Officer of the CHVRCH and so to vs as cheif Officers succeeding him which is also Mr B judgement pag. 94. Others affirm it to belong to Peter here as a Minister of the word and sacraments and the like and so consequently to belong to all other Ministers of the gospel equally which succeed Peter in those and the like administrations But we for our partes do beleeve professe that this promise is not made to Peter in any of these forenamed respects nor to any office order estate dignity or degree in the Church or world but to the confession of faith which Peter made by way of answer to Christs question who demaunding of the disciples v. 15. whom amongst the variety of opinions that went of him ver 14. they thought him to be was answered by Peter in the name of the rest Thou art Christ the sonne of the lâ—ving God ver 16. To this Christ replyes ver 17. blessed arâ— thou Symon the sonne of Ionas c. and ver 18. thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not overcome it and v. 19. I will give unto thee the keyes of the kingdome of heaven whatsoever thou shalt bind vpon earth shal be bound in heaven and whasoever thou shalt loose on earth shal be loosed in heaven So that the building of the Church is vpon the rock of Peters coÌ„fession that is Christ whom he confessed this faith is the foundation of the Church against this faith the gates of hell shall not prevayl this faith hath the keyes of the kingdome of heaven what this faith shall loose or bind on earth is bound loosed in heaven And thus the Protestant divines when they deal against the Popes supremacy do generally expound this scripture though Mr B. directly make the Pope and his shavelings Peters successours in this place as hereafter wil appeare Now vpon the former ground it followeth that whatsoever person hath received the same pretious faith with Peter as all the faithfull have â— Pet. 1. 1. that person hath a part in this gift of Christ whosoever doth confesse publish manifest or make knowen Iesus to be that Christ the sonne of the living God and Saviour of the world that person opens heaveÌ„ gate looseth sin partakes with Peter in the vse of the keys And herevpon also it followeth necessarily that one faithful man yea or woman eyther may as truely and effectually loose and bind both in heaven and earth as all the Ministers in the world But here I know the Lordly clergy like the bulles of Bashan will roar lowd vpon me as speaking things intollerably derogatory to the dignitie of Preisthood and it may be some others also eyther through ignorance or superstition will take offence at this speach as confounding all things but there is no such cause of exception For howsoever the keyes be one and the same in nature and efficacy in what faithful mans or mens handes soever as not depending eyther vpon the number or excellency of any persons but vpon Christ alone yet is it ever to be remembred that the order and manner of vsing them is very different These keyes in doctrine may be turned as well vpoÌ„ them which are without the Church as vpon them which are within and their sinnes eyther loosed or bound Math. 28. 19. but in discipline as we speak not so but onely vpon them which are within 1 Cor. 5. 12. 13. Againe the Apostles by their office had these keyes to vse in all Churches yea in all nations vpon earth ordinary Elders for their particular flockes Act. 14. 23. 20. 28. Lastly there is an vse of these keyes publiquely to be had and an vse privately an use of them by one person severally and an use of them by the whole Church ioyntly and together an vse of theÌ„ ministeriall or in office and an vse of them out of office but the power of the gospel which is the keyes is still one and the same notwithanding the divers manner of vsing it And this distinction well observed will stop the hole by which Mr Bernard in his reply sundry times scapes out where otherwise he should be vnavoydably taken in Mr Smythes arguments by taking vantage at and perverting of a phrase vsed by Mr Sm which is the ministeriall power of Christ. This ministeriall power Mr S. makes that externall coÌ„municated delegated power of Christ with and to the Church serving onely for manifestation and declaration of the remission or retention of sinnes opposing ministeriall power in the creature to that power essentiall incommunicable which is inhaerentin Christ and God the creator but Mr B. on the other side eyther ignorantly or deceiptfully misinterprets the terme Ministeriall as meant onely of the power in office opposed to that which is out of office and so creeps out at this cranny But with what reason can it be eyther conceived or suggested that Mr Smyth should affirme that the body of the Church or a private brother out of office should have this power spoken of in office Thus much to prove that all the pretious promises Math. 16. were made to Peter in respect of his confession of faith and so consequently to all others which succeed him in the same confession and amongest the rest the vse of the keyes though not in the same order or office with Peter which was peculiar vnto him with some few others It followeth First if the keyes of the kingdome of heaven be appropriated vnto the officers then can there be no forgivenes of sinnes nor salvation without officers for there is no enterance into heaven but by the dore there is no clyming over any other way without the key the doore cannot be opened so then belike if eyther there be no officers in the Church as it may easily come to passe in some extreame plague or persecution howsoever in England a man may haue a Preist for the whisteling and must needs be in the Churches of Christ in our dayes eyther in their first plaÌ„ting or first calling out of Babylon for Antichrists masse-preisthood is not essentially Christs true Mâ—nistery or if the officers take away the key of knowledge as the Scribes Pharisees did will neither enter in themselves nor suffer them that would then must the miserable multitude be content to be shut out and perish eternally for ought is knowen to the contrary They haue no remedy in this case no redresse may be had of this evill no meanes vsed to avoid it Though the Pope cary with him thowsands to hell no man may say vnto him Sir why do you sâ— To admonish the Officers of their sinne were against common sense that the father should be subiect to his children the work dominere over the workman the seeds-man be ordered by the corn and to excoÌ„municate them and call new were intolerable vsurpation of the keyes this power is given to the chief
speach to the 2. person not saying what it but what you shall bind and loose c. In so saying you give the cause though you presently eat vp your own graunt For you affirm that by the Church ver 17. is meant the whole body of which Christ speaks in the third person and what say wee more But where you adde that the authoritie is not given till the 18. vers and that then Christ turns his speach to his Apostles it is your own devised glosse For first it is evident that Christ establisheth the power of binding and loosing in the hands of the Church speaking in the 3. person v. 17. that so firmely as what brother soever refuseth to heare her voice is to be expelled from all religious cōmunion Vnto this the 18. v. is added partly for explanation and partly for confirmation For where as the party admonished might say with himself well if the Church disclaim mee I shall disclaym it if it condemn me I shall condemn it again the Lord doth here back the Churches censures for her incouragement and for the terrour of the refractary despising her voice and that vnder a contestation that what she bindes and looseth vpon earth namely after his will he also will bind and loose in heaven And for the change of persons in the 17. and 18 verses it is merely grammaticall and not naturall It is common with the Holy Ghost sometimes for elegancy sometimes for explication sometimes for further inforcement of the same thing to and vpon the same persons thus to vary the phrase of speach in the first second or third person grammatically as the reader may take a tast in these particulars Psal. 75. 1. Is. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. c. Math. 5. 10. 11. 12. c. and in this very Chapt. v. 7. 8. Rom. 6. 14. 15. 16. 8. 4. 5. 12. 13. c. Your 3. Reason that bycause Christ speakes of a few two or three gathered together therefore he meanes the officers of the Church and not all the body is of no force if the body consist but of two or three as it comes to passe where Churches are raysed in persecution as the most true Churches are Yet if Christ do speak of two or three officers of a Church gathered together in his name he speaks against you where all the power of the keyes over many 1000. Churches are in the hands of two Arch-Prelates and from them delegated and derived to their severall vnderlings But the truth is that gratious promise which Christ here layes downe for the comfort of all his saints you do engrosse into the hands of a few Elders You might aswel affirme that onely two or three officers gathered together have a promise to be heard in their prayers and not a communion of two or three brethren for Christ v. 19. 20. speakes principally and expressely of prayer though with reference to the binding and loosing of sin which as all other ordinances are sanctified by prayer The very scope of the place and reason of the speach is this The Lord Iesus had v 18. enfranchised the Church with a most excellent and honourable priveledge now the disciples did already see with their own eyes and were more fully taught by their Maister that the Church should arise from small and base beginnings and that it was also by reason of persequution subject to great dissipation Math. 7. 14. 10. 17. 18. 22. 23. 13. 31. 32. least therefore their harts should be discouraged and they or others driven into suspition that the Lord would any way neglect them or his promise towards them for their paucity and meannes he most gratiously prevents and frees them from that jealousy telles them and all others for their comfort that though the Church or assembly consist but of two or three as such beginnings the true Church of God had and have though your English Church begū with a kingdome in a day Act. 16. 14. 15. 17. 34. 19. 7. yet that should no way diminish their power or prejudice the accomplishment of his promise And the reason hath been formerly rendred bycause this power for binding loosing being given to the fayth of Peter depends not vpon the order of office multitude of people or dignity of person but merely vpon the word of God And hence is it that Christ thus gratiously descends even to two or three wheresoever assembled in his name yea though it be in a Cave or Den of the earth of which most gratious and necessary priveledge you would bereave them Now in your 4. Reason out of v. 19 you do most ignorantly erre in the grāmaticall construction for you make a change of the person agayne where there is no change at all Christ speakes onely in the third person as the originall makes it plaine though the English tongue do not so distinctly manifest it to an ignorant man Christ sayth not whatsoever you two shall agree of shal be given to them that is to the Church but whatsover two of you shall agree of or consent in they two that so agree shall obteyne it of God Which words Mr B. you do most vnsufferably pervert to the seducing of the ignorant as if Christ had sayd if two or three of you officers or you two or three officers shall agree together of a thing whatsoever they that is the Church shall desire namely of the Officers for so you expound the words it shal be givē them where it is most evident that they which are to agree vpon the thing they are to ask it and that of God who will give it them And where the scripture sayth that the brother offended speaking indefinitely of any brother and so of the Officers themselves must complayn to the Church M B. on the contrary as if he would even beard the Lord Iesus tells vs the Church must complayn to the Officers Your 5. Reason followes with many litle ones in the womb of it which you bring forth in order to prove that Christ speakes here figuratively and that by the Church he means the governours The first is It agrees with the practise of the Iewish Church frō whence it is held that the manner of governing in the Church is fetched And is this the necessary proof you speak of whatsoever is so held is so in truth And yet in your second book as hath been shewed you bring in sundry men holding contrary things as if contraries could be true Well I confesse it is so held and that by many with whom I would gladly consent if the scriptures taught me not to hold otherwise It had been good here the authour had shewed vs what the government of the Iewish Church was and not thus sleightily to have passed over things of this moment For the purpose in hand thus much The Church of the Iewes was a nationall Church the Lord separating vnto himself the whole natiō
for the exercising of the censures that belongs not to the whole body or to any member thereof principall or lesse principall but to the Bishops and his substitute which are forreyners and strangers as in theyr office from the true Church so even in theyr persons from yours All your portion in the censures Mr B. is to do the exequutioners office when the Officiall hath played the iudge which if you should be so bold as to refuse besydes the punishment of your contumacy the Church doore would do your office for the bull of excommunication hanged vp there by the sumner byndes the offenders both in heaven earth And for the position it self howsoever we do indeed maynteyne the most of the particulars against which Mr B. intends his refutation yet as he sets it down we do vtterly disclayme it with all the errors in it First for teaching in the Church we do not vse it promiscuously nor suffer it to be vsed but according to the order as we are perswaded which Christ and his Apostles have prescribed And for the sacraments the contrary to that which you affirme is to be seene of all men in our confession of fayth wherein it is held that no sacraments are to be administred vntill Pastors or Teachers be ordayned in theyr office neyther have we practised otherwise And this Mr B. knew when he writ this book as well as our selves Thirdly touching the censures we do expresly confesse that the power as to receive in so to cut of any member is given to the whole body together of every christian congregation and not to any one member a pâ—â—t or to more members sequestâ—ed from the whole vsing the mâ—etest member for the pronouncing the censures And answerable to our profession is our practise with what conscience then or credit Mr B can father vpon vs those bastardly runnagaâ—es let God men iudge These things being thus the vntruthes which he sayth we build vpon this opinion are his and not ours as the groundwork is his so is the whol building raysed from it But touching interpretation of scripture by private brethren and pollution by sinn vnreformed in the Church separation from it for the same we shall speak in their places Onely I desyre it may be observed that rather then Mr B. will forbeare to accuse vs that we hold it lawfull for one person to excommunicate the whole Church he will back this most odious calumniation with as fond and false an assertion and that is that separating from a Church and excommunicating of it is all one in substance though called lesse odiously But the contrary is manifested by these two reasons First excommunication is a sentence judiciall presupposing ever a solemn and superiour power over the party sentenced but no such thing is inferred vpon separation 2. Excommunication is onely of them which are within and of the Church but separation may be from them without And I would know of Mr B. whither a person though never so meane might not separate from the assemblies of Pagans Turkes Iewes Papists other haeretiques and Idolaters I hope he would not draw such a man within his separatists schism yet for the same person to excoÌ„municate such an assembly were a sinful prophanation of Gods ordinance And though we held as we do nothing lesse that one man might excommunicate the whole Church yet were it not more as you affirm then your Church allowes to any Bp. in Engl. no nor so much by a thousaÌ„d parts for one Bishop with you may excommunicate a thousand Churches every Diocesan Bishop all the Churches in his Dioces the two Provincial Bishops theyr two Provinces so livelyly do the reverend fathers the Bishops resemble the holy father the Pope which may judge all men but be judged by none The next collection made agaynst us is that we hould that two or three gathered together must be a Church which hath the whole power of Christ and may preseÌ„tly make them officers vse the discipline of Christ. No such hast Mr B. of making officers presently we make no dumb Ministers neyther dare we admit of any man eyther for a teaching or governing Elder of whose ability in prayer prophecying debating of Church matters we have not had good experience before he be so much as nominated to the office of an Elder amoÌ„gst vs remeÌ„bring alwayes the deep charge of the Apostle to lay hands suddeynly on man nor to be partakers of other mens sums But this we hold and affirm that a company consisting though but of two or three separated from the world whither vnchristian or antichristian and gathered into the name of Christ by a covenant made to walk in all the wayes of God knowen vnto them is a Church and so hath the whole power of Christ. And for the clearing of this truth I will propound and so prove by the scriptures these two heads 1. First that a company of faithfull people thus covenanting together are a Church though they be without any officers amoÌ„g them coÌ„ntrary to that your Popish opinioÌ„ here insinuated els where expressed that a company is no where in all the new testament called a Church Christian familyes excepted but when they have theyr officers and that otherwise they are called beleevers Disciples but not a Church but onely by anticipation as heaven and earth are so called before they were Gen. â— 1. that the officers give theÌ„ the denominatioÌ„ of a Church 2. That this company being a Church hath interest in all the holy things of Christ within amongst theÌ„selves immediately vnder him the head without any forreyn ayd assistance Of which holy things in particular we shall consider as they come in our way These two grounds by the grace of God I will prove in order and for the confirmation of the former take these reasons The first is gathered from the authours owne words that a coÌ„pany of holy persons without officers are called beleevers disciples but not a Church which is all one as if he sayd that a Church is not called a Church for the word Church is no more then a coÌ„pany or assembly howsoever gathered together and so a set company of visible beleevers must needs be a constituted visible Church and to manifest the vanity of that distinction that one place shall serue Act. 11. 26. where in the same verse the same persons are called the Church Disciples and Christians Two or three or more people making Peters confession Math. 16. are the Church But two or three or more may make this confession without officers Therefore such a company is a Ch The former proposition is evident by that promise Christ made to build his Church vpon the rock of Peters confession The second namely that men without officers may professe their faith is without question except we will hold that without officers no men can
