before he instituted the Church of the New Testament after he was pleased to use the Ministery of the Church Acts 1. to choose two and take one of them immediately by a lot and when Paul was called he appeared to him immediatly and called him both to the faith and to his Apostleship whereby it is clear that their call is a reserved case Reply If Ministers dispense the seals as the stewards of Christ from whom they receive their authority immediately then the power of the Keys is not in the community of the faithfull if as the servants of the Church from which they derive their authority then the Office of a Minister is not the immediate gift of Christ nor the Minister so much the servant of Christ as of the Church from whom he must receive Lawes in whose names he must doe his Office and to whom he must give account Answ This Objection will hold as strongly against any other subject of the Keys that can bee named as Classes Synods or Church Catholick and therefore by this manner of reasoning the Lord Jesus must doe all things immediately himself in choosing Officers c. or else his Ministers must receive Laws doe all in the name of such as he delegates to that work of administration under him and therefore let others look to answer this Objection as well as we Our answer is briefly plainly this the Office is the immediate institution of Christ the gifts and power belonging thereto are from Christ immediately and therefore he ministers in his name and must give account to him 1 Pet. 5. and yet his outward cal to this Office whereby he hath authority to administer the holy things of Christ to the church is from Christ by his Church and this makes him no more the servant of the Church then a Captain by the leave of the Generall chosen by the Band of Souldiers is the servant of his Band. Wee see in this reply here and elsewhere how apt men are to cast this odium upon this Doctrine and to ranke us with Separatists in it but it is easily wiped off and stickes as fast upon the Classes Synods Catholick Church or any other subject of this power Reply If the communitie of the faithfull have to doe in all matters of the body to admit members cast out make and depose Ministers c. by authority from Christ wee cannot see how in your judgement the execution of the power of the Keys is concredited to the Ministers Answ If the power priviledge and liberty of the people be rightly distinguished from the authority of the officers as it ought a dim sight may easily perceive how the execution of the Keys by the officers authoritatively may stand with the liberties of the people in their place obedientially following and concurring with their guides so long as they goe along with Christ their King and his Lawes and cleaving in their obedience to Christ dissenting from their guides when they forsake Christ in their ministrations if there need an ocular demonstration hereof it is at hand in all civill administrations wherein the execution of Laws and of justice in the hands of the Judges and the priviledge power or liberty of the people in the hands of the Jurours Both sweetly concurre in every case both civill criminall neither is the use of a Jury onely to finde the fact done or not done as some answer this instance but also the nature and degree of the fact in reference to the Law that awards answerable punishments as whether the fact be simple theft or burglary murder or manslaughter c. and so in cases of dammages costs in civill cases whereby it appeares that although the power and priviledge of the people be great yet the execution authoritatively may bee wholly in the Officers Reply Fourthly That which you adde that God will not vouchsafe his presence and blessing to an Ordinance but when it is dispensed by those whom hee hath appointed thereunto must be warily understood or it may occasion errors and distractions not a few c. Answ Wee shall not contradict your warinesse in this case for wee acknowledge a presence of God with his Ordinances administred by such as hee appoints though some corruptions bee admixed in the entrance and administrations but wee doubt not the presence and blessing of God is more or lesse according to the purity or corruptions of the administration and participation of his Ordinances but what need there was or use of this note wee see not our words were sound and safe enough but it seemes your tendernesse of the standings of Ministers and Ordinances in England occasioned this warinesse and wee deny not what you say that Gods presence and blessing upon his ordinances dispensed by us gave some approbation to our standing and to his Ordinances the Lord mercifully passing over our many corruptions but this will no way give allowance to the many grosse corruptions and defects which cleaved to our standings and administrations nor to the continuance of any in such corruptions after the discovery thereof Reply Secondly As for the assumption that Pastors and Teachers are limited to a particular Church or society but that flock is not ever one congregationall assembly meeting in one place neither the bond so straight whereby they are tyed to that one society that they may not upon occasion performe some ministeriall act of office in another congregation or to them that bee not set members of their proper assembly Answ For clearing of the the assumption that wee may give the more distinct answer wee shall take leave to explicate our selves concerning the limitation of the Ministery to the Church which it is like they who drew up the answer had formerly done had the times then been as criticall as they are growne since 1 When we say the Ministery is limited to a particular Church wee doe not so limit it to a Congregation under her owne Presbytery as to exclude from communion in the seales many Congregations standing under one common Presbytery as wee have formerly said we honour the reformed Churches of Christ Jesus and the godly members thereof 2 When wee say the seales are limited to a particular Church or Congregation because the Ministery is so limited our meaning is not of that congregation onely whereof the Ministry is but of any Congregation in generall 3 When wee say that where a Minister hath no power he may not do an act of power this is to be so understood that hee cannot performe such an act as an Officer over them or unto them as to his proper flock the office being as wee said founded in the relation betweene the Church and the Officer such a stated power as an Officer over his owne flocke hee hath not to those of other Congregations partaking in his owne Church or in any act of his Office in another Church yet an occasionall act of power or precaria potestas charitatively to put
to rise up against it with zeal and detestation a Minister godly and able will use any part of it with offence c. we suppose we had cause to fear and leave it doubtfull whether the godly might lawfully joyn with them therein and therefore we desire you to call back your sharp censure of such withdrawing as you conclude this passage withall or else we shal appeal to the reverend Assembly of Ministers and their late and godly Directory herein Reply Fifthly If these and such like scruples make it unlawfull to joyn in the ordinance of Worship we must hold communion with no society under heaven For may not the brethren which hold all stinted Liturgies and set Forms unlawfull say with like reason it is not lawfull to joyn with others in conceived Prayers if they give too little honor to it as conceiving the other lawful or sinfully limiting themselves to one stinted Form though conceived at first by themselves c. Answ We must in treat the Christian Reader still to carry in minde with what tendernesse we offered our selves in this point and upon what considerations we durst not wholly excuse and cleare such joyning as the case now stood and therefore we think these reasonings would be far differing from the case in hand and we would not be taken so as to justifie such rigid principles as these are We heartily joyn in the conclusion that such advancing of small differences would indeed bring all to confusion and we are far we hope from any such meaning If our answer in this or any other passage give just advantage to such separations we are heartily sorry for it but we hope what hath been said will satisfie the ingenuous and Christian Reader Reply Sixthly we have credibly heard that you hold fellowship with professed rigid separatists without acknowledging of their error and receive them as members or communicate with them in the priviledges of the Church though you professe you approve not their opinion or practice and if in godly wisdome you can see grounds to joyn with them we marvail you should be so timerous in this particular Answ Although in many of our Churches we know not that there be any such professed rigid Separatists that reject the Churches of England as no Churches and their Ministers as no true Ministers yet we deny not but some such there may bee in some of the Churches Whence we grant it may follow that we can have communion in Gods Worship with men of severall judgments yet we may be justly timerous of joyning or approving others to joyn in any part of a corrupt Worship in case of scandall c. we think these things have not the same face or shew of reason in them and therefore so long as they live peaceably with us we can well have fellowship with them as we have also with other that think it may be better of the Churches and wayes of it then there is cause in regard of the corruptions thereof so we be not bound to approve their opinions nor conform to any of their corrupt practises Reply Seventhly if to administer in a stinted Form be scandalous to such as separate it is scandall taken not given and we should do it the rather that they be not confirmed in their error the truth be not prejudiced needless scruples occasioned c. Answ 1 This is from the question for we dispute of your Liturgy not of any Liturgy or stinted Form 2 Take in the case in all its circumstances as before declared and it will appear scandall