station of that particular relation because they know not when Gods providence may oblige them to remove or change it XXXII Though the Peoples consent be necessary to their relation their Election of the Pastor which signifieth the first determination who shall be the man is not absolutely necessary though of old so thought An after-Consent may serve ad esse relationis XXXIII Much less is it necessary that the people choose who shall be ordained a Minister unfixed and only of the Universal Church XXXIV 1. Mutual consent of the duely qualified Ordained and Ordainer determineth who shall be a Minister in the Church Universal as consent of the Colledge and the Candidate do who shall be the Licensed Physician 2. The Peoples consent and the Ministers instituted determine who shall be the Pastor of this particular Flock or Church 3. The King determineth whom he will tolerate countenance and maintain XXXV Though a man may be Ordained but once to the Ministry unfixed in the Universal Church to which I said the Peoples consent is not necessary yet may he be oft removed from one particular Church to another on just cause to which the peoples consent if not Election is still necessary Though to avoid Ambition the old Canons forbad Bishops to remove XXXVI It 's lawful to be ordained sine titulo

respectively P. 7. Some are as Colonels of Regiments others as Captains of Troops the Body is but One the Members many P. 13. The New Testament saith The Churches of Galatia Gal. 1. 2. the Churches of Judea Asia Yet One body All the faithful make One heavenly City one Church of the first born so that Gods Church on Earth is Many Churches and yet but One Church Do you not think now that we are agreed But hear him judge himself P. 15. I will shew one common Errour or mistake in multitudes of our able Divines That those we call particular Churches are counted Parts and Members of the Church Universal This I deny Mr. Baxter makes the Church of England or the Churches of England to be an integral part of the Church Universal as a Troop of an Army or a City of a Kingdom So the Independents I overthrow this Errour by this Argument One and the same thing cannot be both a Body and a Member a whole and a part a society and one single person But that which we call a single or particular Church is not a Member but a Body it is not a limb or part of a Church but a whole and entire Church It hath a whole within it London is not a Member of England but a City and aggregation of Members It 's no less than a flat contradiction in terms what Dr. Ames saith Medul l. 1. c. 32. that a particular Church est Membrum ex aggregatione variorum Membrorum singulorum compositum contrary to common reason and plain Scripture P. 18. A bare Member in the Body hath no Authority but acteth by mere natural life and appetite and is not endued with rational authority nor can be capable of any That which we call a single Church is a Catholick or Universal Church It hath an Universal Head To be a Christian is to be of an universal impartial spirit where there is an All there is an Universal But every single Church hath an All within it the Pastor and all his flock The Church Universal and particular do only differ as to place and number A Church of godly Ministers and people in France Holland and England differ but as to place Every Church of Christians must needs be a Church Universal not a limb or member of another Church but a true body or entire Christian society P. 20. Christs Body is One not as one is opposed to Multitude but to division contrariety and destruction § 4. P. 21. This leads me to shew the unsoundness of another part of Mr. Baxters Doctrine and some others with him He saith There are two essentially different Policies or Forms of Church-Government of Christs Institution never to be altered by man 1. The Form of the Universal Church as Headed by Christ himself which all Christians own as they are Christians in their Baptism 2. Particular Churches headed by their particular Bishops or Pastors and are parts of the Universal as a Troop of an Army or a City of a Kingdom And he defines the Universal Church to be The universality of Baptized Christians headed by Christ himself These his sayings contain many Errours I will first note them out and then confute and prove them to be Errours 1. It is an Errour in the art of defining to put in those words Headed by Christ himself 2. It is another Errour to define the Universal Church without Guides and Ministers as one essential constituent part 3. It is another Errour to say that the Universal Church and Churches particular differ essentially 1. It is an Errour in the art of desining to say Headed by Christ himself that 's supposed but need not be in the definition He finds fault himself with such a defect in the definition of a particular Church Grant them to be Christians and you grant they own Christ 2. It is an Errour to define the Universal Church without Pastors So doth the Assemblies Confession and Mr. Hudson His definition of the Church without Pastors is as if he defined a living healthful man without a stomach liver or lungs P. 24. 