Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	apostle_n	paul_n	timothy_n	3,216	5	10.2195	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A82522	The defence of sundry positions & scriptures for the Congregational-way justified: or An answer to an epistle written by Mr. Richard Hollingworth, unto S.E. and T.T. wherein he (in many particulars) chargeth them with injurious dealing against God, and against himselfe, in that booke of theirs, called A defence of sundry positions, &c. Containing a vindication from such charges and aspersions so laid upon them. As also a briefe answer to his large (if not unreasonable) demands, to have scripturall, or rationall answ. given to his 112 queries. / By Sam: Eaton teacher Tim: Taylor pastor [brace] of [brace] the church at Duckenfield in Cheshire. Published according to order.	Eaton, Samuel, 1596?-1665.; Taylor, Timothy, 1611 or 12-1681.	1646 (1646)	Wing E120; Thomason E346_4; ESTC R24943	33,505	50

also you would have the Reader to understand that the chiefe part of your answer viz. It is not said they gave themselves to the Church or Churches but to us viz. Paul a●● Timothy is left without the least limit or intimation Answ Are not these words to be found in our defence pag. 44. The argument is fetcht a Comparatis the members of the Churches of Macedonia did as much in a like case they gave themselves to the Lord and to the Apostle and Timothy according to Gods will to be guided by the Lord and directed by them a whole Church or Churches to one or two persons gave themselves And an argument is fetcht thence thus then may one person that is to joyne to a Church as fitly give himselfe to the Lord to be guided by him and to the whole Church and Officers thereof to be directed by them according to the will of God Doe not we grant that it is not said that they gave themselves to the Church or Churches but to us viz. Paul and Timothy Nor doth the Position imply any other thing For it saith As the members of the Church of Macedonia did in a paralell or like case It speakes onely of something done proportionably to that which they presse where then is the injury done to you Is it in this that without mentioning your allegation as your allegation we have yet answered the whole strength of it Forgive us this wrong and retract your charge which though it have truth in it in the letter of your words in which it runs yet it wants truth in your scope in which you make it For you complaine of wrong to you and the truth of God but causelesly and most injuriously as from what is presented is manifest The fourth instance is out of Position 22 where you say Your whole answer to Revel 4. 4. is by an Index expurgatorius blotted out Answ We have sought up our papers and we perceive that in the copying out of the Reply for the presse the answer to this text was omitted Casu an Consilio we cannot say The answer was to this effect it hath been usually the practise of men of the most approved parts and unquestioned integrity after they have solidly proved a place by plaine texts of scipture then to adde as probable those which in their judgement lookt that way though more obscure as typicall and propheticall places The same is that practise of the Elders of New England in urging this place So that if you could make it out that the Elders have mist the genuine sense of the place yet you have but knockt off one of the Emblemata of the garnishings of the roome whereas the Position it selfe remaines unshaken by you 2. We doe professe our selves unwilling to defend the position by vertue of the text at least in that expression viz. of authority and governing power yet it may be those reverend learned and religious Authors are able to maintaine it though we by reason of our weakenesse dare not undertake it 3. As for the exposition that you put upon it though it be consonant to the interpretation of some learned writers and though it seemed probable to one of us yet upon further inexpectation though we absolutely reject it we have not yet these exceptions against it 1. We reade not of any eyes that the 24 Elders had but the four beasts were full of eyes Rev. 4. 8. Is this the meaning of it that the Churches in the foure Quarters of the world had eyes that is wisdome knowledge understanding to manage order guide and dispose of the affaires of the Churches But the Officers wanted eyes and so were excluded from directive power For this will follow upon your exposition at least if your argument against the interpretation which the Elders of New England give of Crownes prove solid You say by their exposition The Elders which are signified by the foure beasts are excluded from governing power for they sit not on Thrones nor have Crownes on their heads And we will say against you the Elders which you would have to be the Elders of the Churches are excluded from directive power for they have not eyes before and behinde as the four beasts have 2. We reade that the four beasts doe lead the four and twenty Elders in the worship and Service of God in the Church Revel 4. 