acknowledged as members thereof and consequently to be under the Ministeriall dispensation of the publick Ordinances of Christ the ordinary means of saving souls but such as are already and antecedently found to be savingly converted regenerated and sealed of God for his by the Holy Spirit if not in the truth of the object which yet most part of his reasoning and discourse pleads for yet in the positive judgement of very spirituall and discerning men And that as some others of his way further lay out the matter upon triall and proof thereof given by a conversation led without the omission of any known duty or commission of any known sin A publick declaration of their knowledge in the fundamentalls and of other points of Religion necessary to lead a life without scandall together with a narration of the experimentall work of their Effectuall Calling unto Repentance and faith And all Churches that are not constituted of only such matter as this are to our Author wrong constitute In the former part of this Examination my labour is to discover the unwarrantablnesse and contrariety of this Tenent to the Word of God And to shew that all who being of years does seriously professe the Christian faith and subjection to be disciplin'd and governed by the Ordinances of Christ ought to be admitted into the fellowship of his Visible Church without any necessity of puting them to a triall touching their inward spirituall estate and judging upon the same whether regenerat or not as to that effect And are to be dealt with by Pastours and privat Christians in their respective wayes as these that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 within 1 Cor. 5. 12. Upon this point I have insisted the more largely because not so fully and of purpose handled by others before And it is of a truth of greater importance then many are awarre of 'T is far from my thoughts to charge our Independent Brethren with any perverse designe in taking up and following that opinion which I dispute against Many of them known to me by their writings especially these worthy Ministers in New-England Cotton Hooker Shepheard Norton c. I do from my heart reverence as godly and faithfull Servants of Christ and as burning and shining lights in the Reformed Church But I think verily the specious notion of a pure Visible Church has duzled their eyes and led them upon a way which in it self beside that it hath no warrand in the Word of God should it get footing in the world tends to the ruine loss of many souls and to the bringing of the greatest prejudice to the present Cause and Churches that any thing ever yet did since the first Reformation from Popery And I am perswaded that albeit the intention of those holy and reverend men abettors of it be honest and from simplicity of heart Yet Satan is under-board let no man offend at this I say Peters example teacheth us that Satan may abuse good mens zeal and intentions for Christ to wicked ends contrair to his Cause Satan I say is under-board driving that wicked designe For if that be the the rule and modell of constituting the Visible Church which they give us are not all the Reformed Churches by this means condemned of wrong constitution razed out of the account of true Visible Churches as not being conformed nor ever having been set up according to that modell And what could more gratifie the Roman Antichrist and his followers then to yeeld this Again is there not hereby a ground laid to Question all Administration of Ordinances that has been in them and to justifie the wilde fancy of Seekers denying that there is or hath been for many ages any Church or Ordinances in the world Moreover when as none of the Reformed Churches at this day are thus constitute if that modell should have place must not either all of them be dissolved and cast down to the ground that new ones may be reared up of some few precious ones picked out of their ruines or to the effect they may consist only of persons regenerated and sealed by the Spirit all other persons who albeit they professe the truth subject themselves to Ordinances yet come not up so far as to obtain a positive sentence that they are regenerat upon such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 evidences as these men require must be all cast out and banished the Church put amongst those that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without 1 Cor. 5. 12 left destitute of the custody of spiritual Discipline Pastorall instruction inspection and authority And so exposed to be a prey to Satan and his Emissaries Jesuits Hereticks and erroneous spirits whatsoever to be led away unto what soever pernicious soul-destroying errours or to turn black Atheists That this is no needlesse fear but a reall consequent of this way is too too clear by the sad examples of many in these times who living without the pale of true Visible Churches and not subject to the shepheards staffe and vigilancy are run out into so many wilde errours in Religion as never age of the Christian Church saw the like Touching the other head the Author in his Appendix pleadeth for two things 1. That the power and exercise of Church Government should be in the hands of the whole body or community of Professours as well as of the Officers appointed by Christ in the Church A Tenent not heard of in the Christian Church untill Morellius in France Anabaptists and Brownists fancied it and as contrary to the Word of God which to Ministers and other Officers appointed by Christ in his Church as contradistinguished from common Professours attributeth the name of Rulers injoyns the work of Ruling and prescribes the rules of right governing but never to the people so cannot but unavoidably draw after it much confusion and frequent schisms in the Church of God whereof experience affordeth plenty of examples 2. That this power of Government should be solely intirely â—nd Independently in a single Congregation A Tenent that besides the contrariety thereof to the Word of God and the very light of nature carrieth with it a multitude of gross absurdities and inconveniencies By this means let a particular Congregation of 30. or 20. or fewer 10. or 7. persons for of so few may a Church as our Brethren say be compleatly constitute run into never so grosse an errour as to Excommunicate a person unjustly to hold and maintain Heresie in Doctrine to set up idolatrous worship there is no Ecclesiastick authoritative remedy left under Heaven to rectifie it All Church-communion amongst the Churches of Christ is taken away The unity of Christs sheep-fold the Visible Church upon earth is dissolved and Christ should have as many visible bodies as there are particular Congregations A Minister could not perform any Ministeriall act out of his own Congregation Not Preach but as a privat gifted Brother Not Administer the Sacraments out of his own Congregation nor give the Sacrament
say much sand without lyme 1. The Gentiles of whose Conversion Act. 15. 3. speaks were of many more places besides Antioch Now suppose all here alledged were granted what evidence can Mr. Lockier give us that Paul and Barnabas or any such other persons competentlie able to judge had stayed as long in every one of these other places 2. But to hold our selves to this Church of Antioch I confesse indeed it were dangerous universally to say that these first Christians at Antioch had not I say not only as Mr. Lockier hath it as far as able men could apprehend but in very deed both name and thing i. e. gracious heart-Christianity But I see it not so very dangerous to say that not all and every one of them had so much Nay I think it very dangerous positively to say they had for 't is clearly contrary to what the Scripture speaketh of the effect and successe of the Preaching of the Gospel and to many passages of this very Story of the Acts. 3. True Paul and Barnabas were discerning men able to give a good judgement in so much time what they found amongst those Christians But what evidence can the Author give us from the Text that this was their intended work during that space to examine and try what heart was in every one of these Professours and that in relation to constituting them a Visible Church after that tryall and judgment passed thereupon The only work we find mentioned in the Text ver 26. is their teaching they taught much people And there is nothing in it so much as hinting at this that they were not in state of a Visible Church untill after that whole years tryall Paul and Barnabas had given judgement what they did find amongst them as to their inward spirituall estate Nay there is a right apparent intimation that all along that years space they were a Visible Church and so esteemed a whole year they assembled themselves with the Church or in the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. I will note but another thing here The Author intimateth that Barnabas his being full of the Holy Ghost is spoken of in that Text in relation to and as the Principle of tasting trying and judging these Christians soul-complexion for Church communion with them this is a â—eer forgerie It being clear as day light that 't is mentioned as the reason and Principle of the zealous exhorting them to sincere and constant continuing in the faith section 12 He goeth on thus In particular Churches some competent judgement may be made of every particular member by able men in a long tract of time And so are these worthies else where said with this Church to have had intimat communion Act. 14. 27 28. And there they abode a long time with the Disciples pag. 5 6. Answ I wonder how Mâ— Lockier speaking of the judgement touching Church members their qualification as members talks of it as given by some that are able men when as the way maintained by his side of judging and admitting Church members requireth this to be done by the decisive votes of all and every one in the Church all which cannot be supposed to be such able men as he speaks of But to the purpose in hand true able men in a long tract of time having conversed with every particular member of a Church may be able to give a good judgement of them but the matter in question is in thesi whether such a judgement grounded upon a tryall of so long a time must be antecedent to their stateing in Church-membership And in the hypothesis of the particular now in hand whether Paul and Barnabas had so long a time intimat communion with the Antiochian professors and thereby gave a judgement upon them concerning their spirituall estate before they were constitute in a Visible Church This Mr. Lockier should have alledged and made good if he would had a solide ground for his Doctrine intended But doth the Passage cited Acts 14. 27 28. say any thing for this purpose Now I report my self for judgement upon this to any Reader of ordinary common capacity let him but take this to consideration that before the time of this abode at Antioch mentioned Acts 14. 28. Barnabas after the work of the Gospel begun at Antioch had come thither sent from Jerusalem he and Paul had Preached there together a whole year they had gone in commission sent by the Antiochian Christians with a relief to the distressed Brethren at Jerusalem Chap. 11. and had returned again Chap. 12. 25. And having stayed there some time by speciall Divine appointment they are sent abroad through the Nations about to Preach the Gospel and having after a long peregrination returned again to Antioch then is said that Chap. 14. 28. and there they abode a long time with the Disciples Now were not the Antiochians stated in a Visible Church untill judgement was given upon them after intimat communion in this time of abode I might bring a multitude of Arguments to prove the contrary from severall passages of the Story going before But I need go no further then the immediat preceeding Verse v. 27. When they were come and had gathered the Church But it may haply be said that the Author brings this Passage to shew not what tryall and knowledge Paul and Barnabas had of them before they were stated Members in a Church Visible but what they might had of them to be a warrantable ground of their report made touching them Chap. 15. 3. Answer If so then say I he alledges it to no purpose as to his scope in this Lecture for his intention is to have Paul and Barnabas Chap. 15. 3. speaking of the qualification of these Gentiles in relation to their stating in a Visible Church and accordingly thereupon to build a generall Doctrine touching the proper matter of a Visible Church section 13 Adde saith he to this Acts 15. where you shall see further what is solemnly asserted of these Converts in severall verses as v. 8. And God which knoweth the hearts beareth them witnesse giving them the Holy Ghost even as he did unto us and put no difference between us and them purifying their hearts by faith Here is a Text to some purpose God which knoweth the hearts beareth them witnesse c. That they have the like powerfull spirituall receptions with the best of them at Jerusalem And indeed I think it dangerous for any to affirm that all these expressions might not mean effectuall grace or else be spoken of some only but not of the whole Compare with this v. 11. 16 17 18 19. what he concludes Wherefore my sentence is c. pag. 6 7. Ans Here is indeed a Text to some yea to a very great purpose viz. for the end for which it was spoken by the Apostle Peter that is to prove that Circumcision and the rest of the yoke of the Ceremoniall Law ought not to be imposed upon the
and acts of outward Christian fellowship This distinction is of necessary consideration in this controversie For it is certain one may be actually a member of the Visible Church in actu primo and yet not actually injoy the use and exercise of all and every Church priviledge and ordinance whereunto Church-membership gives him a right in habitu Because unto the fruition of the actuall exercise of some priviledge and ordinance there may be required an especiall condition which may be a man wanteth through some physicall incapacitie or some morall defect As under the Old Testament persons that were undoubted members of the visible Church of Israel yet might for some legall pollution as an issue of blood touching of a dead body c. been debarred from the publick Assemblies of the Church and Sacrifices for a time untill they were cleansed from the pollution according to order instituted by God So also one who is an acknowledged member of the Visible Church being overtaken with a scandalous fault and not carrying himself obstinatly but submitting himself may be kept from the actuall exercise and use of some Ordinances untill the scandall be sufficiently removed yet still as is acknowledged on all hands continue a Church-member in actu primo and it hath been constantly held by Orthodox Divines untill Anabaptists arose that Children under the Old Test being born in the Church were then and now being born in the Christian Church are even while under the years of discretion members of the Visible Church Although neither then they were nor now are capable of actuall use and exercise of all Church-priviledges and Ordinances Therefore it is one thing to enquire what is requisite to constitute one capable of Church-membership simpliciter and in actu primo and another to enquire what is requisite to make one immediatly capable of actuall use and exercise of all and every Church-priviledge and Ordinance whereunto Church-membership doth entitle him section 10 3. Consider we must difference between that which is required of a man by way of duty in foro Dei that he may adjoyn himself unto Church-communion and participate Ordinances in such a manner as is necessary for his own salvation and approving himself to God and that which is required of him by way of qualification in foro Ecclesiastico that the Church may lawfully and orderly admit him to their externall communion and thereafter respect account and deal with him as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. amongst these that are within The reason of this distinction is clear because the duty of a man that will so adjoyn himself into the communion of the Church as is requisite for salvation and for approving himself therein to God doth no doubt reach formally and directly the inward man the frame and acting thereof But the qualification requisite in the Ecclesiastick Court whereupon the Church is to proceed in admitting or acknowledging men Church-members doth consist formally and directly at least only in somewhat outward and apparent to men For it is a sure rule de occultis non iudicat Ecclesia as is confessed by Hooker Survey Part. 1. c. 2. pag. 15. speaking of the same purpose and by Mr. Lockier himself pag. 55. section 11 4. Consider There is an holinesse relative or adherent and an holinesse absolute and inherent The holinesse relative and adherent consisteth in the separation of a thing from a common use and dedication of it unto some holy use or end Holinesse absolute or inherent consisteth in qualities or actions of a person agreeable to the Law of GOD. In the former way the stones of which the Temple was built are called stones of holinesse Lam. 4. 1. So the Temple it self the Vessels consecrated to the Worship of God the City of Jerusalem are called holy In like manner persons in a speciall way set apart for the Worship of God as the Priests and Levites and especially the High Priest are called holy In like manner the whole People of Israel are said to be holy Deut. 33. and to be sanctified by God Exod. 31. 13. Lev. 8. 8. and 21. 8. and 22. 32. Because to wit God by entering in Covenant with them had separated them from other people and Adopted them to be a peculiar People for himself in the same sense 1 Cor. 7. 14. The Children born of one Parent at least a beleever i. e. a Professour of Christian Religion are called holy because they are comprehended in the Covenant made with and imbraced by the Parents for themselves and theirs and so are to be esteemed as among Christians separated from prophane people and dedicated to God Again holinesse is either inward and true which consisteth in the inward renovation of the soul faith hope love and other supernaturall habites and their elicite acts Or externall which consisteth in the Profession of the true and Orthodox Religion and a conversation so far as comes under mens knowledge ordered according to the rule of Gods Commands as is competent to humane weaknesse i. e. without scandall at least contumacy and obstinacy in some given scandall and comprehendeth also in it that holinesse relative and of dedication Further it is worthy diligent observation here that when it is said the Church is a societie of visible saints this may be understood in a double sense for the Epithete visible may either be taken as a note signifying not the nature of the form which gives the denomination of Saints or holy but an adjunct thereof viz. the notoreitie and manifestation of it before men In which sense if it be taken in that description visible Saints are such as by outward manifest and evident signes and tokens are perceived and acknowledged to be endued with true inward holinesse and grace of regeneration Or it may be taken as a note signifying the very nature and kind of the form i. e. holinesse which giveth that denomination In which sense if it may be taken then men are said to be visible Saints in so far as they are adorned with externall holinesse although abstract from that internall and true grace of regeneration section 12 The state of the Controversie then lyeth in this to expresse it as plainly as I may what is requisite in a person as the necessary qualification in the Ecclesiastick Court whereupon he is to be received or acknowledged as a member of the Visible Church and is to be accounted as not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. among these that are without but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. among those that are within and so over whom the Pastors and Rulers of the Church should watch and care to feed him by the Ordinances of Christ according to his capacity and to whom private Christians ought to perform duties of Christian communion according to their stations viz. whether reall internall grace of regeneration repentance toward God and faith in Jesus Christ at least such evident signs thereof manifested and approven upon acurate examination
these thine elect and therefore I cannot tell how to feed them It is not necessary or a Pastour to feed the Elect that he know distinctly who are the singular persons by the head but for feeding by publick Doctrine it is sufficient that he know them confusedly that they are there in the Congregation and if he have any grounds of a positive judgement concerning particular persons that indeed gives him further advantage to apply himself to those in a more particularly applicatory way If indeed it were the Ministers work to feed efficaciter to give the increase as the Apostle expresseth the actuall efficaciousnesse or efficiency of grace and they were required to feed the elect that way I confesse if the Lord did not distinctly point out the particular persons to them then they might make such a reply Lord I cannot search into thy secrets to perceive who are these c. but the efficiency of grace is in Gods own hand alone and the Minister has upon him but an externall morall suasive administration which he is to dispense for the good of the elect but he needeth not for that know them distinctly it is enough he knowes they are there where he dispenseth them and let God discern and waile them out from the rest 3. It is a groundlesse supposition and contrary to the truth that in the current and common sense of Scripture that redeemed being spoken of spirituall redemption from sin and eternall wrath as for the name sanctified it is not in this text and therefore is impertinently brought in here is taken for redeemed visibly though not really I doubt he can bring many passages of Scripture wherein it can with any appearance be so exponed yea visibly redeemed is an expression in my judgement strange to Scripture Let this suffice us in answer to Mr. Hooker in this particular We doubt not but Mr. Rutherfurd will have more full and acurate considerations on it section 10 I shall adde a word or two for proofe that by the Church redeemed by the blood of Christ cannot be understood all and every one of the Visible Church but only the Elect desiring Mr. Lockier to take the same to his consideration if the Church which Ephes 5. 25 26 27. Christ is said to have loved and given himself for that he might sanctifie and cleanse it be not the Visible Church as such and so all members of the Visible Church then neither is it so to be taken here the consequence and connexion of this proposition is necessary and clear because the attribute enunciate of it in both places is all one upon the matter for what else is it that Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it that c. but that he redeemed it by his own blood But that Eph. 5. by the Church is meant only the elect i. e. the Invisible Church is the constant Doctrine of all Orthodox Divines in their disputes against the Remonstrants universall Redemption for the Redemption of the elect only and likewise of all Orthodox Divines writing against Papists on the Question concerning the members of the true Invisible Church the Mysticall body of Christ and also upon the Question of the Visibility of the Church I instance but a testimonie of one viz. Learned Whittaker de Eccles q. 1. c. 9. tert arg where you shall find him not only affirm but solidely prove this we say reasoning thus from the place Christ is not the Head * This is to be understood of such headship as has allusion to the head of the naturall body which hath a reall influence into the body so no doubt Christ is an head in a politicall sort to the Visible Church having a morall influence by command c. but of that Church which he shall save which he shall present to himself on the day of Judgement glorious not having spot or wrinkle But only the predestinate shall be saved Ergo. only the Elect belong to the Church of Christ i. e. the Church mentioned there and to Bellarmin's answer that Christ is Head to that Church which he shall not save he saith falsissimum esse Read that whole paragraph and you shall find sundry other solide Arguments brought by him from that context to prove that only the elect are that Church spoken of there 2. Again I desire him to look forward from v. 28. to ver 30. of this very 20. chap. of the Acts and see what the Apostle saith also of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them Whether we expone of your own selves of the whole body of the Church of Ephesus or particularly of the Elders and Officers thereof is all one to our purpose It will not be denied that the Officers were members of the Church of Ephesus and as Christians were partakers of the common Priviledges and Titles competent to the Visible Church now if Paul shall be conceived to speak that redeemed by the blood of Christ let it be out of the positive judgement of charity and so far as he could judge universally of all the Visible Church of Ephesus how could this consist with what he saith v. 30. * Surgendi verbo quo utitur significat iam lupos illos fovere clandestinam perniciem donec occasione sibi datâ erumpant Calv. in loc that he knew there was some amongst them presently fostering secret and clandestine wickednesse who would afterward openly kyth apostatize from the truth and become seducers of others Could the Apostle have a judgement such as is mentioned of such that they were Redeemed by c. Sure understand the Word v. 20. as Mr. Lockier would and we shall have clearly contradictory judgements of Paul at once I judge the Church of Ephesus Universally all and every one of you Redeemed and yet I know some among you are lurking traitours who will kyth afterward he sayeth not may be some of you will but positively some of you will section 11 For the Church of the Philippians is cited chap. 1. v. 6. and chap. 4. v. 15 16. For the latter I see nothing in it that hath any colour of a ground for his point nor yet doth the former hold forth a proof of it The Apostle writeth to all the Saints at Philippi and v. 6. declares the confidence that he had that God who had begun the work in them would perfite it to the coming of the Lord Jesus Will it follow hence that all and every one of the Visible Church of Philippi were reall Saints so far as man could judge * The 6. vers by the Orthodox writing-against the Remonstrants upon the head of perseverance is applyed only to the Elect and true Believers in the judgement of verity or truth of the thing it self See Ames Coron art 5. arg 2. proving this by solide reasons no Logick will evince this from these words cited If he had taken in the 7. vers he might had a