3. If there be an essential difference between Church and Church what then is the difference between the Church and the World Heaven and Hell the righteous and the wicked How can any man know which is the right Church We shall never be able to confute Popery nor Infidelity by this Doctrine For this Doctrine supposeth two essentially different Churches The Universal Church without Pastors and of this Christ is Head himself Particular Churches of which Christ is no Head but particular Pastors are the Heads By this Doctrine the same thing shall be contrary to it self Christs Church in this world is but one And can one and the same thing have two different Essences beings and definitions Quae conveniunt uno tertio c. But the Church Universal and particular agree in uno tertio They stand on one foundation are directed by one rule quickned by one spirit an addition of homogeneous Particles makes no essential difference It will necessarily infer that God is contrary to himself and that the essentiating principles of Church holiness order and government are black and white darkness and light P. 25. If this opinion stand Religion cannot stand Two essentially different Forms of Churches will infer two sorts of Holiness the one repugnant to the other yet subordinata non pugnant If Christ set up two repugnant or essentially different Church-Forms he is not the Saviour but the deceiver of the world O dreadful § 5. P. 92. A word more ad hominem of that opinion That particular Churches are parts of the Universal as a Troop is of an Army or a City of a Kingdom This is Mr. Baxters opinion why then do you blame the turning all the Parish-Churches into Chappels and making them to be but parts of the Diocesan as a Troop is of an Army c. who sees not that your Doctrine doth the same that you condemn c. If they are but parts and Members of another Church the Universal then they are not Churches It is not unlikely but you can find somewhat to say in defence of this your self-contradicting Doctrine but I believe it will match your wit were it ten times more and prove too hard for you Look to it if your disputations against Prelacie stand down goes this main assertion of yours If your disputations against Prelacie be found to have a hollow and false bottom then you have made you work for repentance you have greatly injured the Church of God and particularly the Church of England and have deceived a great many Look what Bellarmine maketh the Pope to be to all the Pastors Churches and Christians through the world That do you make this which you call the Church Universal for you say that particular Churches as headed by their respective Bishops and Pastors are parts and members of another Church called the Church Universal By which assertion you set up

humane policie that he denied and that they differed but about words Did ever Christian before you deny particular Churches to be distinct policies and parts of the Universal Have we so many Books written of Ecclesiastical Policie and is there no such thing or no Churches that are Politick Societies § XXXVII He adds According to your assertion all the world must be Atheists of no Religion at all Answ Then all the world of Christians are so for as far as writings notifie they are generally of this mind Alas Brother did you shew this to any man before you Printed it for their honour I must think you did not and for your sake I wish you had § XXXVIII He adds Your division of the Church into Universal and particular is plainly against that Rule in Logick Membra omnis bonae divisionis debent esse inter se opposita but you oppose the same thing against it self Answ Thus do men humble themselves by forsaking humility Had it not been better for your to have let your Logick alone than to bewray that which you might have concealed Are not diversa distinguishable as well as opposita And is there no diversity in parte essentiae as in subalternis where there is not a diversity in totâ essentia as there is in summis generibus is there not both diversity and opposition inter totum partem and between the species of an universal and particular Society Are they not Relative opposita May you not distinguish Army and Regiment and Troop Kingdom and City Christ and a Bishop c. § XXXIX He adds You make the Church at Corinth a particular Church Answ And do not all Christians Is it all the Christian world § XL. You plainly saith he leave out of your description the differing form or token of that which you call a particular Church and that is Neighbourhood c. Answ Anne putares 1. Have I so oft exprest it and yet will you say so 2. But it was in descriptions indeed and I was far from your Logical belief that Neighbourhood is the differencing form And I hope no one else is of your mind 1. If Neighbourhood be the differencing form then all Christian Neighbours are particular Churches But that is false Ergo. 1. Those that dwell together only for Trade are not therefore Churches 2. Those that hold that there are no particular Churches or Pastors but that all