9 10. When those Beasts gave honour and glory c. the four and twenty Elders fell downe and worshipped c. So also c. 5. 8. 11. 14. Now whether the Churches doe lead their Officers in all their worships they performe to God which will follow from your exposition or the Officers doe lead the Churches judge you 3. We see no absurdity in Masters Cottons and New-Englands brethrens exposition who make the four beasts to be the Officers of the Churches and the four and twenty Elders to be the members As for your allegation of Revel 7. 9. 11. 13 14. where you say That the Elders are distinguished from beleevers We answer to it We discerne not that the Elders are any more distinguished then the four beasts are which yet you interpret to be the Beleevers of the four parts of the world let the place be viewed 4. Though Master Cotton drive that by Crownes are Ensignes of authority any more then white rayment was an Ensigne of Priesthood yet he asserts that in some particulars that belongs to Church members which is the Priviledge of Kings that weare Crownes As 1. That they transact nothing by themselves but by their Officers 2. Their consent Cott. Case is requifite to the judgements that passe in the Church And therefore it may seeme lesse strange if they appeare with Crownes Having thus answered that part of your Epistle wherein you lay divers charges upon us we shall now more briefly answer the former part of your Epistle wherein you endeavour to purge your selfe from those charges laid upon you And you say The deepe and heavy charge as you call it in the first part of my preface against misinterpretation of scriptures as a belying of God counterfeiting the King of Kings hand though I now see how I have sped I re 〈…〉 t not of Answ Neither appeares it that you doe repent that you Psal 35. 11. have position 23 laid to our charge things that we knew not yea things that when we heard of them were of detestable consideration in our thoughts If you shall solidly confute our reply we shall justifie you in this impenitency but if otherwise we shall desire to mourne in secret for you and pray that God would give it an impression upon your spirit You have the more cause to repent if that be true which you alledge in the portall of your Epistle viz. that the Examination c. was for the most part an answer to some allegations as they were privately made to you for satisfaction For doe doubting brethren wanting light addresse

enterteises which serve for ornament and yet possibly may yeeld some contributions of strength also yet so that if they should be removed the building would remaine firme These amongst the learned are usually types doubtfull parables and darke prophesies which they bring in when they have solidly proved a point by sound argument before Thus it falls out with the Elders of New England who being demanded whether they did allow or thinke fit to allow and settle any certaine stinted maintenance upon the Ministers answer that there is nothing done that way amongst them and their practise they defend by two reasons which must needes inferre the unfitnesse of the contrary course at least to them which may be resolved into these two Arguments 1. Arg●If the Condition of the Ministers and the Churches to which they belong may vary then it is unfit to settle a certaine and stinted maintenance for the Ministery But c. Ergo. 2. Arg t If Christ our Lord hath appointed no such thing as stinted maintenance then it is unfit for the Church to settle stinted maintenance But c. Ergo. Upon these two pillars is the fabrike of their practise borne up yet to adde some probable lustre to what was well proved before they adde the opinion of some Divines concerning Revel 8. 8 9. and they speake doubtfully of the place as not thinking it fit confidently to lay this burden upon it But say they if those writers be not deceived which so expound that scripture as for our parts we know not but they expound it truly c. They say not confidently that the exposition is true but that they know not the contrary and if it be so then it may be truly gathered that the bringing in of setled endowments and eminent preferments into the Church hath beene the corruptions and to some t●● destruction of such as lived by them both Church Officers and members And we have endeavoured to shew the probability of this interpretation but dare not speake definitively of it Yet the Position in the leter of it undertakes no more than what you Brother grant viz. that Revel 8. 