may be given at least we put the case of a scandall really given 3 How far a man in some cases of clear and undoubted truths may do a thing the rather for such reasons though others take offence we will not dispute but if for meat or by use of our liberty by eating of such meat as another accounts unclean we may destroy the work of God and therefore must not eat flesh nor drink wine nor any thing whereby a brother stumble c. Rom. 14 14 15 20 21. how dangerous then to use such corrupt Forms of Worship or any part thereof so much the rather when a weak brother stumbles at them we leave it to the Christian Reader to judge we doubt it will not agree with the rules of charity prescribed Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 8. CHAP. III. 3 Position That the children of godly and approved Christians are not to be baptized untill their Parents be set members of some particular Congregation 4 That the Parents themselves though of approved piety are not to be received to the Lords-supper untill they be admitted as set members Reply WHat is here premised to prevent mistakes doth seem more to raise then to abate scruples You refuse not all communion with all that are not church-Church-members and so much they professe who formerly have gone for and professed themselves Separatists from our assemblies you doe not appropriate these priviledges of the seals onely to members of your own Churches c. If you mean onely that the Sacraments administred in other Churches be true for substance it is no more then you will confesse of Rome If you deny not fellowship with them in the seals and to receive them to the Sacrament your judgement is against your practise or you exclude the Churches of England from the number of true Churches Answ We see not how such scruples could be raised without great mistake of our meaning our expressions were so plain and distinct For 1 What if some Separatists admit private communion with such yet they reject your Churches and Ministery as null which we doe not And many of them have refused also such private communion 2 We marvail how you could fall into such a mistake as to suppose we onely allow the truth of Sacraments for substance in other Churches when we speak in the same sentence of receiving satisfaction by Letters or otherwise concerning those we admit to the seales which plainly shew we speak of communion with such Churches 3 Concerning fellowship with those Churches we may admit members of them to the seales with us when we cannot always joyn with them in their administrations by reason of some sinfull corruptions wherein we must have actuall fellowship with them as your selves would not joyn in case you must kneel at the Lords-supper 4 Concerning the Dilemma We answer 1 Our practice is not crosse to this profession For such as come recommended from forein Churches and give such satisfaction as is meet we doe receive and such as have wholly cast off all relation to English Churches and live amongst us we have looked at as scattered stones till they joyn some where in a Church and themselves generally so judge of themselves but if any will hold to their membership in England and come orderly to communion with us we have not noâ— shall not under that notion refuse them if they be fit for the ordinances and therefore we exclude
not the English Churches out of the number and herein we deal no otherwise with them then with the members of our owne Churches Reply All possible care to keep the ordinances of God from contempt we allow and commend so you deny not Church priviledges to whom they are due nor the name of Churches to such as God hath blessed with meanes of grace and have râ—ceived the Tables and Seales and entred Covenant with God Your liberty to receive such satisfaction as is meet is not questioned nor whether you are to keep the bond of the spirit inviolable according to order but whether this be according to order to exclude from the Sacrament true visible Christians or known recommended Christians formerly members of visible Churches amongst us and their children and to put such difference between them and such as are in your Church order Answ 1 If the learned Author would hold to what here is granted we hope this controversie would soon be at an issue but it will appear after this order allowed binds onely in case of the Ministers to dispense Sacraments but Christians are left at a loose end in respect of combining themselves unto particular Churches according to the order of Christ which is the thing wee plead for 2 We have not denyed the name of Churches to such as are said to have plentifully the means of grace Tables Seales and Covenant 3 Concerning the stating of the question too much liberty is taken as in other cases for neither in the Position or in our Answer doe we limit the question to members in our Church order as here it is called but expresly extend the same to other Churches of Christ though through error or humane frailty defective in matters of order yea to the members of any true Church as in the Answer is said 2. Concerning such as come over and are for a time without Seales it is not because we refuse communion with them as being members of your Churches known or recommended Christians as you say For if any godly man remaining a member in any true Church with you or elswhere come so recommended or be well known to the Church we never under that notion refuse any but giving such other satisfaction as is meet shall readily receive them as we always professe and therefore we must still call for attendance to the state of this question in its right terms viz. whether the children of godly parents or themselves though of approved piety are to be admitted to the seales not being members of some particular Congregation or untill they be such CHAP. IV. Reply TO the first consideration If by the Church be understood the society of men professing the entire faith the seales are given to it as peculiar priviledges but if you understand a Congregationall assembly the seales were never appropriated to it Answ 1 Our meaning is plain in the second sense as may appear by the reasons alledged against any such universall Church as instituted and politicall wherein the seales are dispensed which reasons you answer not but grant there is no such Catholick Church in our sense pag. 21. And if no such Church wherein the seales are administred as we proved then the cause it self is yeelded and the seales must belong to particular Churches 2. Seeing the main hinge of this question turns upon this point to what Church the administration and participation of the seals belong wee shall a little further open our selves in this point And because we affect and study peace with truth we shall freely acknowledge First that as there is an invisible Church and Body of Christ consisting of all the elect effectually called throughout the world in all ages of it the whole family in heaven and earth so unto Jesus Christ all the visible beleevers and Churches of the world are as one body to him he governing protecting instructing all as his visible body Secondly we acknowledge a visible communion of all the true Churches of the Lord Jesus in all offices of brotherly love and in the holy things of Christ so far as may appear the Lord have ordained and commanded and by his Providence called them to exercise one with another Thirdly we grant that all true beleevers where-ever they bee have by faith in Christ a true right and interest unto Jesus Christ and all his benefits whatsoever he hath purchased for them but here we must first distinguish of these benefits of Christ whereof some are meerly spirituall inward and flowing immediately from Christ unto them and therefore peculiar to true beleevers as justification sanctification adoption accesse to God in prayer c. some are outward and tending to the help and furtherance of our spirituall communion with Christ being outward and visible meanes thereof and therefore are also extended to hypocrites being visible beleevers as the Ministery of the Word Seals Church-discipline c. And these cannot be dispensed by Christ immediately nor ordinarily but by means of a visible Church 2. We distinguish of right to these outward benefits of Christ which is either remote called jus ad rem or near and immediate called jus in râ— right to the enjoyment and fruition of it Now in the first sense we grant all visible beleevers have a right to seals c. But the immediate fruition of them they must have mediante Ecclesiâ visibili now here lyes the true state of the question Whether the Lord Jesus have ordained an universall visible Church in which and unto which by the Officers thereof all these outward visible priviledges and means of Grace are to be dispensed and immediately enjoyed of the faithfull or whether not the remote right but the immediate fruition and administration of all these ordinances by the institution of Christ be given to particular visible Churches and surely to whom one of these is given all are given For there is the same nature reason and use of all Ministry of the Word Seals Discipline all are outward ordinances priviledges means of Grace belonging to the visible Church where Christ hath given one he hath given all But we must confesse however you call this A new Church way it is new to us to read so much of late of such a Catholick Church to which administration of Seals Censures c. belong We are yet of the opinion of Baynes Parker and Cartwright c. that have against Papists and Prelates maintained that in the new Testament there is no instituted Catholick Nationall or Provinciall Church but onely the Church of a particular Congregation both for the reasons alledged in our Answer as also for the impossibility thereof in the days of the New Testament when the Lord Jesus sent his Apostles into all the world therefore impossible both in regard of distance of place and variety of language almost ever to meet in one so much as by representation and that not onely by accident as may befall a particular Church by sickness persecution c.