such matter i. e. Members as are all truely Godly But the former is true Ergo c. and if thus then we deny the connexion or consequence of the first Proposition And my reason for the denyall thereof is this Because I may say if the Churches Visible be de facto such that all or most part of their Members be truely Godly and shining in the Power of Godlinesse at the time wherein God hath decreed to bring in the Jews that will be sufficient for provoking the Jews although it be not constitute by a Rule or Precept that the Church in admitting Members into externall Church-fellowship admit none but those that are truely Godly And why may we not say that the Lord will at some time for carrying on a design decreed by himself in the way of the dispensation of his efficacious Grace make his Visible Church at least in most part the Members thereof better as to the reality and Power of Religion then he requires them to be by way of Rule relating to Ecclesiastick proceeding with Persons in admiting them to externall Visible Church-communion In a word the futurition of the provocation of the Jews by the Power of Godlinesse in Gentile Professours proveth only that God is to make the Gentile Professours such de facto or at most what they ought to be in point of their duty for serving and glorifying God But proves not that they ought to be such in point of qualification in foro exteriori Ecclesiae and in relation to admission to the externall society of the Visible Church section 11 Or Secondly It may be formed thus If the Jews shall be provoked to turn unto the Lord and imbrace Christian Religion by the glory and purity of his Worship and Worshippers then the Visible Church or Churches use which ye will now shall be constitute or consist of such as are truely Godly But the former is true Ergo the latter also And I answer 1. Suppose the consequent be granted in as large an universality as it can be taken in Yet it speaks nothing to the Question in hand Why Because only of what is to be de facto quoad eventum by dispensation of effectuall Grace in the Visible Church And not what ought to be by rule of necessity that the Church Visible may be rightly constitute in its Visible Church-state and the Question is about this latter not that former And dispensations of effectuall Grace are not our rule in this 2. Nor yet doth it follow of necessity that even de facto the Church Visible shall be so constitute as to its matter in every difference of time but only that it shall be at that time that the Jews are to be brought in and converted to the Christian Faith Yea nor doeth it follow that de facto even at that time the Church Visible shall be so constitute in its mater that all and every Member thereof shall be truely Godly and shining in the manifestations of Purity and the Power of Godlinesse but that so it shall be for the most part and commonly in the Visible Church I acknowledge that a means of awaking up the Jews to come unto and imbrace the Christian Religion will be a more glorious full Reformation of Christians both in point of Worship and in point of conversation Now Superstition and Antichristian Idolatry amongst those that are called Christians which are these they only see for the most part is a stumbling block to them that ly in their way at this day and I will not say but the impurity and unrighteousnesse of Christians is also a stumbling block to them Albeit I think they do not so much stumble at this as at the former considering that which is well known in the places where they live how much notour and known unrighteousnesse is amongst them generally being for the most part most covetous exorbitant usurers cheaters c. most evidently the deadest formall slight in performance of their way of Worship as mine eyes have been witnesses of any people in the World Yet I say I will not deny that this may stumble them and they may be do pretend it also Therefore Babylon the Mother of fornications must and will down And the Princes of the earth that have given up their power to that Whoore will hate her burn her flesh with fire and the Lord will purge and reforme his Worship and Ordinances and the Christian World from Superstition and Idolatry And I believe also that their is a time coming when there shall be also a more general and shining Reformation of the lives of Christians that both these shall concur as means to provock the Jews to fall in love with the Christian Religion and to seek unto Jesus Christ But that all and every Professour in the Visible Church shall be truely Godly or shining so gloriously in the Power of Godlinesse for indeed it is not Godlinesse simply so much as a more then ordinary shining and eminency of it that will be the means of this great work which Mr. Lockier has not heeded well in this Argument or that if any in the Visible Church be not such convincingly though otherwayes professing the truth and pure Worship and living without scandall shall be casten out neither the necessity of that effect doth require nor can there be warrant of Scripture produced to say or beleeve that it shall be so section 12 As for the passages of Scripture brought for illustration and confirmation of this fourth reason though the very sense of them given by him were granted they bear no more but what we have granted that God will by dispensation of providence punish destroy and purge out among his Elect in the Church wicked idolatrous godlesse and profane ones and this we deny not but that the Lord now and then may be towards the end more is and will be doing this But speaks nothing expresly and directly nor by way of consequence of a rule concerning Ecclesiastick qualification of persons in relation to admission into externall Visible Church fellowship But verily the most part if not all of them are but absurdly and violently contrary to the genuine scope of the Spirit in them drawn to this purpose in hand I shall not now insist much upon them But briefly point out the perverting of them section 13 For the first Esay 66. from ver 16. to the end let the Reader be at the pains to read but upon the place Calvin Junius and the English notes and especially if he have any skill in the Language the notes of the learned judicious Nether-Dutch Interpreters and I doubt not but he shall find such an Exposition and up-taking of the series and threed of that context as shall fill and satisfie his minde much different from that of Mr. Lockiers which is but a new coyn'd Interpretation by men addicted to the millenarian phancy and forced upon the Text. I shall only give some little
professours but yet unregenerat to invite and so to be means of bringing in such to communion with Christ and participation of his saving grace set forth under the Parable of a Feast Hence then 't is evident that the Ministry and Ministeriall dispensation of the Gospel is ordained and instituted in the Church to be an ordinaâ—y means of Conversion 2. 2 Cor. 5. 18 19 20. Hence we reason thus The Ministry of the Gospel iâ— a Ministry of Reconciliation i. e. for bringing men from their estate of enimity to peace with God and it is the Office of Ministers as ambassadours in Christs stead to treat with souls and bring them in to Reconciliation with God Therefore they are appointed to be the ordinary means of Conversion 3. 2 Tim. 2. 24 25. The servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle to all men apt to teach patient In meeknesse instructing those that oppose themselves if God peradventure will give them Repentance Then 't is evident Ministers are instituted to be means of Converting souls and they must be qualified in relation to this as the work of their Ministry It is well marked by Estius tho a Papist yet in most things a judicious solid Interpreter docet hic locus Deum ad convertendum peccatores uti velle operâ hominum qui externum adhibeant Ministerium correptionis Doctrinae 4. Rom. 10. 14 17. 'T is so clear from this place that the Ministers of the Gospel by their Ministeriall Preaching thereof are the ordinary means appointed by God for Conversion and begetting faith that it cannot be avoyded but by denying absurdly with Arminians Socinians and others everters of the Ministry that by a sent Preacher is not understood any other but any gifted man though not called and set apart to the Office of the Ministry We conclude then that seeing the Ministry of the Gospel is ordained of God to be an ordinary mean of converting the elect and bringing them to Christ it cannot be a condition necessarily requisite in the members of the Visible Church antecedently to their admission into the society thereof that they be already converted or supposed and judged to be such so far as men can discern And that which followeth upon the contrary That privat Christians and not the Ministry of sent Preachers are the ordinary means and instruments of converting souls is a meer dream having no warrand in the Word of God * Hooker Sur. p. 1. c. 7. pag. 84 85. I know Mr. Hooker stormes at my Reverend Collegue for charging this absurdity upon them And he confesseth that is a dream and hath no warrand in the Word and wonders how such an absurdity is so continually in the eare and minde of Mr. Rutherfurd and sayeth he knoweth not whence it cometh But verily the good man was angry at Mr. Rutherfurd without cause For it cometh as naturally from his principles as any conclusion can come from its premisses For if a Visible Church cannot be constituted of any but such as are supposed to be before converted and an Visible Church is prior to an ordinary Minister neither can there be a Minister but in a constitute Church as themselves maintain I pray what must be the ordinary means for there are not alwayes Apostles extraordinarily sent of God of converting souls but privat Christians What the good man sayeth pag. 84. materialls of new gathered Churches with us are such as have been converted by Ministers in their severall Congregations With reverence of his memorie be it spoken is childish and nothing to the purpose for first the Question is not how or by what means de facto this or that man is converted but what followeth upon his Tenet And according to the genius of this it followeth clearly that all are supposed to be converted we speak of Conversion ordinarily before ever they come under a Ministry and so by privat Christians And these some of whom you gather your Congregations having them from under other Ministers in their severall Congregations if these Congregations be rightly constitute according to your principles were converted ere ever they came under such Ministers section 27 Argument 5. If the mater of the Visible Church were only reall Saints and the complexion of the Visible Church true holines and saving grace as Mr. Lockier roundly expresseth in his Tenet pag. 29. and that by expresse opposition to seemingly good pag. 25. or such as are positively to be judged such by evidence so far as men very spirituall can discern as other where he expresseth it then it doth follow that a man being in the Visible Church for non-regeneration simply or non-appearance or defect of positive evidence to ground a positive judgement of his Regeneneration ought to be Excommunicat and casten out of the Visible Church but the consequent is false Ergo the antecedent also The connexion of the proposition Mr. Lockier cannot deny for in effect it is his own pag. 28. where he sayeth Excommunication is an Ordinance to cleanse the House of God and keep it pure and according to what it ought to be so far as men can discern according to his Tenet consisting of only reall Saints and not one other And sayeth expresly that if men creep in where they should not be i. e. if men not Regenerat creep into the Visible Church they are to be cast out 'T is true pag. 29. in the end of the paragraph he mincheth the mater and sayeth only not one known to be otherwise can abide within But he should have said by the consequence of his Tenet not one not known positively to be such c. As to the Assumption that it is false that for non-regeneration simply or defect of positive evidences of Regeneration persons are to be cast out of the Visible Church 1. Because there is neither precept nor practice in the Word of God for casting out any upon this account Let Mr. Lockier produce us any thing from Scripture of this kind The Scripture enjoyneth Excommunication for obstinacie in known publick scandalous sins in conversation or heresie in Doctrine or at most for atrocious crimes whether the persons be judged Converts and Regenerats or not but no mention of any other cause of Excommunication And in maters de jure in Religion a negative Argument from Scripture is sure 't is not commanded 't is not written in Scripture Ergo it ought not to be done I do professe this consequent following upon this opinion is one of the considerations amongst others that of a long time has swayed me to think that 't is a way which is not of God But on the contrary tho I esteem reverently of many of the followers of it and has no harsh thoughts of their intentions therein that 't is a subtile device of Satan transforming himself into an Angel of light set on foot by him as to advance Atheism in the World so in speciall to overturn the Protestant Religion and Churches For
the duty of his servants to cast out all such in the Visible Church as they did see not to be qualified not gracious converts which is flatly contrary to that which is supposed in the antecedent Now I assume that the antecedent is clearly held forth to us in these places 1. 'T is clear that in these places he holdeth forth the Visible Church in its outward constiâ—ution as to the mater thereof to be a mixed society of good and bad truely gracious and such as are void of true grace and not only this but 2. That not only he permits it to be so untill the last day But also 't is his will and he commands his servants to permit such to abide in the Church as even to their discerning are bad leaving the separation of them to himself at the last The servant said unto him wilt thou then that we go and gather them up Yes would Mr. Lockier say leave not one of them No not one of them in a Visible Church they are where they ought not to be they want the complexion of the Visible Church c. But sayeth the Lord himself Nay but let both grow together untill the Harvest section 33 Object If it shall be objected against this exposition and application of this place that hereby it should follow that any prophane ones ought to be permitted to be members of the Visible Church which in consequence is contrary to Christs institution of Ecclesiastick Discipline enjoyning incorrigible offenders to be casten out and Excommunicat and that therefore by these tares must be understood latent hypocrites which may be such in appearance as may charitably be judged by men true beleevers Answ It cannot be that such latent hypocrites as these only are understood Why They are such tares as are seen and known by the servants they must therefore be such as falls into sins and whose badnesse is obvious to the senses of others yet there is no contradiction between this of Mat. 13. 29. so understood and that of Mat. 18. vers 17. We may say as Augustine on the same places against Donatists Domino in Euangelio dicenti in illo obtemperare debemus ubi ait si neque Ecclesiam audierit sit tibi tanquam Ethnicus Publicanus in illo ubi prohibuit colligi Zizania ne simul eradicetur triticum potest enim utrumque custodiri The reason is because they may well be conceived to speak not adidem in respect to these same sort of persons The command of Excommunication is against such notorious offenders as to their offences adde contumacie against the Discipline of the Church or at least if it be further to be extended whose offence is atrocious these that offends these wayes whether they be tares gracelesse men or indued with true saving grace But there may be sinfull livers in the Visible Church seen to be such by the servants who falls not under either of these two sorts section 34 The Doctrinall notes which the Reverend Mr. Dickson hath upon that Parable Mat. 13. 24. c. are worthy the reading and consideration to this purpose we are on and they are genuine and naturally flowing from the place The Book is common so that I need not transcribe all I shall but bring two or three of them for such as may be has not the Book at hand 1. The externall Visible Church is worthy to be called the Kingdome of Heaven even in respect of the externall constitution of it in the world notwithstanding the wicked hypocrites in it because therein Christ rules as King and hath his Subjects all professing him to be King of Saints 4. It is mater of grief and offence to see in the Church of Christ so many unprofitable weeds 5. The rash zeal of servants before they consult their Lord and Master is ready with the hazard of the Church and true members thereof to have such a constitution of the Visible Church as they should suffer none to be a member who are not inwardly Regenerat But have all others of whose inward Regeneration they are not assured plucked from among Professours 6. The Lord although he hath given order to censure scandalous offenders yet he discharges his servants to presse towards such a separation as to have all weeds and wicked in heart to be cast out Least while they gather out the gracelesse tares they should root out also the gracious wheat with them For it is not possible for any man to discern the renewed from the unrenewed so clearly but he may be mistaken 8. The mixture in the Visible Church Christ the Lord is minded to permit and commands to be permitted till the day of Judgement and then but not till then shall a full separation of the godly and the wicked of the Elect and Reprobat be made In the time of Harvest I will say gather the Wheat c. See also his note on the ver 47. This Parable teacheth us that the Visible Church in the way of gathering members and in the manner of constitution thereof it is like a draw-net taking in all who professe subjection to Christ and his Ordinances good and bad true and false Professours for it gathereth of every kinde to wit whosoever professe faith in and promise subjection to Christ section 35 Argument 8. The Doctrine which excludes the Infants of Christians from being members of the Visible Church cannot be from Christ nor have any truth in it But Mr. Lockiers Doctrine concerning the mater of the Visible Church excludes the Infants of Christians from being members of the Visible Church go c. For the proof of the proposition I refer Mr. Lockier to Mr. Baxters Dispute against Tombs If he deny that Infants of Christians are members of the Visible Church let him take some pains to answer these many solid and acute Arguments brought by that Learned man to prove that they are The assumption is most clear For Mr. Lockiers Doctrine is that none others no not one other are fit mater of a Visible Church but such as are truly converted so far as men truely converted and very spirituall are able to discern and judge This is a thing that cannot be spoken or understood of â—nfants And it is remarkable that Mr. Lockier nor here when he propoundeth his Doctrine concerning the mater of the Visible Church nor else where in prosecuting it in this Lecture does so much as once with these whom he allowes to be mater of the Visible Church take in their Infants as some others of his mind are wont sometimes to do And therefore that which Mr. Caudrie sayeth considering Mr. Hookers conclusion concerning the mater of the visible Church that had he not added a little after comprehending the Infants of confâ—derat believers under their Parents Covenant he might have been suspected c. Mr. Lockier having altogether left this out I may say it of him positively he is justly to be suspected of concurring with