Christians are as Priests 3. Those that hold that the Minister of the Parish where they live is no true Minister nor the Parish a true Church 4. Those that profess themselves Members of no particular Church 5. Those that profess to be no Members of that Church but of another 6. Papists and Sectaries that stand in opposition to that Church 7. Those that dwell near another Parish-Church and many miles from their own are not Members by proximity 8. Those that are Excommunicated which is de facto all professed Non-Conformists 9. In places where the Magistrate tyeth not Churches to Parish-bounds persons of the same street and house may be of several Churches 10. No man that consenteth not is a Church-Member 11. And who knoweth not that proximity is but dispositio materiae and not the differencing form All these singular novelties should have had better proof than these dry assertions contrary to all Christian sense § XLI This startles me I strive to be silent and cannot saith he and the more I strive the more I am overcome Answ If you are so far gone I shall hereafter I think without any striving with my self let that which is within you talk on and not resist you For who can hold that which will away But I wish you the benefit of some stiptick remedy and a sober mind § XLII I prove to you saith he when there is nothing like one proving word c. you make the Lord Jesus the authour and founder of subverting principles Answ Read the Ninth Commandment I conclude with these requests to him as my true friend viz. to consider Qu. 1. Whether a man so far from persecution and yet condemning us of Atheism blaspheming and destroying all Religion c. be not much more uncharitable than they that charge no such thing upon us but trouble us for refusing Forms are Ceremonies or is it not the same spirit Qu. 2. Whether he justifie not the silencing and ruining of all whom he so accuseth should not such impious Atheists be silenced Qu. 3. If he knew that the generality of the Christian world in all ages hold what he thus censureth what will he call it to charge all Christians so far with Atheism and casting out all Religion and making God and Christ a deceiver If he knew it not what will he call it to venture thus to publish such an accusation before he knew that which an ordinary Inhabitant of the world might so easily have known As if he had published All that say a City is specified by its subordinate Form of Government and is a part of the Kingdom specified by the Monarch are Traytors and depose the King or make him a deceiver and no King and deny all obedience What will you call this dealing Qu. 4. Was it well done to write such a Book while he understood so very little of the very plainest passages which he wrote against Qu. 5. Was it excusable to confess some errour of the last and to add far worse and after warning a second time so to speak evil of what he understood not Qu. 6. Was it humility to make ostentation of the Logick he understood not Qu. 7. Doth not the extreme bold confidence of the falsest of his own conceptions shew a very unhumbled overvaluing of his own understanding To be ignorant is common to Mankind yea and to be much ignorant of our ignorance and to think that we know more than we do But to have so little sense of this calamity and so little suspicion of ones own understanding as to be confident to such a height of accusation of the grossest falshoods where a lad of fourteen years old that had read any thing of Logick and Politicks might have better taught him that I say not the reason and use of Mankind this seemeth somewhat beyond the common measure of self-conceitedness Qu. 8. Whether the great number of asserted untruths here shew not some want of necessary tenderness or care of writing CHAP. IV. Mr. Chenies Accusations of me about Church-Covenants and rigid Independencie and the odiousness hereof considered § 1. WHen he had said that it leads to two contrary Gods which is to make no true God p. 69. He proceedeth Mr. B. hath devised and framed two Covenants the one to make a man a Member of the Church Universal the other of the particular p. 97. I will shew 1. That this is the same with the upstart way of the Independents 2. The unsoundness of it p. 101. Mr. B. and the Independents now are contrary to

their own principle in baptizing the Infants of Non-Confederates p. 129. I do utterly withstand it as Wickedness and Abomination in Gods Church I am to die and burn at a stake before I yield to any such thing This is Mr. Baxters way He offers it to Bishop Morley and Bishop Gunning in his Preface to his last Book of Concord that posterity may see what it is that he would have had and laboured to set up in all the Churches And accordingly let both the present and future Ages see and know p. 130. Your way is not so innocent as that of re-baptizing For the very matter and terms of your Church-Covenant are unsafe and plainly Schismatical As if Constables and people of each Town must Confederate to be a Corporation an Independent body having all jurisdiction within themselves and such as will not enter