immediately flow from spirituall union and relation to Christ and his members but are dispensed by Christ to his people mediately and in such an order as he hath in wisdome ordained and this the nature of visible government and ordinances of Christ necessarily requires And hence it is that although the Church in its nature and essence and in respect of its spirituall union and relation to Christ and one another profession of the same faith c. have been always one and the same in all ages yet both the visible government and ordinances of Worship and also the instituted form and order of Church-societies hath been various according to the wisdome and will of Christ whereby it appears that the order government forms of visible Church-societies to which actuall enjoyment of visible ordinances doe belong cannot justly be deduced from the common nature of the Church Catholick or any respects of reason or logicall notions under which it may fall but onely this depends upon the will and pleasure of Christ who hath in all ages instituted the forms and orders of such Societies to whom the actual enjoyment of instituted ordinances was given And hence the argument for a nationall form of a Church to be in the New Testament as wel as in the Old drawn from the common nature essence prosession of faith c. of the Church in all ages falls flat to the ground for by the same reason it must then be in families onely now as it was about Abrahams time Propos 6. Hence it follows that the true state of this great dispute about a Catholick Church so far as tends to clear up to what Church the actuall administration of Church-government and all instituted Worship belongs doth not lye in the consideration of the common nature essence unity visibility or any other notions under which it may fall but the true state lyes here concerning the nature order form of such visible Societies as Christ Jesus by Divine institution in the Gospel hath reduced his visible members unto for the actuall and immediate enjoyment of all his instituted ordinances And therefore with due respect to the Godly-learned be it spoken we conceive many large disputes in this question fall short of the issue that is desired and intended for what if it be granted 1 That there is a Catholick visible Church which in some respects of reason as Mr. Ball saith is one that having partes visibiles is a totum visibile 2. That the visible Church is not onely a totum genericum in relation to all the particular Congregations as species specialissimae of a visible Church in generall which respect of reason in some sense we freely consent unto but also that it may fall under the notion of a totum integrale as some contend though we conceive in this notion they are so intangled in their own logicall principles as that they cannot get out without breaking them and flying to theologicall considerations yet we say what if that also be attained 3 Yea further what if this Catholick Church be in some respects of reason and order of nature also the first Church and particular Churches ortae 4 Yea further what if it were gained also by such disputes that the Keys and Officers Ordinances c. be given firstly to this Catholick Church as to the object and end We confesse we do not see that what our Brethren contend for is by all this obtained For first if the universall number of visible beleevers be one totum aggregatum yet it will bee hard to prove that these are one instituted and politicall Society that can enjoy visible communion together in visible Worship and government and yet more hard to prove that by the institution of Christ these all are to be actually governed as one totum Secondly what though the members of the Church Catholick be in order of time before particular Churches as being fit matter for them and constituting of them yet this proves not one politicall body before they combine but rather the contrary Thirdly be it so that this Catholick Church is the first Church to which Christ hath firstly given the Keys Ordinances Promises c. for which Christ firstly performed the Offices of King Priest and Prophet and what else soever can be said in this kinde yet all this may be in this respect that Christ looked at this Catholick Church firstly as the chief object and end for whose sake and good he ordained and gave all these things and this will not carry the cause for as the Church Catholick visible in this sense is the first Church in respect of the particulars so the invisible body of Christ is in nature and priority the first Church in respect of visible as visible for Christ no doubt firstly intends and gives all these things to the invisible Church as to the object and end of the same for whose good they are all ordained rather then for the Catholick visible Church which containes many hypocrites and reprobates within the verge of it But now if we speak of a subject of the Keys to which the actuall exercise and dispensation of Keys and instituted Ordinances belong who doe not see that in this sense the invisible Church quâ talis cannot be that instituted Society to which the Keys c. belong and by the same reason the Catholick visible Church quâ totum and quâ Catholick cannot be this instituted Society to which they are given It is a known rule in Reason that That which is first in intention is last in execution and so it is here first Christ propounds this end to himself to gather edifie perfect sanctifie save his Catholick Church Ephes 4. 11 12. 5. 26. and therefore institutes all ordinances as means to farther and attain this great design but in execution he may for all this give the Keys and ordinances in regard of the immediate exercise to any form of visible Societies that he shall be pleased to institute and it may be that will prove the least Society sooner then a greater And seeing our Brethren otherwise minded make much use of similies in this dispute we hope it will not be amisse for us to illustrate what we say by a similitude partly to make our conceivings the more plain to all whose edification we seek and partly to discover the invalidity of many discourses of this nature and because similia arguunt fidemque faciunt as he saith viz. so far as rightly applyed we will therefore propound it in way of argument The similitude is this genus humanum or mankinde in generall is the subject of Civill government in generall and of all the priviledges thereof as the object and the end and let the question be whether this Catholick number of all mankinde is the first subject of all power of Civill government and the priviledges thereof and if so whether such consequences will follow as our Brethren deduce from the unity visibility and priority of
been said the Conclusion as we conceive doth easily and naturally follow That as notwithstanding all that is said there is no Catholick visible Body of mankinde to which or to the Officers wherof is given the power and priviledges of Civill government to rule this Catholick Body either as one totum politicum or the parts of it Families Cities Kingdoms in communi by subordination of all Societies with reference to the whole or so as every King Major c. should be an Officer of the whole So these and like consequences will not follow in respect of the guides government priviledges c. of the Catholick Church notwithstanding all that is said from these considerations of unity visibility priority of nature c. 1 Object If any shall Object the case is not alike because in this Catholick Church were universall Officers set up as the Apostles not so in the world of mankinde Ans We say these were but for a time in the first beginning for the setting up of the firâ—â— order in all the Churches who being dead there is none to succeed them in that respect of Catholick power Secondly we say likewise at the first for a time Adam and after Noah had a generall power over mankinde though after them none had the like as it is here And therefore the comparison stil runs clear 2 Object If any object as some doe in answer to an argument somewhat like this that this similitude holds not because there is not that externall union of visible communion in the Common-wealths of the world as in the Church if one say God hath placed Kings Dukes in the Common-wealths as in one organicall Body who have one head who giveth influence to so many organs of head feet c. as the Apostle speaketh of the Body the Church 1 Cor. 12. then indeed all the Common-wealths of the world would make but one body Answ To the Scripture alledged we shall speak after here onely let us clear our parallel And first take the similitude as it is stated by us and it will be clear First compare the Catholick number of mankinde with the Catholick Church which is the number of called ones and then there is as much externall union of visible communion in one as in the other For first all mankinde may and ought to maintain Civill communion one with another in all Offices of humanity for the common good of the whole as the members of the Catholick Church doe or ought to doe and common humanity and the command of the Morall Law binds thereto as well as Christianity and rules of the Gospel bind here Secondly if we compare Civill societies as Families Cities Common-wealths with instituted Churches it is as possible and as well the duty of all Common-wealths in the world by principles of humanity and the Morall Law in all mens hearts to maintain externall union of leagues of friendship and communion in all Offices of Civill society as it is possible and the duty of all Church societies by the principles of Christianity and rule of the Gospel to maintain externall union of visible communion in the duties of Church society Thirdly not to dispute here whether there be such an externall union of visible communion amongst all the visible Churches as parts of the Church Catholick if the reason alledged be sufficient to prove the same viz. because there is one head in the Church who giveth influence to so many organs of head feet eyes c. in the Church Then still our parallel will hold for as this Head is no other then Christ Jesus in his spirituall Kingdom the Church giving that influence named so the same Lord that is King and Head over all 1 Chron. 29. 11. Ephes 1. 