8 9. is applyed by some good Authors to those times in which Constantine brought setled endowments into the Church and yet we are still beaten as though what the Elders intended viz. to cast a probable lustre upon what was solidly proved before we had not clearely delivered this text of scripture and by consequence must be guilty of belying God and counterfeiting the King of Kings hand which is the language of the preface and so make us a laughing stock to some and the objects of hatred to other vulgar readers For this cause we must of necessity discover your dealing in this businesse 2. It is said of Amaleck that he met Israel in the way and Deut. 25. ●8 smot the hindermost of them even all that were feeble behind them so you Brother shew a singular dexterity in passing by the two fore-mentioned reasons and fall upon the probable argument drawne from this place the hindermost and most feeble of all the rest 3. Againe what they speake hypothetically and by way of supposition you make use of thetically and by way of position and so that it may well leave the ordinary reader under this apprehension that we have no other argument to build our dislike of stinted Church maintenance upon but this place For your scope is apparently not onely to vindicate the scriptures from abuse but also to confute these positions of the Congregationall way 4. Once more whereas the Elders shew that this place is applyed to those times wherein Constantine brought setled endowments into the Church with ampla praedia large possessions you Brother leave out ampla praedia and mention onely setled maintenance whereas the place may be understood in the latter sense as well as in the former For there were certaine Revenues belonging to the Churches before Euseb lib. 10. 1. 5. Constanstine his time as may appeare out of the imperiall constitution directed to Anilinus wherein he saith We have already decreed the same that the possessions belonging to the Churches aforetime should be restored And againe provide that if either gardens or houses or other possessions whatsoever have belonged to the tytle of their Churches all the same be speedily restored to them againe Lastly Give us leave to tell you that we conceive you are not a little injurious to the Elders of New-England and learned Master Forbes and others whilest you affirme that Constantines donation as you seeme to understand it is the foundation of this exposition because you would imply that they beleeve such a donation of Constantine to be a truth which is such an impudent fiction that all wise men no sooner heare it but abhorre it For those which say d. c. fund de El●c Sext. Chro. vol. 2. least affirme that Constantine gave the City of Rome to Silvester the Pope and his successours and others are not ashamed to avouch that he gave all the Westerne Empire And this donation is mentioned by Gratian in the Decretalls this also is censured by Nauclerus to be but Palea because it is manifest that Constantine gave Italy and other Kingdomes of the West to his sonnes by his last will and testament No● not of this Donation but of other maintenance which Constantine bestowed not upon the Bishop of Rome alone but upon other godly Bishops and Ministers throughout his Empire are the Elders of New-England Master Forbes and others to be understood Eightly say you And Position 7 doe you manifestly cleare that 2 Cor 8 5. doth pertinently and powerfully prove that every member at his admission doth promise to give himselfe to the Church to be guided by them when you say the practise of the Churches of Macedonia is by way of allusion made use of and the Argument is a Comparatis For you know allusions and comparisons are not argumentative Answ Why doe you the second time after admonition given by us in our former booke leave out that without which neither can the Churches directing nor the members following direction be lawfull For the Elders of New-England say not that a Church member is to give himselfe up to the Church to be guided by her according to will but according to God But these words according to God you leave out 2. If to answer all your Reasons to the contrary be to defend this Position by vertue of this text we have done it produce if you can any thing which hath the least appearance of an Argument in it which we have not answered 3. We have shewed that the case of the Macedonian Churches 2 Cor. 8. 5. is paralell with the case of a member giving himselfe up to be guided by the Church according to God For as God gave Paul and Timothy to direct the Churches of Macedonia according to God so God hath given particular Churches to direct their severall members according

to God that is to say The Elders by way of office authoritatively and the brethren as God shall give them opportunity to advise and admonish their fellow members Therefore by the same reason that the Churches of Macedonia gave themselves up to Paul and Timothy by the same reason ought Church members to give up themselvs to the Church to be directed by her according to God But you would make men at least if any possibly may looke upon this exception as though Logique Reason and Religion what ever they be are wholy in subserviency to your present designe beleeve whether you have confuted us or no that we have consuted our selves when we say it is Argumentum a comparatis for say you You know that allusions and comparisons are not argumentative For unlesse we must unknow all that we have knowne to gratifie your cause withall we must needes professe that when we were but boyes in the University we were taught that one head or common place from which Arguments were to be drawne was a Comparatis from Comparrisons And we have had no reason to extirminate that doctrine from intermedling with the matters of God Suppose a man should say to Master Hollinworth a Minister You should season others with the salt of knowledge and of the love and seare of God for you are the salt of the earth Math. 5. 