conversion of the Gentiles pag. 2. and 3. begin Ans That the Holy Ghost here intendeth as the principall purpose to describe a visible Church of the New Test by the proper constituent matter thereof is but the meer conceit of the Author forced upon the Text and no wayes deduceable from the words themselves the genuine purpose of the words being simply to note some circumstances of Paul and Barnabas and the other Commissioners joyned with them their journey from Antioch to Jerusalem whether they were sent for resolution upon the Question then in controversie at Antioch As 1. The Christian courteous respect that the Church at Antioch put upon them they were brought on their way 2. What these commissioners did as they were on their journey that they declared to the Christians that lay in their way that same thing that they had declared before at Antioch Chap. 14. v. 27. viz. that God had been mightily with the Preaching of the Gospel even amongst the Gentiles so that many of them as the Story relateth the particular countries and places Chap. 13 and 14. were converted to the Christian Religion 3. What effect this produced amongst the Christians to whom it was declared that they had great joy at these tydings that the Kingdome of Christ was so spreading and that even the Gentiles were brought in to it Here indeed are grounds of usefull points of Doctrine but what is all to that which Mr. Lockier intends the description of a visible Church by its proper matter A Church visible to Mr. Lockier is a particular Congregation participating together the Ordinances of Christ Doth it any wayes appear that the Spirits intention in these words is to describe unto us what sort of persons were admitted into the constitution of such a Congregation viz. as he would have it not any professours whosoever but such only as were tryed and found by truely converted and very spiritual men able to discern and judge to be truely regenerate What evidence is brought to shew that this is intended in the Text This to wit that first it is said being brought on by the Church and then sayes he what the matter of this Church is the next words tells they declared the conversion of the Gentiles Answer What must these latter words be a description of that thing which is mentioned in the first i. e. the Church viz. of Antioch for that is the Church spoken of there because forsooth the one followeth immediately after the other in the series of the narration I must say this is strange Logick and interpreting of Scripture I am not here to deny but the Church of Antioch did consist of such as are here mentioned i. e. converted Gentiles but my purpose is to shew how impertinently the Author hath chosen and made use of this Scripture to be his Text for his Doctrine concerning the matter of a visible Church section 4 That this may yet more clearly appear I desire the Reader to consider that the Historian Luke is not in these two Clauses of this Verse pitcht upon by Mr. Lockier as a ground of his Doctrine relating the words of one mans continued discourse so as the one part of them might be taken as exegetick of the other or as intended to expresse a description of the thing contained in the other but is relating two diverse actions of two distinct pâ—rties as circumstances of Paul and Barnabas journey one reall of the Church of Antioch their Christian courtesie in bringing them on a part of their way The other so to call it verball viz. the discourse that Paul and Barnabas themselves had amongst the Christians by whom they passed viz. that the Gentiles were converted to the Christian Faith so that any man that hath but half an eye may easily perceive that these terms Church and converted Gentiles stands not in the words in relation one to another as a definitum and a definitio or as a compound and the matter of which it is compounded Therefore it is but a forcing of the Text to make up of these two this Doctrine as intended in the words A visible Church consists of converted ones as its proper matter what ever truth may be in it of it self This I said before I am not questioning now but would discover the inconsideratnes of chusing and making use of this Text for that purpose and adds but this seeing in preaching the Word of GOD aright any enunciative Doctrine which is propounded from a Text if it ly not in the Text in expresse and formall or equivalent terms yet should be deduceable by good consequence from it I humbly desire that Mr. Lockier would build a clear Syllogisme upon any enunciation in this Text inferring this Conclusion the proper matter of a visible Church is converted ones for in this Text it is not said expresly and immediatly as he would seem to say in the next progresse in these words The complexion of a visible Church under the Gospel is here said to be conversion the constituting matter converted ones This much might suffice for answer to this Text as it is alledged by Mr. Lockier for to be a proof of the Doctrine intended in this Lecture for unlesse it be first supposed that conversion of the Gentiles is here mentioned and set down as a description of the visible Church mentioned before all the pains taken by him afterward to clear what is meant by conversion is to little purpose for proof of the point intended as from this Text. Yet we shall be at the pains to take into consideration what followeth in the opening up of the Text lest we seem purposely to passe over any thing which may be alledged to speak for the point maintained by the Author I confesse it had been fitter that the controversie had been first stated but I am resolved to follow the tract of Mr. Lockiers discourse that I may shunne the smallest appearance of wronging him Go we on then section 5 They declared the conversion of the Gentiles what conversion was this A meer outside conversion pag. 3. Nay would the Author say an inside truely gracious heart-conversion Ans 1. Do we any of us whom the Author takes for his Adversaries say that no more at all is meant here but a meer outside conversion He but fains an Adversary and wrongeth us by intimating so much We conceive thus that by Conversion here is meant a forsaking and relinquishing of the Heathnish and a turning unto and embracing the Christian Religion as the Nether Dutch Notes on the place expound De Bekeeringe â—…el tot de Christilick Religie i. e. Conversion viz. to the Christian Relion no wayes excluding but comprehending under it also the inward heart-turning by true faith to Christ but withall we think it cannot be warrantably said that when Paul and Barnabas made this declaration of the conversion of the Gentiles they meant that all and every one of these Gentiles turned from Heathenism to the
they were convoyed on a part of their journey by some of the Church This was a Christian affectionat courtesie and respect put upon them by the Church So Mr. Lockier himself exponeth it pag. 2. l. 1 2 3. forgetting himself in so short bounds 2. What hint or ground of the least conjecture can he point us at in the Text that these Commissioners when they told the Conversion of the Gentiles did set up some of those Gentiles before the Churches by which they passed to be discoursed with tryed and examined concerning their soul-complexion the Spirit of Adoption their experiences in the work of grace nugae 3. He will have those Gentiles whom he thinks the Commissioners brought thus upon the stage to be the same by whom they were brought on their way But first how shall we know that those that brought them on their way were Gentiles and not Jews for sure the Church at Antioch did not consist of Gentiles only and it is not like that the whole Church of Antioch went along with them and was thus set up Again how will it be made out that those who brought them on their way went so far on with them as Phenice and Samaria where the Declaration was made Hug. Grot. a man well skill'd in the Greek Language tho little to be respected in Dogmaticks of Divinity gives us to understand the contrary from the genuine signification of the word for saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. alioquousque deducti à quibusdam fidelium nam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non est se comitem dare itineri sed honoris causâ aliquòusque prosequi much more might be noted in this passage but enough I leave it to all indifferent Readers if this be not to do violence to the Word of God and to make the Scripture speak what a man himself fancies if not I know not what is Yet when all is done one thing is omitted by Mr. Lockier in this pretty fiction which as is the old Scottish Proverb is the tongue of the Trump For to all that he makes to have been the substance of the Commissioners Declaration he should have added this also as spoken by them And we assure you that all and every one of the Gentiles converted to Christian Religion at least all of them that are admitted to the fellowship of Visible Churches not one of them excepted no not one in a whole Church are just such as these you see of that same soul-complexion c. Without this the rest will not give a certain sound to his purpose And there is as much ground for this as for the rest in the Text and that is nec vola nec vestigium section 10 We proceed That there was an effectuall work viz. of true saving Grace wrought in the hearts of those my Text speaks of I judge will sufficiently appear by comparing with my Text these Scriptures Act. 11. 20 21 23. Ans 1. Mr. Lockier supposeth at least ought suppose if he would have his Argument here hold good that these spoken of in his Text and these spoken of Act. 11. 20. the Grecians are the same persons But first some judicious Interpreters namely the Nether-Dutches understand by these the Jews that used the Greek tongue and the Greek version of the Bible And indeed the name is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinarily used for those and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for the Gentiles though I know Beza and others judge otherwayes But however understand we Gentiles yet these were but a small part of them spoken of in Mr. Lockiers Text whom Hugo Grotius on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Text reckoneth up thus n. Cornelii Antiochensium Cypriorum Pisidarum Pamphiliorum Lycaniorum Lyciorum 2. What ever they be that are spoken of there Act. 11. yet it can not be proven from any thing in these verses cited that all and every one of them had an effectuall work of saving Grace wrought in their hearts Nay nor will the Author himself abide by so much but will come presently in with this qualification according to what Christian can discern of Christian which may be no effectuall saving work at the heart at all I deny not absolutely that there was such effectuall work wrought in hearts amongst them But I deny that the Text imports that there was such a work in the hearts of all and every one of them Ye will say what then mean these expressions 1. the hand i. e. the mighty power of the Lord was with them viz. that Preached the Gospel ver 21. 2. A great number beleeved and turned to the Lord ibidem 3. When he came and had seen the Grace of God v. 23. Ans 1. It was no small work of the hand of God to bring these men to embrace the Profession of the Christian Religion Yet I doubt not but the hand of God was effectuall to more Only I say it appeareth not from the Text that it was effectuall to both in a like extension 2. We know that men are said in Scripture to believe and to be converted in respect of serious profession yet I deny not but there was here also saving heart-believing and Conversion But it cannot be demonstrate out of the Text that all of them beleeved and were converted in this sense 3 By the grace of God that Barnabas is said to have seen is meant the effectuall working thereof in bringing so many to imbrace the Doctrine of the Gospel as also I make no doubt captivating hearts to the obedience of it but whether all and every one of their hearts is not said Nay the very words of Barnabas exhortation may seem to give an hint that he spake as supposing it might be otherwayes with some of them he exhorted them all with purpose of heart to cleave unto the Lord. With purpose of heart i. e. saith Beza Non frigidè nec simulatè sed syncero ardenti studio quod Hebraei totius cordis appellatione significant ut veâ—…runt Syrus Arabs Interpretes As if he had said ye professe now the faith of Jesus Christ see that ye content not your selves with profession alone which may evanish but adhere to him with a sincere fervent constant heart-resolution section 11 The Author goeth on by way of confirmation thus The next verse viz. Acts 11. 25. tells us that he found out Saul and brought him to this Church of Antioch where they abode a whole year and these Converts were first called Christians Barnabas is here said to be a man full of the Holy Ghost and therefore able to taste his communion and he and Paul together might be competently able to give a judgement what they found amongst these first Christians and I think 't is very dangerous to say that as far as they could apprehend these first Christians had not both name and thing for which commended and in which by these worthies joyed in pag. 5. Answ Here is I may
not a pillar and ground to bear up truth unto the world or dead persons who only made a Profession of Religion might have done that office well enough 3. Then either in the Church of God there was none at least there might have been a true Church offering and yet no pure offering no offering spiritualor then a pure offering i. e. service spirituall holy and acceptable unto God might have been offered by persons who only did professe Religion were dead stones having nothing of spirituality in them but meer formality and so hypocriticall and amongst the number of them that are most abominable Let the Author if he hold that difference intimated in his restriction between the Churches of the Old and New Testam extricate himself of these things which I am much deceived if he shall be able to do unlesse either he retract his restriction or otherwise shoar upon some Socinian and Anabaptistick Fancy concerning the ancient Church section 3 Secondly Let it be marked here that Mr. Lockier clearly asserteth that the necessary and essentiall qualification absolutely requisite to constitute persons matter or in a capacity to be Members of a Visible Church is true saving Grace known to God the searcher of hearts and that is such grace in the verity of the thing and not only in the judgment of charity Others in the Independent way have spoken more warily in this matter though indeed I confesse I do not see how considering their prosecution of the point and the Arguments they use in it they do not run into this same in the issue However it may hence appear it was not for nought that the Author said in his Epistle to the Reader That he has spoken with more plain dealing then some other of his Brethren who have wrote of this Subject section 4 But haply it may be said that he explaineth himself in the next words viz. so far as men converted are able to discern and judge Which seemeth to import a resolving of the matter into the judgement of charity Ans This seemeth not sufficiently to salve the mater for this additament seemeth to be brought in rather to expresse the mean whereby persons so qualified as is said before viz. truly converted c. are to be found out then to expresse any thing in the objective qualification of the mater of a visible Church And certainly the Arguments brought afterward by the Author to confirm his Thesis speak all for men godly in the truth of the thing as will appear when we come at them section 5 The third thing I would have marked in the Authors proposall of his Doctrine is this that the judges by whose estimation men are to passe as the qualified mater of a Visible Church are by him determined to be men truely converted and very spirituall All Writers of the Independent way have not I confesse come to my hand but of these I have seen I remember of none that saith this much so that it seemeth to be a new conception of his own touching which I humbly desire satisfaction in these particulars 1. By this when a person desireth to be admitted a member of a Church it followeth that his qualification is to be judged not by the estimation of the whole Church but of some speciall members thereof which is point-blank contrary to the Independent way of Government The consequence I prove 1. thus Either it must be said that all and every one of the Church are truely converted de facto or if that be not said this which we have said doth unavoidably follow but the former will not be undertaken by the Author because it is point-blank contrary to plain Scripture telling us that many are called but few chosen and this is confessed by such as are most peremptory for his way of Church constitution * Barrow discov false Church p. â—…0 Ainsworth Objection Ay but all are true Converts in the judgment of charity Answ Such explanation is not mentioned or hinted by the Author when he speaketh to this point of the Judges by whose estimation Church-mater is to passe 2. I prove the consequence thus Mr. Lockier speaketh of such men to be Judges as are not only truely converted but also very spirituall Now very spirituall importeth I conceive in plain English if not a superlative degree yet certainly somewhat above the meer positive to be very spirituall is more yea much more then simply to be really and truely spirituall So that either he must of necessity say that a Visible Church must consist of such only who are not only simply true converts but also much more far advanced Christians and so new born Babes bruised reeds and smoaking flax must be held out crushed and quenched or that which we said must follow Now I suppose yet further that most part of the Congregation be spirituall but in the positive degree and onely two or three or a few number in comparison be very spiritual certainly this may be by our Brethrens way of constituting a Church for they grant such as have any thing the least thing in truth of Christ appearing in them are not to be excluded then the resolution and judging of the whole businesse must be devolved upon these few Nay I must presse it yet further Albeit it may be granted that when a Church is now compleatly constitute in its integrality and organized with all its members it cannot be well supposed but there will be therein some such men very spirituall at least Rulers whom if so be they had not of themselves while they were yet a gathering yet it may well be supposed that while they are yet but a gathering all of them are but spirituall in the positive degree For what hinders but such a company of persons may come together to gather into a Church Now I pray what shall be done in this case if Church-mater in point of fitnesse must passe by the estimation of men more then positive in spiritualitie Must it be said in such a case that though they be all satisfied in conscience concerning the truth of one anothers conversion Yet they are not fit mater to make themselves a Church I would see semblance or shadow of reason for this Yea it appeareth contrary to sound reason because in homogeneall bodies such as a Church is by the Doctrine of our Brethren in the instance and period we are now speaking to what is sufficient to constitute a part is sufficient also to constitute the whole Therefore if Conversion and spiritualnesse in the positive degree be sufficient for one member of the Visible Church its sufficient also for the whole I mean considered yet as totum homogeneum The Author would do well to assay a clearing and extricating of these things upon his Principles section 6 The fourth thing to be considered is that the Author hath chosen an ambiguous term to be the subject of his thesis not distinguishing nor shewing in what sense he takes
did apostatize much and so forsook their assemblings and so their exhorting one another with all these means of grace and life which God hath instituted in this new house and so indeed grew worse and worse till at last they came as the rest of the Jewish Churches to nothing As long saith the Apostle as ye hold fast the practice and power of what you profess so long you are a Church but when you let go this you unchurch your selves and should it be persued upon you you should be thrown out as unhallowed mater but if others which should do it will not do it the Master himself who is faithfull will do it He wil cast such a Church wholly off which thus suffer his institution to be corrupted and so indeed he did write Loammi upon the first Churches quickly after the Apostles time for this thing section 7 Ans If this be not to force Scripture and make it speak what men please I know not what else is Let 's first mark some groundlesse Assertions and then we shall come to the main point of our Answer 1. I wonder at that rash assertion in the close of this and so indeed did he write Loammi upon the first Churches quickly after the Apostles time for this thing What and were the first Churches so soon casten off by Goâ— as no Churches What divine warrant is brought for this Assertion Sir produce the Bill of Divorcement given to them from the Lord. And was there never a Church since untill they were erected of the new Independent frame and model Were all the Christian Churches in Asia Africk and Europe in the times of the four famous Generall Counsels the first whereof was about three hundred years after the Apostles time now no Churches at all Here indeed look out the Donatists ubi cubas in meridie especially if we 'll consider upon what account the Author unchurches them because forsooth they admitted members into their fellowship which were not true Converts partakers of the sure mercies of David c. this is very Donatism in grain 2. The Author supposeth that the Apostle here is speaking to a Church of the Jews i. e. to one particular Congregation distinct from all the rest of the Jewish Churches This is but a bare Assertion without any proof or semblance of proof joined with it We know that some of the Learned Interpreters take this Epistle to have been written not to any particular Church or Congregation but to the whole multitude of the Jews professing Christian Religion scattered abroad through the world as were the Epistles of James and Peter and have for them an argument not improbable from that 2. Epist of Peter c. 3. v. 15. 'T is true that others think otherwayes upon consideration of what we read Heb. 13. 19. where the divine Author desires them he writes to to pray for him that he might be restored the sooner to them which seemeth to import a more limited compasse then the whole dispersion But granting this that it was not written to all the Jews why might it not be written to all the Christian Jews that were in Palestina and Judaea Most part Interpreters take it so but that it was written to one single Congregation of the Jews as Mr. Lockier would have it who will believe upon his bare word 3. He seems to suppose a clear untruth of these to whom the Apostle speaketh viz. that they did apostatize much forsook their Assemblies their mutuall exhorting with all the means of grace and life Indeed the Apostle warneth them to take heed of these things and speaks of some that did so but as for them he writeth unto he layeth no such thing to their charge as done by them but giveth testimony to the contrair c. 6. v. 9 10. cap. 10. v. 32 33 34 39. 4. The maine mistake groundlesse supposition here is this that when the Apostle saith whose house ye are if ye hold fast c. he meaneth this of an outward Visible Church-state So long saith he as ye hold fast c. so long ye are a Church he meaneth a stated Visible Church but when you let go c. you un-Church your selves c. And so as we see will have the words to involve a threatning of losing that visible Church-state upon failing of performance of that which is urged viz. holding fast the confidence c. contrary to the current of all Orthodox Interpreters * See Pareus Hyper. others in Morlorâ—t Excellent is Mr. Dav. Dickson a man of exercised senses in the Word of God his opening of these words N. 3. He the Apostle addeth a condition if we hold fast c. i. e. If we continue stedfast inward ly gripping the promised glory by hopâ— outwardly avowing by confession CHRISTS Truth Whereby he neither importeth the possibilitie of finall apostacy of the Saints nor mindeth to weaken the confidence of Believers more then he doubteth of his own perseverance or mindeth to weaken his own faith but writing to the number of the visible Church he putteth a difference between true believers who do indeed persevere and time-servers who do not persevâ—re to whom he doth not grant for the present the priviledge of being the house of God And then he hath this 2d. Doct. such as shall make defection finall are not a part of Gods house for the present howsoever they be esteemed I believe any judicious Reader will see this Interpretation somewhat more genuine then that of Mr. Lockiers who expone that whose house ye are of the state of grace and spirituall communion with Christ proper to the Mysticall Invisible Church in regard of which Christ dwells in the heart by faith and consequently conceive not the context of the verse to import a turning of them out of one state which now they were in into another estate upon non-performance of that duty which is required But to intimate that the non-performance thereof would discover that they were not in that state which they professed themselves and seemed to others to be in And I prove that it is to be Interpreted thus and not as Mr. Lockier will have it The Apostle meaneth the same here whose house ye are c. which he saith v. 14. We are partakers of Christ if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence c. So Interpreters agree that one and the same thing is said in both verses and the very purpose it self evidenceth so much But now is partaking of Christ nothing else but to be in a Visible Church state Yea for confirmation let it be observed that the Apostle saith not whose house ye are but we are so that he speaks of some what under the metaphor of house which he supposeth common to him and them together What was this Visible Church-member-ship of a certain we are not told where residing particular congregation of Jewes Mr. Lockier hes not heeded this or has purposely passed it over 5.