22. doth give influence to many organs in this Body of Mankinde even to all Kings Judges Fathers of Families And Christ is the same in respect of all authority power gifts administrations Civill c. to this Kingdome of Men as he is to the Kingdom of his Church of all power spiritual And although the Church be a Body of nearer relation to Christ then the Body of mankinde yet in regard of a common relation between a Head and Body there is a similitude which is sufficient in this case There is one thing more we meet withall that here we shall remove viz. when it is objected that the Catholick visible Church cannot be one because it cannot convent together in one Society it is answered usually that such comming together in one society is not needfull because as a Kingdom may be one though all parts of it never meet together having the same King Laws c. And as an Army may be one having the same Generall the same Laws of Discipline the same cause c. though the severall Brigades should never be drawn up into one body So the Catholick Church having the same King Laws Cause Enemies is but one though it never meet To this we shall here Reply so far as it lyes in our way 1 As all union is for communion and all communion flows from union so look of what nature the union is such and no other is the communion and look of what nature the communion ought to be of like nature ought the union to be else it will not reach the end And therefore here as the mysticall spirituall union of the Catholick Church to Christ the head by faith and to one another by love is sufficient to afford spirituall communion with the same So unto Politicall communion there must bee a Politicall union into one policy And as the nature of Politicall communion is such must the nature of the union be that it may reach the end To apply this a Politicall Church is instituted of Christ for communion in all the Worship and Ordinances of Christ instituted in the Gospel as the Ministery of the Word the Seales and Discipline now no Church as One can have communion with Christ and one another in these things but it must have a Politicall union suitable thereunto that is they must be one Society that can at least meet to combine together And therefore if all Churches make one Politicall Body for Politicall communion it must be such an union as will reach that end which cannot be imagined in such a Catholick totum politicum as the Catholick Church 'T is true distinct Churches as distinct Kingdoms may have communion in some politicall priviledges answerable to their union consisting in a fraternall relation one unto another yet not make up one Body Politicall of which we speak Secondly to the similitudes brought we answer This whole Kingdom or Army is properly and clearly one Politicall Body under one Politicall head the King or General as stands by Covenant as members of that one Policy and those who have right to choose their King or Generall may and doe some time or other convene Let the like be shewed in the Catholick Church that all Politicall
but they were onely a visible number of Saints We have been thus large in clearing this Scripture because we conceive the chief strength of the contrary opinion to lye in it And this being answered the light of it we hope will scatter the darknesse that is brought upon divers other Scriptures which are drawn to prove such a kinde of Catholick Church as Rom. 12. 4. c. Col. 1. 25. 1 Tim. 3. 15. Ephes 4. 11. In which last Scripture we never doubted but that the Officers were given not for that particular Church of Ephesus onely much lesse to such a diminutive Congregation consisting of 40 60 or 100 onely as if we intended to impawn all power in this or that Congregational body but to a congregationall Church considered as the genus of all particular Congregations of the world Neither to this congregationall Church onely but to all that are to be gathered to the unity of the faith But doth this argue one politicall body consisting of all these For though vers 16. the whole body be said to be compacted yet that this should be understood of a politicall not spirituall way of compacting we confesse with submission our weaknesse cannot apprehend The last Scripture which we find cited that seemeth to look this way is 1 Pet. 5. 1. Feed the flock which is among you Answ 1 We answer It must necessarily be understood distributively for the severall flocks in all those Countreys to be fed by their particular Elders not collectively to be fed as one flock in common For the Countreys are so many and large as it was impossible Yea we have a clear parallel James 2. 2. where writing to the Jews of the twelve Tribes scattered abroad yet he speaks of a man comming into their Assembly which cannot be meant collectively as if they had one assembly amongst them all but distributively of any assembly 2 Though they bee called a flock not flocks yet this as Baines observes was not because it was one flock really in themselves but in some respect of reason which also he expounds to be per internam we had rather say spiritualem unionem but not per externam combinationem in respect of which spirituall union that is true which Mr. Ball citeth out of Cyprian Etsi Pastores multi sumus unam tamen gregem pascimus As also that there is Episcopatus unus Ecclesia una in toto mundo Hence also may appear an answer to divers arguments the chief whereof we shall run through Object 1. If by baptism we are not admitted into one particular Church but into the whole Catholick visible Church 1 Cor. 12. 13. then there is such a Catholick Church Answ Baptism admitteth us into the whole mysticall body of Christ whether visible or invisible of all ages But this is not a Catholick Politicall body of which we speak for then every baptized person should be a member of every particular Church and have an Oaâ—e in every boat in electing Officers admitting members censuring offenders c. which Mr. Ball will not grant and indeed would bring in endlesse confusion into the Churches of Christ Besides no man can be a member of any combined society without their consent for otherwise so many may croud into the Church because baptized as shall overthrow the edification thereof and that against the consent of the Church and all the Officers thereof Object 2. When any scandalous person is delivered to Satan he is cast out of the whole Catholick church Ergo he was a member of the whole Catholick Church for be cannot be cast out who was never within Answ 1 Some answer that he is cast out of all onely consequenter by reason of communion of Churches neither doe we see that this is taken away by saying that As when the left hand cutteth off a finger of the right hand it is not the left hand onely that cuts it off but the whole man deliberate reason and will consenting For if this similitude would suit then the whole Catholick church must be called to consult and consent antecedenter before a particular Church can cut off any member which ordinarily is impossible to be attain'd 2 But further according to our former principles laid down we say he that is justly cast out of one Church he is morally excommunicated out of all but not politically and formally For to excommunicate politically and formally is by vertue of a superior authority next under Christ so that what is bound by them is bound in heaven In which act the Minister doth not onely bind the person but also by vertue of his Office chargeth the Church not to have communion with him But we doe not think that our Brethren will say that one Church putteth forth such an act of superior authority binding or charging all Churches politicè and judicialitèr not to have communion with him for so one Church should exercise jurisdiction overall Churches and that without their actuall approbation for quod spectat ad omnes debet ab omnibus approbari If it be said That a particular Church doth excommunicate by an intrinsecall power not onely in it self but intrinsecall in the whole body the question will be What is that intrinsecall power Is it naturall or voluntary To say it is naturall were too absurd if voluntary then neither Congregations Classes Provinces Nations have power to excommunicate without the praevious consent of the whole Catholick church which must voluntarily concurr thereunto And if the Catholick Presbytery as is said have no next but a a remote power of excommunication and this remote power bee extraordinary or raro contingens or almost never then the ordinary power of excommunication which is enough for us is not from an intrinsecall power of the Church catholick On the other side if it be said this power is in the whole but not derived from the whole to the parts as the power of seeing is first in the man then in the eye yet not derived from hands leggs shoulders c. and as the great body of the Sunn hath intrinsecall light in every part not by derivation from one part to another so this power of the Keys is from Christ the Head to all the integral parts in points that severally concern the same First if this be so then every particular Congregation receives its power of the Keys immediately from Christ not by derivation from any Presbytery or the Catholick Church and is in that respect Independent Neither also can Congregations derive the power seated in them to Presbyteries nor any greater bodies take it from them Secondly though we acknowledge this intrinsecall power of excommunication in particular Congregations as being there properly seated by Christ yet that there are any such politicall Churches Classicall Provinciall Nationall or Catholick that have any such intrinsecall power as is in the Sunn this is not yet proved to our understanding We deny not the use of lesser and greater Synods nor