this key as it were the wrong way vpon themselves Now by the evidence of the former generall truth approved I doubt not to the conscience of every indifferent man which is that a company of faithfull people vnited together in the fellowship of the gospel though without officers is a Church This specialty in hand wil be cleared And wheresoever the promise of forgivenes of sinnes and life eternall is to be found there hangeth the golden key of heaven gates there sinnes are loosed in heaven for what els is it to loose sinnes but to publish proclayme or declare in the word of God righteousnes of Christ the forgivenes of sinnes to them that repent But of these things hereafter I will in the first place consider of Mr Bernards proofs and of his collections from them The places alleadged are Math. 2â— 19. 16. 19. Ioh. 20. 21. 22. 23. Mark 13. 34. which scriptures are not all of one nature nor serving to the same end Yet this in generall I do answer to all of them that we deny not but that the publique Ministers are by coÌ„mission from Christ to publish the gospel administer the sacraments bind and loose sinnes watch and ward the howse of God and the like which for vs to deny were wickednes and for you to proove is lost labour But the pointes in controversie betwixt vs are first whether these things and all of them and with them all other Church affairs not here mentioned be so appropriated to the Officers as that none other may meddle with them and 2. whether this power be committed to them immediately from and by Christ or mediately from Christ by the Church which consideration whilest you neglect you erre your self deceive such as follow you and injury them you oppose But to the particulars The first third scriptures Math. 28. 19. Ioh. 20. 21. 22 23. are meant onely of the Apostles and in them they receive the coÌ„mission Apostolik which to speak properly is incommunicable to any other Officer in the Church For as none are to succeed them in the Office of Apostles so neyther is the Commission peculiar to the Apostles â—â—nveyed or intended to any others which also further appeares thus Their charge was to teach and baptise all nations to goe into all the world and to preach the gospel to every creatureâ— but ordinary Ministers have no such commissioÌ„ but are tied to their particular flocks Act. 14. 2â— 20. 28. 2. Their CoÌ„mission was extraordinary and miraculous whether we respect the inward qualifications of the parties by the immediate inspiration of the holy Ghost wherewith they were at the first springled as it were Iohn 20. 22. and afterward replenished Act. 2. 4. or whether we respect the miraculous confirmation of the doctrine both by them thaâ— taught it and by them that bâ—leeved it Mark 16. 17. 18. 20. 3. The very outward oâ—der and manner of conveying it was extraordinary and by Christs immediate voice and as it were with his owne hands where ordinary Ministers have their commissioÌ„s from Christ indeed but by men Gal. 1. 1. And the consideration of this very difference doth minister sufficient matter of answer that though Christ did transferre unto the Apostles their office and power to exercise it immediately yet for ordinary ministers the case is clean otherwise Lastly the disciples of Christ did not then first receive power to teach when they were possessed of their Apostleship but long before they were admitted into office as did others also besides theÌ„ without office as well as they Math. 10. 5. 6. 7. Luk. 10. 1. 2. 3. 9. 10. which scriptures alone as they are sufficient to justify against Mr B. that the keyes of the kingdome were given into the hands of men without office yea before any office or officer was in the Church so do they manifest the notable falshood of that his peâ—emptory affirmation pag. 93. that it is as playn as the shining of the sun of the firmament of heaven to such as are not blind or wilfully shut not their eyes from seing that Christ never sayd to the body of the congregation that is to any out of office for that is the point goe preach The Apostles by Mr B. own graunt in this place by these scriptures at this time and not before had their commission of Apostlâ—ship graunted them â—rom Christ and I hope he will not say they entred their office without a commission â—nd yet both power and charge was given them long before to preach the kingdome of God as the forequoted scriptures manifest The next place is Mat. 16. 19. where expresse mention is made of the keyes of the kingdome of heaven and of the power of binding and loosing given to Peter by which scripture rightly interpreted I desire the difference betwixt Mr Bernard and me may be determined That by the keyes is meant the gospel of Christ opening a way by him and his merits as the doore into the kingdome I have formerly declared and we must take heed of that deep delusion of Antichrist in imagining that this power of binding or loosing sinnes of opening or shutting heaven gates is tyed to any office or order in the Church it depeÌ„ds only vpoÌ„ Christ who alone properly forgâ—veth sinnes hath the key of David which opens and no man shuts and shuttes and no man opens and this key externally is the gospell which with himself he gives to his Church Isa. 9. 6. RoÌ„ 3. 2. 9. 4. and not to the officers onely for them as Mr Bern. in his last book come to mine hand in the publishing of this mine answer doth insinuate because the materiall book was giveÌ„ into the hands of the Preists and Elders to be kept Deut. 31. 9. whence I do by the way gather thus much that since the keyes of the kingdome of heaven is the gospel and that the gospel is giveÌ„ to the whole Church and to every member of it whether there be Ministers or no it therefore followeth that the keyes are given to all and every member alike as the gospel is though not to be vsed alike by all and every one which were grosse confusion but according to the order prescribed by Christ. Now for the place in hand which is Math. 16. 18. 19. it is graunted by all sides that Christ gave vnto Peter the keyes of the kingdome that is the power to remit and reteyne sinnes declaratively as they speak as also that in what respect this power was given to PETER in the same respect it was and is given to such as succeed Peter but the quaestion is in what respect or consideration this power spoken of was delegated vnto him The Papist affirmes it was given to Peter as the Prince of the APOSTLES and so to the BISHOPS of ROME as PETERS successours and thus they stablish the POPES primacy the PRELATES say nay but vnto PETER an APOSTLE that is a cheif
in his teaching such vertue and vigour of the spirit as did draw even the prophane hearers into admiration There are in deed in the cōmon wealth Kings and Magistrates in authority under them partakers of their kingly power by subordination by which participation they properly and effectually even as the King himself bind and loose save and destroy exact and procure obedience civily both in Church and cōmon wealth and that by a kingly and lordly power over the people whose Kings Lords and Maysters they are but the Officers in the Church are in no such authority by participation of Christs kingly power neyther can they properly and effectually bind and loose save and destroy exact and procure obedience as Christ doth neyther are they as civil Magistrates though the Kings servants and ministers yet the peoples Lords and maysters but both Christs and the peoples servants and Ministers Now let any judge that hath in him eyther religion or reason conscience or cōmon sense if it be not irreligious vnconscionable vnreasonable and senselesse that the body of the Church should have no more liberty and power in the imployments of their servants and Ministers in their Office then the body of the cōmon wealth in the imployments of their Lords and Maysters in their Office To this also I may adde that there are many civil ordināces and constitutions in the common wealth which concerne not one of a thowsand of the Kings people many Magistrates Officers chosen the inferiour by the superiour without the peoples privity or cōsent many administratiōs vsed judgemēts passed exequutions done which the greatest part of the people do not nor are bound so much as once to enquire after much lesse are they bound to complayn of the breach of every civil ordinance to see it reformed to charge every Magistrate to look to his office to admonish him if in any thing he deale corruptly or wickedly and if he will not be reclaymed but goe obstinately on in the spirit of an Haeretick Idolater or Atheist to disclaym or depose him but in the Church all and every ordinance concernes every person as a part of their communion without the dispensation of necessity for their vse and aedification all the Officers to be chosen by suffrages and consent of the multitude the brethren are to admonish their brethren of every violation of Gods commaundement and so in order to tell the Church and to see the parties reformed to observe and to take notice of the officers cariage and ministration and to say to Archippus as there is need take heed to thy ministery that thou hast received of the Lord that thou fulfil it and if the Ministers will deal corruptly and so persevere in the spirit of profanenes heresy idolatry or atheism to censure depose reiect or avoyd them otherwise they betray their own soules and salvation These things I thought good vpon this occasion further to annext touching the difference and dissimilitude of civil and ecclesiasticall governours and government not doubting for conclusion to affirm that ther is no one errour in Popery serving more directly to advance Antichrist to the highest step of his throne or there to establish him then thus to confound these two estates in their authority and manner of government though alasse too many will needs transforme Ministers into Magistrates servants into Lords and as the Kings of the earth have given their power authority vnto the beast and arrayed the great whore tha◠fitteth vpon the beast with purple and scarlet and gilded her with gold pretious stones and pearles so do they still help her to hold her kingly lordly authority and to beare vp her pompous trayne and that specially by enforcing those scriptures for ecclesiasticall government and the manner and order of it which were left for direction in civil governments and their administrations And yet for more speciall answer vnto you Mr Bernard it followes not that bycause the people are not interessed in the reformation of abuses by the scriptures you cite therefore it is never found eyther in the old or new testament that any such duty lyes vpon them The scriptures do not intend to speak of all things at once but that charge which is omitted in one place is oft tymes supplyed and prescribed in another And to this purpose I do desire that these few scriptures amongst many others may be considered of Num. 5 1. 2. Iosh. 7. 1. 11. 12. 24. 25. 22. 11. 12. 16. 17. 18. 20. Iudg. 20. 11. 12. 2 Sam. 20. 22. Ezech. 44. 5. 6. 7. 9. Luke 17. 3. 4. Gal. 6. 1. 1 Thes. 5. 14. 1 Cor. 5. whol Ch. all these many other of the same nature will manifest that the people are charged with the reformatiō of abuses for the keeping pure of their cōmunion as well as the officers though not in the same order or degree But what need we seek further as all the scriptures brought forth by Mr Bern. do charge the govervours with reformation and none of them exempt the people in their rank and order so are there some of them so pregnant against him in the point by which he hath been so oft silenced to his face that if he had not set himself in opposition without all measure or modesty he would never offer his cause to be tryed by that evidence in writing by which in speach he hath been so oft cast and convinced The scriptures I especiall mean are Rev. 2. 3. And the thing which he would prov◠from those scriptures is that bycause Iohn in the verses named by him speakes to the Angels of the particular Churches that therefore it conernes the Angels that is the chief officers alone and no way the people no nor any of the Officers but one in a Church by Mr Bernards exposition to see to the reformation of such abuses and disorders as in those Churches are reproved But if in these scriptures he thus sever and sejoyne the officers and people why might not the officers be excluded by a◠good consequence by other verses of these Chapters where mention is made of the Churches and not of the Angels as the people in these where the Angels onely and not the people are mentioned and both alike The answer and truth then is that Iohn writes and sendes these Epistles or this book to the 7. Churches in Asia as he is expresly directed by Christ so willeth all men to heare and take knowledge what the spirit sayth to the Churches but bycause the matters were publique he absent from the Churches it was both most convenient necessary he should direct his letters to the officers for the whol Churches as being not onely most fit for their knowledge but most bound by their places to provoke the Churches vnto and to direct and goe before them in the reformation of such evills as were found amongst them As if the
together with their answers layes them downe in his 2. book Of the first Argument I have spoken in another place The 2. is that if Christs ministeriall power be by succession to the Pope Bishops or Praesbytery then the Ministery of Rome is a true Ministery Mr Bern answer is that he meanes true succession which is both personall and hath with it a true office true doctrine true sacraments and prayer about which Christs true ministers are exercised but for the Romish Ministery it is idolatry and superstition and the men appointed there to ordeyned sacrifising Preists This answer of yours Mr B. puts me in mind of a practise of children who when they have a long while busyed themselves in drawing the best formes and figures they can in dust and ashes do at the last with one dash of their hand deface all vndo what they haue formerly done And that this childish dealing you use no reader that considers the quaestion in hand can be ignorant of The quaestion then between him me is not of such a succession personall as hath joyned with it successiō in a true office true doctrine true sacraments prayer wherin the minister is in any measure faithfully exercised but generally whether succession of persons be of such absolute necessity as that no minister can in any case be made but by a minister more specially whither the first ministers of the reformed Ch or of such as come out of the confusiō of Antichrist must of necessity be ordeyned by the Pope his Bishops or minister by vertue of their ordinatiō so received And that this succession by from the Romish ministery is that Mr Ber pleads for his writings manifest as first that as in all the Apostles time the Ministery was by succession ministers as it were begetting Ministers by ordination so after their tyme the like succession hath been kept frō tyme to tyme Bishop after Bishop and Ministers ordeyned by them which the Catalogue of thē stories of tymes on which we must rely where the script cease to make further relation do witnesse for the continuation of which succession to the worlds end he alledgeth Math. 28. 20. odiously perverting to the Pope and his shavelings the promise which Christ there made to be with his Apostles other faithfull ministers teaching the things which he had commanded and dispensing his other ordinances accordingly Answerable vnto which is his other saying in which his termes and meaning do well suit that Church-men ever ordeyned Ministers not the lay people To this also let his inferēce be added in another place pag. 311. that if we receive and hold our baptism from Rome why not our ordination also And in his former book most clearly condemning our Ministers for being made by such as are no Ministers contrary to the constant practise of the Church of God from the dayes of Adam hitherto And agayn that this custome of ordeyning Ministers did continue in the times following the Apostles tymes as before it had done in all the Churches of Christendom as ecclesiasticall wryters do make mention and so through pure impure Churches and that God in the last reformation of his Church would not break this order but choose men who were Bishops ordeyned even in the Popish Church so that they might ordeyn fit persons afterwards And this he tels the Reader he speaks of the Church of England as in deed he may wel for other Ch departed frō Rome would be loath to joyn in his plea. And lastly he chargeth vs with great praesumption for daring to break this order of God continued five thowsand and six hundred years Novv what can be more vayne The very poynt which MR. BERNARD is to prove and from which he brings his historicall narration from Adam to this day is that God hath continued the course of succession in the Romish Ministery and that from and by it successively the Ministery in England hath been and is at this day continued And yet in his answer to Mr Smyth he is driven to affirm that he hath no referēce at all to the Romish Ministery which he accounts Idolatry and superstition but meanes such a personal succession as hath ioyned with it a true office true doctrine and the like He will haue succession continued from the dayes of Adam hitherto and this to haue been the order of God for five thowsand and six hundred yeres and that he chose Bishops ordeyned in the Popish Church to ordeyn fit persons in the Church of England and yet Mr Smith is to know he speaks not at all of the succession in the Romish Ministery which is idolatry and superstition Now that the more simple reader may not loose himself in this mans maze and that he may the better know the state of the quaestion and judge of it I will here interpose some few thinges touching succession and ordination accordingly First then wee acknowledge that in the right and orderly state of things no Ministers are to be ordeyned but by Ministers the latter by the former in the Churches where they are and over which the holy Ghost hath set them And so the Apostles being generall and extraordinary men vnto whom the Evangelists also were joyned for assistance to water where they planted and to finish the works by them begun as they had the care of all the Churches committed vnto them and were charged with them so were they also to ordeyn the Elders and Bishops in them and the people bound to wayt theyr comming for that purpose as Mr Ber. truly affirmeth as were also these Bishops or Elders to ordeyn others in the Churches over which they were set so others after them in the order appoynted by Christ in his Apostles with whō also he promised to be alwayes till the worlds end in this and the like their holy ministrations But is the consequence good that bycause the Apostles and Evangelists were to ordeyn Elders in the Churches by Cōmission from Christ and that the people converted from Indaism or Paganism were to wayt till they came to ordeyn them theyr ministers therefore the Pope and Prelates vnder him have cōmission from Christ to ordeyn his priests and that the people converted from Antichristianism are to wayt 〈◊〉 they come to ordeyn them their Ministers or till they send them such as they have alwayes in store ordeyned to their hands or that bycause the Apostles and Evangelists had Christs promise to be with them alwayes that therefore the Pope Cardinalls Lord Bishops and Lord Suffragans have interest in the same promise It might asvvell be concluded that as the Lords people were bound to obey and submit vnto the former in their times so are they now to submit vnto and obey the Pope and his vnderlings And yet is this the very mark Mr Bernard aymes at in his long drawn historicall narration this is the force of his argument and his
that bycause one thing is done that an other might follow vpon it that therefore the latter which is to follow is also done And for the poynt as it is the work of the spirit to lead men into all truth as all that are Christs or mēbers of his body have his spirit so doth it follow that all the members of the Church have the spirit given them of God to lead them into all truth though it have not his full work by reason of the cōtrary work of the flesh in this life wher all mē know but in part 3. That Mr. Bar holds every truth in the scriptures fundamentall that is as they expound it Pag 147. such as if it be not known and obeyed the whole religiō and fayth of the Church must needs fall to the ground Mr. Ainsworth hath set down his words from which no such collection can be made he directs them that worthily agaynst these deceivers which knowing acknowledging that they want many speciall ordinances of Christ and are burdened in stead of them with the inventions of Antichrist do notwithstanding encourage themselves and others by these distinctiōs that they haue the fundamentall truthes of the gospell and whatsoever is necessary to salvation and the like in a purpose to go on all their life long in disobedience For which men how much better were it to consider how it is written that whosoever shall break one of the least commaundments and teach men so he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven then thus to turn vpon them which reprove them for their vnfaythfulnes and misinterpreting their sayings most injuriously to spend thus many words as these ministers do in confuting their owne corrupt glosses Their fourth and last Argument is for that all the known Churches in the world acknowledge their Church for their sister and giue her the right hand of fellowship This Argum. hath been sundry tymes vrged by Mr. Ber. and so answered sundry tymes both by M. Ainsworth and my self in the former part of my book whether I must refer the reader contenting my self with a breif observation of such vntruthes and errours as these ministers are driven vnto in the prosecuting of this Argument as First that all the known Churches in the world are well acquaynted with their doctrine and liturgy to which they should also ad their book of ordination and canons Ecclesiasticall for their ministery and government then which nothing is more vntrue Beza which was specially interessed in these matters will hardly be perswaded of the true state of things touching dispensations pluralityes the power of excommunication in one man and the like It is most vntrue that God hath sanctifed the testimony of Churches for a principall help in the decyding of controversies in this kind It is though some help yet lesse principall yea the least of many 3. That Paul feared that without the approbation of Iames and Cephas and Iohn he should have run in vayn Paul feared no such thing for he was both assured of his calling from the Lord and had also taken long before that tyme good experience of the Lords blessing vpon his ministery both amongst the Iewes and Gentiles and knew right assuredly that his preaching was not in vayne His care was to take away from the weak all scruple of mynde or iealousy of contention amongst the Apostles he went vp to Ierusalem to confer with them 4 That Paul sought to win cōmendation and credit to the orders which he by his Apostolicall authority might have established by the iudgement of other Churches Whereas the Apostle Paul did by his Apostolicall authority appoynt those orders in all those churches he speaks of as the scriptures quoted testify 1 Cor 4. 