13. You should feede your people with wholesome doctrine and discipline for you are a shepheard would Master Hollinworth out with this Logique and say Comparrisons prove nothing and therefore the Arguments are naught Did Paul commit a sol●ris●e in Logique when he proves that Ministers should receive maintenance because the mouth of the Oxe must not be ●●zelled that treadeth out the corne Or is our Saviours argument weake and insufficient when he justifieth his Disciples for plucking the eares of corne by an argument ● Comparatis taken from Davids taking and eating the shew-bread So that till we have something more then your bare assertion to convince us we shall beleeve there is a truth in the old rule of Analogie Quod de uno secundum proporti●nem affirmatur vel negatur id etiam de altero That which is asserted or denyed of one thing according to proportion may be asserted or denyed of another thing And if you can overthrow this old maxime we are confident that the Classique cause will suffer as well as the Congregationall Ninthly say you In stead of cleare manifestation of Ministers mantenance out of the stock of the Church you say we thinke we see most warrant for it from the New Testament and as most probable once disputed it but neither then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are per●●ptory in it c. Answ What shall our modesty be now ●●de use of against us Though it be so yet we shall desire to be mode●t Salust B●l. Jug still It was the Commendation of 〈◊〉 that he did plurimum fac●re ●inim●m de s●l●qui We hope God will never leave us so 〈◊〉 to ou● selves as to professe my doctrine or f●ll upo● a●● practise confidently and per●●●torily as of divine inspiration or institution for which we have not a cleare evidence of scripture That tythes and stinted Church maintenance are unlawfull that Ministers are to be maintained out of the Church stocke the reception and distribution whereof appertaineth to the Deacons office we conceive we have solidly proved out of the word of God But that the Ministers are to be maintained by such a stocke as is raised by a weekely contribution because it is not absolutely cleare in the Text at least to us we thought fit to dispute it onely as probable If you could come as neare unto a demonstration of Classique goverment as this chapter doth to a demonstration of a stocke by weekly contribution of the Church and we had no more to say against it then yet we have heard for we cannot prophesie what you may hereafter produce against a Stocke raised by weekely contributions we should be tender how we mutter'd a word against Classique government 2. Except you can produce some one of the Congregationall way that in writing or disputation hath asserted weekly contributions to be of divine institution and binding to all Churches we shall esteeme the Position and scripture annexed as to such a purpose your owne invention As for us as we defended it in disputation so we have to the same purpose clearely manifested it to be sufficient pertinent and full of power viz. to make it probable that the Ministery should be maintained by a Stock raised by weekly contributions and see no cause to doubt but that we have solidly answered all your arguments to the contrary Lastly Colophonis vice as the close of this charge you conclude when you say we thinke we conceive its probable and doe never so confidently assert any of the severall Positions and do not prove the same by the severall texts respectively alleadged nor cleare the said text from all Objections made against your Exposition one materiall Objection unanswered being enough to invalidate the same you afford so many Arguments to any wise Reader that you have not clearely manifested the Positions and Scriptures where such Speeches are found to be sufficient c. Answ All that we have to say is this First That your triumph concerning our not proving the Positions by the Text respectively alleadged is before your victory Secondly Though one materiall Objection unanswered unanswerable you should say for our weakenesse may not peradventure be able to defend a truth doth invalidate our Exposition yet where we urge divers Texts to any Position if any one of them be truly urged and so unanswerable though you should invalidate all the rest as to such a purpose you may advantage the truth thereby but advantage not your cause at all So that one materiall Objection such as we have not yet met with in your writings though it might invalidate the Exposition yet possibly might not prejudice the Position at all The third Charge which you lay upon us that our pretending to prove some Positions and practises by other Scriptures and Arguments as to your intent expressed in the preface is but a By-matter For Positions and practises may be true and lawfull and yet not truly and lawfully grounded on the Text alleadged c. Answ When the King had burnt Jeremiahs Rowle and Jerem. 3● 32. and he caused Baruch to write the Rowle a new it is said he added besides to them many like words If we had neglected to answer your Examination of the scriptures alleadged by us and had fallen upon new scriptures you might well have complained but we thought good measure pressed downe shaken together and running over would not have offended you And yet the truth is we know not how to please you the one way or the other In some sections though to our understanding we have not left any thing in the similitude of an Argument unanswered