modum jubet ut Ecclesiam c. 2. By altar is meant per synecdochen the whole Worship of God this is confirmed by the Testimony of the same Author 3. What is meant by worshippers is plain of it self 4. The state of worship and worshippers now under the Gospel is to be measured kept regulated to an exact rule What is that viz. rule by the Word of God To confirme this is brought the testimony of the same Author 5. By the Court which is without the Temple is meant men which have only outside Religion and devotion but are destitute of the power thereof 6. What is meant by the not measuring of these That same Author saith he telleth us ne complectaris eos in spirituali aedificio Domini do not imbrace them to be matter of the spirituall house they are without and let them be cast out Why must not such be received nor abide in the Church seing they have a profession Because first saith that Author Marlorat the house is spirituall holy they are not congruous matter Secondly saith John these are given to the Gentiles i. e. saith Marlorat ipsi sunt facti conformes gentibus incredulis immo deteriores sunt illis quantâlibet sanctitatis specie polleant nam traditi sunt in reprohum sensum c. And saith Mr. Lockier himself such kind of Professours and outside Christians will soon in times of temptations conform themselves to the worst of men yea and be worse then they and will strike in with the vilest to tread down the holy citie i. e. the true worshippers in Gods Visible Church that have name and thing form and power of Godlines Then he tells that he cites Marlorat not as finding him fully of his judgement but to see how he and other good men of the reformed Churches speak unawars his judgement and cannot tell how else to give any life to places of Scripture Neither can a man tell how to make themselves agree with themselves in their commentaries without taking them with a grain of salt in this maner After all these grounds laid down he inferreth upon the whole this conclusion that persons professing meerly the things of God are not approved and allowed mater by the Lord in a Visible Church they are such as he doth not measure embrace for his building they are such as are fit to destroy not to build the holy City And these Christ not allowing of them nor measuring of them but casting them by and will do if we do not how then we can but at our perill both in order to God and order to such men imbrace them I know not Thus he upon this place section 5 Ans 1. Here a word or two in the generall First I say Mr. Lockier doth confidently enough to say no more but very poorly with bare assertions without the least proof triumph over these good men as he calls them hinting as it seemeth that tho good yet they were not very deep nor discerning at least in this matter of the reformed Churches as speaking his opinion unawars and not able to expound Scriptures else and as contradicting and clashing against themselves unlesse a grain of his Interpretation be allowed them Parcius ista viris Who are these good men in the Reformed Churches that have spoken unawars his opinion concerning the constitution of the Visible Church I wish he had named the men and designed the place where they say it Nay were it not we are unwilling this peece should grow too big we could produce of these good men who have directly and solidely refuted Mr. Lockiers Tenet as he hath it in ancient Anabâ—ptists He would have done well also to have pointed us to some of these places of Scripture which they could not tell how to give life to without complyance with his Tenet and some of those seeming contradictions in their commentaries which cannot be agreed without that graine he speaketh of untill he do this we must account what is spoken by him here but groundlesse and empty boasting 2. That in the whole discourse upon this place Mr. Lockier speaks so as that he cannot be Interpret but to hold none to be members of the Visible Church but such as are endued with true saving grace and the power of Godlinesse in veritate rei He never once in it mentioneth that qualification so far as men can judge Yea his expressions are such as cannot possiblie admit it as will appear in following the particulars To which now we come section 6 We begin with some notes upon the conclusion 1. I aske here what he understands by meer professing the things of God Whether such professing as is opposite to and destitute of even morall and ordinary seriousnesse which may sometimes be without an inward saving worke of grace yea or outward convincing positive evidences of it Or as it is opposite unto an inward saving work If he meant the former he shall not have us to contradict his conclusion we shall grant him that such as have not so much as an ordinary morally serious profession such as evidently professe the things of God histrionically mockingly manifestly purposing to deceive are neither allowed of Christ nor to be admitted by men as mater of the Visible Church If he say the other and so that none are to be admitted into the Visible Church but such as beside profession have also really true inward saving grace he putteth the Church upon an impossibility and in this will be disclaimed by all the judicious of his way If it shall be said it may be he meaneth neither but such a profession as is opposite to positive convincing evidences of grace to the judgement of discerning men and so far as they can judge I say 1. This is not said by himself there nay he cannot say it and hold to all what he saith here Why because some may be such as far as men can judge and yet such as Christ will cast out yea and hath casten out and men may be such and yet fit to destroy the holy City 2. Persons may be such as are not approved and allowed mater by the Lord in the Visible Church and yet the Church may admit them into the Church without any perill in order to God i. e. without sinning by admitting them as for instance Simon Magus If he say he meanes not here the Lords not approving not allowing persons simpliciter and in point of their duty but in relation to Ecclesiastick proceeding with them in foro exteriore he shall not have us dissentient from him about this in the generall But himself hath never this distinction of the Lords approving or not approving when from it at any time he reasoneth to the admitting or not admitting of such persons Yea for ought that can be perceived along this Peece he seemeth alwayes to speak of Gods approbation or not-approbation of persons in point of their own dutie simpliciter But now to put the most
Author to the Hebrews saith and made Jews inwardly a holy Nation according to inward call and choise and so a spirituall Priesthood section 11 Answ 1. Here again we are to mark the Conclusion that Mr. Lockier would be at touching the mater of the Visible Church such as are all indeed from above as have indeed an internall consecration the Law given into the mind made Jews inwardly an holy Nation according to inward choise and call Here indeed is an Anabaptisticall model of the Visible Church all reall saints and not in the judgement of charity only Mr Lockiers so far as spirituall men can judge as it is wholly left out by himself so it cannot well be admitted to have any place here 1. Because he saith they are all indeed from above and have indeed an internall consecration that indeed I think to every mans apprehension noteth veritatem rei in se or judicio veritatis as they call it as contradistinguished a judicio charitatis of spirituall men 2. Because that place Heb. 8. 10. cited from Jer. 31. 33. brought in by him for confirmation of his purpose he is speaking of of the impertinency whereof to the purpose in hand I mean the constitution of the Visible Church we shall speak presently speaketh of truth and reality of grace in the heart I may say in the very judgement of God himself under which there is no possibility of mistake But to the grounds he goeth upon from this Text. 2. He taketh for granted that this whole Chapter is taken up to shew the state of the Visible Church in its constitution as such and that it is the Spirits intention in the vision set down in it to give unto John a patern thereof to be a rule to him and others then and succeeding ages for regulating the constitution of it and particularly in the point of Church-members but why did he not assay some proofe of this Must we take every thing upon his bare assertion 'T is true Learned Brightman in his commentary conceiveth that this vision containeth a common Type of the holy Church in all ages But 1. In all the progresse of his commentarie on that Chapter I find not any evident passage pointing at any particular in the vision as a patern type or rule concerning the qualification of such as are to be admitted in the external fellowship of the Visible Church as the homogeneall parts of the outward visible body 2. Though I will not stay here to examine the intent of all the particulars in that vision and though I esteem much of the judgement of that learned and pious man yet in the generall I must say I find no convincing argument nor much appearance of any argument at all brought by him to prove that the intent of the vision was to give John a patern a certain portraicture or resemblance of the Church whereby we might know which is she Yea albeit I confesse sundry particulars in the vision are things of the Church in the Interpretation whereof I would not much disagree from Brightman yet I think he is mistaken in taking that for the generall intent and purpose of the vision and conceives that John being now to receive a new Propheticall Revelation concerning these things that were to come to passe in and upon the Church from that time to the end of the World ver 1. fin The intention of the vision of this Chapter is to describe and set forth the Glory and Majesty of God the Father the first Author of the Prophesie as in the next Chapter is described the Son the Mediatour and subordinate Author thereof as it is ordinary when the Lord is to communicate to his Prophets and by them to the Church Propheticall Revelations of great things to come to passe concerning the Church to present by way of preparation some glorious representation of himself as we may see Esay 6. and Ezek. 1. See these words of the learned and judicious Gomarus upon that Chapter on the Margin * Sequitur to wit from v. 2. descriptio Authoris Coelestis partim ratione visaeillius Majestatis partim praeceptae honorationis ejusdem Cujus descriptionis scopus est primum commendatio apocalypseos ex Authore Caelesti deinde Ecclesiae in fide timore Dei ac patientia confirmatio ex Majestate honoratione illius promanante Quae describuntur opportune nam revelandum est hoc libro mysterium status Ecclesiae afflictissimae c. so Gomar And certainly had it been the purpose of the Spirit by this vision to hold forth a patern portraicture and resemblance of the true Church common to all ages least because of troubles and disturbances we should either think it utterly extinguished or at least through ignorance of her right form and figure we should be lesse able to know which is she as Mr. Brightman saith it seemeth the wisedom of the Spirit of God would have portraicted the figure and form of the Church in these things that are most substantiall in the constitution of it so as Christians of ordinary capacitie might been able to discern take up the true Church by but Mr. Brightman himself is even troubled to find what things are meant by every particular in the vision And in some he bringeth but meer conjectures yea and likely is mistaken as could we stay might be very probably shown as for example in his Exposition of the sea of Glasse like Christall before the Throne 3. But what is the particular in the vision from which Mr. Lockier deduceth his conclusions this viz. that it was in Heaven he saw it a door was opened in Heaven and the Throne was set in Heaven this saith he was to shadow that the worshippers should be indeed from above c. and to make it the stronger it is confirmed by a comparison of what was done with Moses Moses had his patern upon the Mount nigh Heaven c. Answ 1. Here is a thing begged for a ground that as Moses was taken up to the Mount to get a patern of these things which he was to appoint in the ancient Church so Iohn is here taken up to get a patern of the Visible Church and the things to be ordered in it under the New Test This I say is groundlesly supposed For these things that were to be done by Moses were but now a instituting and to be first set up and therefore it was necessary that he should have a patern of them represented to him to regulate him but ere the time of this revelation Christ had fully instituted all particulars belonging to the Church of the New Testament and many Churches through the World were already actually setled and ordered according to that institution and beside sundry of the Books of the New Test written wherein the institution and rule was already plainly written down and this indeed is one reason which inclineth me to think that the scope and intention of the Spirit
in this vision was not to give a patern and portraicture or modell of the Visible Church for the time to come 2. As to that alledged meaning of Moses receiving his patern near Heaven viz. to shew of what qualification the people i. e. the members of the ancient Visible Church should be viz. in foro exteriori so must he understand it if he speak to the purpose in hand I will not trouble my self to inquire who may be these very learned men that say so But the thing it self is but a conjecture and I desire Mr. Lockier concerning this and the expounding of Heaven here to remember the axiome acknowledged by Schoole-men themselves otherwise doting on allegories theologia symbolica non est Argumentativa except where the Spirit of God himself openeth the signification 3. I desire to know what Mr. Lockier meaneth by persons really living very near Heaven if truely gracious then what difference between those and these afterward brought in with an adversative opposing them to the former and why did he propound his Doctrine with a restriction to the time of the Gospel 4. That patern which Moses had shown to him in the Mount according to which he was commanded to make did not concern the constitution of the body of the then Visible Church of what and how qualified persons it was to be made up But was a patern of the Tabernacle and the things pertaining to it Exod. 25. 9. 40. S. The place Ezek. 44. 7. referred as speaking of the ordinary members of the then Visible Church is not to the purpose for it speaks of such as were admitted to the Priests Office See Junius and Paraeus in locum 5. As impertinently and much more impertinently is the place of Heb. 8. 10. cited from Ier. 31. 33. brought into this discourse concerning the Visible Church and the mater thereof I appeal to all judicious Christians in the World and to Mr. Lockier himself in second serious thoughts if that Scripture was intended to be a rule of constituting Congregations Or if it be not a declaration or revelation of Gods purpose and Decree what he is to do himself by his efficacious grace and if that Covenant and the promises thereof belongeth not in the fulfilling thereof only to the Lords elect SECTION V. Examination of Mr. Lockyers proofe of his Doctrine by induction section 1 BVt saith he this is not the way which I most mind to make probation by of this point I would prove it by induction it seemeth then that he hes not had such confidence in that former way of probation by testimonies alledged to speak the point in thesi And I humbly leave it to the judicious and impartiall Reader to judge by what hath been said in answer to these passages if it be not made clearer that he had little ground of confidence in them for proof of his point and comes now to that way of probation wherein it seemeth he conceiveth more strength to ly section 2 The Churches of the Romanes Corinthians Ephesians Galatians Collossians Thessalonians of the Jews which are mentioned by Peter Iames and the Author to the Hebrews and in the Acts were all thus constitute of truely Godly so far as a Godly man can make judgement of one like himself Ergo. if these be denyed as presidents then I would aske our Brethren of the Presbytery by what rule they walk But if these be considered as presidents I have only to shew that these Churches did all thus constitute though I think they did not long keep and maintain this pure constitution for which they bore their judgement yet bear Ans Where did Mr. Lockier read that the judgement comed and yet lying upon these Churches came upon them for their admitting and permitting to be in their visible society such as were not true converts such as God the searcher of the hearts of all men can bear witnesse of as indeed sealed for his by his Holy Spirit as far as men truely converted and very spirituall can discern and judge We find indeed laid to some of their charge that they suffered scandalous persons broatchers of errors and seducers of others into their errors such I mean maintainers of errors I trow he and others of his way are not averse from receiving and suffering into their Independent Churches and I doubt not but for this among other causes judgement came upon them But that ever that which he saith was laid to tâ—eir charge or that the judgement of God came upon them for that cause we cannot believe his assertion we require it to be instanced by proofe but to the purpose he supposeth that beside these particular Churches instanced and what is said of them in the Epistles written to them there can be no where in Scripture found any thing holden forth as a rule by which we may walk in the constitution of the visible Church as to the mater or members tâ—ereof So doth his Question then I would aske our Brethren by what rule they walk import But we trust ere we have done to find a rule else-where yet we shall not deny nor refuse these Churches as presidents in this businesse in whatsoever can be made clear to have been their practice in this mater I mean the notion and consideration under which persons were admitted unto and reckoned in their externall Church-fellowship Come we then to consider the antecedent of this Argument or what is affirmed in his induction of these Churches First in the generall and then his proof thereof particularly The assertion of them all in generall is that all of them were constitute of persons truely Godly so far as Godly men could make judgement Ans 1. Mr. Lockier if he would have made the attributum of this induction answerable to his conclusion intended he should have said they were constitute of persons all and every one of them truely Godly and none else But he speaks only indefinitely which might be granted But let us take him to mean so this assertion as it lyeth may be granted in some sense which it may carry and never a whit advantage redound thereby to his Doctrine for it may carry this sense that these Churches were made up or did consist of persons all of them truely matâ—…ially Godly de facto and quoad eventum or it may carry this sense that they were constitute of persons all truly godly formally considered as such in their taking them into the constitution and external society of them Now in the first sense it might be granted as I suppose some Congregation or Congregations may be such eventually that all the members may be truely godly yet no advantage come thereby to his Tenet unlesse he could prove that the enumeration which he makes is a perfect enumeration of all the particular Churches in Scripture which he cannot because it is clearly contrary to truth and therefore his induction is imperfect Yea and this also that there is no other
we wish you may do we cite you before his Tribunall to answer for it But 2. Sir we are content also to stand at the Barre of any impartiall judicious Divines in the Christian World and that they give their judgement by that same much which I who pretends not to be one of the Learned Men in this Land have Answered to your preceeding Discourse if your Doctrine be such as we are not able to disprove and if we do not upon some good grounds of reason and not out of a meer spirit of contradiction oppose the same And thus I shall leave your invective without saying any more to it we have not learned Christ so as to repay evill with evill bitternesse with bitternesse you have cursed us we blesse you we wish you heartily a blessing Repentance and forgivennesse of this evill thought of your heart and the uncharitable issue of it SECTION VIII Mr. Lockyers Objections he maketh to himself and his Answers thereto considered section 1 MR. Lockier having discharged that bitter foregoing invective against the opposers of his way comes to propound and answer some Objections against himself choised out and formed at his own pleasure Five in number whereof two only are in causâ Were there no other Arguments worthy of his consideration besides these to be found in Orthodox Writers opposite to his way If he thinks not it will seem he hes not read such Writers on this purpose as he might and ought for clearing of himself and others If he knew others why did he not assay to clear them also I think he had not will to present before his hearers all Arguments brought against his Doctrine least he should not ridde his feet well of them and something thereof might have stuck to such as was judicious Whatsoever hes moved him so to passe them over we hope it shall shortly appear he had some cause rather to passe them in silence then to hazard grappling with them it was his prudence so to do But let 's see these he hath and his answers to them section 2 Obj. 1. Why But they gather Churches out of Churches whom you plead for Why I thought the Dispute hitherto ye have been on was not about persons and their practises but about a dogmatick point Had we been propounding Objections to you we should not troubled our selves with these extrinsecall ones taken from prejudices against persons abaters of your Doctrine But should more directly pointed at the throat of the cause it self Yet we think all Godly Orthodox men in the Christian World besides your selves will judge that the Godly Ministers of Christ in this Iland have just cause to lay this practice of picking out of Orthodox Churches in which Jesus Christ is soundly Taught Sacraments administred according to their institution and are by the most judicious of your own way confessed to be true Churches from which it is not lawfull to make separation such Professours as by Gods blessing upon his Ordinances in these Churches have gotten most good to make up of them Churches to your selves All Orthodox Christians will judge this justly laid to your charge as a Schismatick practice having no warrand or president in the Word of God tending to the begetting of heart-burnings divisions hatred amongst Christians yea these of nearest relations Husband and Wife Parents and Children Magistrats and People to the hindring and no wayes to the promoving of the Work of Reformation But see what is said to this section 3 Nay it is but Churches out of a Church Gospel Churches out of a legall Nationall Church and the one being abolished there may be yea there ought to be a departing from it and a gathering out of it unto the order which God hath instituted so we finde Churches gathered out of that Church of the Jews Gal. 1. 22. And whether he meaneth by being in Christ meerly according to profession see 1 Thes 2. 14. Ans 1. The citation of the 1 Thes 2. 14. for clearing what is meant by being in Christ mentioned Gal. 1. 22. is a digression from the purpose of the Objection and hath been sufficiently answered before 2. You gather Churches say you out of a Church not out of Churches This is strange are not the Church of Edinburgh and the Church of Aberdene Churches Again if it be a fault to gather Churches out of Churches shall it be no fault to gather Churches out of a Church majus minus non variant speciem Ay 't is a legall Nationall Church he meaneth such as the Jewish such a Church is abolished therefore 't is no fault yea we ought to gather c. For Answer We may consider a Nationall or Provinciall Church of a threefold sort and notion 1. Wherein all of the Nation are bound to a publick and solemn typicall service and Worship to be performed in one place chosen by God under the inspection of one Visible Pastor or Priest who in Worship and Sacrifices doth hold forth and represent the whole People of the Nation 2. Such a Nationall and Provinciall Church in which many particular Churches are united and subjected unto one Church as they call it Mother or Cathedrall Church and depend upon a Visible Pastor who is Pastor and Ruler of all other Pastors and particular Churches in the Nation or Province And wherein the Inferiour Churches enjoy Divine Ordinances and Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction of that Mother and Cathedrall Church or that Provinciall or Nationall Pastor 3. Such a Nationall Church wherein many particular Churches are joyned and united together under one Visible Church-Government wherein all are equally and collaterally concerned and have equall interest for the use and exercise of all these Ordinances which are necessary to the Visible Ministeriall Government of these Churches and mutuall Ecclesiasticall fellowship in it and edification and preservation by it Now a Nationall Church in the second notion is not nor ever was an Ordinance of God but a meer invention of men and Antichristian tyrannie overthrowing the power granted by GOD to the Churches and Pastors A nationall Church of the first notion and sense was indeed an Ordinance of God Such were the Jews but instituted and to continue for a definite time viz. untill the fulnesse of time should come and then it was abolished and evanished And a Church Nationall in this sense was legall But a Nationall Church in the third sense is not a legall or typicall Church and Ordinance But moralis perpetui juris Such was the Jewish under the Old Testament in point of Government and Ecclesiastick Discipline They were many particular Churches and Synagogues â—hich did in diverse places celebrat the Morall Worship of God and the exercises of Doctrine Discipline and Church-Government Acts 15. 21. Acts 13. 15 16. Luke 21. 12. John 12. 42. All which were joyned and united under one Nationall Visible Ecclesiastick Government This Visible Church-ship so to speak of the Church of the Jews as