particular Society Thirdly joyning to some particular Society being an Ordinance of God of so great concernment if Baptism must be administred in it why ought not why may not such joyn to that Society at least as members for a time Also when he saith divers times That men are made members of the Church by Baptism speaking of such Churches as choose Officers over them yea that the Apostles constituted Chrches by Baptism and the like which we shall note in the answer Now what doe these argue but a yeelding of the cause for if the Apostles made members and constituted Churches by Baptism this was onely sacramentally and if so then of necessity they must be really members of such Churches before Baptism Thus we have run through this large field of the Catholick and particular Church which hath detained us longer then we intended yet to prevent mistakes from any thing that have been said concerning the union communion and combination of the Churches we shall add these two things 1 We observe that the Scripture speaks of the Church sometimes as One body sometimes as many and therefore called Churches and hence our care is to preserve not onely the distinction of Churches as many by particular combinations but also their unity as being one by spirituall relation 2 Association of divers particular Churches we hold needfull as well as the combination of members into one yet so as there be no schism of one from another nor usurpation of one over another that either one should deprive the rest of peace by schism or many should deprive any one of its power by usurpation hence a fraternall consociation we acknowledge consociation we say for mutuall counsell and helpe to prevent or remove sinne and schism yet fraternall onely to preserve each others power consociation of Churches we would have cumulative not in words but in deed to strengthen the power of particular Churches not privative to take away any power which they had from the gift of Christ before For as on the one side it may seem strange that One Church offending should have no means of cure by the conceived power of many so on the other side the danger may appear as great and frequently falls out that when many Churches are scandalous one innocent Church may be hurt by the usurpation of all And hence we see not but that fraternall consociation is the best medicine to heal the wounds of both We utterly dislike such Independency as that which is maintained by contempt or carelesse neglect of sister Churches Faciunt favos vespae faciunt Ecclesias Marcionitae saith Terâ—ullian We utterly dislike such dependency of Churches upon others as is built upon usurpations and spoils of particular Churches Having thus largely digressed for the clearing of the foundation of the dispute in hand we desire to be excused if we be the more brief in our answers to particulars which now we shall attend unto as they lye in order CHAP. VI. Reply THe seals are given unto the Church not onely in ordinary as you say but also in extraordinary dispensation c. And when you say the dispensing of the seals is an ordinance given onely for the edifying of the Church gathered must it not be understood of extraordinary dispensation as well as of ordinary c. added these words ordinary dispensation were to prevent the objection which you foresaw might be made from the Apostles practice and example but so as they cut asunder the sinews of the consideration it self and make it of no force Answ Before we come to the particulars of the Reply it is needfull to clear our meaning from this mistake about the word ordinary dispensation which being rightly understood it will appear that it no way cuts the sinews of the consideration as is objected For whereas first you extend the opposite term extraordinary dispensation to the whole generall practice of the Apostles and Evangelists and secondly take it for granted that their practice was not to baptize members of particular Churches we neither intended the first nor doe we grant the second as for the first we acknowledge freely that the Apostles and Evangelists ordinarily and generally practiced according to comon rules in this point of baptizing as well as in other and left their practice for our pattern and therefore their ordinary practice in this thing we shall stick to yet they having not onely extraordinary power above Pastors and Teachers but also having sometime an immediate call unto some acts and speciall guidance of the Spirit to warrant what they did therefore there were some of their actions especially in respect of some circumstances thereof which ordinary Pastors not so assisted may not doe as in this case when they baptized in private houses in the wildernesse alone and not in the face of a Congregation c. and therefore if in some few cases some doe think they did not baptize into a particular Church yet if their ordinary practice were otherwise we ought to imitate the ordinary not some extraordinary cases and thus the sinews and force of the consideration remains strong notwithstanding this word of ordinary dispensation and that this was our meaning was not hard to discern by the Scriptures cited in the answer to prove the seales are given unto the Church in ordinary dispensation amongst which Acts 2. 41 42 47. containing the Apostles first practice in this kinde are expressed and Mr. Ball took notice thereof as appears by his own reference to the same afterwards though in his printed Reply those quotations bee wholly left out 2 Let us consider whether the Apostles ordinarily did not baptize into particular Churches and this may be proved from the stories of their ordinary practice First it will be easily granted that the Apostles did gather disciples into particular visible Churches but there is no other time or season of doing it can be shewed in all the stories of their Acts yea sometimes they were so suddenly called away or enforced away by persecution after they had converted disciples that it is very improbable if not impossible they should do it at all but when they converted and baptized them as Acts 16 40. 17. 5. c. But to come more particularly unto the story it self the Apostles first and exemplary practiâ—â— being the best interpreter of their commission and of their ordinary proceeding therein the first converts which the Apostles baptized after the visible kingdom of Christ was set up were those in that famous place Acts 2. 41. concerning whom observe first that the Apostle Peter not onely preached unto them repentance and faith in the name of Christ with promise of remission of sins and that they should be baptized but according to that commission Mat. 28. with many other words he exhorted them saying Save your selves from this untoward generation being the very scope of his exhortation and this implies a gathering of themselves to the fellowship of the
may ordinarily be had or given to such as set loose from all societies the Apostles had extraordinary power being generall Pastors over all persons beleeving as well as Churches and therfore at some times by speciall guidance of the Spirit they might doe that which ordinary Pastors may not do Reply Secondly as the seals so the Word of salvation preached and received is a priviledge of the Church c. If by preaching be meant the giving of the Word unto a people to abide and continue with them and consequently the receiving of it at least in profession then it is proper to the church of God Answ We grant in some sense it is a priviledge and proper to the Church so to have the Word but this no way takes away the difference between the Seals and the Word which the answer makes viz That the Word is not such a peculiar priviledge of the Church as the Seals in that the one is dispensed not onely to the Church but also to others for the gathering of them which is not so in the Seals for the Word of God received in Corinth abiding with them professed of them was not so peculiar but an Idiot comming in might partake in the same but not so in the Sacraments 1 Cor. 14. Reply The Word makes Disciples the Word given unto a people is Gods covenanting with them and the peoples receiving this Word and professing their faith in God through Jesus Christ is the taking of God to be their God the laws and statutes which God gave unto Israel were a testimony that God hath separated them from all other people the Word of reconciliation is sent and given to the world reconciled in Iesus Christ and they that receive the Doctrine Law or Word of God are the disciples servants and people of God Answ In these words and that which follows in the second Paragraph there seems to be a double scope First to prove the Word proper to the Church to which is answered afore Secondly that where-ever the Word of God is there is the true visible Church and so where the true Worship of God is there is a mark of the Church especially where it is received and confessed To which we answer 1 There is a covenanting between God and man which is personall and so whosoever receives the Word of Gods grace by faith sent unto him by God enters into Covenant to be his and that before he makes any visible profession thereof and so every beleever is a disciple a servant of God and one of Gods people but many thousands of these considered onely in this their personall relation to God doe not make a visible Church many such might be in the world but no members of the visible Church until they came and joyned to the Church of Israel of Old or to the visible Churches in the New Testament 2 There is a sociall or common covenanting between God and a people to be a God to them and they a people unto God in outward visible profession of his Worship and so the Lord took Abraham and his seed into Covenant and renewed that Covenant with them as an holy Nation and peculiar people to him and in this covenanting of God with a people whereby they become a Church there is required first that they be many not one Secondly that these many become one body one people Thirdly that they make visible profession of their Covenant with God really or vocally Fourthly that this Covenant contain a profession of subjection to the ordinances of Gods Worship wherein God requires a Church to walk together before him and all these may be seen in the Church of Israel who received Gods laws indeed but so as they became one people to God visibly avouched God for their God received and submitted unto all the laws of his Worship Government and other Ordinances And this is expresly or implicitly in every true visible Church though more or lesse fully and purely Now if you intend such a covenanting of a people with God by a professed receiving of his Word and subjection to his Ordinances we grant such to be true Churches and to such the seals do belong and therefore we willingly close with the Conclusion that follows They that have received the Word of salvation entirely and have Pastors godly and faithfull to feed and guide them they and their seed have right to the seals in order And they that joyn together in the true Worship of God according to his will with godly and faithfull Pastors they have right to the sacraments according to Divine institution These conclusions we willingly embrace and inferr that if the seals belong to such a Church then to particular Congregations For where shall we finde a people joyning together with godly Pastors but in such particular Assemblies For we doubt not our Brethren doe disclaim all Diocesan Pastors or Provinciall c. Reply That there is now no visible Catholick Church in your sense will easily be granted c. If this be granted in our sense so that there be no such Catholick church wherein seals are to be dispensed then it will fall to be the right and priviledge of particular Congregations to have the seals in the administration proper to them and so the cause is yeelded but because there is so much here spoken of the Catholick visible Church and so much urged from it we shall refer the Reader to what is said before onely one thing we shall note about the instance of Athanasius that a man may be a member of the Catholick visible Church but of no particular Society Reply You say it is evidenced in that a Christian as Athanasius for an example may be cut off unjustly from the particular visible Church wherein he was born and yet remains a member of the Catholick visible orthodox Church Answ This case proves nothing for look how such a Christian stands to the Catholick so he stands to the particular Church if he be unjustly censured as he remains before God a member of the Catholick so also the particular Church for clavis errans non ligat and in respect of men and communion with other Churches in the seals if they receive him being satisfied that he is unjustly cast out they may receive him not for his generall interest in the Catholick church but in respect of his true membership in the particular Church that unjustly cast him out Whereas if the Churches were not perswaded but that he were justly cast out of the particular they ought not to admit him to seales were he as Orthodox as Athanasius himself in doctrine and as holy in his life Reply Though there be no universall Congregation nor can be imagined yet there are and have been many visible Assemblies or Societies true Churches of Christ to whom the prerogative of the seals is given which have not been united and knit together into one Congregation or Society in Church-order For every Society in