7. 17. 16. 1. Besides the Church of England can win no great credit to her orders by the orders of other Churches considering how contrary she is in them to all other Churches departed from Rome whom alone in very many the resembleth Fiftly the testimony which Iohn Baptist gave of Christ is vnfitly brought for the testimony of one Church of an other For it was the proper and principall work of †Iohns calling to give witnes of Christ wherein also he could not erre It is not so with or between any Churches in the world Where it is further affirmed that there are cases wherein one Church is commaunded to seek the iudgement of other Churches and to account it as the iudgment of God for which Act 15. 2. is alledged as it is true that one Church is in cases to seek the judgement and help of an other so is it vntrue that the judgement of that other Church or of all the Churches in the world is to be accounted as the judgment of God Indeed the decrees of the Apostles at Ierusalem being by imediate infallible direction of the H Ghost were to be accounted as the judgement of God but for any ordinary eyther Churches or persons to challenge the like vnto their determinations were popelike praesumption To the Ministers demand in the next place Sayth Christ to any particular congregation of the faythful in our land Whatsoever they bind in earth is bound in heaven Mat. 18. 18. and sayth he it not also to the Churches of other nations I do answer that if Christ have so sayd to the particular cōgregatiōs who hath sayd it to the Praelates their substitutes or to any officer or officers excluding the body of the Congregation Even none but he whose work it is to gainsay Christ to subvert his order 2. If any of your parishes be such congregatiōs why do not you as faythful Ministers exhort thē to guide them in the vse of this power of binding loosing which Christ hath given them Or are not you content to suffer them to go on and your selves to go before them in the losse of this liberty yea in a most vile subjection to their and your spirituall Lords which have vsurped it And for the Argument it is of no force for neyther hath any one Church in the world that power over an other nor all the Churches in the world over any one which the meanest Church hath over any her member or members whomsoever One Church may forsake an other but juditially to censure or excommunicate it may it not The same answer for substance may serve for that which is objected from 1 Cor. 14. 32. Besides no Church can so fully discern of the estate of an other Church as it can of the proper members apperteyning vnto it Yea I ad that in this respect wee are better able to iudge of the Church of Engl then are any forreyn Churches notwithstanding our weaknes bycause they do not in any measure know the estate of it as we do Lastly as that saying
our care be not to offend the Lord and if with the offence of a private person though never so base be joyned the offence of the Lord better offend all the both lawfull and vnlawfull Magistrates in the world then such a little one Mat. 18. 6. Lastly where Mr. Ber. concludes this decade of counsayl with that which is written Rom. 14. 17. 18. he misinterprets the Apostles words if he put them down as it seems he doth for a reason of that which goes before For the Apostles in that place hath no reference at all to the authority of the Magistrate whose kingdome indeed doth stand in meate and drinke and the like bodily things wherin he may command civilly is to be obeyed in the Lord but the Apostles purpose is to admonish the strong in fayth to take heed of abusing theyr ChristiaÌ„ liberty in the vnseasoÌ„able vse of meats drinks the like to the offence of the weak brethren as though the kingdom of God stood in the pereÌ„ptory vse of those things that they were therein to shew the libertie of the gospel Furthermore howsoever the kingdome of God be not meat drink yet is the kingdom of God much advanced or hindred both in a mans self and in others in the seasonable or vnseasonable vse of them A man in vsing them or rather abusing them with offence to a weak brother may destroy both him and himself also in breaking the law of charity Rom. 14. 15. 20. It remaynes now we come to the second rank of counsayls as they are devided by the authour for what cause I know not neyther wil I curiously enquire but wil take them as I find them 1. Omit no evident and certayn commandement imposed of God If there be nothing but probabilitie of sinning in obeying the precepts of men sâ—t not opinion before iudgement Wofull counsel God knoweth and in deed such as directs a course to harden the heart of him that followes it in all impiety For he that wil at the first do that by mans precept which is like or which he thinks to be sinne wil in time do that vpon the like regard which he knowes to be sinne and so fall into all presumption against God Men are rather to be admonished especially in the case of religion about which wee deale that if the Lord shall touch their tender harts with fear and iealousy of the things they do they rather suspend in doubtful things except they can in some measure overcome their doubting by faith till in the use of all good meanes the God of wisdome and father of lights give to discern more plainly of things that differ least being head-strong hard-mouthed against the check of conscience which the Lord like a bit puts into their mouthes they provoke the Highest to withdraw his hand to lay the reyn on their necks so they even run head long vpoÌ„ those evils without fear upoÌ„ which at the first they have adventured with feareful troubled coÌ„sciences which is oft times the iust recompence of such errours froÌ„ the Lord. Rom. 1. 27. 28. 2. Let ancient probabilitie of truth be praeferred before new conjectures of errour against it As this rule shewes by what tenure Mr B. holds his religion namely by probabilities likelihoods of truth so if he mean that this way wherein we by Gods mercy walk is any new way or our rules conjectures I do hope by the good hand of God herein assisting me to make it manifest that this way is that old and good way after which all men ought to ask and to walk therein that so they may find rest vnto their souls And that we are not guided in it by conjectures neyther goe by guesses but by the infallible rule of Christs Testament 3. Mark and hold a difference betweene these things the equity of law and exequution between established truths generally and personall errors of some between soundnes of doctrine and erronious application between substance circuÌ„stance the maner the matter between the very being of a thing and the wel being thereof between worship and conveniency between a commaundement and a commaundement to thee between lawfulnes and expediency and between that which is given absolutely or in some respect The sixt and 7. rule in the former rank being the same in substance might well have been bound vp in the same bundle with this had not the authour labored to supply that in the number of his counsayls which is wanting in their weight But to the point There is a difference indeed to be held betwixt the lawes of the Church of England with the ordinances and doctrines by law established and the personall exequutions excercises applicatioÌ„s of theÌ„ the difference is betwixt evil worse the worse of the twayne by far I deem the lawes ordinances with sundry of the doctrines For though the whole cariage of the courts miscalled-spirituall be most corrupt abhominable and though the pulpits be made by very many especially in the greatest places the stages of vanity falsehood and slaunder so that as the Prophet sayd what is the wickednes of Iacob Is not Samaria And what ar the high places of Iuda Is not IerusaleÌ„ so may we say what is the sink of all brybery and extortion Is not the Consistory What is the theater of carnall vanity Is not the pulpit Yet in truth the the lawes are worse then those which exequute them and the ordinances by them established then those which minister them Let but the last Canons which are as well the lawes and doctrine of the Church of England as the Canons of the counsel of Trent are the lawes and doctrine of the Church of Rome be severely and sincerely exequuted as becomes the lawes of the kingdom of Christ the Church all in the land having any feare of God would fynd and complayne that their bondage were increased as was the bondage of the Israelites vnder the Egyptians Exo. 5. But what though there were neyther Statute nor Canon law enacted for the confusion in the assemblyes collected and consisting of all the parish inhabitants be they Atheists adulterers blasphemers and how evill not what though no law ecclesiasticall or civil did coÌ„firm the transcendent power of the Bishops Archbishops for the placing and displacing of Ministers for the thrusting out and receiving in both of Ministers and people and so fâ—r innumerable other corruptions Yet these things being vniversally practised in the land the Church were nothing at all the more pure onely it had the more liberty of reformation which now by the lawes and cannons as by iron barres is shut out What Statute or Canon was there that the Corinthians should suffer amongst them the incestuous person vnreformed And yet for so doing this litle leven levens the whole lump What Parliament or Convocation-house amongst the Galathians had decreed the mingling of
so many times been driven to so grosse absurdities by a consequence or two about this cause as he vtterly abhorrs the very memory of all coÌ„sequences it seems would have it enacted that never consequence should be more vrged To conclude whatsoever it pleaseth this man to suggest the mayne grounds for which we stand touching the coÌ„munion government ministery and worship of the visible Church are expresly conteyned in the scriptures and that as we are perswaded so plainly that as like Habbakuks vision he that runnes may read them The 4. guesse against vs is That we have not the approbation of any of the reformed Churches for ouâ— course and that where our Confession of faith is without allowance by them they give on the contrary the right hand of fellowship to the Church of England This is the same in substance with the first instance of probability and that which foloweth in the next place the same with them both And Mr Bern. by his so ordinary pressing vs with humane testimonies shewes himself to be very barren of divine authority as hath bene truely noted by another Nature teacheth every creature in all daunger to fly first and oftenest to the chief instruments eyther of offence or defence wherin it trusteth as the But to his horne the Bore to his tusk and the byrd vnto her wing right so this man shewes wherein his strength lies and wherein he trusts most by his so frequent and vsuall shaking the horne and whetting the tusk of mortall mans authority against vs. But for the reformed Churches the truth â—s they neyther do imagine no nor wil easily be brought to beleeve that the frame of the Church of England stands as it doth neyther have they any mind to take knowledge of those things or to enter into examination of them The approbation which they give of you as Mr A. hath observed as indeed it is of speciall observation is in respect of such generall truthes of doctrine as wherein we also for the most part acknowledge you which notwithstanding you deny in a great measure in the particulars and practise But touching the gathering governing of the Church which are the mayn heads coÌ„troverted betwixt you vs they give you not so much as the left haÌ„d of fellowship but do on the contrary turne their backs vpon you The difference betwixt you and them in the gathering and constituting of Churches is as great as betwixt copulsive conformity vnto the service book and ceremonyes which is your estate and voluntary submission vnto the gospell by which all every member of them is ioyned to the Church and as is betwixt the reigne of one Lord Bishop over many Churches and the government of a Presbytery or company of Elders over one And if you would take viewe of this difference nearer home do but cast your eyes to your next neyghbours of Scotland there you shall see the most zealous Christians chusing rather to loose liberty country and life then to stoop to a far more easy yoke then you bear Yea what need I send you out of your owne horizon The implacable mortall hatred the Prelates bear vnto the Ministers and people wishing the government and Ministery receaved in the reformed Churches proclaymes aloud the vtter emnity betwixt them your vnreformed Church of England of which I pray you hear with patience what some of your own have testified Those that will needs be our Pastors and spirituall fathers are become beasts as the Prophet Ieremy sayth And if we should open our mouthes to sue for the true shepheards and overseers indeed vnto whose direction we ought to be committed the rage of these wolves is such as this endeavour would almost be the price of our lives And do these Churches like sisters go hand in hand together as is pretended Now for vs where Mr B. affirmeth that wee published our confession but without allowance if I saw not his frowardnes in the things he knowes I should marvayl at his bouldnes in the things whereof he is ignorant we published the confessioÌ„ of our fayth to the Christian Vniversityes in the low countryes and els where entreating them in the Lord eyther to convince our errours by the word of God if so any might be found or if our testimony in theyr iudgments agreed with the same word to approve it eyther by wryting or silence as they thought good Now what Vniversity Church or person amongst them hath once enterprized our conviction which without doubt some would have done as with such haeretiques or schismatiques as arise amongst them had they found cause Thus much of the learned abroad in the next place Mr B. drawes vs to the learned at home from whose dislike of vs he takes his fifth Likelyhood which he thus frameth The condemnation of this way by our divinâ—s both living and dead against whom either for godlynes of life or truth of doctrine otherwise theâ— for being theyr opposites they can take no exception No mervayl we may not admit of partyes for iudges how is it possible we should be approved of them in the things wherein we witnes against them And if this Argument be good or likely then is it likely that neyther the reformists have the truth in the Church of England nor the Prelates for there are many and those both godly and learned which in their differences do oppose and that very vehemently the one the other Now as for myne owne part I do willingly acknowledge the learning godlynes of most of the persons named by Mr B. do honour the very memory of some of them so do I neyther think theÌ„ so learned but they might erre nor so godly but in their error they might reproch the truth they saw not I do indeed confesse to the glory of God and myne owne shame that a long tyme before I entered this way I took some tast of the truth in it by some treatises published in iustificatioÌ„ of it which the L. knoweth were sweet as hony vnto my mouth and the very principall thing which for the tyme quenched all further appetite in me was the over-valuation which I made of the learning and holynes of these and the like persons blushing in my selfe to have a thought of pressing one hayr bredth before them in this thing behynde whom I knew my selfe to come so many miles in all other things yea and even of late tymes when I had entered into a more serious consideration of these things and according to the measure of grace received serched the scriptures whether they were so or no and by searching found much light of truth yet was the same so dimmed and overclouded with the contradictions of these men and others of â—he like note that had not the truth been in my heart as a burning fyre shut vp in my bones Ier. 20. 9. had never broken those bonds of â—lesh and blood wherein I was so
that can be brought but because they are yours which notwithstanding I am perswaded neyther you nor any other can satisfie And if Mr B. himselfe thus wryte and speak in private why blames he vs for our publique testimony Now if the Bishops be Antichristian and so the spirit of Divils Rev. 16. 14. why might not Mr Barrow affirm theyr Ministery and ministration to be of and by the Divill and what are they but eyther the tayl or some other lim of the beast And for theyr excommunications by name it is evident by this they are not of God for that the most religious in the kingdome make least account of them For theyr Luciferian pryde whereof Mr Barrow accuseth them it is apparant they burden the earth threaten the heavens with it for their hateful Symony both in giving and receiving they are so notorious as the best service Mr B. can do them in this case is to turn mens thoughts from those evils which every ey sees every heart abhorrs Towching the Ghost the Bishop gives in his blasphomous imitation of Christ Ioh. 20. 22. except contrary to the rule in nature nihil dâ—â— quod non habet he can give that he hath not it is not very likely he should give the Holy Ghost why then might not Mr Barrow call it an vnholy Ghost And for the Bible in the Bishops hands which he gives his Preists in ordination Mr Barrow calls it the libell not in contempt of the book but in reproof of the ceremony that iustly since the Lord never appointed the scriptures for any such vse nor any such ceremony in the ordination of his Ministers Christ and the Apostles would have such Ministers ordeyned as have the Bibles in their hearts the Bishops of England to supply this want give it into the hands of their Preists which they think sufficient though in truth the most of them are more vsed to handle a paire of cardes vpon an alebench then the holy bible Your Patrons Mr Barrow calles great Baals Lord Patrons and iustly in respect of that Lordly power they vse in obtruding their Clerks vpon the Parish assemblies your ministers yea all and every one of them Preists which is their proper name given them both in your book of ordination and coÌ„mon prayer your Deacons half-preists according to the nature of their office betwixt which the Deacons office in the new testament Act. 6. 1. 2. 3. 4. there is no consimilitude For the other more harsh termes wherewith he enterteynes such persons and things in the Church as carry with them most appearance of holynes they are to be interpreted according to his meaning and a distinction vsed by Mr B. in another place is here to be applyed Which is that Mr Barrow speaks not of these persons and things simply but in a respect so so considered so no one terme given by Mr Barrow to my knowledg but may at the least be tolerated The Ministers as they receive the wages of vnrighteousnes oâ— counsayl to spiritual fornication are Bâ—lâ—â—mites in respect of thâ—ir office vowed to destruction Cananites as they plead for confusion Babylonish divines as they endeavour to stay Gods people in Egypt spiritually so called Egyptian inchaunters as they are members of the Hierarchy 〈◊〉 of the Divel by vertue whereof he bear great sway as the reformists amongst you have expresly testifyed And for your very divine exerciseâ— of prayer preaching sacrâ—â—â—tâ— suâ—ging of psalâ—s howsoever they be good holy in theÌ„selves or at leasâ— have much good in them yet in respect of the vnhallowed coÌ„munion forgâ—d ministâ—ry and superstitious order wherein these and all other things with you are ministred and exercised they are lyable to the heaviest censure Mr Barrow hath put vpon them And for the most forward preachers in the kingdom considering their vnsound and broken courses in denying that in deed and practise which in wâ—rd and writing they profâ—sse to be the revealâ—d will oâ— God and inviolable testament of Christ binding his Church for ever yea and practising the contrary in the face of the sâ—nne commiâ—tâ—â—g two evils forsaking the Lord the fountayne of lâ—ving water to dig themselves broken pitâ—s which will hold no water yea not onely refusing themselves to enter into the kingdome of God the Church but also hindering them that would persecuting them that do and lastly considering them in their vnconscionable defence for their own standings and practises as that onely the godly in the parish are of the Church with them that they hold and vse their ministery by the acceptation of the people and not by the Bishops that they obey the Bishops in their citations suspensions excommunications and absolutions aâ— they are civil magistrates and â—he like they do deserve a sharper medicine then happily they are willing to endure Yea the very personall graces of knowledge zeale pâ—â—ience the like manifested in many both ministers and people are most vniustly perverted and misused to the obduration and hardening both of the persons themselves others in most deceivable wayes wherein the deepest mistery of iniquity and most effectuall delusion of Satan that can be worketh as is by Mr Barrow and others clearly discovered But that Mr Barrow should say that the preaching of Gods word â—â—e spirits effectuall working should make men the children of hell and two fold â—orse then bâ—fore is a great slaunder and could not possibly enter into his or any other godly mans heart And so I leave these and the like more vnsavoury-seeming speaches of Mâ— Barrow to the wise and Christian readers charitable interpretation The last rank of Mr B. reasons followeth which respect the matter of our sepâ—â—â—tion by him called schisme which how materiall they are shall appeare in their place Our first errour according to his reckoning is They hold that the constitution of our Church is a falsâ— constitution And let vs see how strongly your answer forces vs from this our hold 1. Arg. They cannot prove this simply by any playne doctrine of scripture and that which they would prove is but onely respectively and so may any thing and their Church also be condemned 2. Arg. It is against the evidence of the scriptures which maketh the word externall profession and sacraments the visible constitution c. That you then affirm in the first place is that wee cannot prove this simply by any playne doctrine wherein you do half confesse that wee do it by iust consequence though not by playne doctrine wholly that respectively and so so considered as you speak your coÌ„stitution is false And thus you say any thing may be condemned But first it is not true that any thing may be condemned after this sort The constitutioÌ„ of the Ch Apostolike could in no coÌ„sideration be condemned neyther could ours to our knowledge being according to that pattern how weakly soever we walk in it Secondly