of the Visible Church formally consists baptizing if Mr. Lockier shall say that this cannot be done without the sentence of the collective body of Professours he 'll speak beside the book of God which holds forth to us baptisme administrate by one Minister alone without the knowledge of any particular Church and mentioneth not any instance so far as I can remember of Ministers requiring the vote of the Church for baptizing any at any time section 8 For the third the limitation of the Elderships exerting of power not without the consent and approbation of the Church Upon this 1. I would inquire of Mr. Lockier whom he meaneth by the Church without whose consent and approbation this ought not to be done Whether the whole Congregation i. e. all Members thereof promiscuously and indifferently or only some certain Members thereof excluding the rest If the whole Congregation and all the Members thereof Then women and children also must have an hand in these weighty maters of the Government of the Church which I cannot well think he will affirme sure I am will not be owned by many of his side and is contrary to the Word of God If not the whole Congregation but some certain Members viz. men these of years of discretion or of a manlyage Then 1. why speaketh he of the Church indefinitely without any such restriction not without the consent and approbation of the Church Are not women a part of the Church yea and children also under age unlesse we shall say that they are without i. e. of the world of heathens and aliens from the Israel and Household of God which is absurd Nay I suppose there may be a Church consisting of only women beside the Officers as in case all the men of a Congregation were removed by death or otherwise for must we say that a Congregation consisting of 40. men and as many women if by Pestilence all the men should be removed excepting the Officers thereof that it should because of this cease to be a Visible Church 2. It cannot consist with what he saith afterward in sundry of his Arguments brought to prove his Assertion In the first thereof he alledgeth that the power of the Keyes are given to persons not as Officers Apostles or Elders but as beleevers to the Church of beleevers and beleeving with such a faith as flesh and blood cannot reveal but I assume that Women are beleevers and beleevers with such a faith as well as Men Ergo by his Argument they must have an hand in the Government by their consent and approbation as well as the men Again in the third whereas he alledges that other wayes viz. than as he asserted the Elders cannot but offend the little ones of the Church yea the tender consciences of stronger Brethren for as much as persons may be taken in and casten out concerning which they can have no distinct knowledge I assume that this will hold as well for women little ones of the Church and sisters of tender consciences as well as men Because offending of these must be eschewed as well as of those Further in his fourth Argument he alledgeth as a ground of his Assert that the spirit of discerning is not confined to Elders but may be in great measure in some of the members and a greater gift when all are joyned together in the Name of Christ and his presence with them to discern and judge And addeth that the Saints shall Judge the World All which take in female Saints as well as male Saints section 9 2. When as there is a consent and approbation of acts of Government privat obedientiall and not-authoritative And a consent and approbation publick and authoritative by way of a judiciall decisive vote Why is it that the Author does not in his Assertion determine which of these he means 'T is true afterward in his 5th Argument he is expresse that the whole Church and so men women and children should be joyntly authoritative about these acts of Government But here in propounding the Assertion involves the mater in an ambiguous generality It would seem to bear the ignorant Reader in hand that we did grant nothing to people about these acts of Government but a passive blind obedience to what is determined by the Eldership It would seem I say this is the drift of it the rather that afterward SECT 5. end he hints at our Doctrine in this expression If the managing of all things be committed wholly to the Presbytery and the people left out only to see and judge implicitly by their eyes and wills who thus impropriat power But surely this is either a grosse misunderstanding or a foul misrepresentation of the Doctrine of Presbyterians in this mater which may appear by these things which they reach and grant unto the people in relation to matters belonging to Ecclesiastick Government As section 10 First we grant as to the mater of the Calling of Ministers and Officers of the Church that to all the people belongeth the power to nominat and elect the persons to be their own Church-Officers And that to put upon a people who are Christians and in a capacity to elect any Church Officer without their consent and election is unwarrantable intrusion But withall we affirm that this nomination or election is not an authoritative act of Ecclesiastick jurisdiction conferring upon the person any Ministeriall or Officiall power and authority but that this is conferred by the act of ordination 〈◊〉 the ordinary course appointed by Christ in his Church Ministerially under Christ and by vertue of his institution which act is to be performed by the Rulers of the Church and not by the people and that the nomination or election performed by the people is only the designation of the persons on whom this power is to be conferred by ordination if he be one as yet not ordained and is appropriated to be their Minister Besides we grant that any of the people has power to object any just exceptions against a person who is a calling to be their Minister and they ought to be heard and if their reasons be relevant they ought to be admitted section 11 Secondly we grant in like manner as to admission of members that any of the members of the Church has power to represent any just exception and reason they know against any person to be admitted and that their reasons ought to be heard and if relevant to be admitted section 12 Thirdly as to the Preaching of the Word we grant that the people are not obliged to give blind and implicit obedience to what is delivered by the Ministers as if they ought to receive as the Word of God whatsoever is delivered by them but that they have power and ought by the judgement of discretion to search the Scriptures whether the things delivered by the Ministers be so to try the spirits whether they be of God or not to prove all things and hold fast that which
passage contrary to any truth otherwhere delivered in Scripture may consist with the purpose of Antecedents and Consequents in the context It may well be Intâ—…ret in such a particular signification in that particular place thâ— it could not be found in that same signification in any other place of Scripture Much more if the purpose intended in the Text and some circumstances to be found in the context be such as requires it to be taken in such a signification Now to the presâ—… purpose in hand 1. The genuine grammaticall signification of the word Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is such as may well be applyed to signifie a coâ—…tion or Colledge of Rulers and certain it is that the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is oftener then once in Scripture used for the convention 〈◊〉 Colledge of Judges or Rulers as Psal 82. â— 1. 2. To take the word in such a sense here for the Colledge of Church Rulers the Eldership puts no sense upon the place contrary to the Analogie of faâ—…or any truth otherwhere delivered in Scripture lâ—t Mr. Lockier shew us any thing of this kind What is brought by him a little after from 1 Cor. 5. 4. shall be considered in its place 3. â—here is nothing in the antecedents or consequents or in the context of the place inconsistent with it Yea 4. The purpose spoken of in the Text and circumstanâ—… are such as seeme to requâ—… it to be taken in such a signification â—…y I will â—ot say that the purpose or circumstances will force us to take the name of the Church here in a different signification from that whereby it signifies the visible society of Christians as well privat professours as Rulers Yet this I will say that such is the purpose and such circumstances are in the context as permits not all and every one Universally who are coprehended under â—…signification otherwise to be taken in as the definit persons to whom that dilation of offences and inflicting of censure spoken of there doth belong but that must be the Rulers alone I like well the judicious observation of Cameron in his praelect on the place pag. 26. Edit Salmur in 4. where after that he has said sundry things before upon the use of the word Ecclesia at last has these words which I think speaks the most genuine meaning of the place Aâ— haec omnia illud accedit c. to all saith he that hath been spoken this may be added that these things may be said to be told to the Church which are told to these who are with authority over the Church for as the body is said to see when as only the eyes do see so the Church is said to hear that which these only hear who are as it were the eyes of the Church noâ— that the Rulers are vicarii or substitutes of the Church as the eyes are not vicarii or substitutes of the hands and feet But as the body is a certain whoâ—e whereof the severall members have their severall functions in the very like manner the Church is aâ—… body that consists of the compaction of more members to each of which belongeth their proper functions so that when one presents an object to be seen by the eye he is said to present it to the body so he that dilaâ—eth a matter to the Colledge of Presbyters he seemeth to dilate it to the Church whereof that Colledge is a part so far he judiciously section 3 Now take the name of the Church in that sense that is competent to the whole body of Christian Professours yet that all and every one of the body signified by that name cannot be taken as the definite person to whom these actions spoken of here belongs as formally concuâ—…ing therein I prove 1. because the actions here spoken of as belonging to the Church are Acts of Government and Authority yea Acts of highest authority and power receiving of publick judiciall delations judging upon them authoritative commanding amendement of the offence inflicting of publick even the highest censure of Excommunication upon disobedience But cleat it is from Scripture that not to all and every one members of the Visible Church for example women and children are Acts of Government and Authority formally competent and therefore these things ascribed here to the Church cannot be understood to be ascribed to the whole Church Therefore I think Mr. Lockier must either say one of these two that of the whole Church women and children are no parts or that women and children must have an hand and concurrence formally in receiving publick judiciall delations c. or else he must correct that Which word Church Math. 18. 17. I judge doth mean the whole Church and expound it of all men of age in the Church Professours as well as Elders and then give us leave to ask him where he can finde the Church so used for only men of age professing excluding women and children And to use his own Argument if he cannot finde it so used otherwhere in Scripture how can he judge it to mean so here But 2. that the persons here designed cannot be all and every one of the Church that are men of age but must be the Rulers or Eldership only I prove 1. by an Argument ad hominem upon a ground acknowledged confessed and practized by these of the Independent way themselves well observed by worthy Mr. Baillie Disswasive from Err. par 1. c. 9. p. 192. they to whom offences are to be told immediately after the two or three witnesses in a private way are not heard are intended and meant here when Christ saith tell the Church But the Elders alone without the people concurring with them are these to whom offences are to be told and delated immediately c. Ergo. the Major or first Proposition is clear in the Text The Minor or Assumption is their own confession and practice See Hooker Surv. Part 3. c. 3. p. 36. maters are first brought to the Elders they must judge whether the maters be of weight or worth examine the cause call witnesses take depositions yea and at last ere ever the people give any vote propound the sentence dogmatically which the people are oblidged to obey in the same way that they are oblidged to obey their preaching of the Gospel So then either our Brethren must acknowledge that under the name of the Church here Tell the Church are intended the Elders alone or their doctrine and practice of bringing scandals first to the Eldership thus as we have seen must of necessity be not only groundlesse beside Scripture warrand but directly contrair to the Scripture in hand And here it is remarkable that the learned and godly Mr. Parker albeit he be of a judgment contrary to us touching the first subject of the power of the Keyes yet is forced to acknowledge with us that in these words Mat. 18. 17. Tell the Church in the beginning of the Verse is meant the
lean that way 1. Not only speaks he to his heare â—s in the present â—…seâ— if thy brother offend thee go and tell him tell the Church but also is speaking of a case that might have in that present time fallen out and which falling out it was necessary for them to know and be informed what course they should follow fâ—…edresse of it Hudson vindic of the Essence and Vnity of c c. 1. p. 3. 2. It inclines not a little to understand a Church that was in present being among the Jews because he applyes his present speech to the capacity of the Jews Let him be to thee as an Heathen and Publican who might not have communion with Heathens and would not with Publicans But Christians might eat and drink with both I say not these are demonstrative grounds Yet they may seem to lean that way But see we what the Author brings from the Text that the order of the Gospel Church and it only for so he must be understood is meant section 7 His first Ground is this He Christ speaks in the verse foregoing of little ones which he explaines to be true beleevers and converted ones v. 6. v. 3. this is made the qualification of the visible members of the New Church in the Chapter foregoing Mat. 16. 17. Ans 1. That true saving faith and conversion is the qualification viz. in the externall Ecclesiastick Court of Visible Church members is a dream and that it is taught Matth. 16 17. is another dream and that another kind of qualification as to substance is requisite in visible members of the Church under the N. T. then was under the Old is a third as many of his own side will confesse who usually in that Question bring Arguments from the constitution of the Church under the Old Test 2. What necessity of consequence is here Christ in the foregoing v. 14. of Matth. 18. speaks of little ones true beleevers and true faith is the qualification of members of the New or Gospel Church â—…rgo when v. 17. he bids a Brother if he cannot get an offending â—rother reclaimed by privat admonition tell the Church he is to be understood to speak only of the order to be kept in such offences in the Gospel Church that was to be afterward I confesse if this consequent can be clearly deduced and proven from that anteâ—…denâ— per decimam nonam consequentiam I am deceived certainly the consequence of it is not immediatly evident let the Author assay to make it out section 8 2. Ground Then saith he the very words of censure in case the Church be disobeyed are the same he useth to Peter when he gave the Keyes to him upon his faith Whatsoever ye bind on earth c. Mat. 18. 18. and just this he saith to Peter c. 16. 19. And I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth c. so that the one explains the other That by Church is not meant the Presbytery or Eldership of one sort or other but the Gospel Church the Congregation of beleevers these conjunctim have the power to censure Answ I confesse I cannot well such is may be my dullnesse conceive what is the order and forme of this Argument in relation to prove that which he undertook a little before viz. that in that tell the Church is not meant the Jewish Eldership whether Civill or Ecclesiastick 1. If he would reason thus the words of censure here used are the same with these Mat. 16. 19. when the power of the Keyes were given to Peter upon his faith and these are words expressing the order of the Gospel Church Therefore by the name of the Church used here cannot be meant the Jewish Eldership I Answer then the Author considers not that the first words of censure are such as are relative to the order of the Jewish Church let him be to thee as a Heathen man and a Publican Or 2. If his purpose be to reason only thus The power of censure spoken of here being the same with that spoken of Mat. 16. these to whom it is ascribed here and given to there are the same the one plaâ—… explains the other But there Mat. 16. it is given 〈◊〉 Peter is a beleever and so in him to the Church of beleevers the Gospel Church Ergo here must be understood not the 〈◊〉 of â—…e and or other Jâ—wish or Christian Answ It s 〈…〉 â—ver yet proven not ever will be that the power of the â—…yer of binding and loosing were Mat. 16. given to Peter as a beleever 〈◊〉 to the 〈◊〉 Church of beleevers section 9 He adds for 〈◊〉 These 〈◊〉 have the power to censure and cast out according to that Corn. 5. 4. When you are gathâ—…ed together c. to deliver such a one to Satan c. and by the same power â—…ved in again that as his punishment was by many so his consolatio◠〈◊〉 reception might be by many also as 't is 2 Cor. 2. â— that Satâ—… might take no advantage which is enough to shew how that admission of members should be by a joint act of the Church as well as excommunication of Members ANSW The Author contemns his Readâ—… very much when as he thinks it enough to cite controverted Paâ—…ges of Scripture and affirm they speak enough for his 〈◊〉 without the least essay to bring any argument or ground to prove and clear that to be their meaning which he affirmeth They are too too credulous that will be moved by such kinde of dictating rather then disputing We deny that the place 1 Cor. 5. 4. doth import that the power to censure and excommunicate doth belong to the whole Congregation of believers as Judges and formall authoritative Actors therein And we deny in like maner that 2 Cor. 2. 6. doth import that the reception of the censured or excoÌ„municated is by the whole Congregation acting therein authoritatively When Mr. Lockier shall be pleased to present us some reasons for what he saith we shall take them into consideration In the mean while he must give us leave not to be moved by his naked Assertions and withall we refer the Reader for further satisfaction concerning these Passages to Cameron praelect in Mat. 18. 15. p. 19 â—0 Edit Salmur in 40. Rutherfurd due right of Presâ— c. 2. pag. 36 37. and c. 10. pag. â—48 349 35â— 351 352. Jus Divin of Church Government par 2. c. 10. pag. 97. and humbly desires Mr. Lockier to consider what they have said on the places section 10 What followeth said by the Author in his 7th SECT the contrary to this understanding c. to the end Is nothing else but a bitter railing which I think the judicious godly men of his way will not own and account unworthy the defiâ—…ng Paper with transcribing it onely briefly to it 1. Whether â—…e Independent way or the Presâ—yterian way of Government be liker and nearer to
judge by these things following â— Let the maters handled and concluded in this Synod be objecâ—…ly of never so â—…caâ— consequence Yet by Mr. Lockiers 〈…〉 prosecution of his 〈◊〉 Assertion namely SECT 30. and 〈◊〉 The Synods Act and determination thereupon was meer counsell and no authoritative juriâ—dictionall decree Nor could they do any more but counsell and 〈◊〉 by the Independent Doctrine which 〈…〉 truth But from this ad hominem If 〈…〉 with Apostles and Elders in a mater of meer counsell and advise What is that to the purpose now in controversie Because privat Christians may joyntly concur with â—…ders in Acts of counsell does it follow that they must also joynt 〈◊〉 â—…thoritatively concur with them in authoritative juridicall Acts of Government â— When he saith that nothing was done in the bâ—ginning carrying on or ending of these maters but with interessing the Congregation and the Brethren 1. Why does he here use so ambiguous a word as interesâ—ing the Congregation and 〈◊〉 not plainly and speciâ—icallâ— but with joynt authoritâ—tive concurrence of c. may theâ— not be a interessing of persons in the managing of such a publick procedure and yet without their authoritative concurrence viz. to be witnesses of the justnesse of the procedure that they may have the more clear satisfaction in their consciences in giving their obedientiall concurrence to have their consultative advice upon the businesse to have their privat tho not authoritative approbation Mr. Lockier in all this Section does not once mention their joynt authoritative concurrence because as I conceive he thought the act of the whole Synod to be no authoritative juridicall act 2. Whom means he by the Congregation without whose interessing in the whole businesse nothing was done Whether the Congregation of Jerusalem alone or also the Congregations and Brethren of Antioch Syria and Cilicia The latter cannot be said as is evident and to say the former First is nothing to make out his purpose Because these other Churches being as much if not more concerned in the maters that were to be concluded in the Synod if nothing could be done without the interessing or joynt concurrence of the Congregation and the Brethren of Jerusalem with the Elders these other Congregations and Brethren ought as much and more to have been interessed and joyntly to have concurred Again nor yet can it be that all thâ—… Congregation or Church of â—…rusalem could â—e so 〈◊〉 to concur jointly in acting and voting that businesse in 〈…〉 with the Apostles and Elders which yet Mâ— Lockie◠〈◊〉 say first the beleevers in â—erusalem were so numerous that they could not all conveen with the Apostles and 〈◊〉 one 〈◊〉 and in one place to act and vote in the 〈◊〉 Theâ— could not all meet together at once in one place for ordinary acts oâ— Worship and so were indeed a Presbyteriall Church as is demonstrat irrefragably by sundrie Mr. Rutherfurd The Assembly in their Answers to the Dissenting Brethren Jus. Divi◠〈◊〉 Church Government and others And therefore the whole Church mentioned v. 22. must not be understood of the whole Church of Beleevers in Jerusalem but of the whole caetus Synodious the Synodicall multitude the Synodicall Church section 12 But to answer directly we acknowledge and maintain that not only this meeting was a proper Synod but also the determination thereof was authoritative and juridicall and as to that which Mr. Lockier intendeth here that the Congregation privat Brethren jointly concurred with the Apostles and Elders in the determination Granting that the Brethren mentioned were privat Christians out of office 1. These were not the whole Churches concerned in the businesse that was determined which yet he must say if he would say any thing to his purpose intended in his first Assertion as has been shown yea nor all the Church of Jerusalem as hath been also shown 2. We deny that these privat Brethren concurred with the Apostles and Elders authoritatively in the determination of the sentence They gave at most but their privat assent and approbation which we grant may be given unto privat Christians in any Synod That they had not authoritative definitive vote seemeth clear from somewhat expressed in the history it self of â—…at Synod observed by Mr. Rutherfurd peace plea. c. 14. p. 213 First these only had definitive vote who met together Synodically to consider of the Question But these were only Apostles and Elders c. 15. v. 7. Non dicit Lucas convenisse totam Ecclesiam Sed eos qui ratione officij erant legittimi judices Calv. com in loc again the Canons of the Synod are denominated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decrees which were ordaiâ—…d by the Apostles and 〈…〉 Jerusalem c. 16. 4. 21. 25. the particulars reckoned up 〈◊〉 Mr â—…ckier proves not the country 1. That their names waâ— in thâ—â—yhodicall Letters rather the Letterâ— were in their name generally For we read â—…thing of their particular subscriptions First this is no act of authority in it self Secondly Nor doth it necâ—ssarily impâ—… their authorâ—tative concurrence in the determination coâ—…luded in the sentence â—f the Synod and intimate by the Letters to the Churches For as Letters being Writen to a multitude consisting of persons of diverse capacities some publick and in office some privat without office may contain some things peculiâ—r to the one some things belonging to the other yea may recommend one businesse to both but to be acted by them according to their different capacities and stations So Letters as sent from such a composed company in name of all may contain some things as common acts of all in whose name they are written and some things as proper acts of a part of them or somethings as proceeding from all but in a different way according to their severall capacities as proceeding from some authoritatively and from others aâ— giving their privat consent thereunto which may adde more weight to the authoritative determination amongst others 2. For their speaking in the Assemb 1â— It is not said in the Text that they did speak The speech and Disputation that was in the Assemb for ought appears was amongst the Apostles and Elders before the Brethren Not by the Brethren what is said v. 12. that all the multitude kept silence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proves not that they disputed before the word as Mr. Caudrey well observeth vindic clav pag. 54. signifies no more but this that they were quiet or held their peace from noise or murmuring usuall with multitudes they hearkned attentively 2. Suppose they did speak propose and reason upon the matter as we grant that privat Christians may in a Synod in an orderly way so the 2. Book of Discipline of the Kirk of Scotland c. 7. that proves not â—…t they did vote authoritatively and definitively in the determination that they received satisfaction by reason proves it not neither That may be necessary and given to clear mens consciences in concurring by privat approbation and
caused them to make by suffrages to themselves Elders Now let any man judge if the Author has brought us expresse Scripture for private Believers formall and authoritative concurrence in the act of ordination of Elders And whereas he addes in the close of his Section By these two first examples are other Scriptures which speak of ordination as if they did attribute it to the Elders onely to be Interpret if other answers proper to such places cannot be found out I Answ If he find not out more proper answers for these places then to expone them by these two examples it may easily be perceived by what has been said that he is at a weak passe in maintaining his point undertaken And I pray tell us why such places of Scripture as plainly attributes the act of ordination to Presbyteries onely should be expounded to take in the people with Elders by these two examples wherein yet their is no demonstrative ground brought to evidence that the people had formall hand in ordination of the Officers mentioned in them And not rather these two examples or practiseâ— seeing it is not expresly said in them that the people concurred in the ordination be expounded by such places wherein the acts of ordination is expresly attributed 〈◊〉 Eldership alone I vâ—rily â—hink that to any understanding man the latter of these two will seem most rationall As for Arguments proving that â—ot the people but only the Officers of the Chuâ—…h â—…ve the power of ordination See these Authors often mentioned section 17 To close up this inducâ—ion of particulars Finally saith he SECT â—… I might instance in lower matters which would strengthen thâ— Argument for if in lesse things the Eldership may not act alone surely not in greater Answ 1. If Elders may not in lesser maters act without joint concurrence of the people what needeth that restriction in the Assertion first propounded not in most weighty things 2. It is a very weak Consequence In lesse maters they may not act alone Ergo not in greater Some persons may have the managing of great maters laid upon them by speciall commission from such as have supream authority to commissionate in these maters and yet have no speciall commission laid upon them to manage lesse maters Mens capacity to act alone or not alone but with others in such maters ariseth not from 〈◊〉 â—uantity or weight of the maters but from Commission and waâ—…â—nd granted by him that hath supreme power and authority over those things But let 's briefly see these particular instances of lesse things alledged by him here section 18 As in Letters recommendatory saith he they were not directed to the Eldership of such a Church but to the whole Church of which they were to be received So Paul recommended Phebe to the Church of Corinth 't was to the Church of Rome Rom. 16. 1 2. So John wrote to the Church concerning certain brethren that were to be received by them onâ— Diotrephes the Elder which stood upon his sole authority in this and such like things and used the Keyes at his own pleasure to keep out and cast out as he would is noted with this mark not to be of God but of Satan for this very thing and one that had not seen God Answ What poor stuffe is here to the purposâ— in hand 1. Directing of Letters commendatory to persons Eldership or Church is not their actings but the actings of some others that 〈◊〉 the Letters and I may say their passion But if it 〈…〉 recommendator◠〈◊〉 not be at all directedâ—â—to◠〈◊〉 â—…ceived by the Eldersh◠〈◊〉 but the whole Church 〈◊〉 â—…fesse this is a strange Assertioâ—â—nd he that will beleeve 〈…〉 ofâ— is too too credulous 3. The matâ—er that Paul recommend Pâ—ebâ— for to the â—oman Christians was a duty of common Christian love to intertain her kindly as a Christian to assist her as they could in her affairs at Rome a duty jure naturali incumbent to all Christians both conjunctly and severally And so the recommendation foâ— that on her behalf might well be directed to all Elders and people But interest of concurring in actings of Church Government being not juris naturalis but juris positivi persons must be sure of speciall warrant and vocation for concurring in them So that 't is but a very sick consequence if Letters of recommendation for such purpose as these for Phebe may be or if ye will ought to be directed to the whole Church then ought the whole Church also to concur in actings of Church Government and juâ—isdiction He must have a good head that will make it out 4. As to the instance of Diotrephes Mr. Lockier is I conceive in a mistake when he supposes that â—…ving of these Brethren for which Iohn did write to the Church was to receive them into the state of Church membership they needed not that they were Church members yea it seems Ministers before and an act of the Keyes It was a receiving of them into duties of Christian kindlinesse and charity v. 5 6 7. but what is all this of Diotrephes to the purpose Because Diotrephes one Elder usurped sole authority to himself alone in the Church made peremptor acts inhibiting the members to receive unto duties of Christian charity stranger-Christians did tyrannically at his own pleasure Excommunicat-persons and that for disobeying his unjust acts if he for this was marked not to be of God but of Satan not to have seen God must the same mark be put upon the Colledge of Elders in the Church if they all jointly and equally act authoritatively in matters of Ecclesiastick Government and jurisdiction without the authoritative concurrence of the whole CongregatioÌ„ yet not according to their own pleasure but according to the Rules of Gods Word nor yet pressing upon the people blind and absolute obedience but reserving to them the liberty of their judgement of discretion must they for this be Classed with Dâ—otrephâ—s 'T is evident Mr. Lockâ—… â—…liquely reaches this blow at Presbyterians but they need no◠〈◊〉 it I will spare what I might say to this Only this much 〈◊〉 â—e give better proof then yet we have seen for popular concurrence in Acts of Ecclesiastick Government I can judge no otherwise of suâ—… bitter hints as these then as is said of Diotrephes words vers 10. of that Epistle SECTION IV. Mr. Lockiers Argument from common Testimony SECT 12. considered and Answered section 1 MR. Lockier having alledged first reasons next some expresse Passages of Scripture wherein how he has acquit himself we leave to be judged by the impartiall discerning Reader in the last place Take saith he common consent for this truth i. e. his Assertion no truth that the whole Congregation are to have joint authoritative suffrages in all maters of greatest weight i. e. all acts of Ecclesiastick Government By common consent he must mean the testimony of Ecclesiastick Writers and now I pray what testimonies of Ecclesiastick Authors