Covenant with God is the true Church of God For what is it to be the flock people or sheep of God but to be the Church of God and where there is a Covenant there is the people of God c. Answ This assertion seems to us very strange to fall from that reverend and learned Author being a foundation of many inconveniences and absurdities and tending to overthrow the order of Christ in his visible Churches For First if this be so that every Society in Covenant with God be the Church of God then men may set up as many Forms of visible Churches as they please if the people be in Covenant with God visibly at least the Archdeacon with his Commissary Priests Churchwardens c. being in Covenant with God are a true Church So the Diocesan Bishop in his Cathedrall with his Clergy or any such Assembly are the Church of God or what other form-soever men will devise may goe for the Church of God and to them belong the seals and you may as wel say discipline and all Ordinances of God if they bee the true Church Secondly upon this ground every company of godly Christistians in Covenant with God meeting in fasting prayer c. are the true Church of God and to them as such the seals belong and sending for a true Minister of the Catholick church they may have Baptism and the Lords-supper administred and by the same reason discipline also yea if but two or three as you say being in Covenant with God meet together in their travail at an Inne c. are the Church of God especially every Christian family is the Church for they professe the entire faith joyn daily in prayer and thanksgiving receive the truth of God to dwell amongst them are in some measure obedient unto the commands of God and in Covenant with God And therefore being the Church of God why not call for a Minister and have seals ordinarily dispensed to them Thirdly upon this ground a company of Christian Women in Covenant with God are a Church to whom the seales belong and who sees not how all orderly dispensation of Gods Ordinances and the whole order of visible Churches in the Gospel would be overturned by this assertion We verily beleeve this Author was far from admitting these things but the Position it self will unavoidably enforce the same Neither can we impute this assertion to any inconsideratenesse through heat of disputation For if any shall maintain the personall Covenant of people with God to be sufficient to constitute visible Churches and not admit a necessity of a more publick or generall Covenant explicite or implicite whereby a company of Christians are made one people joyning in one Congregation to worship God in his holy Ordinances and walk together in his ways they must of necessity acknowledge every Society in Covenant with God to be a Church as here is said and therefore admit all forms of Churches and all Families c. to be Churches and so bring in the confusion objected which we desire may well bee considered All your Arguments stand upon that ground of personall covenant with God which is too weak to bear up that conclusion to make all such visible Churches to whom the seals belong as the absurd consequences thereof shew These Reasons and the Scriptures in the margent some of them will prove them fit matter for visible Churches and that they have a remote right unto the seals of that Covenant which we grant but they will not prove every Society of such to bee true Churches having immediate right to have the seals dispensed unto them Reply Fifthly If it be granted that the seals are the prerogative of particular visible Churches known and approved Christians amongst us are members of such Churches and so to be esteemed amongst you c. and every visible beleever professing the pure entire faith admitted to the right and lawfull participation of the sacraments is a visible member of the true Church if he hath neither renounced the Society nor deserved justly to be cast out by excommunication or Church censure c. And if known and approved Christians members of our Churches comming to New-England shall desire to have their children baptized or themselves admitted to the Lords-supper before they be set members amongst you we desire to know upon what grounds from God you can deny them if you acknowledge our Churches Ministery and Sacraments to be true as you professe and the members of the Church be known and approved orderly recommended unto you Answ We grant all this here expressed for the substance however some reasons spoken unto before intermixed we passe over and to your question we frame a ready answer from your own words For first you grant that if such members have renounced that Society wherein they did partake of the seals they are not to be reputed members of it and this is generally the case of all approved Christians among us who though they doe not so renounce the Churches that bare them and gave them suck as no true Churches yet seeing they were grown so corrupt many ways as they could neither enjoy some needfull Ordinances nor partake in those they had without sin they have therefore renounced and forsaken all further communion with them and membership in them and so by your own grant neither themselves nor the Churches here can take them as members of your Churches to receive them under that respect Secondly if any yet have not so far renounced those Churches they belonged unto yet they are not orderly recommended unto us which also you grant ought to be and indeed otherwise we may oft receive persons justly excommunicate or such as are no members of Churches any where or otherwise under great offence as frequent examples amongst our selves doe shew though the Church may think well of such as offer themselves What else follows in this Paragraph is the same in substance and much of it in words also that we have answered before and therefore we passe it over and that of the Jewish Church we shall speak to after As for that you desire leave to set down and us to examine what may be objected against that we affirmed That the distinct Churches named in the New Testament were Congregationall Societies we shall consider as followeth Reply The number of beleevers were so great in some Cities that they could not conveniently meet in one place as one Assembly to worship God according to his will and for their edifying as in Samaria Jerusalem Antioch Ephesus Answ Although we expected not Objections in this case against the currant Tenent of our godly Reformers Baine Parker c. with whom we joyn and we might refer you to them for answer to this beaten Objection of the Prelates yet we are not unwilling to examine what is said in this digression The Argument stands thus If the number of beleevers were so great in some City as could not meet in
beleevers as the way of the Gospel and Rom. 16. 1. wee have a plaine example of orderly receiving the members of one Church to Communion in an other being recommended thereunto by the Apostles wee have not the like for any not in Church order at all and though there be a parity in respect of particular relation with that Pastour and flock yet that is a disparity in regard of immediate right that the one have to the ordinances of Christ and priviledges of a Church which the other have not being out of that order of Christ prescribed in the Gospel in which order of a visible Church visible ordinances are to be dispensed as hath been proved before Reply If a Synod consisting of sundry members of particular Churches met together in the name of Christ about the common and publike affaires of the Churches shall joine together in prayer and Communion of the Supper we can see no ground to question it as unlawfull although that assembly bee no particular Congregation or Church hath no Pastour over them c. Answ That suâ—h an assembly may pray together is no question for every family may doe so and that they may receive the Supper also in a right order wee deny not for meeting where there is a particular instituted Church they may have Communion therewith in the Supper being many as well as few but whether they may as a Church being no politicall body but members of many Politicall Churches administer Church ordinances proper to a Church wee would see some reasons before wee can judge it lawfull so to doe for though some doe account such a Synod Ecclesia orta yet not properly such a Church as hath Ecclesiasticall power authority and priviledge belonging thereto they may consult and doctrinally determine of cases of that assembly Acts 15. but further to proceed we see no rule nor paterne Besides if such an assembly of many Churches may administer Seales why may not any other assembly of Church members or Ministers doe the samâ— and so this power will be carried without limitation we know not how far if they once depart from a particular Church CHAP. VIII Consid 3. Reply TO the third consideration this whole reason as it is propounded makes onely against it selfe who ever thought that the Seales were not proper to confederates or the Church of God of old visible beleevers in the Covenant of grace were of the visible Church and in Church order according to the dispensation of those times though not joyned to the society of Abrahams family to exclude Job Melchisedeck c. because not of the visible Church is welnigh a contradiction and so to debarre known approved Christians c. Answ That this reason makes