into this Confederacy must be counted none of the Kings Subjects To say there are no Churches in the world but a few Independent Churches were to go beyond Brownism It were rather to teach Infidelity such an opinion would be abhorred by all Now Mr. Baxter and the Independents Doctrine saith it Their errour should they hold it habitually predominantly and practically would be certainly their damnation p. 141 I see not but Pagans gross Hereticks Apostates Thieves and Robbers might combine together and say I take thee for my Pastor and I take you for my people Doth not your Doctrine infer it p. 143. If I yield to their assertion I must subvert the office of Christ and his Apostles and all his faithful Ministers and all the Churches to this day which I will not do for fear of the censure of any man living no nor of a whole Council of men p. 57. The way that Mr. Baxter offers seems to be a worse way It is the way of rigid Independencie Indeed Mr. B. in all his Writings seems to be against the Office of Lay-Elders But that he is not for them under another notion as Heads and delegates of the people mutually chosen by the Pastor and people for assistance in Discipline may be doubted He seems to hint at it c. § 2. How little truth is in all this and abundance such 1. either it is truth that I am for rigid Independency or not If not if yea I am glad that the Independent way is no worse I am not much acquainted with them But if this man say true 1. They are for no Covenanting but consent to the relation signifyed 2. They are not for binding any to continue in that relation 3. They are not for binding any from a regular use of any other Minister or Churches Communion 4. In places where Parishes are divided by Law and the ordinary attendance on the Pastors Ministration goeth for a sign of consent they are true Churches and Members that thus signifie it and ad esse it is usually enough though ad bene esse in doubtful cases the more express as more intelligible caeteris paribus is best 5. They are against an Office of Lay-Elders distinct from Ministers of the Word and Sacraments as of Gods institution for Church-government 6. They are against Democracie or the Church-governing power of the People 7. They take reformed Parish-Churches for the best Order not taking all for Members that are in the Parish but all the capable 8. They are against gathering Churches out of such Parish-Churches without great necessity 9. They are greatly against requiring any qualification as necessary to Communion in point of holiness but express consent to the Baptismal Covenant or profession of Christianity not disproved 10. They make not the peoples Election of their Pastors necessary ad esse but meer consent though the Patron or others Elect them 11. They suppose that the peoples Election or consent is not necessary to make a man a Minister in the Universal Church but only to make him their Pastor As to make a Physician and to make him my Physician differ 12. They suppose that a true Minister officiateth as such where ever he doth it 13. They suppose that associations or correspondencies of Churches for concord and help and Synods to that end and dependencie on such Synods is usually a duty where it can well be had and needless discord a fault 14. They refuse not to submit in practice to the instructions or admonitions of any general Visiter or Overseer of many Churches called by some Archbishops 15. They refuse not the precedency of one Pastor in every particular Church over the rest of the Presbyters 16. They refuse him not the name of the Bishop nor yet to submit to his negative voice as of the Quorum or the Archbishops either in Ordinations and all great publick matters 17. They are for separating from no Christians further than they separate from Christ or would force them to sin but are for universal Love and Concord 18. They are for obeying the Magistrate in all lawful things belonging to his function 19. They take the most extensive Love Peace and Concord for the most desirable and best 20. It is next their obedience to Christ and his sufficient Laws the great reason why they are against the terms imposed in most places of the Christian world where things unnecessary and suspected are made necessary to Communion Reader Mr. Ch. is so honest a man that it were unjust to take him for a deliberate studied Lyar. Therefore seeing he saith that my way is rigid Independency and oft maketh me a downright Independent I that know my own Judgement and knew not theirs so well as he seems to do am glad to hear that they are no worse and that they are wronged by such as accuse them of denying any of those Twenty points § 3. And supposing that he saith true and that they hold but my way as he calls it I will now try the force and honesty of his charge against them And first it savours of a spirit worse than his own that when he had before used the word Oath as owned by me and then said he repented of it that he still useth the word Covenant here as mine instead of Consent which is the word which I use and over and over say that I own no Covenant but any signification of Consent to the relation onely because I said that not ad esse but ad bene esse plain or express Consent in doubtful cases is best This smells of an ill intention and now I will try his arguments against this Consent § 4. P. 101. he saith Mr. B. acts contrary to his own Principles in baptizing the Children of No● confederates The Universal and Particular Church make but one Church of God He that refuseth one Essential of Church-communion is no Christian and is to be debarred the Priviledges of Christians But according to you Non-confederates refuse one essential of Church-communion I may not baptize you you are to me a Pagan Ans Putares sed calumniaris Here is