governing yet each acteth orderly in his distinct place viz. privat Christians in their place Elders in their place and station Yet this takes not away the absurdity For seeing Mr. Lockier will have all and every one in the body of the Church formally and authoritatively to act in the acts of Government it followes that all and every one of them are formally Governours and Rulers the privat Christians as well as the Elders and there is no distinction between them at all as to governing except of meer order in acting Certainly if all and every member of the naturall body did formally elicit the act of seeing albeit that part of the body which we now call the eye were supposed to act therein in some respect somewhat distinctly as to order from the rest of the parts Yet all the rest of the parts were as formally and properly an eye as it Therefore as it were madnesse to say that in the naturall body each member doth formally act seeing So it is exceeding absurd supposing the Church to be an organicall body and some of the organes whereof it is composed are rulers governing and commanding in the Lord to whom subjection and obedience in the Lord is to be given by the rest and are as the eyes in the naturall body Yet to say that all and every member in the Church hath a formall authoritative hand or influence in the acts of governing 2. See the incongruity of the Authors comparison The power sayeth he may be fundamentally in the whole viz. body For he is speaking in the immediatly preceeding words of an organicall-body and yet each organ c. for instance the sensitive faculties are in all the soul originally c. What incongruity is this to propound in the generall of power fundamentally in a whole body organicall And then for an instance oâ— simile to tell us of powers or faculties in the whole soul originally Is the soul an organicall body But may some say the Author saith the sensitive faculties are in all the soul fundamentally and radically and the soul radically and fundamentally in all the body and so would by consequence say that the sensitive faculties are in the whole body fundamentally and radically Answ 1. 'T is a very grosse absurdity to say that the soul is in the whole body fundamentally and radically or potentially as we have shown before It is formally and by way of information in the whole body 2. It is a grosse inconsequence the sensitive faculties are in all the soul and the soul is in the whole body Therefore the sensitive faculties are in the whole body fundamentally Nay they are fundamentally and radically in the soul and therefore are not fundamentally and radically in the body neither whole nor part But are formally and by way of inhesion in their respective parts or organs of the body 3. I would fain know of the Author what he does make in the Church answerable to the soul in the naturall body and so that wherein the power of governing is fundamentally and radically as the sensitive faculties of the naturall body are fundamentally and radically in the soul Is it the whole Church as comprehending both people and Ministers That is the body Or is it the people That is a part of the body The truth is Mr. Lockier is at a losse here with his simile Jesus Christ as King of the Church is unto the Church as the soul in the naturall body And the power of governing is fundamentally and radically in him and not in the body of the Church And therefore 3. to make use of the last words of his similitude for which we thank him as making clearly against himself and for us as the sensitive faculties are radically and fundamentally in the soul and act only as he sayeth well by such parts as are fit to act by as seeing by the eye and hearing by the ear and the soul acts all its works by such organs as are proper to each work The hands to work the feet to go So to give the apodosis which he had no will to expresse Ecclesiastick organicall powers such as the senses are â—n the naturall body as the power of governing teaching administrating the seals are fundamentally in Christ the King of the Church and act only by such parts as are fit to act by Rulers Teachers and Ministers These are the proper organs of those works section 7 The fifth and and last Obj. he meeteth with is this The Elders of the Church are called overseers stewards shepherds fathers All which in their analogy hold forth a peculiar and sole power to do things fathers govern alone so overseers c. As to this propounding of this Argument 1. We speak not for a peculiar sole power to do things indefinitely in Elders But for a sole power of authoritative acting in maters of Government and not excluding or denying unto people a private judgement of discretion to try and prove the actings thereof by the rule 2. The Author leaves out some of the names and titles given to the Elders which use to be alledged in this Argument besides the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 guides leaders conducters governours Heb. 13. 7 17 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 5. 17. Rom. 12. 8. 1 Thessal 5. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Governments or Governours the abstract being put for the concrete 2 Cor. 12. 28. 3. Because the Author is pleased to propound the Argument from this ground in the softest way for his own advantage we desire the Reader will be pleased to take it thus These persons and these only in the Church have power and authority to govern and consequently are to exercise formally acts of Government to whom in the Scripture by the Spirit of Christ are appropriated such names and titles which do import the power and authority of governing But to the Officers of the Church are such names appropriat as importeth power and authority of Governing Ergo c. For the major or first proposition I think it may be clear to any of it self And if any shall be so wilfull as to deny it I would ask him as doth the learned Authors of jus divin of Church Government Par. 2. pag. 170. to what end and for what reason are such names and denominations importing power and authority of Government appropriated to some persons i. e. given to them and not to others if not for this end and reason to distinguish them that are vested with authority to govern in the Church from others and to signifie and hold forth a duty or work incumbent to them and not to others The assumption see evidenced at length in jus divinum of Church Government Par. 2. pag. 171 172 173. the summe is this These titles Elder Overseer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conducter Governour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Steward Pastor Governments Ruler are names which generally
of Elderships and Presbyteries of more Congregations consociated that they may lawfully be and of diverse sorts is confessed But there are these points especially concerning them of which there is controversie between us and our Brethren section 4 The 1. is concerning the nature of their power over the severall Congregations or Churches consociated in them Our Brethren of the Independent way attribute no other power unto them but of counsel perswasion to informe and hold forth unto the Churches what is commanded by the Word of God to exhort perswade them to their duty to obedience of what they find commanded in the Word But allow them no authority and jurisdictionall power to enjoine their determinations from the Word authoritatively under pain of Ecclesiasticall censures So Mr. Hooker in the forecited place pag. 2 3. 't is true he calls this power of counsell by the name of Authority And so Mr. Lockier from him Sect. 30. but an authoritative power of meer counsell advice and persuasion may be justly counted a Chimaera But we shall not contend about names Call it authority or power or what you will the thing it self is nothing else but brotherly counsell which hath no binding force formally as issuing from the Presbyterie But bindeth meerly vi materiae materially in regard of the thing which is propounded by them as it is a Scripture truth or command as is confessed by Mr. Hooker And this is no more then one Brother may do towards another and one sister Church may do to another Mr. Cotton in the Keyes ch 6. seemeth to attribute more power to a Synod They have sayeth he power not onely to give light and counsell in mater of truth and practice But also to command and enjoine the things to be believed and done The expresse words of the Synodicall letter imply no lesse Act. 15. 27. It is an act of the power of the Keyes to binde burdens and this binding power ariseth not only materially from the weight of the maters imposed which are necessary necessitate praecepti from the word but also formally from the authority of the Synod which being an ordinance of Christ bindeth the more For the Synods sake This in the letter of the words is a flat contradiction to what Mr. Hooker sayeth He sayeth they have only a power of Brotherly counsell Mâ— Cotton not only that but also to command and enjoin He sayeth they bind only materially because what they determine is either expressed in or infallibly collected out of the Word Mr. Cotton not only materially but also formally from the authority of the Synode Yet I conceive for all such fair words in the intention and reall meaning of the Author little more is understood than what Mr. Hooker sayeth at most nothing more but a Doctrinall power which is competent to any single Pastour as M. Caudrey sheweth Vindiciae clav c. 6. pag. 53. We on the contrare assert that by warrand of the Word of God the Presbyteries of associated Churches Classicall or Synodicall have a power and authority of Spirituall jurisdiction whereby they authoritatively discerne maters Ecclesiasticall and impose these decrees under pain of Ecclesiastick censures and may inflict Ecclesiastick censures upon the disobedient and refractory in the particular Congregations within the combination or association Only let it be observed here that this authoritative and juridicall power we attribute to such Presbyteries of discerning maters Ecclesiasticall and imposing their determinations under pain of censure is not Autocratorick and absolute binding absolutely by vertue of their authority But Ministeriall and adstricted in its determinations to the rule of the Word of God So that that obligation formall which floweth from the authority of the Judicatory into the decree in actu exercito presupposeth that materiall obligation of the thing decreed as contained in the Word of God else it hath not place section 5 2. Point of Controversie is that the Independent Brethren doe not allow the standing use of such associated Presbyteries But only occasionall We assert that by warrand of the Word of God some such Presbyteries are of standing use as standing ordinary juridicall Ecclesiasticall Courts We say that Classicall Presbyteries in the ordinary settled case of Churches are necessary standing Courts for administration of Ecclesiasticall Government and also that Superiour Presbyteries Synodicall may be warrantably of standing use where and when conveniently moe Presbyteriall or Classicall Churches may have and injoy actuall combination as of Yearly Provinciall Synods as in the Churches of the Low Countries are more frequent Provinciall Synods and yearly Nationall Assemblies as in the Churches of this Kingdome of Scotland 3. Point is concerning subordination of lesser Assemblies to greater The Independent Brethren deny altogether subordination of Inferiour Assemblies to Superiour as juridicall Ecclesiasticall Courts Albeit they acknowledge that difficulties arising in a particular Congregation in matters of Government there may be a going out to an Assembly of more Churches and if need be full satisfaction and clearing not being found there there may be a going forth yet to a greater and more large Assembly Yet they say that is elective and only by way of reference and arbitration and only for counsell and direction and assert that a particular Congregation is the supream Ecclesiasticall Juridicall Tribunall under Jesus Christ upon earth So that a person although wronged by an unjust sentence there as they are not in their determinations infallible suppose sentenced to Excommunication which cutteth him off from the benefit of Church Ordinances and fellowship of Christians in all the Churches of the World he may have no appeal from their sentence to another Superiour Judicatory to have his processe juridically recognosced and the injurious sentence rescinded but must ly under it without any Ecclesiastick remedy till death unlesse that particular Congregation be pleased themselves to revoke their sentence So doth Mr. Hooker tell us Survey par 3. c. 3. pag. 40 41 43. and par 4. pag. 19. We on the contrary assert that both the Law of Nature and the positive Law of God revealed in his Word both in the Old and New Testament holdeth out to us a juridicall subordination of lesser Assemblies Ecclesiasticall unto greater so that appeals may be made from Inferiour and lesser to Superiour and greater Assemblies That it is both against the Law of nature and the positive Law of God to place a supream Independent Ecclesiasticall juridicall power in a particular Congregation yea or in any lesser Assembly when as a greater and Superiour is to be had and may conveniently be had We assert also that that series and gradation of this subordination which is acknowledged and maintained by Protestant Churches viz. of Congregationall Classicall Provinciall and Nationall Assemblies is lawfull and agreeable to the Word of God section 6 Whereas there are these three principall points of Controversie concerning the matter in hand The thing Mr. Lockier propoundeth to dispute against
their ordinary power But 1. tho it be true that they were together in Jerusalem by Gods command waiting together for the powring out of the Holy Ghost Yet it follows not that by accident they did joyne in Collegio for that businesse Because being together by Christs institution they were to joyne together in managing the affairs of the Church They were bound and it was necessary that they should do so 2. True what was done might have been done by any one of them alone had they been alone But it followeth not that being all in one place where they might joyn together hic nunc any one of them might do it alone Nor does it follow either that they acted as Apostles because any of them might have done it alone Any of the Apostles might alone by decisive sentence determined the controversie Synodically concluded Act. 15. yet the Author will not for this say that in that businesse the Apostles acted as Apostles The next thing I note is a great mistake of our mind concerning the nature of the Presbytery ruling over more Congregations then one That it should be a combination of appropriate Elders to severall particular Churches which these Acts 1. were not but generall Officers We do not think it is necessary to the essence of such a Presbytery that it be made up of Elders appropriated to several fixed Congregations We say at the first where there were more Professours then could meet in one Congregation their Pastours and Elders did teach and rule them in common not being distributively appropriated to the severall Congregations and that yet in some Cities where there are more Congregations it may be so as it is at this day in some Protestant Churches Tho we think that now in the ordinary condition of the Church it is convenient that Congregations be fixed and have their severall fixed Officers Therefore we say further what ever use be to be made of the present passage Act. 1. in the Question in hand it is but a poor Argument the Author insinuateth There was not here concurring Elders of other Churches this of Jerusalem being the first and only Gospel Church Ergo there was not here a Presbytery ruling over more Congregations then one it doth not necessarily follow For that very Church of Jerusalem might be made up of severall Congregations nor can the contrary be proven the number of names set down v. 15. will not prove it because it cannot be demonstrate that that was the whole number of Christians in Jerusalem section 5 The second Scripture he meeteth with is Act. 4. 35. For as many as were Possessours of lands c. sold them and brought the price and layed it down at the Apostles feet And how this place will maintain a * This nick-name the Author wil put in at every turn which we desire may be as often rejected as wrongfully given to the Presbytery we speak for forraine coercive Eldership I do not yet under stand Answ Here againe is a grosse mistake or a wilfull wronging of his adversaries I know none that alledges this place by it self as an intire Argument to prove the Presbytery we speak for the truth as to the use of this passage by Presbyterians in this controversie is this They alledging the instance of the Church of Jerusalem for a patern of more Congregations than one under one governing Presbytery and for making out this alledging that Scripture holdeth forth 1. That Church to consist of more Congregations then one 2. That yet these are called one Church 3. That over these Congregations called one Church was one Presbyteriall Government in common To prove the last of these points whereof the Argument consisteth alledging that the Scripture mentioneth the Officers of that Church as meeting together in common for acts of Government they bring this place for one instance of an act of Government for which they were met viz. to take charge of the Churches goods and of the due distribution thereof See Jus Divinum of Church Govern part 2. pag. 210. Now see we his answer if it hath any thing to infringe that for which this is indeed alledged section 6 The Apostles though they had a capacity over many Churches yet then there were not many Churches when this was done Ans Yes Sr there were many more than one Church I mean more particular Congregations even in Ierusalem see this proven as by sundry others so particularly by the Assembly of Divines in their third proposition concerning Government and their answers to the reasons of the Dissenting Brethren and by the Authors of Jus Divin 2. part pag. 193 194 195 196. seq and the exceptions brought to the contrare by your strongest heads fully cleared I wonder the Author should so contemne his Readers as to obtrude his bare Assertions upon them in a mater concerning which he knows so much reason hath been brought as is extant to the contrare of what he affirmeth If he hath any new exceptions against the proofs of that particular which hath not been brought by these of his side before him he would done best to have produced the same Or let him do it yet and we shall take them into impartiall consideration 2. And this capacity to wit that the Apostles had over many Churches was as they were Apostles and not as ordinary Elders Answ That a capacity to act acts of Church Government over many Congregations simply was competent to them only qua Apostles and so not competent to ordinary Elders is a maine part of the Question in hand and should not be begged or nakedly affirmed but proven section 7 3. And in this mater they did an extraordinary thing because the Officers fit for this work were not yet ordained Answ What is this And was the Apostles receiving and ordering these alms the doing of an extraordinary thing Sure it was not extraordinary in the nature of the acts For then it should not be an act competent to any ordinary Officer in the Church which is confessedly false it being an ordinary act which may be and is dayly done by ordinary Officers Nor yet can it be said to have been an extraordinary deed as done by such Officers the Apostles The Author indeed imports this in his reason Because the Officers fit for this work were not yet ordained so he would say the Apostles were not fit Officers for that work and therefore their doing of it was extraordinary but either they were not fit Officers in point of qualification and endewment requisite to manage that work and this I think the Author will not say Or they were not fit in point of vocation to exercise such an act But as little reason has he to say this because altho that businesse was not the proper act of their Apostolick vocation and office nor the maine and principall work thereof and therefore say they Act. 6. 2. It is not reason that we should leave the Word of God
but in his immediatly preceeding words he has done that the decrees of this Synod were binding only materially as matters revealed in the Scripture and not formally can withall Answer this Question affirmatively that this Synod had an authoritative power as such an Ordinance as a Synod Erit mihi magnus Apollo nay I shall say Mr. Lockier can make contradictories agree well enough See we then his Answ to this A forrain Eldership rightly constituted hath particular authority i. a power of preheminent and prevailing counsel though not a power of jurisdiction to constrain their results to be practised or to censure Ecclesiastically in case persons who have the result of things produced by them do not follow them They have as an Ordinance of God a power of preheminent and prevailing counsel That is their result ought to be preferred and prevail more upon our hearts then what Interpretation other single persons and ordinary helps ordinarily afford Answ First here ere I come to the main businesse note shortly some few things 1. We never attributed authority to a forrain Eldership over any persons or Churches Mr. Lockier here saying that a forrain Eldership hath peculiar authority if his meaning be according to his words if he understand authority indeed that is an Eldership extrinsecall to Churches yet hath peculiar authority over them goeth farther then ever Presbyterians did and indeed goeth clearly contrary to truth and in terms speaketh very like the Prelatick way which attributed to a forrain Eldership the Prelate and his Cathedrall authority over all the Churches in the Diocaese But indeed his words and his sense agree not For his peculiar authority is no authority as we shall see anone 2. We say yet it is but an odious feigned description of that power of jurisdiction we attribute to Synods and other associated Presbyteries when it is called a power to constrain their results to be practised as we have discovered it before 3. It is yet a grosser misrepresentation that we attribute unto such Presbyteries a power to censure persons Ecclesiastically in case they have the result of things produced by them and do not follow them Did ever any Persbyterian say such a thing as this that a Synod or Presbytery has power to censure persons who have their results by them and does not follow them For example that a Synod in Scotland hath power to censure persons in England or France that have their results by them and does not follow them or that any Presbytery hath power to censure persons of the Church within the bounds of their association who may be have their resultâ— by them and not follow them If this has been said out of a mistake and ignorance we pity it and wishes the Author to know our Doctrine better ere he take upon him to represent it to others If it has been of purpose to render our Doctrine odious let his own conscience judge what sort of dealing this is section 13 But to come to the purpose in hand Mr. Lockiers clear and plain answer at last to this place of Act. 15. 28. is that that Synod exercised no power of jurisdiction but a power of counsell or advice only He calls it indeed a peculiar authority But when he makes it to be but counsell that is to give it a bare name for credits sake And to deny it the thing of that name Counsell or advice is but an act of charity and if good of wisdom and prudence and not of authority 'T is no other act but that which one man may do to a Church one brother to another one woman to another yea as Mr. Rutherfurd saith Abigail to David a maid to Naaman That the Author saith it is a power of preheminent and prevailing counsell that it ought to prevail more upon our hearts than the interpretation of single persons and ordinary helps availeth not For preheminent counsell is still but counsell and so that which is attributed to the Synod differeth no wayes from that which is competent to any single persons to do or one sister and equall Church to another but only gradually And suppose a company of Christians Pastors or others met together not Synodically being persons of known piety and understanding in maters of Religion their counsell would be such a preheminent and prevailing counsell that it ought to be preferred and prevail more with our hearts then the interpretation of single persons So hereby there is no peculiar authority or power granted to that Synod as such an Ordinance of God If yet it shall be said that their counsell is preheminent and prevailing ought to prevail more upon our hearts c. not only upon this ground that they are many pious and understanding men and liker to find out the minde of God in his Word then single persons But also because they are such an institute meeting a Synod To this I cannot see how Mr. Lockier can say this having but now told us that the decrees of the Synod bind materially as being the will of God but not formally as the result of the Presbytery For what else is it to say that their results ought to prevail more upon our hearts because the result of such men as a Synod but that they are binding formally as the results of the Synod 2. If there be a preheminency or power of prevailing in the decree of a Synod so that there is an obligation upon our hearts to be more prevailed with over and above that preheminency and power of prevailing which is in the counsâ—l of a company of pious and understanding men met occasionally not in a Synod which certainly ought to be preferred and to prevail more with our hearts then the interpretation of single persons I would ask what is that different power if it be not a juridicall power and consequently of censure upon disobedience For if it shall be said it is not juridicall power but only dogmaticall or doctrinall then I say this is competent to every single Pastor For a truth of the Gospel taught and delivered by a single Pastor ought to be beleeved and obeyed i. e. bindeth to obedience and faith not only because it is Gospel but because it is doctrinally taught by a Minister and so that preheminent and prevailing power shall differ from the power of a single Pastor but only gradually and is the very same in kinde and so no peculiar authority or power of a Synod as such an Ordinance of God But now whereas Mr. Lockier asserteth that this Synod at Jerusalem Act. 15. had not nor did exercise a juridicall power but only a power of counsell or advice We assert the contrair which is abundantly proven by sundry learned Writers treating upon this subject and maintained against all Objections made to the contrair by Opposites We refer the Reader for satisfaction to these namely Mr. Gillespy Assert of the Govern of the Church of Scotl. Part. 2. c. 8. Aarons Rod Book 2. c. 9. Arg.