not against it self Mr. Ball himself hath cleared when he stated our consideration truely in the words following as will appeare however here he somewhat troubles the waters needlessely that the ground may not appeare for there is nothing in our answer which deny Melchisedech Job c. to bee of the visible Church according to the manner of those times indeed wee instance in them as persons under the covenant of grace not mentioning their membership in family Churches as being enough for our purpose if they had not right to Circumcision by vertue of their right in the covenant of grace except they joyned to the Church at first in Abrahams family and so after to the same Church in Israel and the more speciall Church relation in Abrahams family was required to Circumcision the stronger is the force of our reason not the weaker For so much the rather it followes that seales are not to bee dispensed to beleevers as such though visibly professing the faith except they joyne also to such a forme of the visible Church to or in which the seales are instituted and given Reply The true and proper meaning of this consideration is that as Circumcision and the Passeover were not to bee dispensed to all visible beleevers under the Covenant of grace but onely to such as were joyned to Abrahams family or the people of the God of Abraham no more may Baptisme and the Lords Supper be administred now to any beleevers unlesse they be joyned to some particular Congregation Answ These words rightly stating the consideration wee leave it to any indifferent reader to judge whether any way it make against it selfe or whether there was any cause first to darken it as was done in the former passage Reply The strength of it stands in the parity betweene Circumcision and Baptisme but this parity is not found in every thing as your selves alledge To unfold it more fully wee will consider three things First wherein the Sacraments agree and wherein they differ Answ It matters not in how many things the Sacraments differ so they agree in the thing questioned and though wee might raise Disputes and Queries about some particulars in this large discourse upon this first head yet seeing here is a grant of the parity in the point now questioned viz. Concerning the persons to whom Circumcision and Baptisme doe belong wee shall take what is granted and leave the rest For thus it is said Circumcision and Baptisme are both Sacraments of Divine institution and so they agree in substance of the things signified the persons to whom they are to be administred and the order of administration if the right proportion be observed Now that we â—â—ld the right proportion in the persons may appeare First in that as was granted Circumcision sealed the entrance into the Covenant but this Covenant was not simply and onely the Covenant of grace but that whole Covenant that was made with Abraham whereby on Gods part they were assured of many speciall blessings whereof Lot and others not in this Covenant with Abraham were not capable and whereby Abraham his seed and family were bound for their part to be a people to God and to observe this signe of the Covenant which others in the Covenant of grace were not bound to Answ Secondly as is granted it was Abraham and his houshold and the seed of beleeving Jewes that were the persons to bee Circumcised and therefore not visible beleevers as such for then Lot had been included so by right proportion not all visible beleevers as such but such as with Abraham and his family are in visible Covenant to bee the people of God according to the institution of Churches when and to which the seale of Baptisme is given and therefore as all family Churches but Abrahams being in a new forme of a Church were excluded so much more such as are in no visible constituted Church at all Reply Secondly As for the proposition it selfe certaine it is Circumcision and the Passeover were to bee administred onely to the visible members of the Church i. e. to men in Covenant professing the true faith but that in Abrahams time none were members of the visible Church which joyned not to Abrahams family wee have
and so might they circumcise themselves must not this bee done amongst and before the people of God in his visible Church whence such were called Proselytes and reckoned of the Common-wealth of Israel Esay 56. 3 4 5 6. And is not all this to joyne themselves to the visible instituted Church before they were circumcised Lastly it is not true that no man could be reputed a visible beleever before hee did all this That which followes pag. 40. is answered before Reply If Lot Job c. were not circumcised there is not the like reason for Circumcision and baptisme in this particular Answ The force of the consideration doth not depend upon the likenesse of reason betweene the persons to be circumcised and baptized in every respect but in this that as Circumcision and the Passeover were given onely to visible members of that instituted visible Church and therefore so in this case of baptisme and the Lords Supper now therefore if you could alledge many more different reasons betweene Lot Job c. that were not circumcised and those not to bee baptized it would little availe in the case but wee shall consider your differences particularly Reply First If ever circumcision was appropriated to Abrahams family and might not be communicated to other visible beleevers it was in the first institution but in the first institution of baptisme it was not so observed that beleevers should bee gathered into a Christian Church and then baptized Mat. 3. 7. John baptized such as came to him confessing their sinnes the Apostles baptized Disciples such as gladly received their doctrine c. Answ There is no such disparity in this as is objected for Abrahams family was in Covenant before Circumcision was given onely the Covenant was more fully explained and confirmed and so when John baptized hee baptized the members of the Jewes Church in Covenant before to whom hee was sent to turne the heart of the fathers to the children c. and to prepare a people for the Lord and baptisme was then given to the Church of the Jewes with reference to so many as would receive the doctrine of John concerning repentance and remission of sinnes by faith in the Messiah now come amongst them and therefore Christ himselfe and his Disciples remained yet members of that Church Secondly Though the visible Kingdome of Christ was not yet to bee erected in Christian Churches till after Christs death and Resurrection whereby hee did put an end to the Jewish worship and therefore no Christian Churches could bee gathered by John yet there was a middle state of a people prepared for the Lord gathered out of the Jewish Church which according to that state were made the Disciples of John by solemne profession of their repentance or conversion to God and acknowledgement of Christ the Lambe of God already come to whom the seale of baptisme was appropriated As for the instances Act. 2. 37. c. and 8. 37. and 10. 47 48. they are spoken to before in the first consideration Reply Secondly Lot Job c. were not bound to joyne to Abrahams family and bee circumcised but now all visible beleevers are bound to seeke baptisme in an holy manner Answ First This difference makes little to the point in hand it is enough that all that would be circumcised were bound to joyne to that Church and so now Secondly in after times no doubt every true proselyte fearing God was bound to joyne to that church as well as now and if now all visible beleevers be bound to professe their faith and seek baptisme in an holy manner why should they not bee bound to joyne to some visible Church and seeke it there as well as of old yea where should they professe their faith but in the visible Churches as the Proselytes of old did Your third difference is oft pressed and answered before Reply Fourthly If Circumcision bee appropriated to the family of Abraham it is because that Covenant was peculiar to Abrahams posterity namely that Christ should come of Isaac but baptisme is the Seale of the Covenant of Grace without peculiarity or respect Answ This difference is of little moment neither will it hold for first though that and other promises had a speciall eye to Abrahams family yet Circumcision sealed the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4. to them being in visible Covenant with the Church as baptisme now doth Secondly this peculiar respect you speake of no way hindereth the joyning of many servants to Abrahams family and Covenant nor any proselytes to the Church afterward of any nation no more then now in respect of baptisme Thirdly the true reason was because although the Covenant was made with others yet not established nor enlarged towards them and hence if they would partake of such a Covenant they must joyne in this which also is the glory of the rich grace of Christ shining forth in Church-Covenant with all that will become a people to him to this day The first difference is answered in the first and second CHAP. IX Consid 4. Reply TO the fourth consideration first Men are capable of Church censures either as having power to dispense them or as being subject unto them c. In the second sense many are capable of Church priviledges who are not subject to Church censures as the children of Christian Parents are capable of baptisme and approved members of any true Church are capable of Seales in other Congregations amongst you who are not subject to the censures of the other Congregation spiritual Communion in publike prayer whereof visible beleivers not in Church order are capable but not subject to common censures in your sense Answ This distinction is needlesse our meaning is plaine in the second sense and therefore wee say nothing to what is objected against the first To the instances objected against the proposition in the second sense wee answer first concerning the Infants of church-Church-members they are subject to censures whensoever they offend the Church as others are though so long as they live innocently they need them not Secondly Members of any true visible Church are subject and so capable of censure though not in another Church which is not in in the proposition 2 Also they are capable of censures mediately by and in that other Church if they there offend for that Church may admonish and prosecute the admonition in the Church to which they belong and refuse society with them if they repent not which cannot bee said of such as are not members of any visible Church who cannot be prosecuted to excommunication in any place Thirdly Publike prayers of the Church though they bee an ordinance of Christ and the Church have a speciall Communion in them in which respect others do not share yet they are not a priviledge or peculiar ordinance wherein none but the Church may share for an Heathen or Infidel may hear the word and joyne in the prayers being cultus naturalis saying Amen unto the same