mongst you or any good effect which God hath wrought by them but this I deny that either they are or have been so effectual as to make any one of your parish assemblies the Church of Christ truely gathered constituted And for the place of Ieremy 23. 22. which as here to prove a true church so every where to prove a true ministery by the effectuall work therof is so frequētly alledged I desire it may be wel cōsidered it will appear that the Prophet speaks not at all of the effect of prophecying but of the drift intēt of the Prophets which had they taken counsel of the Lord would not have flattered the people in theyr sinns by preaching peace peace as they did thereby hardening theyr hearts and strengthening theyr hands in their disobedience and rebellion but would on the contrary by denouncing against them the iudgements of God have endeavoured their repentance as the true Prophets did And if we must thus iudge of true and false prophets by the effects of their ministery certayn it is that neyther Ezechiel no Ieremy himself stood in Gods counsel but were false Prophets for neyther of them were effectuall for the peoples conversion Ier. 20 7. 8. Ezech 3 7. 11. And yet a wonder it is to hear what a noyse Mr B. and his people do make with this scripture of Ieremy as though it did without contradiction iustify both Church and Ministery by some ministeriall effect where it is most playne to all that but read the Chapter with any observatiō that the Prophet speaks not a word of the effect of their Ministerie but of the drift of the ministers the false Prophets desperately slattring the people to their destruction 3 By Gods most straunge and miraculous deliverance of vs from the enemyes of his gospell a promise of God to his people Lev. 26. 7. 8. Deut. 28. 7 These deliverances do no more iustify your estate before the Lord then the deliverance of Samaria out of the hands of the Aramites did the ten tribes in their Apostasie The Lord doth promise victory and deliverance vnto his people in their iust quarrels and vse of good meanes but ever with condition of his glory and their good And they thus walking and being thus delivered take experience of the truth of his promises and have cause of reioycing in the God of their salvation but besides this there are many other causes of deliverance and victory which with all other things of the same kinde †come alike to all men good bad and thus to measure the Lords love by morsels bewrayes too carnal a mind in any man and Mr B. neighbour minister if he have a fatter benefice then he may aswel avouch him self a better minister for the quoted scriptures do as well promise plenty and aboundance as deliverance and victory And where in the last place you lay to our charge that though wee like it well that you should call vs brethren yet wee will not so acknowledge you nor do we hold our selves bound so to admonish you I do answer that as we finde at your hands Mr B. little brotherly dealing traducing vs in all places as Brownists Schismatiques Anabaptists persons obstinate in sin so neyther indeed can we acknowledge any of you for brethren in that visible cōmunion of Saincts which is the Church notwithstanding the loving and respective remembrance wherein we haue very many amongst you severally considered for your personall graces Our reasons are these 1. We cannot admonish any of you according to the rule order of Christ Math. 18. to which duety towards every brother in communion we are absolutely bound 2. We can not acknowledge you for our brethen but we must also acknowledge your Prelates for our reverend fathers vnder whose blessings we mean not to come 3. We cannot acknowledge some of you brethren but we must acknowledg all amōgst you for such for there is but one brotherhood of all amongst you as your owne rhyme teacheth and makest vs all one brotherhood Now by the scriptures we have not learnt to enter any such fraternity where we must acknowledge brother Preist brother half Priest brother dumb Preist brother Atheist brother Epicure brother drunkerd brother blasphemer brother witch brother conjurer lastly brother recusant Papist if not living yet dead for so you must bury him as your deare brother committing his soul to God and his body to the earth And for these causes among others we cannot acknowledge you as we desire in that speciall fellowship of the gospel communion of saynts But disclayme you the fatherhood of the Prelates the brotherhood of the vnhallowed multitude and fest your selves in the family and househould of God and we will acknowledge you in word and deed We will not with that vngodly brother grudge your cōming into our fathers house but will help with our owne hands to kill the fat calf wil make all spirituall melody with you in the Lord. The fifth errour reputed is That onely Saincts that is a people forsaking all knowne sinne of which they may be convinced doing all the knowne will of God encreasing and abiding ever therein are the onely matter of the visible Church This Position which you account errour rightly vnderstood and according to his exposition from whom you received it is an vndoubted truth For of such onely externally and so farre as men can iudge the true Church is gathered whether out of Paganism Iudaism Antichristianism or any other Idolatrous or adulterous estate whatsoever and of them alone framed as of the subject matter which is onely true whilest it continueth such false when it degenerates from this disposition and so as rotten putrified stuffe to be cast out of the Church We will then come to your allegations to the contrary And first you say this is a proper description of the invisible members of Iesus Christ secluding even hypocrites from being true matter of the visible Church All the true and lawfull members of the visible Church are to me members of the invisible Church to me Isay which am bound to iudge them to be in truth as outwardly they appear so I am taught by the Apostle himself who accounts the whole visible Ch and every member of it elect redeemed iustifyed sanctifyed which are conditons competent to the invisible Church And for hypocrites as they may perform all the conditions here required visible or to vs as Mr Smyth hath answered so do we take knowledge of none such in the Chur in the particular til they be knowne in their day by the outbreakings of sinne and being so discovered they are no longer to be reteyned in the Church but to beare their sinne except they repent and then who can repute them hypocrites You object secondly that this makes that David Iehoshaphat and the Church of God in their dayes were no true matter of a Church
themselves yeâ— though they be Paul Cephas and Apollos and the Church Christs Christ Gods then may the Church vse and enjoy all things immediately vnder Christ and needs not goe to Rome to fetch her power whether Mr B. would send her but may have and enioy the Ministers and ministrations as her own of all the holy things which are given her But the first the Apostles expresly affirmes 2 Cor. 3. 21. 22. 23. and so the conclusion necessarily followeth which will also be more manifest in the particulars as they come to be handled in theyr places as occasion shal be ministred by Mr B. reasons layd down against popularty as he termes it which in the next place come to be considered of The first and second whereof are that it is contrary to the order which God established before the law vnder the law and since Christ or in the Apostles dayes during all which tymes he affirmes that the power of governing was in the cheif in the first born before the law in the Levites vnder the law and in the Apostles in their dayes And for confirmatioÌ„ of these things he brings sundry scriptures from the old new Testament for the exposition of them clearing of his aslertion intermingles sundry other observations For entrance into the answer of which his refutation I desire it may be considred that the visible Church being a polity Ecclesiasticall and the perfection of all polities doth comprehend in it whatsoever is excellent in all other bodyes politicall as man being the perfection of all creatures comprehends in his nature what is excellent in them all having being with the Elements life with the plants sense with the beasts and with the angels reason Now wise men having written of this subiect have approved as good and lawfull three kyndes of polities Monarchycall where supreme authority is in the hands of one Aristocraticall when it is in the hands of some few select persons and Democraticall in the whole body or multitude And all these three formes have their places in the Church of Christ. In respect of him the head it is a monarchy in respect of the Eldership an Aristocracy in respect of the body a popular state The Lord Iesus is the King of his Church alone vpon whose shoulders the government is and vnto whome all power is given in heaven earth yet hath he not received this power for himself alone but doth communicate the same with his Church as the husband with the wife And as he is announted by God with the oyl of gladnes above his fellowes so doth he communicate this aâ—noynting with his body 2 Cor. 1. 21. 1 Ioh. 2. 20. Gal. 2. 9. 10. which being powred by the Father vpon him the head runneth downe to the skirts of the clothing perfuming with the sweetnes of the savour every member of the body and so makes every one of them severrally Kings and Preists and all ioyntly a Kingly Preisthood or communion of Kinges Preists and Prophets And in this holy fellowship by vertue of this plenteous annoyntment every one is made a King Preist and Prophet not onely to himself but to every other yea to the whole A Prophet to teach exhort reprove comfort himself the rest a Preist to offer vp spirituall sacrifices of prayer prayses thanksgiving for himselfe and the rest a King to guide and govern in the wayes of godlynes himselfe and the rest But all these alwayes in that order according to those speciall determinations which the Lord Iesus the King of Kings hath prescribed And as there is not the meanest member of the body but hath received his drop or dram of this aÌ„noynting so is not the same to be despised eyther by any other or by the whole to which it is of vse dayly in some of the things before set downe and may be in all or at least in the most of them So that not onely the ey a speciall member cannot say to the hand a speciall member I have no need of thee but not the head the principall member of all vnto the feet the meanest members I have no need of you And yet as if a multitude of Kinges should assemble together to advise consult of their coÌ„mon affaires some one or few must needs be appointed over the asseÌ„bly both for order speciall assistance of the whole which should go before the rest in propounding discussing and determining of all matters so in this royall assembly the Church of Christ though al be kings yet some both most faythful and most able are to be set over the rest that in office not kingly but ministeriall because the assembly is constant wherein they are both deeply charged effectually encouraged to Minister according to the Testament of Christ and that not †onely for comlynes and order as Mr B slaundereth vs to hould but for the proffit aedification yea and salvation of the Church 2 Cor. 1 24. Eph 4. 11. 12. 13. 1 Tim. 4. 16 by the ministration of such holy things as to the Church appertayne by the free absolute and immediate donation of Christ. This praemised I come to Mr B. reasons and refutation And first I do freely acknowledge the thing which he would charge vs to deny and seeme to prove by many scriptures and that is that the government of the Church before the law vnder the law in the Apostles tymes was and so still is not in the multitude but in the cheife In the first born before the law in the Levites vnder the law in the Apostles in their tymes and so in the ordinary officers of the Church ever since and that the Lord Iesus hath given to his Church a Presbytery or Colledge of Elders or Bishops for the feeding of the sâ—me that is for the â—eaching and governing of the whole flock according to his will and these the multitude ioyntly and severally is bound to obey all and every one of them submiting themselves vnto their government in the Lord. And this it never came into our harts to deny Cease then Mr B. to suggest against vs unto such as are ignorant of our faith walking that we deny the Officers to be the governours of the Church or the people to be governed by them But this I desire the reader here to take knowledge of and ever hereafter to beare in minde that it is one thing for the officers to govern the Church which we graunt and another thing for them to be the Church which Mr B. in expounding Math 18. would needs make them where he would have the officers alone to admonish and censure As if because the †watchman is set vp to blow the trumpet and to warne the people when the sword commeth that therefore he alone is the City or Land and bound alone to make resistance The officers of the Church are to govern every action of the
King at any time write his letters to any corporation in the land about some such publick busines as wherein every free man hath an hand he directs them to the MAIOR BAYLY or some other cheife officer by whome they are to be published to the whole body and the matter managed which they conteyn though as I formerly sayd every freeman be to speak to and consent in the busines And here it is too much Mr B. should say as he doth that no mention in these places of the revelation is made of the people but of the governours onely where Christ expresly enjoynes Iohn to write his vision and to send it vnto the 7. Churches ver 11. where Iohn expresly salutes them with grace and peace as Paul and others do them to whom they write in the beginning of their letters v. 4. Where he also calls those candlesticks he saw in his vision the Churches though distinguished from the Officers or Angels whom he calls starres or lights ver 12. 13. 20. and lastly and specially where after his both commendations reproofs promises and threatnings he wills meÌ„ to listen what the spirit sayth not of but vnto the Churches Chap 2. 7. 11. 17. 29. 3. 6. 13. 22. which do necessarily conclude the people in them But to let passe generalls to come to such particulars in these Chapters as wherein the suffring of evills in the Churches is reproved Onely I must needs shew Mr B. his great oversight that where he should prove that onely the angels of the Churches were reproved for suffering evils vnreformed he points vs to sundry Angels and Churches where there is no mention at all made of suffring evils but all of doing as well by the Angels as Churches as in Ephesus Sardi and Laodicea and which is worse vnto other Angels and Churches where there were no evils at all worthy reproof eyther done or suffred as in Smyrna and Philadelphia And is not this sound dealing The Lord Iesus finds nothing in the Ch of Smyrna Phyladelphia worthy of taxatioÌ„ but all of coÌ„mendation ergo the cheif governours onely in these Churches are reproved for suffring evils vnreformed I now come to the particular scriptures in number two where mention is made of evils suffred vnreformed and reproof layd vpon them which suffered them in the two Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira And that Iohn directs his reproofs against the Churches and not against the Officers alone I do thus manifest 1. Them whose workes Christ commends for that dwelling where Satans throne was they kept his name and denyed not his fayth c. them I say he reproves and against them he deales for suffering them that mâ—â—nteyn the doctrine of Balaam of the Nicholaâ—tans v. 13. 14. 15. 16. 2. They which are commended by Christ for their workes love service fayth patience and encrease in works they are also reproved by him for suffering the woman Iezebell the false Prophetesse to teach and to deceive vers 19. 20. But it were senselesse to affirm that the Angel alone and not the people with him was commended for dwelling where Satans throne was keeping Christs name and not denying his fayth in persecution that the Angel alone was commended for his works love service fayth patience and the like and as senseles as to affirm that onely some of the Angel of the Church of Smyrna was to be cast into prison ver 10 and therefore as the faythfull the brethren the saynts the people had their portion in these Christian vertues and in the commendations given vnto them so also do they beare their part in the reproofs due to the toleration of such evils as were found amongst them and are exhorted to repeÌ„tance v. 16. And this the two adversative conjunctions but notwithstanding or neverthelesse v. 14. 20. do evidently declare In many graces these Churches did abound and faythfull they were in great tryalls but or notwithstanding in this they fayled that they were not zealous enough against such deceivers as crept in amongst them but suffered theÌ„ to others hurt their owne danger also ver 24. Of these things I have spoken something the more at large to discover the bold injury which Mr B. offereth vnto these scriptures which may also serve to manifest both the libertie dutie of the people for the reforming of abuses in the Churches against the usurpation of the English or other Clergie whatsoever Now to that which is inferred by way of conclusion that 1 Cor. 5. must be expounded by other places and by the whole course of scripture the like that tell the Church Mat. 18. 17. must be vnderstood tell the cheif Officers of the Church these severalls must be answered First let it alwayes be remembred that we beleeve and confess that the Elders which Christ hath left in his Church are to govern the same in all things provided alwayes the nature of ecclesiasticall government be not exceeded according to the lawes by him prescribed and that so doing the brethren are most streytly bound to obey them without disturbance intrusion or opposition vnder peyn of Gods wrath for their rebellioÌ„ against him and them Heb. 13. 17. But as els where is observed it is one thing to be the Church an other thing to govern the Church one thing for the officers to direct and go before the brethren in all things as guides and another matter vtterly to exclude the brethren from any part of the communion as neyther being the Church nor any part of it as this exposition doth These things Mr B. ignorantly blunders together and so he and others rayse odious clamours against vs of Anabaptism popularity and the like as if we confounded all persons and things and made the Church a very Chaos or Babel without form or order 2. I acknowledge that one scripture must be expounded by an other but ever the more dark and obscure by that which is more playne and lightsome now so playne cleare evident and perspicuous are the two scriptures in hand for excommunication the former Mat. 18. 15. 16. 17. for the order and degrees of proceeding the other 1 Cor. 5. for the persons interessed in the buesinesse as that to bring in other scriptures for the expounding of them is in truth as needlesse and lost a labour as to light the sun and moon a candle Now for the places severally and first for Math. 18. 17. where sayth Mr B. tell the Church is tell the cheif officers of the Church and so must be expounded Well the words are cleare as the sun tell the Church that is the congregation or assembly whereof the offender is a member But where you make the Church not the officers simply but the cheif officers therein you deale both wisely and dutifully Wisely to let passe other respects in preventing a quaestion which otherwise you could not possibly answer for if you had sayd the officers simply it would have demaunded