their judgements that nothing can be concluded amongst them What will you have done in such a case By all these may sufficiently appear the weaknesse of his first ground to prove that associat Elderships of more Congregations destroye and elude the end of Church power and Jurisdiction Come we to the second section 5 His prefaces to it with a big word as if some great matter were to be brought forth 't is good to enquire wisely into this matter as Solom saith what is an institution of God into such an end Who would not look for some great matter here Let 's see then the product of this wise enquirie If the power at home in the particular Congregation be the institution of God for its own affairs this shall discern better and judge better and heal better then all the Learned Assemblies in world which people litle looke after whilst this great noise is made with men of so great parts and worth which sojourning Presbyteries assemble withall Parturiunt montes c. Answ If this reason have any force it also militats as well against all Synods even consultatory as well as juridicall It shall follow it was a wrong course they of Antioch took to carry their controversie to the Synod of Jerusalem Why By Mr. Lockiers theologicall reasoning here the power at home in the particular Congregation of Antioch if it was a particular Congregation as these of our Authors mind may suppose it to have been being an institution of God for its own affairs it could discern better judge better and heal better their controversie then all the learned Assemblies in the world and so then that at Jerusalem c. 2. But what if the matter to be discerned judged and healed be not the particular Congregations own i. proper affairs but common equally concerning other Congregations also 3. But the grand and I may say too grosse sophisme here is a clear petitio Quaesiti a begging of the thing mainely in Question that only the Judicature of a particular Congregation is of Divine institution and an associate Presbytery Classicall or Synodicall is not of Divine institution unlesse this be supposed the consequence is null One Ordinance instituted of God for one end doth not make void and uselesse another Ordinance instituted for that same end But we say that an associate Presbytery of more Congregations is instituted of God as well as that of a particular Congregation The contrary of this Mr. Lockier should have proven and not barely supposed and upon that supposition alledged that the power in the particular Congregation being instituted of God shall do better then any Presbytery of that kind section 6 Thirdy saith he in the nature of the the thing 't is a course which casteth those which subject to it upon a multiplication of appeals and references forth and back from the Session to the Synod c. and whether this looks like Scripture Ordinance or like the thing it pretends to an effectuall removall of burden and offences whilst it thus hurryes poor people up and down let Christians judge This is ne quid detrimenti capiant capita Ecclesiae it may be the cryes of this and such like is come up into the ears of the Lord and ah alas that good men should be deaf Answ 1. This reason what ever it sayeth sayeth nothing against the being of Presbyteries over more particular Congregations the unlawfulnesse of which is the thing Mr. Lockier in his Assertion undertooke to prove but against the subordination of the lesser Presbyteries unto the greater 2. Neither sayeth it any thing to purpose against this point But in effect is rather a cavillation then solide reasoning The subordination of lesser Presbyteries unto greater as of Congregationall to Classicall of both to Synodicall Presbyteries in the nature of the thing casteth not persons upon needlesse multiplication of appeals nor Judicators upon needlesse multiplication of references But provides a course for relief to persons when they are or may be probably wronged by the sentence of a lesser Presbytery by appeal to the cognition and judgement of a greater And an help to lesser Presbyteries by having recourse by reference to the judgement and authority of a greater When such help is needfull for them as when they â—nd difficultie in their affairs either through darknesse or weightinesse of the matter or through differences or divisions amongst themselves or through power and prevalency of persons with whom they have to do in the exercise of their authority And if this be not more agreeable to Scripture and a way more likely to remove offences out of the Church of Christ then to put such an Independent power in the hands of a single Congregation may be of 50. or 40. or 20. or fewer persons â—…at if they shall Excommunicat a person and so deprive him of â—he fellowship of all Churches in the World or determine maintain and teach Idolatrie and grossest Heresie There shall be no power on earth in an Ecclesiasticall authoritative way to cognosce upon and redresse what they do amisse Let all Christians judge But that way of subordination of lesser Presbyteries to greater and of appeals is very agreeable unto and warranted by the Scriptures of God has been sufficiently demonstrated and vindicat against all the exceptions of opposers by sundry Learned Writers * See Mr. Gillesp Asser of the Govern of the Church of Scotland Assemblies Answ Jus Divin that we need not insist more on it till we hear more from Mr. Lockier then is said against it here As to that this is ne quid detrimenti c. we say plainly 't is but slandering not reasoning We acknowledge no capita Ecclesiae but one head Jesus Christ and that all his Ministers are pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis And I beseech you Sr. what is the emolument that any Ministers may reap by the subordination of lesser Assemblies or Presbyteries unto greater in regard of which they might be said to receive detriment if the Government were otherwayes to wit Independent in single Congregations Indeed if they should look to their temporary emolument they might see much reason to imbrace the Independent way as that which were the fittest means ne quid detrimenti caperent as any body may easily discern and I conceive some knowes well enough by experience As to that which is spoken in the end of this Sect. against this way of Ecclesiastick Government allowing appeals from lesser Presbyteries to greater as raising cryes that have come up into the ears of the LORD we shall say no more but this if any men at any time or any where in managing that Government have intangled and perplexed persons rather then extricated and issued their distresse and thereby raised cryes into the ears of the LORD by oppression of persons that is nothing against the thing it self Sinfull men will abuse even the best of Divine institutions and may be there are
exceptions made to the contrary abundantly confuted 4. What Mr. Lockier has found or not found we know not nor stands on it but he might have found a Presbytery over more Congregations then one in Jerusalem Antioch Corinth Ephesus and he cannot deny but he has found the Church of Antioch making use of an associate Synodicall Presbytery at Jerusalem and that that Presbytery was more then consultative even authoritative and juridicall has been proven But I think what ever he conceives that he has found of a Congregationall Eldership exercising jurisdiction Ordaining or Excommunicating by it self he shall hardly point us to the place of Scripture where he found the instance of it what he saith of the Elders and Church of Ephesus from Acts 20. has been answered before SECTION XII Reply to Mr. Lockiers Answers to some Objections from SECTION 47. to the end wherein separation from not onely this Church of Scotland but all the Protestant Presbyterian Churches as Idolatrous is driven at section 1 MR. Lockier having hitherto gone about as he could to maintain that the power of the Keyes and Government of the Church of Christ ought not to be in the hands of Officers and Governours set over the Church in the Lord by the Lord himself but in the hands of the whole Church and that in the hands of every particular Congregation independently and supremely without association in or subordination unto any common Ecclesiastick Government which how well he has asserted and maintained we leave it to all understanding impartiall Readers to give their judgement he applyes himself to Answer some Objections against the things he has handled as he sayeth But what Objections are they I pray none of those which are brought directly against the points maintained by him before this Likely he found these too hard for him to grapple with and therefore thought it his wisedome to passe them rather by in silence And the Objections he brings are onely some things which he conceived might been said against his designe in casting this Little Stone at Presbyterian Churches to drive all good Christians if they might be affrighted to separation from them A wicked and shamefull designe especially for a man professing Godlinesse to have set before him I mind not here to insist or enlarge myself upon the Question of Separation from Churches not onely because other learned men have spoken abundantly and well upon that purpose namely my Reverend and Learned Collegue in the Ministrie and Superiour in the society wherein I live Mr. Rutherfurd in his Peaceable Plea and Due Right But also because I find nothing brought by this Author upon the mater worth the staying upon in handling that mater I shall onely give some few notes upon some things the Author I think out of hear of passion hath vented himself in section 2 Having Sect. 47. objected to himself thus You seem to be for separation from a Presbyteriall Church We find no separation but in case of Idolatry To this Sect. 48. he answers thus in summe That not only heathens had their idolatry as Dagon but also Christians theirs as a supreme Bishop over all Churches which he insinuateth to have been the Papists Idolatrie Alas he might have given other instances of their Idolatry then this as their worshiping a breaden god Crucifixes Relicks Saints departed Images c. then a supreme Bishop or Archbishop over the Church in such a Nation the Prelaticall Protestants Idol he would say and then a combination of Bishops over Churches hereby meaning an associat Presbyterie or Assembly Presbyteers Ruling more Churches odiously calling them Bishops that to him is also Idolatry So that command 2 Cor. 6. 17. come out from one kind of Idolatrie is come out from all Or else that rule binds only to separate from Heathnish Idolatrie What is not warranted by the Word is an Idol Answ We shall not deny but that whatsoever is practized in the Worship of God or set up as an Ordinance without Gods warrand in his Word may be comprehended under Idolatry taking Idolatrie in a large sense but that every thing set up or practized in the Worship of God or in Ordinances is such Idolatry as is a ground sufficient to separate from a Church wherein it is practized as no true Church is a conceit in it self without warrand of the Word nay directly contrare to the allowed practise of Gods people in the Word both in Old and New Testament This conceit of Mr. Lockiers is very Brounisme and rigide Separatisme ingraine But of this and the place 2 Cor. 6. 17. see enough in the Reverend Author whom I last mentioned But as for association or combination of Churches under a common Presbyterie it is warranted in the Word of God and so is his Ordinance as has been abundantly proven and what Mr. Lockier has brought to the contrare we trust has been sufficiently refuted And therefore let him consider his account he has to make to Almighty God for so atrocious a calumnie as his branding it with the name of Idolatrie and involving all the Reformed Orthodox Churches of Jesus Christ in the fearfull crime of Idolatrie And as for his pressing separation from all the Reformed Churches as Idolatrous I shall say no more but bring some Godly men amongst Independents themselves giving testimony against him Hear Mr. Hooker speaking in the name of the Divines of new England of the Congregations of old England I would sayeth he intreat the Reader that if he meet with such accusations that we nullifie all Churches beside our own that we are rigide Separatists c. such bitter calumnies a wise meek spirit passeth by them as an unworthy and ungrounded aspersion That which that Godly man in name of many other Independent Brethren with him intreats may not be believed to be thought or said by them accounteth it an unworthie and groundlesse aspersion Mr. Lockier with open mouth ownes and proclaimes that and worse Then we see what the Dissenting Brethren in the Assemblie of Divines say of their keeping communion with Presbyterian Churches Papers given in to the Honourable Committee c. pag. 29 30. holding communion with neighbour Churches in baptizing our Children as occasion may fal out in absence of Ministers in their Churches by occasional receiving the Communion in their Churches Also our Ministers to Preach in their Congregations and receiving theirs also to Preach in ours as Ministers of the Gospel as mutually their shall be a call from each other when we have any cases hard and difficult for our selves to advise with the Elders of their Churches in case of choise of Elders to seek the approbation and right hand of fellowship from Godly Ministers of their Churches and when an Ordination falls out to desire the presence and approbation of their Elders with our own In case any of our Churches miscarry through mal-administration to be willing upon scandall taken by their Churches to give an account as unto Sister Churches
and much worse I will not say the worst that might be said but shall rather pray God to be mercifull to you in this matter so blinded with prejudice and transported with passion far otherwise then becometh a man professing to have the meek and wise Spirit of Christ 1. If speaking so broadly he mean of Presbyterian Churches through the World as indeed your discourse here for pulling them down and separating from them runneth generally without any exception or limitation that for their matter three parts of four are naught prophane atheists c. What bold and blind conjecturing is this 2. If ye mean only the Church of Scotland and that therein three parts of four are naught prophane atheists both Elders and people Yet I say who art thou that judgeth another mans servant No doubt many amongst us are nothing such as they ought to be and it has been alwayes so for the most part in Churches from the beginning But that they are so many and so grosse prophane atheists both people and Elders for a man that is a stranger to the most part of our Churches Elders and people thereof to pronounce so peremptorly is more then he dare answer to God or his own conscience upon second considerat thoughts 3. Suppose it were so indeed that three of four in Churches were naught yet supposing in Churches there be the true Doctrine of the Gospel Preached the Sacraments for their substance and essentialls agreeable to their institution the acts of worship for matter pure must therefore Gods people separat from those Churches and the true Ordinances and Worship of God therein Or must the Churches be pulled down and plucked up root and branch Shew us warrand either of precept or practice for this in the whole Word of God Nay the strain of Prophets Apostles and Christ himself are clearly as the Sun-shine against it How often was it so with the ancient Church that we may say more then three parts of four were prophane and naught And yet did not the Godly and the Prophets of the Lord continue in the exercise of the Ordinances and Worship of God in that Church Was it not so in the Church of the Jews in the time of Christ being amongst them upon earth Did ever Christ for that require his Disciples to depart and separat from that Church Or did he not himself never a white the lesse continue in the Church communion thereof Yea when in glory writing a Letter to the Church of Sardis of whom he testifies that they had a name that they were living but yet were dead and that there were but a few names there which had not defiled their garments Yet his wise and meek zeal is not for pulling down and rooting up and separating from the Church Communion in his Ordinances and Worship But that is his direction v. 2 3. Be watchfull and strengthen the things which remain and are ready to die Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard and hold fast and repent 4. But suppose that de facto in some Churches the generality of persons Elders and people were so grosse and abominably prophane that there were no living for godly ones amongst them is this a good Argument to prove that the very species and kinde must be destroyed and plucked up root and branch Unlesse that Mr. Lockier could shew that the way of Presbyterian Churches of it self in its very kind allowes Churches to be constitute so of persons notoriously prophane and atheists that will not follow But if he shall say this we will avow it to be a slander 5. When as he will have our Churches to be destitute of a right forme because they are not united by way of their Church-Covenant but are knit together only by situation and by forrain forensicall Elderships And upon this account will have them no Churches but only carcasses of Churches It is utterly false that we make situation or cohabitation in place or a forrain Eldership the form of our Churches We say according to the Word of God that the form which gives the being to the Universall Church Visible and unto every member thereof is the profession of and entering unto that generall Covenant with God in his Son Jesus Christ and whereby every Christian is oblidged and engaged to walk in all the wayes of God and perform all duties towards God and other Christians in all their relations required of them according as God giveth opportunity and occasion to perform and exercise them As for Mr. Lockiers Church-Covenant distinct from that generall Covenant with God in Christ as the form of a particular Church giving it the being of a Church and right to the Ordinances of Christ 't is nothing else but a new device of men having no warrand of precept or example in the Word of God either of the Old or New Testament And his un-Churching of our Churches for want of such a Covenant as this is like many other things in this peece has more boldnesse in it then understanding or reason Concerning this matter of the Church-Covenant See Mr. Rutherfurd Due Right of Presbytery Caudrey Review of Mr. Hookers Survey cap. 4. Gul. Apollon Consider of certain Controversies section 6 Mr. Lockier going on yet more to vent his Brounisticall separation objects to himself thus SECT 54. But will no my protest serve the turn If things be corrupt in the Church and I protest against them may not I go on with that Church As for instance If they take in corrupt members or admit corrupt or impenitent communicants And I protest against those may I not go on and partake with these and yet be innocent and enjoy as much presence of God in his Ordinances as if all were holy and good To which he answereth SECT 55. 1. If protesting were only words then such a thing will do But to say the precious should not mingle with the vile and yet the man doth this daily and continually is not to protest but to mock and dissemble Because here is not a meer passivenesse in this man as to the going on in that thing which he protests against 2. Again in practical things t is not so much a mans word as his practice which gives the dislike If a man of an idolatrous Church should stand up and protest against the Masse and yet still go to Masse I doubt how well this would please God or deliver him from guilt Naaman implicitely protests against the idolatry he had practised that he would worship no God but the God of Israel and did he continue to bow down Yes say some but he begs pardon for it But most aptly in our last English Annot. The word being rendered in the time past Pardon that I bowed down 3. Protesting is a piece of revenge which is the vehemence of Repentance and the clearing of ones self which how well this will accord with halting and halving is worthy of deep thoughts of heart Can two
walk together c. 4. And our Brethren when they protest against an Assembly do not submit unto it section 7 Here is sweet stuffe forsooth very Brounisticall separation ingrain'd That if any things be corrupted in a Church suppose wicked and scandalous persons be retained therein and admitted to Ordinances albeit therein be the true Doctrine of the Gospel Preached and worship for the acts thereof and other Ordinances for their substance right Godly Christians must separate from such Churches and may not in the very instituted Ordinances of Christ and true exercise of worship joyn with such Churches wherein such wicked persons joins with them This is the drift and upshot of this passage as any discerning man may perceive tho it be very intricately and confusedly expressed We shall not need to fall upon a refutation of this vile errour which has been so learnedly and fully refuted of old by the Orthodox Ancients especially Augustin and Optatus in Donatists by the first Reformers in the fantastick Anabaptists See particularly Mr. Rutherfurds Learned Disputes on this purpose in his Peaceable Plea and in his Due Right of Presbytery I shall for the present note but some few things on that which Mr. Lockier hath here section 8 And first to the propounding of the case in the Object as it is so generally and comprehensively expressed If things be corrupted in the Church and I protest against them may I not go on with that Church We owne not the affirmative of it We acknowledge that it is not lawfull to go on with any Church in the practice of things that are corrupt in it 2. We acknowledge further that there may be such corrupt things in a Church or a society taking unto them the name and profession of a Church as that it is not lawfull to go on with such a Church or join with them in Church communion at all as where the Worship is grossely idolatrous or Doctrine is publickly taught or professed contrary to the very foundation of Christianity But bring the case to the particular corruption instanced by the Author and then we say that if in a Church through negligence or loosnesse of discipline corrupt members be admitted or wicked scandalous persons be admitted to the Communion the Godly indeed ought in an orderly way to testify against such a corruption to say to Archippus to the Minister and Rulers take heed to your Ministry to mourn for such abuses in the Church But ought not to separat from that Church and the exercise of the true Worship and Ordinances of Christ therein But may go on and partake with that Church in warranted acts of Worship participation of the Sacraments in the exercise of all Gods instituted Ordinances and yet be free of the sin of corrupt fellow partakers of these Ordinances and of the sin of Rulers sinfully admitting such enjoy Gods presence in the Ordinances as well as if all joining with them were holy and good and to say that other mens wickednesses in abuse of Ordinances prejudices or defiles these Ordinances to me using them aright for my self and testifying against mourning for others abuse thereof is a wild errour contrary to the stream of holy Scripture both in the Old and new Test as has been abundantly demonstrated by these I last mentioned section 9 Now for his exceptions against this To the first to protest against a thing as evil and wicked and yet daily and continually to go on in the acting of that thing and practizing it is indeed a wicked mocking of God and man But daily and continually to go on in the exercise of a lawfull and necessary duty in the company of wicked persons against whose wickednesse I do testifie and does all that is incumbent to me in my station is not to mock or dissemble nor to do the thing I protest against I am but a mere passive or has no concurrence to the wickednesse of others But there is here in Mâ— Lockiers words a grosse supposing or begging of the very thing mainly in Question viz. That if wicked persons be admitted to fellowship in a Church as to the communion of the Lords Supper that the thing a Godly Christian ought to protest or testifie against is all joyning in the Ordinance when such wicked persons are joining therein with them This is a very begging of the thing in Question and utterly false The thing the Godly ought to testifie and protest against is the wickeds presuming to abuse the Ordinance and the Rulers sinfull permitting them so to do But to say he does or should protest that no Godly person ought to use the Ordinance of God or performe warrantable Worship when wicked persons either thrust themselves in with them or negligent Rulers permits them so to do is to suppose the thing in Question and is unwarrantable yea contrare to the current streame of the practise of the Godly under the Old and New Testament both yea to the practise of Jesus Christ himself in the Church of the Jews To his second exception 'T is true in practicall things it is not so much a mans word as his practise which gives the dislike But the Question is whether the performance of a lawfull and necessary duty of worship or exercise of a true Ordinance of Jesus Christ for instance partaking of the Lords Supper to remember his death till he come againe when and where wicked and scandalous persons will thrust themselves in to do it prophanely or are permitted by Rulers so to do be such a practicall thing as I am oblidged to dislike as a thing unlawfull for me to do this is the Question the negative whereof we hold to be the truth of God held forth in his Word The instance produced by the Author for clearing this his second exception viz. of a man in an Idolatrous Church protesting against the Masse and yet still going to Masse is so grossely and absurdly impertinent that one may wonder how it could be alledged in this purpose by an intelligent man The Masse is even upon the mater one of the grossest Idolatries that ever was in the world And for a man to go to Masse when he pretends to protest to go against it is to adde to commission of Idolatry mocking of God and sinning against light professedly So that Mr. Lockier needed not make it a mater of doubting how well such a practise should please God or deliver the man from guiltinesse But what is this to participating of a true Ordinance of Jesus Christ for instance the communion of the Lords Table in a Church not Idolatrous but may be negligent and loose in the exercise of Discipline and permitting wicked scandalous persons to participate in that Ordinance when the Godly participating with them testifies against such abuse in the Ordinances Nay can it be freed from great rashnesse I will not say that which I might to parallel these two together But yet farther to bring in as a parallel