the Scripture and Canons 1. A constant publick Teaching them which they owe not to all others or any 2. Constant Government by the Keys 3. Constant Administration of the Lords Supper 4. Constant leading them in publick Worship Prayer Praise c. 5. A special care of the Poor 6. Ordinary Visitation of the Sick 7. Comforting the Afflicted admonishing Offenders watching over all The Canons will tell you much which every man oweth more to his own Charge than to others V. It is certain that this Flock oweth a more special attendance and account and obedience to these Pastors than to Strangers or others of other Churches 1. To hear them 2. To receive the Communion ordinarily of them 3. To maintain them and so in the rest V. I. It is certain that none of this was done or can be done without mutual Consent VII It is certain that this Church-state Office and Duty was setled by Christ's Apostles and continued by the common consent of the Churches on Earth from age to age § 28. That it was an Apostolical Establishment is plain in Acts 14. 23. They ordained them Elders in every Church To omit the sence of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the most usual sence includeth Suffrages it is evident that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implieth the fixing of the several Elders to their several Churches so as to make them the stated Elders of those Churches as their Flock in pepeculiar Acts 20. 17. Are they called the Elders of that Church over which as their Flock the Holy Ghost had made them Overseers to feed the Church of God to imitate Paul that taught them publickly and from house to house and was this no peculiar pastoral relation or were any but Consenters Members of that Church Tit. 1. 5. when Titus was to ordain Elders in every City it is equal to every Church And it stated them as their peculiar Pastors even Bishops as Gods Stewards over them in particular v. 7. more than others Jam. 5. 14. the sick that must call for the Elders of the Church were their proper Flock as is supposed The Angels of the seven Churches Rev. 2 and 3. were not equally the Angels of other Churches Phil. 1. 1. the Bishops and Deacons of the Church at Philippi had a fixed peculiar relation to them as theirs Archippus had a proper Ministry at Colosse Col. 4. 17. And Laodicea had a peculiar Church v. 16. 1 Thess 5. 12 13. sheweth the common state of the Christian Churches Know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you and to esteem them very highly in love for their works sake And be at peace among your selves Here Pastors to labour and admonish and be over them are to be known owned esteemed beloved persons dwelling among them and knowing their own Flock and the peoples duty to them and one another laid down And shall a Christian Minister say O but do not promise no nor signifie any consent to do it for that is to be rebaptized and is damning to the practisers The Bishops and Elders that Timothy is instructed about were such as had their proper Flocks and took care of them as the Church of God that were to rule them well and labour in the Word and Doctrine to preach the word in season and out of season reprove rebuke exhort with all long-suffering and Doctrine c. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. the Elders that Peter writeth to were to feed the Flock of God which was among them taking the oversight of them more than of all the world not by constrain but willingly and may they not signifie willingness not as Lords but Examples to their Flocks and Shepherds under the chief Shepherd Heb. 13. 7 17 24. fully expresseth it Obey them that have the rule over you they watch for your Souls as those that must give account not of all the world but of that Flock that they oversee The same Church had Bishops that had Deacons and some Deaconesses Widows c. but it was never known that Deacons were to be indefinite Overseers of the poor of all Churches but they had ever relation to particular Churches This is the ordering of the Churches appointed by the Holy Ghost Tit. 1. 