Prophet must first haue his hand vpon him whom the rest of the people must follow in putting him to death The last words Publican and Heathen do not declare that Christ speakes of the Iewes at that time eyther onely or civily but serve for other purposes as I shall presently manifest taking Arguments from these words as from all the rest to prove that Christ here speakes of sinne and of excommunication for sinne My first Reason I draw from the cohaerence wherein I have formerly manifested Christ speakes not of private injuries onely but of all such scandalles as are to be found in that streyt way to heaveÌ„ no nor of injuries at all as they hurt the outward man but as they are sinnes and hurt and hinder the soul in the way of godlynes and so by the consequence of cohaerence if Christs words hang one vpon an other he speaks v. 15. 16. 17. of sinne and the carying of it 2. I reason from the terme brother which since it apperteyned at this tyme froÌ„ the disciples to many which might not be brought before the Iewish Synedrion as to the beleeving Romaynes Samaritans and the like cannot be meant as is pretended but speaks of a religious fellowship to which any brother may be brought of what country or condition soever As the word haâ—artáno turned offend is of generall signification by your own graunt and so cannot be restreyned to that particular kind of offence so is it most properly vsed for sinne and that vsually by this Evangelist Mat. 3. 6. 9. 2. 12. 31. and 26. 28. and which is specially to be observed when Luke would speak of trespasses or offences as sinnes against God he vseth this word but when in the same place he speaks of them as of injuries against men he vseth another word Ch. 11. 4. And see how soundly Mr B. deales when he should shew that the word turned offend is not meant of sinnes but of injuries he brings in foure principall writers varying as he sayth about the word and yet the vnadvised man considers not that all four of them as he himself alledges them vnderstand it of sinne and not one of them of injuries so speak against him If Christ here spake of injuries where he sayth if he heare thee thou hast wonne or gayned thy brother he would haue sayd thou hast wonne or gayned thy goods or good name wherein he injuryed thee If these words be meant of injuries and wrongs then Christ commaunds his disciples not to suffer wrongs at their brethrens hands but to deal with them in the order here prescribed for Christ expresly commaunds to tell the Church and so Christs doctrine and Pauls teaching the suffring of wrong should contradict the one the other By this exposition one Iew might account an other as an heathen which was vtterly vnlawfull he might not refuse religious communion with him in the temple into which no heathen might come he might not deny him a portion in the land of Canaan the type of the kingdome of heaven he might not account or call him other then a brother whatsoever he were till the time came of the Iewes defraction or breaking off for vnbeleef Act. 7. 2. 22. 1. 33. 1. Rom. 11. 17. This interpretation confirmes a point of Anabaptistry namely that it is not lawfull for brethren so remayning to sue at Caesars barre where it is most evident that brethren alwayes might and may yea such a case may fall out ought to sue without any alienation of affection or such heathenish thought one of another as Mr B. would have Christ in this place to commend vnto them for even these last words let him be to thee as an heathen and publican are a commaundement as let your speach be yea yea nay nay hundreds others delivered in the scriptures vnder the same form of words And to conclude Christ our Saviour in these words describes excommunication by the effects of it which are withdrawing from the brother obstinate in sinne both in religious and civile fellowship and familiaritie as the Iewes did withdraw both froÌ„ the Heathens and Publicans in both Ioh. 4. 9. Act. 10. 3. 31. 28. Luk. 15. 2. 15. 10. 11. And this very phrase Paul most clearely expounds when he directs the Church 1 Cor. 5. 11. not to be commingled with obstinate offenders nor to eat with them this ever provided that no excommunication or other act in religion whatsoever may dissolve eyther civil or naturall societie The next Reason is drawne from verse 18. where Christ ratifying in the hands of his Church this his power speaks in expresse terms of binding and loosing not onely in earth but in heaven also which words me thinks alone should satisfie the conscience of any godly minded man yea and stop the mouth of the most shameles that Christ speaks of sinne and sin onely Yet is Mr B. neyther satisfied nor silent but replyes that binding and loosing in this place is not properly or onely to be vnderstood of Christs Ministers but is allowed to private persons and for this pag. 223 he brings sundry reasons Consider Reader this severe censurer of Mr Smythes vnstablenes Mr B. in his former book pag. 95. will have this power of binding and loosing spoken of in this place to be in the officers of the Châ— two or three and at no hand in private persons and for this there he brings sundry reasons in this his next book this power is â—lâ—tâ—ed to two or three private persons and must not be drawne to the Ministerie onely and for this he brings as many reasons Observe further the very sum of Mr B. answer is that Christ speaks not here of binding and loosing in the office of Ministerie So we affirm that by two or three having this power cannot be meant two or three Ministers considered severally from the body which alone are not the Church for any publick administration but the officers of the Church but by two or three are meant the meanest coÌ„munion or societie of saints whether with officers or without officers And is this a sufficient answering of an adversary to bring sundry reasons to prove the very thing which he affirmes Adde to all these that where the injuries offred to Christs disciples and such as would respect his direction were vsually for the profession of Christ it had been a most idle course to have complayned eyther to the Iewish Synedrion or Romish Magistracy which would have added injurie to injurie Lastly where Christ v. 23. in his answer to Peters quaestion makes the protasis or first part of his comparison the kingdom of heaven which is the Church he shewes plainely that all the while he hath spoken of Church affaires and the carying of them And thus much to prove that the Lord Iesus the King of his Church hath left in this 18. of Math a rule order
govermeÌ„t for the Church now froÌ„ the Iewish Church were to revive the old testameÌ„t which so long since is abrogated and disanulled For to speak properly the old testament is nothing but that externall policy instituted by Moses in the Iudiciall ceremoniall law for the dispensation of the typicall kingdome and Preisthood of Christ shadowed out by that of Melchisedeck King and Preist repraesented by the administrations of Moses and Aaron and after continued in the Preisthood of the Levites kingdome of David his sonnes till Christ in the dispensation of those worldly and carnall ordinances Now as the judicialls which were for the government of the Congregation civily are dead and do not bind any civil polity save as they were of common equity so are the ceremonialls which were for the Ch polity deadly and may not be revived by any Church save as any of them have new life given by Christ. For though we now be made citizens of the common wealth of Israell and one body with them yet is that in respect of the everlasting covenant confirmed of God with Abraham through Christ. I wil be thy God and the God of thy seed four hundred and thirty yeares before the law was given or the polity and government of the lewish eyther church or common wealth in it established and as we are the sonnes and daughters of Abraham by faith but no way in respect of those Iewish ordinances in in the old testament or the order of dispensing them And yet if it were graunted which you would have that the Church governmeÌ„t now is to be patterned by the goverment of the Iewish church then it would nothing avayle you for the purpose in hand For the church officers the Preists and Levites vnto whom the charge of the whole Congregation for the service of the tabernacle did apperteyne had no authority by the order of their office to inflict any censure spiritually vpon the people as had the civil Magistrates to punish them bodily The Preists and Levites were onely to enterpret the law and in cases extraordinarily difficult to find out the estate of the person or thing and to shew what in such a case the law required and if you will say they gave judgement it was none otherwise then as a Physitian gives â—â—dgement of the body or state of his patient by his faculty or skill in his art but to sit vpon them formally in judgement ecclesiastically to punish them that they might not do neyther are they called in the scriptures judges as the civil Magistrates are Yea the scriptures do make a playne difference where the civil Elders are to sit and iudge the people but the Preists to stand before the Congregation and to minister vnto them Now before we passe over this busines in hand I deem it not amisse vpon this occasion to observe a few things by way of answer to a scripture vsually brought out for the foundation of these representative churches and their power and especially for these Nationall and Provinciall Synodes the like And the scripture is Act. 15. 1. There was no synode or assembly of the Officers of divers Churches but onely certayne messengers sent from the church of Antiochia to the Church of Ierusalem about the controversy there specified 2. Neyther the Church of Antioch which sent the messengers nor the church at Ierusalem whether they were sent was a representative church consisting of Officers much lesse of chief officers onely For first it is sayd ver 1. 2. that the brethren of Antiochia which Ch. 14. 17. are called the church and v. 28. the disciples and in this chapt v. 3. the church and v. 23. the brethren sent their messengers with Paul and Barnabas to Ierusalem and it will most evidently appeare by whom the message was sent if we consider to whom the answer was returned ver 30. where the messengers did not deliver the Epistle till they had assembled the multitude And 2. it is apparant that at Ierusalem not onely the cheif officers the Apostles yea and inferiour officers the Elders also met together about it and sent answer but the brethren with them v. 4. 12. 22. And these scriptures alone in this chapt are sufficient to chalendge the liberty of the brethren in the discussing of publique coÌ„troversies out of the hands of all officers whatsoever 3. Paul and Barnabas went not to Ierusalem eyther for authority or direction for being Apostles they had both equall immediate authority from Christ and equall infallible direction froÌ„ the holy Ghost with the rest of the Apostles Onely they went for countenance of the truth in respect of men and for the stopping the mouthes of such deceivers as pretended they were sent by the Apostles v. 24. 4. Their decrees were absolutely Apostolicall and divine scripture by infallible direction from the holy Ghost and so imposed vpon all other Churches of the Gentiles though they had â—o delegates there ver 23. 28. Ch. 16. 4. But it wil be sayd may not the officers of one or many Churches meet together to discusse consider of matters for the good of the Church or Churches and so be called a Church Synode or the like I deny it not so they infringe no order of Christ or liberty of the brethren they may so do and so be called in a sense but the quaestion now is about such a Church as is gathered for the publick administration of admonition excommunication other the like ordinances of Christ which Mr B. in his first book graunts must be done with the knowledge of the body of the Church and in the open assembly And here falls into handling certayn borrowed stuffe in Mr B. 2. book about this matter As first that Paul called the Elders of Ephesus and conferred with them without the people Act. 20. 27. which who denyes but they which set vp a Lord Bishop to rule alone without advising with eyther the inferiour Ministers or people But that which he addes in the next place hath almost as many errours as wordes in it and that is that the Elders sate in a CoÌ„sistory with Iames their Bishop at Ierusalem without the people and did decree a matter without asking their voice Act. 21. 18. First you erre in calling it a Consistory or juditiall Court for the justification of your own where it was onely an occasionall meeting for advise 2. in making Iames a Bishop whom Christ had made an Apostle The Elders were Bishops Act. 20. 17. 28. Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 1. â— 7. And so if you would haue held any proportion you should haue made Iames an Archbishop 3. that you make him their Bishop where Bishops or Overseers are set over the flock not over the Ministers Act. 20. 28. 4. And most ignorantly where you will have Iames the Elders to make a decree for Paul as if the Elders had authority over
had not excommunicated the incestuous person Bastingius in the 4. place quaestion 85. of his Catichism speaking of the difference between the two keyes that of preaching the other of discipline places it in this that the former which is of the preaching of the gospel is committed to the Ministers the other bycause it perteyns to the discipline of excommunication is permitted to the whole Church Lastly even Beza himself how streyt soever he be to the multitude in this case hardly graunting them the liberty which Mr B. yea which the very Iesuits do namely that they were with the Elders gathered together in the name of the Lord Iesus 1 Cor. 5. 4. yea do playnely deny it in his Annotations vpon 2 Cor. 2. 6. Yet vpon v. â— he is constreyned to affirm that Paul intreats that the incestuous person might by the publique consent of the Church be declared a brother as he was by the Churches publique consent cast out Now to these speciall lights in the reformed Churches abroad I will annex a few of the cheif endeavours of reformation at home The first of them is Mr Hooper who in his Apology writes that excoÌ„municatioÌ„ should be by the Bishop the whole Parish that Pauls consent the whole Church with him did excoÌ„municate the incestuous man To him adde Mr Fox whose judgement in the book of Martyrs pag. 5. 6. 7. is and so is inforced by him that writ the discovery of D. Banâ—r ofts vntruthes and slaunders against reformation that every visible Church or congregation hath the power of binding and loosing annexed to it If it be sayd the Church hath it if the Officers have it I see not but it may be as well sayd the Church hath the scriptures in a known tongue if the Officers so enjoy them Thirdly Mr Cartwright in his reply to D. Whitgifts answer pag. 147 both affirms and proves that Paul both vnderstanding and observing the rule of our Saviour Christ communicates this power of excommunication with the Church Him also an other writing A demonstration of discipline alledgeth adding further that they which were met togither 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. were to excommunicate the incestuous person with whom also consorteth he that wrote of the certayn form of ecclesiasticall governmentâ— who vnder that head of the authority of the Ministers of the word that by the Church Math. 18. Christ meanes a particular Congregation the Pastor Elders people consenting making that the iudgement of the particular congregation which is spoken of 1 Cor. 5. 12. In the 4. place Mr Iacob in his book to the King for reformation pag. 28. pleads for the peoples consent and voyce-giving in elections excommunications to whom I ioyn them that made the Christian offer to iustify against the Bishops and their adhaerents that every ordinary assembly of the faithfull hath by Christs ordinance power in it self immediately vnder Christ to elect and ordeyn deprive and depose their Ministers and to exequute all other ecclesiasticall censures Proposition 5. Prop. 8 that the officers can do no materiall ecclesiasticall act without the free consent of the Congregation Lastly the godly Ministers in the end of Mr Bernards book do directly judge against him interpreting the Church Math. 18. to be a particular Congregation and excommunication the iudgement censure of that particular congregation whereof the offender is a member Thus have I been constreyned by the bold boasting and facing which this man vseth of and with the iudgement of all reformed Churchâ—â— to set downe the judgements of some few amongst many both at home and abroad for his conviction though I desire the touchstone of the holy scriptures alone may try all differences betwixt him and me I now return to Mr Bernard where I left him so come to two reasons he annexeth pag. 98. 99. to prove the officers to be called the Church the former is because it is an vsuall speach to put the name of the whole vpon the part and this to be taken for the whole The 2. bycause a company is no where called a Church in the new testament but where they have officers The latter of these I have formerly confuted as the reader may see pag. 126. 127. c. Onely I adde one thing vpon occasion of these words a Church in the new testament that as there is but one body or Church and we vnder the new testament that one or the same body or Church with the Iewes in the old so if the Ministery made the Church how much more if it were the Church could it not be that the Iewes and we should be one Church for I shall never be brought to beleeve nor I think will any man affirm it that the Ministery of an Apostle or Elder now is the same in nature with the Ministery of a sacrificing Levite vnder the law Wee are by faith sonnes and daughters of Abraham and partaker of the covenant and promises and by fayth grafted in their holy root and in this stands our onenes with them but neyther in the Ministery nor in the government nor in any other ordinance which are but manners of dispensing that covenant and those divers changeable where the covenant is nothing lesse And for the former of your reasons howsoever the place you bring Act. 15. 3. proves no such matter yet is the thing true you say namely that a part of the Church is sometimes called by the name of the whole but what part not the officers but the brethren the saynts as being the matter an essentiall cause of the Church the Elders not so as being but for the assistance and well being of it And so the Church gives both being and denomination to the Elders but not the Elders to the Church which is never called the Church of the Elders as they are called the Elders of the Church and so are of it and not it of them That which you adde of inconveniences and discommodities following vpon your doctrine not to be regarded is frivolous except by them you mean absurdities and inconsequences â—a alâ—gâ— in theologia as they call them and then they are to be regarded as never necessarily following vpon any truth for the truth brings forth no errour by true consequence The sixth Reason of the superiour order followeth for Mr B. hath his reasons and his vnder reasons which is In it self the multitude being ever vnconstant it is instability vnorderlynesse where every one is a like equall it is the nourse of confusion the mother of schisme the breeder of contention These very same things have been formerly objected by you in the fourth part of your 5. argument and there cleared The truth is the drawing of all power into the officers hands breeds in them pride and arrogancy and in the people ignorance and security And for your contemptuous vpbrayding of Gods people in this book with inconstancy