yet we are complained of that we have not clearely manifested the Position as we have already shewed And how should this be done otherwise than by answering your Examination unlesse it be by new Arguments And what are Arguments worth if not backed with scriptures and yet when besides our answer to your examination we adde some short dissertation upon the Point this is counted as a By matter to your intent in the preface 2. Your intent as it appeares both in your Tytle Page the Preface and the Booke it selfe was not onely to vindicate the scriptures but to discover the supposed weaknesse of the doctrine contained in the Positions And why should not we as well assert the doctrine as vindicate the scriptures which some of them cull'd out by you are the weakest and most feeble parts of the proofe made by us as we have told you 3. You could wish you say We might keepe close to the Scriptures and Positions alleadged till they be one way or other cleared and then we may more orderly proceede to other scriptures and arguments and yet you that cannot endure any addition of scripture or reason applyed to the question stated more fully to our owne sense than they are in the Positions drawn up by you require us in the meane time to give scripturall and rationall answers to no lesse then an hundred and twelve Queres whereof some of them are Nihil ad Rhombum independants we are assured in the businesse of controversie betwixt us The fourth Charge that you make against us is That we doe not answer directly but obliquely and evadingly in sundry places as where say you I alledge that the Apostles never taught or practised to gather or separate one part of this true Church and and another part of that especially persons whom themselves converted not to make a purer Church You answer of another thing which was never denyed viz. The Apostles both taught and practised the separating of some Jewes from other Jewes and gathered them into a Christian Church while yet the Jewish Church was not dissolved but was a Church of God Answ We are so farre from answering obliquely or evadingly in this place that we dare be bold to say that no reply can more front and diametrically oppose such a confused answer as yours i● then this of ours doth We did observe that the supposed strength of your answer was couched in the four sinewes of it 1. We thought you deserted it as a thing dissonant to the doctrine and practise of the Apostles to gather some Christians from others to make a purer Church 2. We conceived that the truth of the Churches from which persons are gathered was that which you imagined made the gathering of them in such sort to beare no conformity with the Apostles doctrine or practise And we conceived there was this implication in it that it might be lawfull and suteable to the doctrine and practise of the Apostles to gather beleevers out of a false Church but not out of a true 3. We considered that this might have some strength in your thoughts that there is no such thing mentioned in the doctrine and practise of the Apostles as the gathering of one Church out of many 4. That you imagined that there was some strength in it to prove our gathering of Churches unlawfull because the persons gathered were such as we converted not Having thus anatomized in our thoughts your Answer we addressed our selves to discover the weaknesse and falliblenesse of all these Exceptions and we began with the second because it was most generall and so descended to the rest which were more particular And First we shewed that the truth of a Church is not that that can make it sinfull or unlawfull to gather or take in the members of it into the union of other Churches For then it should have beene unlawfull for the Primitive Churches to have gathered in the beleeving Jewes into their Churches whilest that Church remained true But this say we was the doctrine and practise of the Apostles Now what can be more point blanck opposite to this part of your answer then this Hence also our conclusion hath the strength of this argument in it If it be not unlawfull to withdraw from one Church that is true then it is not unlawfull to gather out of twenty or an hundred i. e. because they are true Object But say you this was not a Christian Church Answ We consider it not as Jewish but under the notion of truth as it was a true Church Object Nor are the Reformed Churches and Ministers to be compared with the then Jewish Church and Priests thereof Answ You shuffle in the Ministers of the one and the Priests of the other impertinently We have onely to doe with the Churches and we say the Christian