5. And yet this man maketh it an abuse or injury against Christ and overthrow of the Gospel § 29. II. As for the constant judgement and practice of all Churches I am ashamed that such usage should put me to such a work as to prove that they ever held and practised that which this man condemneth in me He knoweth nothing of the Churches state and History and Canons that knoeth not 1. That all Churches were Societies of Christians united under their proper known Bishops or Pastors fixed to those Flocks by proper relation though also related to the World and the Church Universal 2. That the people did not onely Consent but Chuse their Pastors and he was to be no Bishop that had not their consent 3. That the Laity of other Churches promiscuously had no power to chuse them but onely those whom they were set over 4. That the Bishops as Ignatius speaks were to know the particular Members of their Churches and see that they came constantly to the Assemblies even to enquire after Maids and Servants saith he by name 5. That they made multitudes of Canons for exercising particular Discipline on each person that needed it by long suspending some from Communion restoring others taking care of the poor and of all 6. That they took not the Catechumens for the Church but Candidates and prepared and tried them before admittance 7. That it was not mere baptizing that made them of that Flock for they preached and baptized in other places 8. That it was not mere neighbourhood of Christians for there were sometime divers Churches in one City as in Meletius case at Alexandria and Dr. Hammond thinks the Jewish and Gentile Christians at first had several Bishops and Churches in the same Cities ordinarily And the Audians Luciferians Donatists and others that were of the same Religion had divers Churches besides such as the Novatians that had some little Doctrinal differences and none till now ever thought that these were all the same Pastors special Flocks and the same particular Churches Yea I have elsewhere cited that Council that decreed that if any Bishop neglected to convert the Hereticks c. he that converted them should have them as his Flock or Church In a word all Church-history and Canons describing their particular Churches and their Elections Orders Offices Priviledges Discipline c. and limiting them that strove for the greatest from encroaching one on another tell us so fully that they were so many incorporate Christian Societies consisting by mutual Consent of their proper Pastors and Flocks that Et pudet piget that such a task as the proofs should be thus imposed on me by a Minister § 30. The same is still continued even

subordinate Head and all but the named parts are denyed As if he would have more than the genus proximum and differentia specificans in a definition yea even the genus supremum and Christ shall be the specifying Head or none § XXVI He saith So the same thing shall be contrary to itself As if 1. Christ and a Bishop in formal relation were proved to be the same 2. Or things subordinate were contrary which he denyeth himself § XXVII He saith Christs Church in this world is but one Answ If there be but one particular Church 1. Then numerically the Church of London and Basil are one And then if I separate not from the Church at Basil I separate not from the Church of London 2. If de specie there be but one then a Patriarchal Diocesane Parochial Presbyterian and Democratical Church are but of one species And why then did you use so many words to tell us of the need of Bishops over Bishops and of the several sorts of supra-ordinate Church-Rulers Then a National Church and a Parish-Church are but one § XXVIII He addeth Quae conveniunt uno tertio conveniunt inter se but the Church Universal and particular agree in uno tertio c. Answ As if Convenientia generica were convenientia totalis vel specifica or Convenientia partialis totalis Accidentalis Essentialis were all one What pretty Logick is here to prove a King and a Constable all one because they are both Men both Christians and both Rulers I hope then a Bishop and a Presbyter are all one that in your sorry sense agree in uno tertio But let us hear the inferred Charge against us § XXIX An Addition of Homogeneous Particles saith he makes no essential differences Answ Christ and a Bishop are heterogeneous Yea a Diocesane and a Parish-Priest have you proved that they are not or that they are § XXX It will necessarily infer that God is contrary to himself saith he Answ O Temerity in the dark that is unless his Church-relation be the same with the Bishops As if the King be contrary to himself if his Kingdom and a Corporation or School be not of the same species § XXXI He saith If this opinion stand Religion cannot stand An. Do you mean in you or in me or all others Do you resolve to cast away all Religion if Christ and a Bishop be not the same informing regent parts of the Church Universal and particular Think better of it first for Religion is more necessary than so Do you think that the Christian world which hath ever been of the opinion which you detest had never any Religion Nor hath now any Which way do Churches that are parts of the Universal cast out all Religion § XXXII If Christ set up two essentially different Church-Forms he is not the Saviour but the deceiver of the world Answ And must Christ bear such a charge as well as I I should sooner have expected it from