have therefore power for officers also which they may chuse and so enjoy all their liberties by their help so in the spirituall corporation the Church there is alwayes the whole power of Christ residing which therefore may call officers for the vse of it to which it is sufficient that it can without officers vse this power for things simply necessary as for the receiving in of members by profession of faith and confession of sinnes for the aedifying of them by exhortations coÌ„forts in the ordinance of prophecying and so for casting them out by excommunication which fall from their former profession or confession The sum of the 11. and 12. Reas is that this power or liberty of the multitude to judge in Church matters overthrowes the power authority of Christian Magistrates in the Church to whom the people are commaunded to be subiect both in the old and new testament And doth not the ill advised man consider that his own opinion making the officers of the Church alone the Church and giving them power to judge in Church matters without the rest of the body doth as much overthrow the authority of Christian Magistrates as ours in making the officers and body with them the Church having power to judge together yea much more for if the ecclesiasticall officers alone be the Church Math. 18. and so must judge and censure sinnes which is the thing he pleads for then â— the civil magistrate simply excluded where wee reputing the whole body the Church do necessarily include the Christian Magistrate as being one of the Church Secondly is Mr B. and his brother Bell whom he quotes in the 〈…〉 gent to ignorant as they cannot distinguish betwixt civil authority and judgements in Church matters and that authority and those judgements which are ecclesiasticall The Christian magistrate as he is a brother may be censured ecclesiastically by the Church whereof he is a member and yet the same person as a magistrate whether of the Church or not of the Church or cast out of the Church may censure and punish civilly the whole Church and every member of it if there be cause whether in matters of the Church or common wealth In the 17. reason Mr B. would fasten vpon vs an absurdity in making the body both to govern and to be governed and so to be both Lord and servant Prince and subiect c. It is your self Mr Ber. that commit the absurdity which I thus manifest The Church must be governed sayth the scripture and coÌ„mon sense But the Church is the officers Math. 18. sayth Mr Bernard Wherevpon it followeth that the Officers must be governed And to your reason whomsoever you count Lords and servants and whosoever are Lords and servants in your Church I know by the scriptures that in the Church of Christ the officers are servants in that relation the Church may be called a Lord and if Christ truely call the sonne of man Lord of the sabbath bycause the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath may we also call the Church in a respect Lord of the Officers for the Officers are for the Church and not the Church for them And yet we hold the same officers which are servants to be governours also for the government of the Church is merely a Church-service as all not carnally blinded with ambition or superstition will graunt with me Now where you affirm Reas 18. that the people are never termed by any name insinuating soveraignty but that the Ministers are you speak partially on both sides would you have the Ministers that is the servants of the Church to be her soveraigns The names you bring as most advauntageable argue no such thing They are Overseers as the watchmen are for the citie Elders for thâ—ir gravity Fathers in respect of the seed of the word by which they bâ—ge to conversion and therefore Paul makes himself he onely father of the Corinthians bycause he had been the instrument of their conversion notwithstanding all other teachers whomsoever to whom in that respect he opposeth himselâ— as not being their fathers And so men out of office may be as wel the fathers of others as they in office However fatherhood argues no soveraignty And yet the holy Apostles Prophets thought not much vpon all occasions to account the saints their brethren and themselves theirs And I would you wist whose names Iohn Bale in his Paraphrase vpon the Revelation ch 17 vers 3. thought your Grace your Lordship your Fatherhood to be And where further you name the brethren sheep the household of faith the wife or spouse in respect of the officers for that is the consideration in hand therein you deal very deceiptfully for the brethren or saynts are not the Officers sheep houshold wife or spouse but Christs betwixt whom and them the comparison is not Lastly your affirmatioÌ„ that the saynts are called Kings Rev. 1. 6. not for any outward power over meÌ„ but for the inward power of Gods spirit saÌ„ctifying the elect by which as Kings they rule over their own corruptions is an ill glosse corrupting the text For in the same place they are called Preists also Now as they are not Preists only for themselves but for their brethreÌ„ for whom they are to offer vp the spiritual sacrifices of prayer thaÌ„ksgiving so neyther are they Kings for themselves alone but for their brethren also having the power of Christ whereby to iudge them the keyes of the kingdome to bind and loose them in the order by him prescribed These things thus layd down occasionally I return to the point And first against the figurative exposition of these words Tell the Church I do alledge two approved Rules and Canon in divinity for exposition of scriptures The former is that scriptures must be expounded according to the largest extent of the words except there be some apparent restreynt of them The second is that they must be expounded simply and according to the letter except necessity compell to depart froÌ„ the litterall sence to a figurative And therefore since there appeares not any such necessity as is pretended eyther of figure or restreynt the words must be taken in their largest and simplest meaning With these rules I desire the reader to beare in mind that which hath been formerly observed to the purpose in hand and amongst other things that the officers are to govern the Church in the ceÌ„sures as in all other actions of communion and therefore cannot be the Church that every true Ch hath or is capable of a ministery over it and so there should be a minister of ministers that the order of officers in the Church is an order of servants and the order of saynts an order of Kings which is the highest order in the Church fitting vpon the thrones of David for judgement whom the ministers are to serve in guiding going before them in and
in ministring of their judgements And so I go on The rule prescribed Mat 18. concernes all the visible Churches in the world since the power of excommunication is an essentiall property one of the keyes of the kingdome the onely solemn ordinance in the Church for the humbling and saving of an obstinate offender and as necessary as the power to receive in members without which a Church cannot be gathered or consist And therefore the Officers cannot be the Church there spoken of since true Churches may and do want officers as I have formerly proved If two or three officers be the Church Math. 18. then may they two or three excommunicate the whole body though it consist of a thousand persons for what brother or brethren soever will not hear the Church there spoken of he or they are to be accounted as heathens and publicans Yea I ad if the power of excommunication be â—yed to the office since the office may remayn in one I see not but one may do any work of his office and so as well excommunicate as admonish preach minister the sacraments and the rest Now whether this power in one or two to punish judicially one or two thousand be not Lordly at the least let the reader judg Further if the officers be the Church I would know if one of them fall into scandalous sinne and will not be reclaymed what must then be done It wil be answered that the rest must censure him But what if there be but two in all must the one excommunicate the other the ruling Elder it may be the Pastour 2. if the rest of the Elders being many may displace the Pastour by their authority they may also place him and set him vp by their authority and so the poore laity is stript of all liberty or power of chusing their officers contrary both to the scriptures and your 〈…〉 oâ—ne graunt If the Officers be the Church then they alone may excoÌ„municate a brother without the consent yea or the privitie of any of the brethren for the busines concernes none but the Church Math. 18. neyther need they so much as acquaint any others with it But so absurd is this as you your self graunt the contrary and thaâ— it must be done with the knowledge of the Church publiquely and when the body meets together in open assembly The Apostles themselves whom no ministers now can equall eyther for skill or authoritie did not thus engrosse all things into their own hands but did interesse the people though raw newly come to the faith in all the publick affaires of the Church and in such deliberations as arose about them And who should deny them to meddle in those things which concerne them But if any do these scriptures avow their liberty Act. 1. 15. 23. 26. 6. 2. 5. 11. 2. 3. 18. 22. 1. 14. 17. 15. 3. 4. 14. 21. 22. 30. 31. 21. 22. Rom. 16. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. 16. 3. 2 Cor. 8. 19. 23. 24. Now there is nothing that more concernes the body of the Church then the excommunication of a brother whether wee respect the commaundement of God binding them not to suffer sin vpon a brother but to rebuke him plainly and to admonish him that being rebuked by many he may be humbled drawn to repentaÌ„ce or the credit of the Church which must be defended against the slaunders of the excommunicants which will ever be iust in their own cause or their own good that â—t by the rebuking of one all may learn to fear or their conscience who must to day avoid him as an heathen and lim of Satan whom yesterday they were to imbrace as a brother and member of Christ. How clearly these things plead the brethrens both liberty and interest in all this busines let the indifferent reader judge If the Officers alone be the Church to which offenders are to be brought and by which they are to be judged then are they as the Church to admonish and judge those offenders eyther apart from the body or in the face of the publique congregation but neyther of these two wayes and therefore they alone are not the Church Not in private or apart for Then may the Pastor be excomunicated before any one of the brethren know of it Of which evill I have spoken formerly 2. It is against the nature of the ordinance being a part of the publick communion of the Church and worship of God to be performed but publiquely Yea there is no reason why admonitions and censures should be administred lesse publiquely then doctrine and prayer For the kingdome of the Lord Iesus is as glorious as his preisthood or propheticall office and his throne is to be advanced as high and made as conspicuous to the eyes of all as his altar or pulpit that I may so speak Now as the Preistly and Propheticall offices of Christ are administred in prayer preaching so is his Kingly office in government In deed if wee thought as you do that Christ had left his kingdom the Church without lawes and officers for the government of it or that this government were an indifferent thing alterable at the willes and pleasures of men then wee should be as indifferent where or how or by whom it were administred as you Mr B are 3. The officers are to feed the flock one part whereof consists in government Now if admonitions and excommunications may be administred apart from the body how is the flock fed by them or how do those Elders vpon whom the government of the Church especially lyeth discharge their publique Ministery and service vnto the Lord and his Church to which they are called or how can the Church see and know their ministration that they may have them in super abundant love for their workes sake if there be cause or contrarywise if reason require the contrary or when they that sin are rebuked openly whether Elders or people how can the rest fear Yea how can these men which are to feed the flock by government be accounted faithfull sheepheards eyther before God or men if they gather not the flock together see they feed accordingly though with you Mr B. they that feed the flocks by government never so much as see the faces of the hundred part of their sheep and when they have a sheep in hand for straying it may be from a dumb sheepheard to a preacher they deal with him for the most part many a mile from but never in the place where the particular stock walkes whereof that sheep is Lastly the administration of Christs kingdom being a part of the communion of saynts and publique worship is to be performed of the Lords day as well as other parts are and to be joyned with the administration of the word sacraments almes and the rest as making all one entyre body of communion yea
in cases to go before the rest I am perswaded least the holy things be polluted by notorious obstinate offenders And if the collections for the saynts which concernes the body be a Lords or first dayâ—â— work how much more the spirituall ordinances which respect the soule eyther for humiliation or comfort Yea I see not how the Church can compell any to forbeare their bodily labour in the six dayes wherein God hath given them liberty to work except it be vpon occasions extraordinary and as they may be constreyned to meet for any other part of publick worship Well then it must needs be that this Church of officers must receive and examine complaints reprove and censure offenders publiquely and with the knowledge of the whole body met together in publique assembly and this liberty in the exequution of excommunication you graunt the multitude pag. 92. of your book And surely there must be but one Church for the whole busines But this course is more vnreasonable then the other namely that the brethren must be gathered together to be spectatours whiles the officers alone sit vpon the thrones of David to heare and judge excluding the brethren from all communion with them though they be personally present For the communion of the Church stands not in this that men are present and see and heare what is done and receive proffite for so may they do which are without but in the mutuall relation and concurrence of the parts and is in this ordinance onely amongst them which are reproved or do reprove at least by consent if they see cause which are censured or do censure And besides it is against common sence that the officers should be the Church representative when the body of the Church which they represent is present as hath been formerly shewed to call the officers alone the Church or assembly which are both one when the people are assembled with them as necessary parts is to call one part of the Church the Church excluding an other part of it If the officers alone be the Church to be told and to admonish and judge the offender for there is one and the same Church for all these then it must follow that if the Officers admonish the Church also admonisheth and on the contrary that if the officers refuse the Church also refuseth to admonish an offendour but neither the one nor the other of these is true First the Elders observing sin may and ought to admonish the party sinning whether the Church observ it or no yea though the whol Church be otherwise minded yea any one of the Elders may admonish if he see cause both the rest of the officers the brethren also but this admonition cannot be the admonitioÌ„ of the Ch except we will say the Church may admonish where shee sees no sinne yea against her will yea which is most senseles except she may be sayd to admonish her self The second point needs no great refutation For who will say that if the officers refuse to admonish and make themselves accessary vnto sin by boulstering it vp that then the Church is also sayling and the whole lump thereby levened except the rest consent with them or fayl in their personall duties which notwithstanding might be sayd of them and imputed vnto them if by the Church were meant the officers If a brother privately considered may bind sin privately vpon the parties irrepentance then may the same brother as a part of the publik assembly bind for his part publiquely and so he brings the party impenitent privately bound to the Church holding him still bound vpon the continuance of his obstinacy but publiquely now with the whole communion as privately before by himself 〈…〉 th his witnes The consequent of this argum Mr B. graunts in his latter book pag. 200. vpon Mr Smythes vrging Mat. 18. compared with some other scriptures much what to this purpose but the Antecedent as he speaks he denyes or rather distinguisheth of these words binding and loosing which he vnderstands onely to be meant of personall wrongs against a man but not of sinnes at all against God But as this exposition conteyns in it two notable absurdities the first that other men may forgive injuries or wrongs done vnto me and secondly that a communion of faithfull men for so the words are which is the Church may medle with judging civile matters as are injuries otherwise then as they are sinns against God at which they take offence or scandalize so is it evidently convinced by the text when Christ speaks of binding and loosing in heaven whither injuries come not save as they are sinns against God Yea Mr B himself graunts in another place of this book viz pag. 223. towards the end that our saviour in this place speaks of binding and loosing spiritually and that not by the power of Christ given to Ministers but to coÌ„mon Christians where he also brings sundry reasons to prove that the binding and loosing there spoken of doth no way concern the Ministers or publique Officers but private persons notoriously crossing both his first book in the persons which he will there needs have officers and no private men and here private persons and no officers and his second in the thing which in the former place he will have merely of civil consideration but here graunts to be meant religiously The next reason I take from v. 19. where mention is made by Christ of prayer by which the censures there spoken of are to be sanctifyed both before and after they be exequuted Wherevpon I demaund whether the brethren present with the officers be part of the Church to which the offender is brought and by which he is judged in the communion of prayer or no It will not be denied thence it must follow that they are also part of the Church in receiving and judging of the complaint or els that they passe in and out and in agayn in respect of the communion during one and the same excercise and the sanctification of it They which are gathered in or into the name of Christ they are the Church spoken of Math. 18. and have the power of Christ for binding and loosing as is evident ver 20. Now as me thinks it should be strange to affirm that the brethren present with the Officers are gathered in or into any other name then the name of Christ so doth Paul drawing this rule into practise 1 Cor. 5. commaund that the multitude with the officers by not onely Mr B. but the Iesuites confession be gathered together in or into the name of Christ and that they so gathered do by the power of Christ deliver to Satan the offender for his humbling ver 4 5 〈…〉 Lastly if the officers without the brethren be the Church for the censures then are they the Church for the other publique ordinances of prayer preaching sacraments and the like and may minister them out of the