Churches might be compared with the then Jewish Church under the notion we consider it in viz. in point of truth For the Jewish Church was a true Church as well as the Christian Churches Object It was but one say you and you should shew gathering out of severall Churches Answ Doe we not shew it thus If it be lawfull to gather out of one true Church then it is lawfull upon the same ground to gather out of many Object But say you the Apostles gathering was onely of those Jewes they converted to Christianity from unconverted Jewes and you should shew the gathering of Christians converted by others from other Christians Answ This also we have shewed at large clearing also the former objection together with it by severall arguments and two places of scripture viz. 1 Cor. 5 6. 2 Cor. 13 10. In our second third fourth fift and sixt particulars and these in opposition to the first and third particulars wherein we thought you placed the strength of your answer Object But you should shew the gathering of Christians converted by others from other Christians converted as well as they and possibly from those persons by whom they were converted Answ And this we have fully cleared pag. 10. from the practise of the Apostles and Primitive Christians None but an Emperick would censure a Physician that he doth not cure all diseafes with one Dosse Shall our reply be judged oblique evading insufficient because it is not a bush to stop every gap with though it be most punctually opposite to that part of your answer against which we levelled it Object But say you that Church was then by Gods Commandement to be dissolved and many Churches to be built upon its ruins and therefore doth no more warrant the building of one Christian Church upon the ruine of other Christian Churches than the Parliaments Commission if there were such a one to the Inhabitants of Derby hundred to take downe Lathamhouse to build them houses of doth warrant any one of the Inhabitants to take as many good stones as they can come by out of this and that and the other neighbours house concerning which

there i● no difference in that betwixt us and the primitive Apostolicke gentile Churches 2. The civill custome of those Countries differ much from ours hence we are not bound to make the covering of a mans head a token of dishonour 1 Cor. 11. 4 5. 7. 10. Answer What ever it be that the Apostle meaneth by covering of the head for that is disputable it seemeth to us to be perpetuall and binding to all Churches as well as to that of Corinth because of the Apostles reasons in 1 Cor. 11. 7. 14. He saith ver 7. The man ought not to cover the head because he is the Image and glory of God but the woman must because she is the glory of the man And ver 14. he saith Nature it selfe teacheth that if a man have long haire it is a shame to him because haire is not given to him for a covering For so it is to be understood to make the Antithesis perfect But if a woman have long haire it is an honour to her because her h●ire is given her for a covering We think the reason is fetcht from the excellency of the one sexe above the other and that reason which is drawne from nature are perpetuall And if ever in force remaine still in force 3. The Church was then but in gathering from amongst Heathens and Jewes bence we want examples to convince refractory Anabaptists of the baptizing of Christian Infants c. Answ Such an argument as this you use to defend your selves in pleading for an Nationall Church Scripture say you mentioneth not a Nationall Church for beleevers were not so many then as to beare the name of a Kingdome or Nation As we conceived it weake against us so may the Anabaptists judge it unsatisfactory against them For can any one rationally thinke but that among those many thousands converted of Jewes and Heathens and gathered into Christian Churches there were not many who had Infant Children some of them borne before they were converted who upon such conversion of their parents were to be accounted Christian Infants and others borne after such conversion in that period of time which the history of the Acts of the Apostles fills up which Infants must also be stiled Christian Infants And if so then the reason of wanting examples of baptizing Christian Infants is not that which you alledge viz. because the Church was then but in gathering from amongst the Heathens and Jewes But because it seemed good to the Holy Ghost for what cause we dare not determine to forbeare the expresse mentioning of Infants baptisme 4. The Church was then under heathenish persecuting Magistrates hence they had no houses built for or appropriated to holy worship Answ In your Examinations pag. 6. you cite 1. Cor. 11. 