a Turk or Jew than from you § XXXIII He saith Why then do you blame turning Parish-Churches into Chappels and making them but parts of a Diocesane as a Troop of an Army Answ Putide putares When shall we meet with a true Sentence It is not for making them parts of a Diocesane Church as Troops of an Army but for making them no Political true Churches but disbanding all the Troops by making them no Troops but such parts of a Regiment as Squadrons are It is for putting down Inferiour Bishops and not for being themselves Bishops over them yet on this doth he ground his charge of my deceiving men and wronging God and his Church c. § XXXIV He addeth Look what Bellarmine maketh the Pope c. that do you c. for you say that particular Churches as headed by their respective Bishops and Pastours are parts of another Church called the Church Universal By which assertion you set up an Universal Head besides Christ and you say this is of Divine Institution and lay the Concord of all the Churches on it Answ If you are sani Cerebri this is so gross that your putarem hath no excuse Had you not your self repeated my definition and carpt at those very words Headed only by Christ and many times your self repeated it as my opinion 2. Or had you tryed your wrangling wit to have proved that if Christ only be asserted to be the Head I thereby assert another Head or that If I make Bishops particular specifying Heads I therefore assert a humane Universal Head you had some cloak for your putarem But now If you next print that I said that a Dog is a man I will no more wonder at it than at this See Reader how my Church-Concord is oppugned and by what weapons Satan doth that work As if he that saith the King only is the specifying Head of the Kingdom and the Captain of his Troop or the Diocesans of a Diocess were a Traytor and did assert another Head of the Kingdom than the King § XXXV Do but grant the Papists saith he this one assertion that particular Churches as headed by their respective Pastors are parts and members of the Universal as Cities of a Kingdom and overthrow the Popes Headship over all if you can It will follow that there must be besides Christ an universal Monarch on earth c. Answ 1. Affirmanti incumbit probatio Did you think we must take your bare word in so great a case Do you say one word to prove your affirmation Must we all turn Papists upon your immodest naked saying it is so 2. But your immodesty is in this excessive to me that have written two Books against Johnson alias Terret and the later but lately and largely to prove that the Church hath no Universal Head but Christ notwithstanding the particular Regency of the Bishops and for you to give me not a word of answer to them and bid me now prove it if you can when I have voluminously proved it This is such dealing as I will not name 3. But I am heartily sorry what ever did it that you are got so neer to Popery As if you will be a Papist unless all the writers of the Christian world are deceived and if the particular Church be a part of the Universal which ●●●● dare boldly swear it is and sober men doubt not XXXVI He adds Indeed you have gone be●ond Bellarmine in setting up Papal Monarchy Your ●ther assertion sets up Atheism by making the holy God the authour and founder of two essential different Churches or Church-Forms Answ Putares But if all the Christian world be of the same mind do they all set up Atheism and are you only free As for Tho. Hooker whom you cited though it be twenty four years or thereabouts since I read Mr. Hudson and him and will not tast away my time in perusing them my memory doubts not that it was only a Universal Church made one by one universal

cannot do for all And he saith It 's all one to your Doctrine if he refuse your Church-covenant The Minister all this while is no Minister the People all this while are no Christians They are no more lawful Pastor and People than Whoremonger and Whore going together and committing acts of filthiness and living in Fornication all their days Ans Continued Calumny as to me Is no modesty or tender fear of sinning against the Ninth Commandment left 1. He that refuseth Consent to be a stated Member is none such But is he therefore no Christian Awake Conscience Do any Independents say that none are Christians but their special charge yea or stated Members of particular Churches If there be any such what 's that to me 2. Such persons may be Members of the Universal Church and I am a Pastor in the Universal Church and as such may communicate with them 3. If he desire temporary Communion he consents to as much as he desireth and that he may have If he desire more he shall have more § 19. But saith the Accuser what speak you of Literae Communicatoriae These are nothing to yourcase he saith it ergo he proveth it It shuts him out of all particular Churches and Congregations under Heaven except c. Ans Putares of me it 's thus true or false 1. He that consents not to be a stated Member of any Church none because he would be none and it 's blind self-contradiction to say that I shut him out because