warrantably be chosen without good experience of their gift and faculty in prophesy and prayer so neyther can they which are cheifly to be imployed in government with good conscience of the Church be called to that ministration except they also have given and the Church taken good proof of their ability and simplicity in the discussing and debating carrying and contriving of Church affaires as also in admonition exhortation and comfort publiquely occasioned and so manifested And a very presumptuous sin it is in any Church to chuse an officer not thus trayned vp and tryed Wherevpon I conclude that brethren though not in officer have not their hands tyed from medling in the affaires of the Church especially the censures but are bound in their places to see to and assist in the reformation of publique scandalls and therefore are part of the Church to which an offender is to be complayned of for onely they are bound to see reformation of the evill to whom the complaint is to be made where Christ sayth Tell the Church It now remaynes we come to the other scripture which Mr B. turns so lightly over viz. 1 Cor. 5. which that wee may aright vnderstand for the present purpose two things must be considred the one whereof is what the Apostles scope is and what he intends in that Chap and the other what persons he interesseth in the busines about which he deales The Praelates with their obedient clergy do coÌ„stantly affirm that the Apostle there reprooves the Corinthiâ—ns for not complayning to him of the incestuous person that he might haue censured him and that he commaunds them being now judged by him as having the sole authority in his hands to exequute his sentence vpon him and this exposition Mr Bern. laboureth to confirm pag. 92. 94. 98. Wee on the contrary affirm that the Apostle in that scripture reproveth the Church of Corinth or them to whom he writes for suffring as they did that wicked man uncast out and that he now wills them to discharge that duty wherein they had formerly fayled in excommunicating him to which he also gives his consent going before them as his duty was in judging and withall avouching his presence in spirit that is in will and consent since he could not be bodily present with them And that this is the Apostles meaning it is much that any man reading the chapter with an honest heart should deny The arguments of proof are manifest in the particulars 1. They ought with sorrow to have put him out v. 2. 13. 2. They were gathered together in the name of the Lord Iesus and were by the power of the Lord Iesus to deliver the offender to Satan for his humbling that is to cast him out of the Church into the world where Satan reignes v. 4. 5. 3. A little leven leveneth the whole lump v. 6. wherevpon the Apostle alluding to the ancient custome of putting leven out of the houses when the Passeover was eaten bids the Church purge out the old leven that is the incestuous man that they might be a new lump v. 7. shewing therein that they were sowred become an old lump in not purging him out els what need they do any thing to become new But here sundry things are objected by Mr Bernard As first that a man may be where leven is and yet not be levened if he take not leven If by taking leven he mean enclyning or falling into the same sin it is idle to imagine that the whole Church was in any such daunger of incest Where 2. he addes that a man reproving the offender complayning of him and seeking as he may in his place reformation as Cloe did is not levened he colours with a few good words many fowl errours First that Cloe complayned of the incestuous man which was not so she coÌ„playned of the contentions amongst the Corinthians but that of the incestuous persoÌ„ was rather brought to Paul by common fame then otherwise 1 Cor. 5. 1. 2 That it is sufficient for the people yea or the Ministers eyther to reprove an offender so to complayn to the Bishops court of him 3. That a man is discharged if he seek reformation as he may in his place whereas it is first required a man have such a place or be in such a-Church as is capable of Gods ordinances and wherein he may vse the meanes for reformation which Christ hath left other wise his very place and standing is not of God nor may be by him continued Laâ—tly where he sayth that the incestuous man had not levened the Corinthians bycause Paul sayth ye are vnlevened v. 7. it is an ill collection For they were unlevened or sweet bread in their persons that is sanctified by the spirit but sowred or levened in the lump of communion by suffering that wicked man vncensured and the Apostles desire is that that wicked man might be cast out of the society that as they were severally pure or in their persons so the whole Church together or masse might be pure which before was polluted with his contagion 4. The Corinthians had formerly been taught by Paul not to coÌ„pany or be coÌ„mingled with fornicators covetous persons c that is according to the drift of the whole Chapter to cast them out and so haue neyther spirituall nor civil familiarity with them ver 9. here he reproves them for fayling in that duty 5. They to whom Paul writ were to judg them that were within are charged to use that power in putting away froÌ„ among themselves thaâ— wicked man v 12. 13. And thus the evidence for the first point is clear that they to whom Paul writ which were to be gathered together were to be gathered into the name of Christ by his power to bynde or deliver to Satan the offender as Math 18 18 19 20. were to purge out the old leven not to be commingled with the ungodly to judge them that were within to put away from among themselves the obstinately wicked And it is most untruly unconscionably affirmed by this man Pag 92. as I haue formerly observed that all that can be gathered from this place is that the censures are to be executed with the publick knowledge of them that are gathered together Now the 2. consideration is who those persons are thus to be gathered together upon whose shoulders the Apostle layes this duty of delivering to Satan purging but puting away judging this wicked man And for this I need no more then M B own confession in the place before named pag 92. where he expresly affirmeth that by them that there meet together is meant the body of the Church And though he and all the world should deny it yet would the truth of God stand which I thus manifest 1. They among whom the fornicatour was out of the middest of whom he was to be put which were puffed vp when they had rather cause of
sorowing to them the Apostle writes them he reproves they were to be gathered together for the excommunicating purging out judging the offender v. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. And therefore the duety here enjoyned as well concorns the brethren as the officers except we will say the fornicatour was onely among and in the middest of the officers to put from amongst them and left amongst the people still and that the officers onely were puffed vp when they should have sorrowed and not the brethren with them 2. It concerned the people as well as the Preists in the type shadow to put away leven out of their houses to keep the Passeover with unlevened bread and so in the truth and substance to purge and put out this leven Paul speaks of namely the incestuous person v. 7 8. 3. The Apostle admonisheth them that were not to be commingled with fornicators nor to eat with them v. 9. 10. 11. this duety I hope as well concerned the brethren as the officers 4. They with whom Paul deals are commaunded to put the wicked man from among themselves v 13. so that the same persons froÌ„ among whom he is to be put are to put him away which are both officers people And so I conclude that the rule praescribed by Christ Math 18. the practise of the same rule coÌ„mended by Paul 1. Cor. 5. do severally joyntly couple combine together the Elders people in th 〈…〉 ing of an offender the officers going before the brethren 〈…〉 ng in their order the women lastly by silent coÌ„sent wherin the scriptures distinguish them from the men 1 Cor 14. 14. 1 Tim 2. 12. To these things I will adde in the last place the consideration of a scripture to wit a Cor 2. 6. which M. B many others with him think of force sufficient to dash in peices all that hath been or can be spoken for the brethrens liberty right in the fore-handled busines But as I have formerly answered the objections forced from this scripture agaynst the truth I hold so will I here set down one Argument or two very pregnant except I be deceived for the confirmation of it from the same scripture the context thereof 1. They whom the Apostle by his letter made sorry for their fayling in the casting out of the incestuous man and that with a sorrow to repentaunce manifesting it self with great indignation zeale they were â—â— reprove and censure him and so did to his reformation and their own clearing which that it was not the case of the officers alone but of the brethren with them appeares in these scriptures 1 Cor. 5. 1. 2. with 2 Cor. 2. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 2. Paul writes not onely to the officers but to the brethren as well as to them to forgive or loose to comfort confirm their love toward the same person vpon his repentance 2 Cor. 2 7. 8. therein plainly witnessing that the brethren as well as the officers had bound rebuked and manifested their indignation against the sin and the person for it Now this point in hand I will conclude with the observation of a practise yet continued in use in the Church of England which is that persons excommunicated for notorious sinns before they be absolved are to do their pennance as they call it in the parrish Churches wherof they are and there to ask the whole Church forgivenes Now I would know of you Mr B. whether the church have power to forgive the parties sin as men can forgive sin yea or no If you say no you discover the shame of your Church thus prophanely to take in vayn the name of God and to make a mock of Christ ordinances if you answer affirmatively then you graunt the power of Christ to forgive to loose sinns so consequently to reteyn and binde them to be in the body of the Church for which I contend The truth is there is no such power in the parish assemblies as now they stand they can neyther bind the sinner nor reâ—â—yn his sin be he to theÌ„ never so impenitent or loose him and his sin seem his repentance vnto them never so full and vnfeighned these knots are to be tyed and loosed onely by the Chauncelours or Officials singers this power have they enclosed with hedge and ditch and as things are judged at their tribunal so must the captived Church take them and will it nill it receive or refuse the party accordingly The Prelates and their substitutes have seazed the substance and kernel as it were into their hands â—aving the poore people onely the shell and shadow to feed vpon And yet this very formall shadow stil remayning in the Apostate asseÌ„blies i◠〈◊〉 to bewray how substaÌ„tiall a power the Churches of Christ were possessed of in their constitution This shell that remaynes shewes where the 〈…〉 hath been And as in this so is it in sundry other paints When the Bishop ordeynes a Minister he bids him 〈…〉 pel though he have been his porter be known vnable to read sensibly he vseth also thâ—sâ— words tâ—ke thou authority 〈…〉 though it may be he is an 〈…〉 dred milâ—â— off but never in thâ— place wherein he is to minister he gives him charge also to monster the 〈◊〉 of Christâ— as the Lord hath commanded though he be but the Bishops mans man to exequute his iudgements which formes of speach notwithstanding serue to shew what the Ministers ought to dâ—â— and where and by whose election they ought to be appointed though in truth they do or be nothing lesse And â—hâ—â— God by his providence continueth vnworn out in the degenerate assemblyes such steps and sâ—adles as may serve to shame them by shewing vnto all that will see how where things have stood by Christs appointment in his Church which do also very well consort with the disposition of Antichrist whose property is vnder a formall flourish for Christ to fight against him in his truth and ordinances Our â— reckoned errour is That the sin of one mâ—n publiquely and obstinately stood in being not reformed nor the offender cast out doth so pollute the whâ—le congregation that none may coÌ„municate with the same in any of the holy things of God though it be a Church rightly constituted till the party be excommunicated This Position thus set downe I deny with Mr Ainsworth though with him and Mr Smyth I do vndertake the confirmation of that truth which in his refutation Mr B goes about to impugne And that is that the whole communion in the Church of England is so polluted with prophane and scandalous persons as that even in this respect alone were there none other there were just cause of separation from it And to this purpose I will lay down a ground vpon which I do build whatsoever I speak in this point which I intreat the reader hâ—re and
Tridentine councell are the doctrine of the Church of Rome and if you will in stead of Prophets to teach your significant ceremonies the cap surplice crosse typpet which are neyther dark nor dumb but apt to stir vp the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by some notable signification Here is drosse for silver and for the finest wheat chasse Lastly your Prophets which administer that part of Christs prophecy or of the scriptures which may be taught and practised amōgst you haue neyther the true office of ministery which Christ hath prescribed nor a lawfull calling to that they have as hath been in part noted from Ephe. 4. and is els where clearly evinced Now Christs preistly office you do corrupt and prophane vnsufferably whether we respect the persons or things whereof you make him a mediator Are those Atheists and vngodly persons wherewith you cōfesse in the beginning of your book your Church is full and which if you should deny heaven and earth would witnes against you are they I say their soules and bodyes those lively holy and acceptable sacrifices and offerings sanctified by the holy Ghost Are those devised printed and stinted collects read out of your humane service-book the spirituall sacrifices of prayer and thanks-giving which the spirit of God teacheth the sonnes of God to offer the fruits and calves of the lipps which confesse his name Is that constreyned payment of a weekly or monethly rate and assesment for the poore more fitly called a malevolence for the ill will it is payd with then a benevolence that gratious cheerfull care for the saynts that freewill offering of love and mercy that sweet smelling odour that acceptable and well pleasing sacrifice vnto God Are these I say those sacrifices for which Iesus Christ the eternall high preist appeareth for ever before his father in heaven that he might offer them vnto him in the golden censure perfumed with the odours of his own righteousnes or are they to be sanctified by the golden altar of his merits standing before the throne of God Rev. 8. 3. 4. Math. 23. 19. A lesse indignity sure it was to lay vpon the materiall Altar in the tabernacle or temple doggs swine vultures and all vncleane beasts and byrds with their durt and dung then thus to lay vpon this heavenly altar those unclean beasts and byrds whereof Babylon is an habitation and cage And for Christs kingly office who is able to set down the indignities outrages offered in your Church to the scepter therof For first where Christ reigneth as the King in Syon his holy mountayn ruling over his servants and subjects onely as the King of saints vnder his father you have gathered him a kingdom crowned him the King thereof contrary to his expresse will of known traytours and rank rebels vnto his crown and dignity even of such as do visibly and apparantly fight for Satan and his kingdom the kingdom of darknes hating deriding and persecuting to the vtmost of their power all such as desire to please and serve Christ in any sincerity Of such and none other doth the body of your Church consist for the greatest part as all amongst you that feare God will testify with me 2. Where Christ ruleth over his subjects by the scepter of his holy word which is a scepter of righteousnes in the place of it the vngodly canons and constitutions of Popes and Prelates must and do bear sway Such subjects such lawes And say not Mr B. as you do in answer to Mr Ainsworth pag. 259. that you acknowledge no other law-giver over your consciences in matters of saith and obedience between Christ and you save him alone For what doth your Church representative but bind conscience in binding men to subscribe to the Hierarchy service-book and ceremonies spont◠et exanimo in pressing men to the vse of things reputed indifferent absolutely and whether they offend or offend not in tying men to a certayn form of prayer thanksgiving excommunicating men for the refusall and omission of these and the like observances of their lawes And vvhat do you but loose and vnbind the conscience in tolerating yea approving yea making and ordeyning vnpreaching Ministers and in binding the people vnder both civil and ecclesiasticall penalties to their ministrations in their own parishes and from others And what do you els in your dispensations for pluralities non-Recidency and the like Are not these matters of conscience with you Mr B. wherein your lawes and law-makers bynde and loose as they list All the lawes and ordinances for the ministery and government of the Iewish Church were matters of faith and obedience between God and the Church bynding the consciences of the people and is the new testament lesse perfect then the old and the lawes and ordinances for the administration of it lesse excellent and of a baser foundation then the former It matters not what your words are since it appeares by your deeds that you vsurp the throne of Christ in appointing officers and making lawes for the government and administration of his kingdome the Church and those many of them to the abolishing of his herein rather holding Christ as a captive then honouring him as a King 3. Where Christ hath given to his Church liberty power and commaundement every one of them severally and all of them joyntly to reprove and reform disorders and whatsoever is found whether person or thing faulty and disagreing vnto his word alasse this liberty is enthralled this power lost this commaundement made of no force The Prelates haue seazed all these royalties into their hands as though they alone were made partakers of Christs kingly annoynting were as Kings to rule in his Church Here is a King in a great measure without subjects without lawes without officers without power But here I must needs observe a few things about two answers given by Mr B. in his 2. book to two of Mr Ainsworths obiections about the matter in hand To the former being about the officers of Christ in the Church he answereth that they have Christs officers appointed to govern the civil Magistrate the Kings Maiesty the ruling Elder next vnder Christ c. and the ecclesiasticall governours vnder him the Bishops who are also Pastours and Doctours But you should have considered Mr Bern. that the question is not about civill but ecclesiasticall governours The King in deed is to govern in causes ecclesiasticall but civilly not ecclesiastically vsing the civil sword not the spirituall for the punishing of offendours And if the King be a Church officer then he is first a King of the Church ◠to be called to his office and so deposed from it by the Church or at least by other ecclesiasticall persons by whom alone you will have Church officers made And lastly if the King be such a ruling Elder as the scriptures speak
The Prophet Ieremy speâ—king in the name of the Lord of the calling of the Gentiles into the new covenaunt or testament as the authour to the Hebrewes expoundeth him testifieth that with whom soever the Lord would make that testament or covenant he would put his law in their mind and write them in their heart and so be their God and make them his people and that they should all know him from the least to the greatest and that he would be mercifull vnto their sâ—â—nes and remember their iniquities no more But your nationall Ch never came within the coÌ„passe of this promise that all in it should know the Lord haue their sinnes forgiven them and his lawes written in their heart Therefore your nationall Church is not within the Lords covenaunt nor ever 〈…〉 nor his people having him for their God Your exceptious in your 2. book to this Argument are insufficient The first is that by this exposition hypocritâ—s should not be under the covenaunt bycause the law of God is not written in their harts But my answer is that hypocrites in respect of God and his secret invisible and approving will and calling are not of the Church nor under the covenaunt but in respect of men of the revealed will of God according to which meÌ„ must judge all that are outwardly holy have their sinns forgiven and the law of God written in their harts And to your 2. exception namely that the place is not vnderstood barely of a member of the visible Church but so of it as withall he be an elect saynt I do answer it is true you say â—oÌ„sidering what bare members of the visible Church you make of what members your Church is most what made even such as ar both bare and empty of all grace and appearance of grace But let them be such in any measure as of whom the Lord in his word gives approbation and whom he entitles to the visible ordinances in his Church and then they are not barely visible members as you speak but elect saynts also in the respects formerly mentioned It is evident that both Ieremy and the Apostle to the Hebrewes speak of the new testament or covenant of grace whereof Christ is the mediatour in his own blood opposed to the old testament and covenaunt of works established by Moses in the blood of bulles and goates and of the persons with whom the Lord makes this covenant and which haue legacies in this will and testament of Christ which he hath also confirmed by his death which do all know God and have his law written in their harts and their sinns pardoned And there is nothing more derogatory to the grace of God and blood of Christ then that any within the compasse of this covenant of grace or having a portion in this testament established in Christs blood should not haue his iniquities forgiven and his heart sanctifyed by the spirit truely or in appearance as he is truely or apparantly partaker of the former graces And here also appears the vanity of your third exception so oft repeated by you to wit that you are not all without the law of God written in your harts and without the forgivenes of sinnes but that some of you have obteyned this grace As though the quaestion were of some few in your Church not of the whole Church If you minded what you had in hand you should see that to prove your Church within the covenaunt of the new testament you were bound to manifest not that some few but that all the members of it were at the least in the constitution partakers of those promises wherein it is established the reason is bycause not some few severally but all the members joyntly considered do make the Church Iohn in the Revelation describing the Locusts sayth of them that they had faces like the faces of men hayre like the hayre of women Doth it therefore follow they were men or womeÌ„ bycause they had eyes mouthes noses some other meÌ„bers that men women haue So neyther is a profane people a true Christian Church or body of Christ for some few Christianlike persoÌ„s vâ—tequally yoked with them since the Church or body as I haue formerly sayd consisteth not of some few but of all the members coupled and combyned together in one communion And thus much to prove that lewd vngodly persons so continuing are uncapable of the new covenant or testament consumed by the death of Christ and that they haue no fellowship or vnion with God in Christ in whom alone he establisheth his covenant and if any man will affirm the contrary not I but Iohn by the word of God reproveth him expressely for a lyar And in deed what more impudeÌ„t untruth can there be affirmed then that an apparant visible lim of Satan should be an apparant or visible member of Christ or that gracelesse persons should be within the covenant of grace and salvation as is that covenâ—â—t into which the Lord gathereth and in which he uniteth his Ch vnto himself For conclusion of this point let the reader observe that as the Church is essentially constituted by this vnion of the meÌ„bers with God and one with another so consider it as an ecclesiasticall policy instituted by Christ the King thereof and then that form or ordâ—r of government which he hath set and which the Apostolik Churches vsed and enjoyed is the form of it as it is in all other poâ—iciâ—s corporations and coÌ„mon wealthes in the world Which form of government the Church of England is so far from enjoying aâ— it hates worse then Papists all that in any measure desire it Now as from the matter form of the Church concurring do arise the properties so would Mr B. in the next place iustify against us that the congregations amongst them have the true visible properties of the Church which he makes three in number the first their continuance in heâ—â—â—ng of the dâ—â—h me of Christ reâ—râ—ved and vsing of the sacraments and prayer 2. the holding out of this truth and the sacraments as banners displayed against the enemy 3. a care for the welfare of all and every one for the whole and each for other though in his 2. book as if it â—ad not been he 1. the hâ—ldinâ— out of the profession of the person covenaÌ„ted with Christ Iesus 2. the holding the words of the covenantâ— the written wâ—â—â— of God 3. the m 〈…〉 ng of the publication of this covenant by the 〈◊〉 and 〈…〉 the assemblies are become the properties of the Church as if the Church were as chaungeable in her properties as 〈◊〉 in his And here I must needs take knowledge of Mr B. distinction in his 2. book betwixt the properties and priviledges of the Church and the rather bycause he layes it down with great ostentation for our learning as he sayth His distinction is that properties arise from within the Church