22. and say To come together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is if rightly translated to come together in one place and ●o Ecclesia is opposed to the buildings or houses in which they did eate and drinke in Here you say That the primitive Churches had not houses c. Doe you not manifestly contradict your selfe for if they were not houses in which they did eate and drinke in but did meete together in for holy worship were they not so farre forth set a part for holy worship If by appropriation of houses to holy worship which you say was not then in the primitive times but ought to be now you meane such a setting a part as must necessarily exclude all using of such houses to other purposes it is superstition so to conceive or speake But if you grant that ●se may be made of them otherwise then in Gods worship How are they then appropriated to Gods worship more now then in the times of primitive Churches For they were then knowne noted places at least among some Churches and capacious of great multitudes in which the Churches did ordinarily meete as from 1 Cor. 14. 23. appeares They meete in the night to pray preach and celebrate the Supper Ans And did they not meet in the day also How else did 1 Cor. 14. 23 the unbeleevers meet with them come among them Ministers had no setled maintenance Answ It is a non sequitur that because the Church was under Heathenish and persecuting Magistrates therefore Ministers had no setled maintenance Is there any rule for setled maintenance in the whole Gospell which yet being that there are predictions many of peaceable and prosperous times to the Church there might have beene if God had meant any such thing Nay there are intimations if not cleare declarations against setled maintenance to arise from the Churches There was then an extraordinary effussion of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles Evangelists and sundry of the Elders and people hence there was no neede of Universities c. Answ Yes there was neede because you speake but of sundry and the Apostle desired that they all might speake with tongues but rather that they might prophesie 1 Cor. 14. 5. therefore there might be use of schooles in reference to them that wanted extraordinary gifts Nor of studying for Sermons Answ Yes Else what meaneth the Apostle when he bids Timothy stirre up the gift c. and give attendance to reading c. No using set Prayers and Psalmes Answ Were there no set Psalmes in those dayes were those Psalmes Hymmes and spirituall songs which the Church at Ephesus and at Colosse and all the Churches did sing inspired by the spirit And were no scripture Psalmes sung in those times That will be a strengthening to them that doubt of the singing of Davids Psalmes As for prayers is there a necessity now of a Forme because extraordinary gifts are ceased May not an ordinary gift be sufficiently helpfull to put up prayers by We would thinke it should now be unseasonable to plead for set formes of prayer 6. The Apostles had the care of all the Churches and without difference taught and baptized and ordered matters in all Churches where they came now we may not expect such Officers but must be content with ordinary Elders amongst whom so much of their power as God intended to be perpetuall ●s divided Answ But if there be an universall visible governing Church which you plead for the Elders of it must have care of all the Churches and must Preach Baptize and rule where ever they come And the representative oecumenicall Church or Counsell consists of such Elders that every of them must have care of all the Churches Where then is the difference according to your principles betwixt the Apostles and such Elders in that matter And whether the Brethren do not share in some of their power you know is under controversie 7. There were then some extraordinary occasionall precepts and practises which binde not in ordinary as selling all to give to the poore Mat. 19. 21. having all things common Act. 2. 44 45. 4. 32. 3● 35. Answ Selling all and giving to the poore was never a precept nor

practise in the Christian Apostolike Churches nor doth Mat. 19. 21. prove it whereas you produce it to declare the difference betwixt the Apostolike Churches and ours The having of all things common had not any precept for it in the Apostles dayes that we know of and the practise was voluntary and not binding though some did it they freely did it and others were not bound to follow as from Act. 5. 4. appeares Where then is the difference betwixt the Apostolike Churches and ours For were there now like cause for having all worldly substance common and should God incline the hearts of Christians thereto it might be lawfull now as well as then Now Brother we have given you an account what wee are able to say to your Seven Particulars which we pretermitted before And whether we did hurt you to helpe our selves by our former silence of them let the intelligent Reader judge The second instance is out of your Examination of your Position the Sixt where you say a maine passage is omitted without giving any hint or intimation of any thing omitted Answ The Printer or he that copied it out for the Presse possibly hath omitted an c. will it be worth the rosting what you have taken in hunting 2. We might chalenge you if you can so to avoide the whole or any part of those six lines omitted to the releefe or rescue either of the cause or your Examination as they relate unto the Position For those words wherein you alledge Gen. 9. 