are against Anabaptists all their writings shew and how much they lay to our charge for ushering in and countenancing this Tenent Answ How we holding Baptism to be the seal and solemn admission of Visible Church members do gratifie the judgement and practice of the Anabaptists in that which is Anabaptism their excluding of Infants of Christians from Baptism I professe my self one that cannot see The Author would have done well to have assayed to shew us how that any way advantageth their Tenent Indeed he sayeth true that Presbyterians are much against Anabaptists Doctrine But would hereby fasten a peece of dottage upon them Because that being so much against that Doctrine they yet maintain a Tenet concerning Baptisme that much gratifies it but let him assay to clear this for it is not enough to say any one may see it What ground there is to looke upon his Tenet concerning the allowed matter of the visible Church as tending to Anabaptism we have shewed before in the 1. part of this Examination But it seems to me that in this place the Author does not a little gratifie the judgement of the totall enemies of Baptism and Socinians that accounts it needlesse amongst Christians While as he averres that there may be a Church he must mean a Christian Church else he speaks not to purpose before baptism and that even before they be baptized acting eminent Church acts as making to themselves Ministers If this to averre that persons may be a Church without baptism and men may be Ministers of a Christian Church without baptism if this Assertion be not advantagious to enemies of Baptism I leave it to the Authors second thoughts section 14 His last Ojection But since this opinion prevailed we see a vast toleration of all strange and damnable Doctrines This indeed is an heavy prejudice against your way and the thing in fact is too too palpably true and you could not here deny it but only goes about to extenuat yea and in a great measure to justifie it and so much the more sad is this charge against you that not only hath this thing eventually followed since your opinion has prevailed But it tends to this in the very nature of it while as it attributes to every single Congregation may be of seven or ten persons an Independent supream Ecclesiasticall power in matters of Religion so that if any such Congregation should hold and teach any Haereticall Doctrine there is no Ecclesiastick power on earth that can authoritatively interpose to reclaim or censure them And for the Civil Magistrate he say you must take heed how he useth his sword for a weed-hook in these maculis mentis But now briefly see we what the Author returneth in answer to this charge section 15 We are willing to be a terrour to evill works and as unwilling to be a terrour to good We are not so well skilled in divine things as to tell what every thing is in the bud We are patient more then some would have us till the bud blossome and bear and when we see the fruit naught upon all occasions we give our witnesse against it by dispute discountenance and otherwayes as we understand the Word to warrand us Answ Alas Sr are you so ill skilled in Divine things as that you cannot tell what these many vile errors vented and taught by many in these lands are which yet to this day are permitted without any terrour used against them and think you that terrour enough against such things to Dispute against them as for discountenancing them we professe we can find no discountenancing of any maintaining errors amongst us more then those that are most orthodox and for your other wayes of witnessing against them we know not what it is forsooth Sr a bold Haeretick will care much for all your Disputes yet I beleeve it is little testimony even this way that this Author has given against the grosse errours of the time let him shew if ever he has moved his tongue or imployed his pen against Anabaptism Antinomianism Arminianism Socinianism and other grosse errours which he knowes aboundeth amongst his Countrey-men both at home and in the Army in this Land as 〈◊〉 has done with much bitterness against the Government of the Church of Scotland which yet is according to the truth of God and if not he personally * I know not if Mr. Lockier has taken the Covenant yet the supream Representative of his Nation and many of the prime Officers of the Army stand bound by the Covenant and Oath of GOD to maintain and defend section 16 But saith he if Tares and Wheat must grow together into the World till the end thereof the Civill Magistrate had need to be wary how he useth his Sword for a Weed-hook in maculis mentis spots of the mind lest Presbytery get a by-blow amongst the rest Some mens weapons to fight in their quarrels are to us as Sauls Armour to David too heavy we cannot tell how to wield them Because we take a litle stone and a sling when others would take an halter and a crosse do we then give a vast toleration Not by might nor by power Civill but by Gods Spirit in his Word and other Ordinances we fight in these quarrels Which weapons the not so terrible to look on yet are mighty through God to east down strong imaginations of vain men Answ 1. They are not meer maculae mentis that we think the Magistrates Sword should medle with But to extenuat damnable Doctrines vented to the high dishonour of God and seduceing of souls from the Truth of God to the destruction of their souls under the name of spots of the mind favours little of the true zeal of God and to reckon in Presbyterie amongst these is to call light darknesse for which I pray God grant the Aâ—thor Repentance 2. If the Civil Magistrate must use the Sword to be a terrour to evill works either he must use it as a Weed-hook against such Haereticall Doctrines or you must say that Haereticall Doctrines are no evill works which is to contradict the Word of God in terminis Philip. 3. 2. 3. It is but an odious intimation that we would have an halter and crosse taken against the teachers of every erroneous Doctrine Indeed there be some blasphemous Doctrines and not a few of them in the time As a halter or a crosse is too little for the obstinat venters of them * I have heard with mine ears soÌ„e boldly avow that every man anointed with the spirit is as much a Christ as JESUS the Sonne of GOD. but there are others wayes whereby the Civil Magistrats might imploy their power for suppressing false Doctrines from being brought forth to the dishonouring of God if they were as zealous for Gods honour as they are for their own interest 〈◊〉 4. While as you do here take off the Civil power from medling with these strange and damnable doctrines and allowes
eorum professione non moveremur Vt quod apud potestatem seculi erant confessi in Ecclesiâ constituti comprobarent Quamobrem Maximum Prespyterum jussimus locum suum agnoscere caeteros cum ingenti populi suffragio recepimus I need not comment upon the place it speaks plain enough of it self what we are pleading for section 18 3. That the giving of definitive sentence in questions of faith or making Ecclesiastick constitutions and canons concerning order to be observed in the Church in these ages did ordinarily pertaine only to Ministers of the Church Bishops and Elders that though others privat Christians might be present hear and consult that yet these only did sit and vote as ordinary Judges is undenyablie clear by the Historie of all Councels that were then held in the Church I say ordinary For I deny not but that sometimes such as were not in any such Ministeriall office did also sit and concur in giving definitive sentence But these were not any whatsoever privat Christians promiscuously But eminent learned and pious men and having authoritie and calling thereunto either by antecedent agreement of the Churches that were to meet in the Assembly or by a subsequent assuming and calling of them by the Assembly it self Which was an especiall vocation unto the Ministeriall office ad tempus and in relation to these particular acts which were to be done in the Synode and in so far did exempt them è sorte out of the state of meer private Christians But that such as were meer privat Christians i. e. were neither ordinary Ministers nor had a speciall calling extra ordinem concurred to give definitive sentence in Assemblies was a thing unknowne See what Junius a man well versed in antiquitie sayeth to Bellarm Cont. 3. lib. 2. c. 25. n. 2. speaking in relation to ancient Councels Eorum qui Conciliis intersunt varia esse genera Esse audientes qui in Doctrina ordine ex auditione informantur Esse doctos qui ad consultationem adhibentur Esse denique Episcopos Presbyteros qui decidunt res ferendis sententiis And again Cont. 4. lib. 1. c. 15. n. 15. qui sine authoritate Ecclesiae adjunt eorum alii etiam consultationibus adhiberi possunt ut docti praetertim Ecclesiastici sed dicere sententiam definitivam non possunt section 19 I hear of two main Objections which use to be be made against what I have been pleading for and for the concurrence of the people in the exercise of the Government of the Church 1. That is alledged of the Magdeburg Cent. 2. c. 7. p. 134. coeterum si quis probatos autores hujus saeculi perspiciat videbit formam gubernationis propemodum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similem fuisse To which may be added that of learned Whitak Cont. 4. q. 1. c. 1. sic partim Aristocraticum partim Democraticum partim etiam Monarchicum n. si velimus Christum ipsum respicere as he sayeth a little before est semperque fuit Ecclesiae Regimen Answ That these Authors called the Government of the Church either much like unto a Democraticall or in part Democraticall their meaning and intention was not that the whole body of private Professours did formally concur in the exercise of such acts as are formally authoritative and judiciall acts of Government which were requisite to make the Government formally and properly Democraticall either in whole or in part But only because of such things competent to them as we have mentioned § 14. which are no authoritative or judiciall acts of Government And first for the Magdeburg see how they explicate that which they say in the next following words Singulae enim Ecclesiae parem habebant potestatem verbum Dei pure docendi Sacramenta Administrandi absolvendi excommunicandi Haereticos sceleratos ceremonias ab Apostolis acceptas exercendi aut etiam pro ratione aedificationis novas condendi Ministros eligendi vocandi ordinandi justissimas ob causas iterum deponendi In these words there are two things expresly observable to our purpose 1. That they in explicating the Democracy they speak of speak not of the power of single persons as to maters of Government but of single or particular Churches Singulae enim Ecclesiae say they parem habebant potestatem c. whereby it may easily and evidently appear that while they say that the Government of the Church was much like a Democracy they mean this not to take away the Government out of the hands of Christs Officers of the Church to put it in the hands of the whole people at least to joine these with them in the formall and proper actings of it But in opposition to that authoritative and juridicall superiority of any one particular Chutch over other particular Churches as the Prelaticall men pleaded for authoritative superioritie in their cathedrall Churches over all particular Churches in the Diaecese and the Papalins for an universall superioritie and supremacie in the Church of Rome over all other Churches in the world 2. It is to be observed that among other things which they reckon up as parts of the Church Government which they say was much like Democracie they put in the Preaching of the Word and Admistration of Sacraments which themselves before say and no man of sound judgment will deny are acts proper to the called Ministers of Christ Whence also it is manifest that they mean not a Democracie properly so called which putteth the formall power and exercise of Government in the hands of all and every one of the multitude which the Independent Brethren plead for And indeed will any man consider what the particular Churches were to which these Centuriators attribute private Synods Cent. 2. c. 7. pag. 130. wherein it may possibly be conceived that Democracie could have place especially and it may easily be perceived that they were such as the whole body of the people for whose right to concur in juridicall acts the Independent Brethren pleads could not possibly meet together in one or be present at once in their Synods when assembled for exercise of jurisdiction For most part at least of them which they call particular Churches were of such amplitude and so numerous that such an assembling of their whole body was not possible and in truth they were Diaecesan or Presbyteriall Churches and not such single Congregations as the Question between us and the Independent Brethren concerneth For mark it in that very place last cited speaking of these particular Churches and their private Synods they bring in the Romane Church for an instance And who knows not how numerous the Christians in Rome were become ere that time Adde to these things that these same Authors Cent. 3. c. 7. p. 151. say expresly that jus tractandi de excommunicandis aut recipiendis publice lapsis penes Seniores Ecclesiae erat and cite Tertul. Apolog. for it read also c. 6. ejusdem Cent. pag. 129 l. 30.
who must do it If some other Ecclesiasticall Court then should not a single Congregation have compleat power of jurisdiction within it self without subordination to any other Ecclesiastick Court in point of jurisdiction If the Congregation contradistinguished from the Eldership then the Congregation alone by it self has power enough of jurisdiction and censure and then what needed it be said the Congregation with their Eldership And indeed this is the way that some Independents goe In their judgement the Congregation of privat beleevers does choose ordain and make their Eldership and they may censure depose and Excommunicat all their Eldership So that these Authors when intending a description of the Congregationall way i. e. the Independent way they attribute the power of jurisdictiction and censure to the Congregation with their Eldership if they mean as their words seemeth to import and they must be understood unlesse they minded to aequivocat that the power of jurisdiction is given to these jointly and not to either of them severally either they have not been acquainted with the mind of all these of the Congregationall way or they have dissembled the latter of which I have not reason to impute to all these Authors The truth is the Authors of the Congregationall way are at a great deal of difference among themselves even to salt contradictions concerning the subject of the power of Ecclesiastick jurisdiction as Mr. Caudry has evidenced in the place cited by us before P. 2. Sect. Go we on to their probation of their Assertion They cite one passage of Scripture first telling us withall that there are diverse other Scriptures which they passe by But I beleeve it shal be long ere they let us see them viz. Mat. 18 15 16 17 18. and do build two Arguments on it according to the two things involved in their Assertion The former lyeth thus in their own words section 3 The Church there tell it unto the Church spoken of has compleat power of binding and loosing as is clear from v. 17. and 18. but the Church is not the Classicall Presbytery But the Eldership with the Congregation Therefore c. The Assumption is clear because it is not to be found in all the Gospel that a company of Elders whether of a Classis or a Congregation apart from the Congregation is called a Church Indeed a Congregation with Elders commonly yea and sometime contradistinguished from Elders ay sometime without Elders is termed a Church Act. 15. 4. 22 23. And Act. 14. 23. Now what an absurdity were it to reject the usuall acception of the word in the New Test and without any colour of reason to coine a sense which no where is to be found in all the Gospel though the word be most frequently used in it section 4 Answ To passe sundry things which might be noted upon this Argument and for brevities sake to insist only upon that which is materiall the drift of this first Argument tends to the probation of the former part involved in the Authors Assertion to wit that the power of jurisdiction Ecclesiastick is not in the Eldership or Officers of the Church but in the community of believers jointly with the Elders and the weight of the whole Argument lyeth upon the signification of the term Church And all which is said is but an old song that has been an hundred times dashed by worthy and learned men already See what we have said already upon the same alledgeance by Mr. Lockier above P. 2. Sect. 3. § 2. and 3. For the present I shall say but these things on it 1. When as these Authors say that in the New Testament the name of the Church is taken sometimes for the Congregation i. e. in their sense the community of beleevers with the Eldership jointly sometimes for the Congregation as contradistinguished from Elders and sometime for a Congregation without Elders and asserteth that here in this place it is to be understood in the first of these three acceptions to wit as it comprehendeth both Congregation and Elders I would gladly know how and by what Argument they prove that it is so to be understood here and not rather in one of the other two for the Congregation as contradistinguished from the Elders or for the Congregation without Elders For that we see only asserted by them but no proof of it brought Only this much they insinuat that it is commonly so used But that will not prove that so it must be taken in this particular place If they would assayed to bring any Arguments to prove that the name of the Church here must be taken not for the Congregation as contradistinguished from or without Elders but for the Congregation with the Eldership jointly I doubt not but we should found them all to be such as speaks power of jurisdiction and government in the Eldership as contradistinguished from the rest of the Congregation 2. What though the word Church be no where else in the New Testament used for the Elders or Governours of the Church as contradistinguished from the body of believers yet this is but a very weak Argument to prove that it is not so to be understood here so be that the genuine grammaticall signification thereof be such as may well be applyed as indeed the word answering to it in the Hebrew is frequently in the Old Testament applyed to signifie a Colledge or Society of Judges or Governours as contradistinguished from the people See Mr. Hudson Vindic. of the Essence and Vnity c. 'T is some rashnes in the Authors to call this sense of the word a coined sense Even prophane Greek Authors have used it in such a sense I mean for a meeting of Rulers Demosthenes used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proconcione magnatum It is yet more then rashnesse I may say it is a great impudency that they say it is without any colour of reason taken in this sense in this place These Authors said before that they have used all helps they could have upon this controversie Now let them tell us did they never read in any Writers upon this controversie of Church Government who expones the word Church of the Eldership or Governours of the Church so much as any colour of reason brought by them for expounding the word in that sense How can they hold up their face and say this Did they ever read Beza his Annot. on the place Or Mr. Rutherfurds Peaceable Plea c. 8. Surely the help of these Authors they easily might have had Sure I am if they have read these to mention no moe they might have found some colour at least of reason brought for the Interpretation Nay let them but read the latter of the two over again I believe they shal find such reality of reason brought for it as they shall never be able to avoide Verily whether we take the word Church here in a different signification from that whereby it signifies the societie
of Visible Christians generally comprehending private Professours as well as Rulers or not yet that not all and every one comprehended under that signification otherwise but only the Rulers are intended as the persons to whom the publike acts spoken of in the place receiving of publike delations of scandals and inflicting of censures does belong is here invincibly demonstrate because otherwhere in the New Testament these acts as all other acts of Ecclesiastick authoritative Government are committed and attributed unto the Officers of the Church as such Math. 16. 18. Iohn 20 21 22. 1 Tim. 5. 1 19. Tit. 1. 13. 1 Thess 5. 12. Heb 13. 7 17. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2. and accordingly to them as contradistinguished from the body of Professours are given names importing Government and authority But no where in the Scripture of the New Testament shall any man shew us either name or thing of Government given to private Professours We proceed to their second Argument whereby they would prove from that same place that any one single Congregation with their Eldership has power of jurisdiction Independent and Supreme and to take away all juridicall Ecclesiastick Courts larger than and Superiour to a Congregation Classicall or Synodicall section 5 The Church say they spoken of in this Text which has compleet power of binding and loosing is the first Ecclesiasticall Judicatorie to which belongeth judiciall cognisance of offences For if private admonition do not gaine the offender then the command is tell the Church But our Classicall Presbyterie is not the first Judicatorie to which appertaines judiciall cognizance of offences For first they come to Sessions and only by refers from the Sessions to Presbytories Therefore this Church here spoken of as having compleat power of binding and loosing cannot be the Classicall Presbytorie but the Eldership with the Congregation No where do we read in the Gospel of jurisdiction in relation to censure committed to Classicall Presbytery section 6 Ans 1. To the Assumption or second Proposition it seemeth these Authors have not well understood or been acquainted with the state and way of Presbyteriall Government settled in this Church and therefore have been too rash and hastie in condemning it or arguing against it before they understood it For 1. 'T is not only false which they say that the Classicall Presbyterie is not the first Judicatorie to which appertaines judiciall cognizance of offences but that first they come to Sessions c. If this be meant Universally of all offences Indeed offences committed by particular persons settled members of particular Congregations and as yet abiding within the bounds of the Congregation comes first to the Session or Eldership of the particular or single Congregation But there are many offences the judiciall cognizance whereof comes not first to a Session but to a Presbyterie yea may be a Synod yea may be to the Nationall Assembly When a private person having fallen into some scandalous sin and being conveened before a Session addes refractorinesse against the discipline and obstinacie to his former offence this is a new offence and the judiciall cognizance of this offence belongeth first to the Classicall Presbyterie So a Classicall Presbyterie is the first Judicatorie to which belongeth the judiciall cognizance Of an offence given by a Minister in the Administration of his calling Of an offence given by the Eldership of a Congregation and indeed supposing the first part of these Authors Assertion viz. that the power of jurisdiction is given to the Congregation with the Eldership jointly if they grant not an associate Presbytery to take judiciall cognizance of their offence they must exempt them from being subject to any judiciall cognizance at all For they cannot come under the judiciall cognizance of another single Congregation Of an offence wherein more single Congregations are alike concerned and many cases more I wonder that these Brethren did not rememher that the first judiciall cognizance of James Grahames offence of Seaforts and many other publick Malignant wicked practises was not by Sessions and from them came by reference to the Classical Presbytery but by the publick Assemblies 2. It is another grosse mistake too that these offences which comes to Sessions or Congregationall Elderships to be judicially cognosced upon and from them comes to the Classicall Presbyterie or to a Synode that they come only by râ—ferres from the Sessions to the Presbyteries For they come also by appeal of the party who is under the judiciall cognition of the Session upon mal-administration or supposed mal-administration They may also and do often come by way of authoritative visitation of Sessions and their proceedings by the Presbyterie section 7 2. To the Major or first Proposition 1. Suppose it were granted as it standeth yet it could not make fully against us to take away altogether associate juridicall Presbyteries of more then one single Congregation Because as we have shewn upon the Assumption such associat Presbyteries or Ecclesiastick Assemblies may be and must be the first Judicatories in many cases to which the judiciall cognizance of offences doth belong But 2. If the Major be taken in this sense the Church having power of binding and loosing is the first Judicatorie to which c. And it only taking it with the exclusive note as it must of necessity be taken to infer that negative conclusion Ergo a Classicall or associate Presbyterie is not that Church We deny it as utterly false having no proof from the Text. We say here that the Church invested with authority to cognosce judicially and inflict censure upon offences is the Rulers of the Visible Church Universall as joined in Collegio or assembled whether in the lesser and Inferiour Colledges or Assemblies as a Congregationall Eldership is in respect of all others a Classicall Presbytery in regard of Synods a Provinciall Synod in regard of a Nationall this in regard of a Synod of more Nations haply associate for Government to which as the first Judicatory matters may come for judiciall cognizance or in larger and superiour such as is a Classicall Presbytery in relation to a Congregationall a Synod in relation to a Classical Presbytery c. to which may be the matter cannot come at first or as to the first Judicatory having power of judiciall cognizance of it 'T is true that in such a case as our Saviour instanceth in the Text when offence is given by one particular member of a Congregation single and fixed in its constitution and proper Officers which fixing of single Congregations under appropriated Officers is not necessary by any divine institution For more Congregations may be have been as it seemeth in severalls of the primitive Churches and are at this day in some orthodox Churches served by the same Officers in common without violation of any divine institution Christs command Tell the Church intends that the matter should be brought to the Eldership of the Congregation as the first Judicature to which belongeth judiciall cognizance