more then tyme I come to the mayn controversie about succession which might be layd down summarily in these words whether the reformed Churches were bound to submit notwithstanding their separation from Rome vnto such ministers onely as were ordeyned by the Pope and his Bishops but for the better clearing of things I will enlarge my speach to these three distinct considerations First whether the Ministery be before the Church or no. 2. Whether the delegated power of Christ for the vse of the holy things of God be given primarily and immediately to the Church or to the Ministers 3. Whether the Lord haue so linked the Ministery in the chayn of succession that no Minister can be truely called and ordeyned or appointed without a praecedent Minister Touching the first of these Mr Ber affirmeth as in his former book that the Officers make the Church and give denomination vnto it so expresly in his 2. book that the Ministery is before the Church And noting in the same place a two fold raysing vp of the Ministery the first to beget a Church the second when the Church is gathered he puts the Ministers in both before the Ch in the former absolutely in the latter in respect of their Office and ordination by succession from the first In which discourse he intermingleth sundry things frivolous vnsound and contradictory Now for the first entery I desire the reader to observe with me that the quaestion betwixt Mr Bernard and me is about ordinary Ministers or officers of the Church such as were the first Ministers of the reformed Churches and as Mr B and I pretend our selves to be and not about extraordinary Ministers extraordinarily miraculously or immediately raysed vp as were Adam and the Apostles by God and Christ whom he produceth for examples Admit the one sort being called immediately and miraculously may be before the Church yet cannot the other which must be called by men and those eyther the Church or members of the Church at the least Besides the word Minister extends it self not onely vnto Officers ordinary and extraordinary but even to any outward means whether person or thing by which the revealed will of God is manifested and made known vnto men for their instruction and conversion Yea it reacheth even to God himself so far Mr B. stretcheth it where he makes God the first preacher Gen. 2. 3. As though there were a controversy between him and me whither God or the Church were first I see not but by the same reason he might avouch that the Ministers of the Church could not all dy or be deceived bycause God is free from these infirmityes It is true which Mr B. sayth that the word is before the Church as the seed which begetteth it and so is that which brings it yea whither it be person or thing which may also be called a Minister and be sayd to be sent of God as it is an instrument to convey and means to minister the knowledg of the same word will of God vnto any So if any private man or woman should be a means to publish or make known the word of God to a company of Turkes Iewes or other Idolaters he or she might truely be sayd to be their Minister and the Lords Ambassadour vnto thē as you speak Yea if they came to this knowledg by reading the Bible or other godly book that book or bible as it served to minister the knowledg of Gods wil in his word might truely in a generall sense be accoūted as a Minister vnto thē But what were all this to a Church-officer about whō our quaestiō is These things Mr B. shuffles together but the wise reader must distinguish them so doing he shall easily discover his trisling The particulars follow And first he affirmeth that God made Adam a Minister to whom he gave a wife to begin the Church and as Adam was before his wife so is the Ministery at the first before the Church If Adams wife began the Church then is your mayn foundation overthrown namely that the ministers make and denominate the Church except you will say that Eve was a Minister Secondly it is not true you say that God made Adam a Minister before Eve was created In the same place you make and truely a Minister and Ambassadour which brings the word all one vnto whom could Adam eyther minister the word or be an Ambassadour to bring it before Eve was formed There was nothing but bruit beasts and senceles trees and to them I suppose he brought it not The truth is Adam and Eve were the Ch. not by his but by her creatiō which made a company or society thus we are in the first place to consider of them and of Adam as a teacher in the second place the speciall calling here and ever following after and vpon the generall Of the same force with your first proof is your 2. which you take from Ephes. 4. 11. 12. where it is sayd God gave some not onely to confirm the Church but to gather the Saynts to make a Church To let passe your boldnes with the words I except against your exposition application of them The word gathering vpon which you insist is in some bookes turned repayring and is the same in the Greek with that which is restoring Gal. 6. 1. of which I have spoken formerly Againe Paul in that place speaks not onely of Apostles other Ministers of the first raysing vp for the begetting of Churches but of Pastours and Teachers which were taken out of the Church and of the 2. raysing for the feeding of the flock You will not deny but the Apostles and brethren at Ierusalem were a Church of God Act. 1. 15. 16. when as yet no Pastours or Teachers were appointed in it and how then can your doctrine stand that the Ministers spoken of Ephe. 4. 11. 12. amongst which were Pastours and Teachers were before the Church out of which they were taken and raysed vp of God to beget a Church Yea it is evident that the very office of Pastour vvas not then heard of in the Church whereby the falsity of your other affirmation is discovered to wit that the Office of such Ministers as are of the second raysing which are taken out of the Church is before the Church Thirdly the Apostles themselves howsoever extraordinary officers immediately called and sent forth to beget other Churches both of Iewes and Gentiles were Christians before they were Apostles and members of the Church before they were Officers And the scriptures do expresly testify that God ordeyned or set in the Church Apostles amongst other Officers and this their setting in the Church doth necessarily praesuppose a Church wherein they were set as the setting of a candle in a candlestick praesupposeth a candlestick as in deed the Church is the Candlestick the officers the candles lights and starres which are set in it
haretiques may not be heard â—herefore vsurpers may You might as sensibly argue thus bycause a fornicatour must not be eaten with but iudged by the Church therefore a covetous person an idolatour a rayler may be eaten with and must not be judged contrary to the Apostles expresse writing In your 9. charge namely that we hold it not lawful to ioyn in prayer with any of you and in your comment vpon it you do vs a double injury first in saying we approve not of any of your praying for vs 2. That wee pray for you onely as wee do for Iewes Turks and Papists For as wee are perswaded we fare the better for the prayers of many amongst you and so both approve of and desire the same so do wee also pray for many as for the Lords people in Babylon and that they may at the Lords call go out of her and that as they are holy in their persons so they may be also in their Church communion and ordinances Now for the poynt it self first for your Reason by which you would prove it erroneous If say you wee hold any of you the childreÌ„ of God then our Saviour hath taught vs to ioyn with you in prayer and to say Our father with you You do wryte in another place of this book that a man justly excommunicated cast out is to be held a brother so consequently a child of God for the brethren of the Saynts are the children of God wherevpon if your Argument in this place and Position in the former place be good it must be lawfull to joyn in prayer with a man justly excommunicated I do answer then that it is true you say we ought to coÌ„municate both in prayer in al the other ordinances of God with all Gods children except they themselves hinder it or put a barre which we are perswaded they in the Church of Engl. do in chusing rather the coÌ„munioÌ„ of all the profane rowt in the kingdom vnder the Prelates tyranny then the coÌ„munion of Saynts which Christ hath established vnder his government So that it is not we which refuse them but they vs binding vs eyther to practise as we do or to coÌ„municate in one spirituall body with all the graceles persons and vile miscreants in the kingdom For as he which hath hold of any one member of the naturall body iâ— not separated from the body but holdeth the whole every member by cohaerence so he which is joyned in coÌ„munioÌ„ with one meÌ„ber of the Church is by cohaerence joyned with the whole Church and every member of it We do professe it is not in neglect of the graces of God which we acknowledge to be eminent in many that we deny coÌ„munioÌ„ with them but onely in conscience of the order which Christ hath set in testimony against the disorder which Antichrist hath brought into left in the world The order which the Lord hath set is that those which fear him should be of a true visible Church rightly gathered that any such should be out of the true Church or coÌ„mingled with all the prophane Atheists in a kingdom is a mayn part of Antichrists confusion Now if God hath set vs in the orderly coÌ„munioÌ„ of a Church we must not break our order for other mens disordered courses CoÌ„munion is a matter of order relation standing in the orderly combyning of the graces of God in two faythfull persons or more And how far order ought to praevayl with men in this case let these particulars manifest One of the Church coÌ„mits some notable sinne known to me alone which being dealt with by me he denyes and without two or three witnesses the Church may not proceed against him I must therefore still coÌ„municate with the Church and so with him as a meÌ„ber of it til God so far discover him as he can be orderly dealt with till the Lord lead him forth with the workers of wickednes And as I am to coÌ„municate with an vngodly man with whom I am orderly joyned in the Church till I can be orderly disioyned from him so by proportion I am to forbear communion with a godly man out of the Church vntill I be orderly joyned vnto him Further put the case a man be excoÌ„municated in mine absence vpon the testimony of tvvo or three witnesses and that I know he is injuryed am able to manifest his innocency to all men yet will I for order sake so am bound forbear communion with him for the praesent till his iÌ„nocency be by me sufficiently cleared Now if for order I must refuse coÌ„munion with him which is put out of the Church for weldoing by the sinne of others how much more with him that keepes out himself by his own default and sinne So that the holines of a mans person is not sufficient for coÌ„munioÌ„ but withall it must be ranged into the order of a Ch wherin both his persoÌ„ actioÌ„s must coÌ„byne vnder whose censure they must come whereas this other vnorderly course destroyes the censures which by Christs appointmeÌ„t do exteÌ„d to every brother whosoever These thinges I do desire the godly Reader indifferently and without offence to take knowledge of and to rest in this our defence if it be found according to the word of God if not to give vs knowledge by the same word of the contrary wherein we shall willingly rest and by the grace of God so practise Our 10. reckoned Errour is that ministers may not celebrate mariage nor bury the dead And this M. B affirmes we say but without scriptures First you that charge our opinioÌ„ with errour should so haue proved it by the scriptures or some Reasons from them 2. You speak against your own knowledge having seen our wrytings especially our Apology where in the 3. Petition to the KING and the fourth braunch of the sixth Position there are almost twenty severall scriptures and nine distinct reasons grounded vpon them to prove that the celebration of mariage and buryall of the dead are not ecclesiasticall actions apperteyning to the ministery but civill and so to be performed You your self M B both affirme and prove in this book from 1 Cor 12. 4. that the Lord onely praescribes the dutyes to be done in every distinct office of ministery in the Church And the Apostle testifieth that the scriptures being divinely inspired do make perfect and fully furnished the man of God or minister to every good work of his calling Now I suppose M. B will not be so ill advised as to goe about to prove that the celebration of mariage and buryall of the dead are duetyes praescribed by the Lord Iesus to be done in the Pastours office or that the scriptures lay this furniture vpon the man of God for the proper workes of his office They are then other spiritual Lordes then the Lord Christ that prescribe these
who relating to Laban the prayer he made for direction in the buesines doth not vse the same words when he tels him what he sayd in his prayer It seems in his vnderstanding a man might say thus thus in prayer though he vsed not the same words if he spake to the same purpose Many more scriptures might I bring as others have done before me to prove that these words and particles upon which these men vvould recken the words of their prayers do no way enjoyn any such stint of words and sillables but onely a similitude of matter and are for direction therein It is evident in the scriptures that neyther Moses nor the Preists or other holy men stinted themselves to these words 1 Sam. 1. 17. and 2. 20. Deut. 33. 1. 2. c. 2 Chron. 6. 3. 4. c. Thirdly why do not the ministers now ty themselves to this form of words in blessing the people they being the Lords Preists and Levites the Ch the Israel of God This blessing was no ceremony or shadow to be abolished but moral perpetual 4. If the Lord Iesus in directing his disciples to pray praescribe them a certayn form of words to be vsed when he bids them pray thus or after this manner when they pray say then eyther Mathew or Luke misse in Christs intendement for they as all may see record not the same certayn form of words If defence be made that they speak of two severall tymes wherein Christ gave this direction I answer such a man that if that be graunted it makes against him for Christ inteÌ„ded the same thing in both places at both times wherevpon it followes that the vse of a certayne form of words was no part of Christs intendement It is evident that these words of Christ pray thus and when you pray say are a commandement binding his Church to the worlds end in all places and at all tymes and that when you pray say is as much as whensoever or â—â— what tyme soever you pray say as when they deliver you up Math. 10. 19. when one sayth I am Pauls c. 1 Cor. 3. 4. when ye come together c. Chap. 14. 26. is as much as when or at what tyme soever they deliver you when soever one sayth I am Pauls whensoever yee come together And to let passe all other scriptures in the 6 of Mathew where Christ delivers this form speaks of this and the like matters when thou givest thine almes v 2. when thou prayest v 5. when ye fast v 16. that is whensoever thou givest almes fastest or prayest Wherevpon it followeth necessarily that if Christ the Lord intended a set form of words when he directed his disciples to pray and bad them when ye pray say then whensoever we pray we must vse that very form of words none other For the words of Christ are not a permission as the Ministers insinuate but an absolute commaundement neyther is the quaestion as they vntruely lay it down whether it be lawfull to vse these very words in prayer but whether it be necessary and that when or whensoever we pray for that which Christ intends he commands and what he commaunds he coÌ„maunds to be done when or whensoever wee pray And these things considered it is no absurd obiection as these Ministers make it that we never read the Apostles did use this prescript form of words in prayer For reading of many formes of prayer they vsed and never of this wee are assured that Christ did not stint them to this form of words nor coÌ„maund them when they prayed to vse them for then they had sinned when they prayed and vsed them not Christ Iesus in the same place teacheth his disciples as well touching almes fasting as prayer and in particular that when they fast they should annoynt their head and wash their face Now who is so ignorant as to affirm that Christs purpose herein is to bind them to these ceremonies and why not as well as to ty them to these very words He sayth as well when thou fastest annoynt thine head and wash thy face as when thou prayest say Our Father c. yea touching prayer it self he as well directs and teacheth his disciples what or how to do as what or how to speak He sayth as well when thou prayest enter into the Chamber shut the dore as when thou prayest say Our Father As then the purpose of Christ in teaching his disciples when they fast to annoynt their head and wash their face and when they pray to enter into their chamber and to shut the dore is not to ty them to that very form of ceremony but to advertise them to beware of all hypocrisy vain-glory in these things so when he teacheth them to pray on this manner his purpose is not to ty them to the very form of words but to admonish them to beware of all vayn bablings and superstitious repetitions and to ask in fayth of God the father who knowes their wants beforehand v 7. 8. Lastly as wee are commaunded to pray the Lords prayer as it is called so are we to preach the word of God But as if a man take the scriptures and read them or some part of them vnto the people or commit the same to memory and so vtter it this is not preaching so neyther is the reading of this praescript or repeating it by memory praying Indeed in preaching we must ever make the scriptures our text and groundwork and must speak according vnto them and may take a verse two or more vse them even word for word as they fit our occasion and may be applyed to our purpose so in praying we must make this praescript ever as it were the text and groundwork of our prayer must pray according vnto it and may vse a petition two or more or all in or of it even word for word if so the holy Ghost by whose immediate teachings and suggestions all our requaests must be put vp do direct vs and that wee can apply the same words to our present occasions and needs The same which I have sayd touching the preaching of the word may be added in respect of the administration of the sacraments The Apostle writing to the Corinthians about the Lords supper advertiseth them that he received of the Lord that which he delivered vnto them Now he that looks into the 3. Evangelists that mention this institution and compares eyther one of them with another or Paul with any of them he shall finde that the ordinance stands not at all in the prescript form of words wherein they all differ ech from others It is evident that the Lord administred this supper but once that in a certayn form of words And that which the Lord delivered vnto his disciples these four pen-men of the Holy Ghost delivered to the Churches Now the great