9 10. we looked upon them as free of the Company of those By-matters you besought us in the Preface not to meddle with which if we had examined could neither advantage your cause nor indanger ours For the rest of the words omitted they are but different expressions of the same thing imported in the words transcribed and both fully answered You say but it is your mistake That the Covenant Gen. 17 is taken for Gods part of the Covenant or Promise to Abraham Gal. 3. 16 17. Not for mans part to God whereof we no● speak then adde Gods Covenanting with Abraham did not impose nor suppose an expresse vocall Covenant on Abrahams part Now if this be so then was not Abraham bound to any thing on his part by vertue of this Covenant but the contrary is manifest from vers 9. where God said to Abraham Thou shalt keepe my Covenant Ob. If it be sa●● This Covenant was Circumcision Answ Circumcision is called the Covenant Metonymically as the Seale may be called by the name of the thing sealed and therefore is called the token of the Covenant vers 11. Ob. If it be said this was not an expresse vocall Covenant Answ The Position mentioneth an holy Covenant but saith nothing of an expresse vocall Covenant and you by your bringing in these words do alter the Question nor doe we hold an expresse vocall Covenant necessary to the being of a Church And we would be rightly understood when we say it is necessary to the purity and strength of a Church Our meaning is not that it is a standing Ordinance of God that the Church should be united by a vocall expression of their mutuall consent which we call the Covenant so as that subscription signalls or silence it selfe as a signe may not be a lawfull testification of their consent but that for as much as with the heart man beleeveth to righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation for as much as God hath given us our tongues to expresse our conceptions withall it is fit and convenient that it should be expressed in words and so words are necessary as one and usually the fittest expression of our mindes Lastly having proved that the stipulation 'twixt God and Abraham was mutuall you are rather our debtor than we yours for passing by your expressions concerning Gen. 9. 9 10. as expletive to fill up your sentence upon a just period rather then argumentative for would i● not be an intolerable inconsequence thus to argue If Gods covenanting with a creature doth not alway suppose so much as an implicite covenant on the creatures part then Gods covenanting with Abraham Gen. 17. doth not suppose an expresse vocall Covenant on Abrahams part take it at the best as you have stated it for your advantage quite besides the question But the first is true Gen. 9. 9 10. Ergo ●c For what hinders though it doth alwayes doe it why it may not doe it Gen. 17. Besides the Assumption may be called in question in point of truth If you speake of a Covenant as properly so called For whereas you urge that the birdes and beasts could not so much as give an implicite assent we say it is true but say withall that it was not a Covenant in propriety of speech with them but improperly even as the Covenant mentioned Job 5. 23. Hos 2. 18. And we say with Master Rivet In foeder is objecto quaeri potest an animalia sunt Rivet in Gen 9. foederis capacia quae neque stipulari possunt neque promittere ex superioribus id repetendum quemadmodum indirecte c. In the object of the Covenant it may be enquired how living creatures can be capable of the Covenant which can neither stipulate nor promise Therefore we must repeate what we have said before that as the living creatures became sharers of the punishment of sinne indirectly and for mans sake so the benefit of the Covenant concerning the not sending of another flood doth indirectly and for mans sake belong unto them So for children not borne it was no actuall Covenant but onely vertuall and potentiall to the reduction of which into an actually mutuall Covenant which is a Covenant properly so called was required the stipulation of the Children when they should be actually called to take hold of Gods Covenant But this Covenant as it related to Noah did suppose a Covenant on Noahs part For he was bound to faith and walking with God on his part as well as God to preserve him and the world from a flood For as Master Rivet saith upon another occasion Fiunt autem foedera mutua stipulatione partuum c. Covenants are made with a mutuall and solemne stipulation of engaging themselves to the performance of such and such benefits and duties Here we reade of the promises of a mercy on Gods part but there is no mention of the duties that Noah for his part was to performe but yet this must be understood that Noah would walke justly and uprightly as he had done in former times So Paraeus upon this place calls it mutuum foedus a mutuall covenant So that if it be understood of a Covenant properly so called and homogeneall with that in Gen. 17. and if it be not the argument will be of no force it may be said that Gods covenanting with man doth suppose a restipulation or covenant on mans part The third instance is out of position 7. where