he will not come in 2. He that consenteth to be a Member of the Universal Church shall not be shut out 3. He that by literas Communicatorias or any good testimony sheweth himself a Christian and desireth onely one days temporary Communion with a stated particular Church shall not be denied that which he desireth nor will we urge him to more § 19. XV. He adds It layeth waste Parish-bounds leaving people to go to what Church they will Intimating that being a godly man and a Parishioner doth not make him a Member of the Parish-Church Teaching people to be disorderly Ans 1. A quatenus ad omne valet consequentia I said enough before to prove the falsehood of your Church-estate 1. Then there were no Church till there were Parish-bounds 2. Then if Papists Anabaptists c. be godly and dwell in the Parish they are Members against their wills 3. And they are Members of two particular Churches one in despight of them and of the other as Consenters 4. There are some Houses that are in no Parish that I have known Alas these must be of no Church 5. Some parts of one Parish are in the middle of another The truth is Parish-bounds are ordinarily of good use for Order and Order is for Edification and to promote the thing ordered and he layeth it not waste 1. That giveth it no more than its due as a humane mutable circumstance and not as essential 2. Nor he that refuseth it when it is turned against the end and the res ordinanda § 20. XVI He addes Then if the Pastor set over them be a son of Belial and sinfully tolerated by the Magistrate the people of the Parish who can neither remove him nor sit under a more edifying Minister must covenant to him c. Ans Strange who would have thought but this was neerer your opinion than theirs Briefly if the man be tolerable they must rather accept of him than have none If he be intolerable in the Ministry they may use such common gifts as he hath as we read even a Cicero but they must be of no particular Church till they can be so on lawful terms Even a Council of the Popes decreed that till men can have lawful Pastors they must forbear that Communion that supposeth such And who can doubt of it § 21. XVII Next he quibbles onely with a Question How long shall it last Answ How long will you be of the Parish-Priests or the Diocesans Flock or of a Physicians Hospital We cannot secure men from providential changes a day and therefore would not have them to binde themselves but on such suppositions He that means to go to morrow to another Countrey should consent but to this days Communion He that intendeth here to dwell must consent to the relation of a stated Member of that Flock till he remove or till God shew him just cause to change that relation till then he should know his proper Pastors § 22. XVIII Next he questioneth Who shall degrade them that prove Heretical or Scandalous c. Ans The Ordainers made him a Minister by Investiture c. and yet without our consent he was not related to us as our Pastor or we to him as part of that Church And so we may withdraw our consent and become none of his special Church-flock and leave it to the Ordainers to degrade him if he must be degraded as to the world and Church Universal One would think this Answer should be undeniable But he goeth on with his dismal accusations p. 116. The particular Church-covenant is a thing of mans invention no where required of God it is destructive to the Church and Souls should it be practised Ans Seeing Covenanting and known Consenting are all one with him what a dreadful damning sin doth the man make it for to consent to be under our Pastors Office Then he that would escape damnation must not consent to the office of the Parish-priest much less of the Bishop much less swear obedience to the Bishop And least of all say or swear never to endeavour any alteration We have need to bless us from Conformity if Consenting be so damnable But what meant he to say should it be practised Doth he not know that it is practised by them all and so that this Judge doth damn them all § 23. XIX He next answereth two of our pretences 1. From the Election of Ministers by the people And saith Election is quite another thing till they are ordained they are no men in office but persons designed Ans Alas that the man that hath all this while been damning others should not see that he hath so damned himself yea and quite exceeded my damning errour This it is to print with the zeal described Jam. 3. before men know what it is that they talk of Note that he is not against the peoples election if he be intelligible and yet elsewhere They are Rebels and no Christians that stand not to the King and Parliaments election 2. Note that he talks of one election to the Office of the Ministry as such and I talk of another election even to be our particular Pastor For this Physician to be my Physician 3. Note that the mans bare word must against all common use and reason perswade us that Consent which I require is more than Election which is much less The Elector nominateth and first determineth of the person Consent may come after even in obedience