which cannot be said of seales and censures being cultus institutus Reply Secondly A Person baptized is not baptized into that particular Congregation onely but into all Churches and in every particular Church hath all the priviledges of a baptized person and so to be esteemed of them Now the priviledge of the baptized person walking in the truth and able to examine himselfe is to bee admitted to the Lords Supper as all circumcised persons had right thereby to eate the Passeover in any society where God should choose to put his name there Exod. 4. 47. Deut. 16. 1 1. Answ This seemeth to touch the question it selfe rather then the proposition of this fourth consideration but wee shall answer to it as it stands 1. Here you grant that a person baptized is baptized unto a particular Congregation which wee accept as a yeelding of the question unawares 2. If you meane that such hath a liberty of Communion in a way of brotherly love in all Churches where he comes wee grant so farre as nothing in him justly hinder but if you meane that hee is baptized into all Churches so as to challenge a right of Membership in them all wee deny it as a position that would take away all distinction of Churches as wee have formerly shewed 3. We deny that the Lords Supper is the priviledge of a baptized person able to examine himself walking in the truth as a baptized person for then a Papist converted to the truth able to examine himselfe hath a right to the Lords Supper in every Church before he make any profession of his conversion and faith in any particular Church for hee may bee such a baptized person And we may say the like of an excommunicate penitent 4. We grant that a baptized person is not onely baptized in to that particular Church whereof hee was first a member For if it bee a seale of his initiation into that particular Church onely then he must bee rebaptized as oft as hee enters into another but hee is baptized in the sense formerly shewed into the whole mysticall Body of Christ and hence hath jus ad rem or a remote right unto the priviledges of the Church every where but that therefore he hath immediate right to the fruition of all when he is severed from that particular church wherein he was baptized that follows not for as he had this latter right in the first Church wherein hee was baptized so he must have it in any of the Churches of Christ afterward now if in the first Church the fruition of ordinances came by orderly joyning to it so it must be afterward for as wee said before such as the communion is such ought to be the union he that would have politicall communion with the politicall Churches of Christ must be some where in politicall union with them otherwise one may have communion in all Churches yet never unite himself to any one which loose walking we are perswaded Christ Jesus will not allow 5 The similitude from a circumcised person will not hold First because there is no parity between severall families in the same Church and severall Churches in the New Testament but rather severall seats of communicants in the same Church answers severall families eating the passeover in the Church of the Jewes Secondly an Edomite circumcised though he were converted and acknowledged the true God in his owne country never so fully yet might not eate the passeover till he joyned to the church of Israel as all other Proselytes did so is it here Reply Thirdly there is not the same reason of every Church priviledge one may have right to some who may not meddle with others as members of one Church may joyne in hearing and prayer with another Church but not meddle in election and ordination of their Teachers and therefore the proposition is not so evident to bee taken without proofe that they have no power to admit a beleever into communion in any Church priviledge who have no power to excommunicate Answ What is here objected from the liberty or restriction of Church members in another Congregation is answered before in the first objection and therefore the proposition may stand good for all that is here said 2 That which is set down as the proposition is neither the same with that in our reason nor any way allowed by us for wee speake not here of power to admit but of the right to bee partakers neither doe wee deny a power in officers to admit members of other Churches to the seales though they have no power to excommunicate them 3 If our proposition seeme to need proofe the reason of it is at hand because those that are the peculiar priviledges or proper priviledges or proprieties of the Church as seales and censures being of the same nature viz. outward ordinances of Christ ordained by him for the edification of his Church and joyntly given to his Church and therefore looke to what Church hee hath given the one hee hath given the other also if the one viz. censures bee given to the Church of a visible Congregation then the other they are all both seales and censures contained in the keys which are given to the visible instituted Churches of the New Testament not to the Catholick as such for a godly man justly cast out of the particular Church yet cannot bee cast out of the Catholick Reply That visible beleevers baptized into a true Church professing the true faith and walking in holy obedience and their seed should be judged such as are without in the Apostles sense because they are not externally joyned as set members to some peculiar Congregation in Church Covenant is affirmed not proved Answ Comming to the assumption of our argument it is expressed according to the frequent manner in this Reply in such termes as it is not affirmed by us and therefore if it want proof blame not us our assumption is Such as are not in Church Covenant are not capable of Church censures where by being in Church covenant wee meane either implicitly or explicitly membership in any true Church as in our answer wee expresse to prevent mistakes and this is proved from 1 Cor. 5. 12. and in applying hereof wee doe not affirme that such are simply without in the Apostles sense but in some respect onely viz. in regard of visible church Communion Reply First It doth oft fall out that the true members of the Catholick Church and best members of the orthodox Church by a prevailing faction in the Church may bee no members of any distinct society and shall their posterity be counted aliens from the Covenant and debarred from the Sacraments because their parents are unjustly separated from the inheritance of the Lord Answ This objection is before answered in the first consideration where was given the instance of Athanasius and it is answered by the Reply it selfe in the next words Surely as parents unjustly excommunicated doe continue still
visible members of the flock of Christ understand that particular Church out of which they are cast so the right of Baptism belongs to their Infants which being so they are not without that Church though debarred unjustly of the present communion with it unlesse he renounce that Church or other Reply Secondly If such Churches renounce it as are no members of a politick spirituall fellowship be without then the members of one Church are without unto another c. Answ This objection wee have had and answered oft before In a word there cannot bee the like reason no not in respect of that other Church who may in a due order of Christ persecute the censures against them though not compleatly amongst themselves which cannot bee said of such as have not joyned themselves to any Church and therefore wee deny that the Apostles reason was because they were without to Corinth but without to all Churches Reply Thirdly The fornicators of this world doe they not explaine whom the Apostle pointeth unto by the title of being without Verse the 10. 11. such as had not received the Covenant of grace Answ Wee never thought otherwise but that the fornicators of this world and the heathen are most properly without in the Apostles sense but if our words bee observed that in a certain respect or as our words are in regard of visible Church communion such as are in no Church society are said to bee without what great offence have wee given For first is not a godly man if justly excommunicate without in this sense Secondly doth not the Apostle Iohn expresly call them without that forsooke the fellowship of the Church 1 Iohn 2. 19. saying they went out Thirdly were not the Catechumeni of old in this respect without and the lapsed in times of persecution and the like who in those zealous and severe times of Church discipline were not onely said to bee without but stood without though weeping and praying as penitents at the Church doores sometimes for two or three yeeres and after this degree of preparation for entrance into the Church which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there were three more before they were received to the Lords Supper which severity though wee approve not yet it may mollifie the mindes of the godly learned that are apt to bee offended at such a word from us Fourthly our Saviour himselfe expresly saith and that not onely of those of no Church but such as were even of the visible Church and his ordinary hearers that many of them were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or men without and therefore this application of 1 Cor. 5. 12. need not bee called insolent or raise such an hubbub abroad as wee perceive it doth Reply Fourthly Church order is necessary wee deny not but that a man should bee a constant set member of a particular society by Covenant to make him a member of the visible Church or to give him title or interest to the publike order this is not taught of God This is but a bare denyall of the position it selfe but what is meant by publike order wee know not or where the order of Christ which is granted to bee necessary can bee found but in particular Churches wee are yet to learne neither is it any where taught in this Reply and wee would gladly learne how that Church should orderly deale with such a man in case of offence that is of no particular Church Reply Fiftly Paul divides all men into two rankes the first and greater without the last and lesser within but that beleevers c. and their children should be reckoned without we read not in any Scripture but in Scripture phrase hereticks themselves are within 1 John 2 19. 1 Cor. 11. 19. Answ All that is said in this objection except the last clause is but a repeated deniall of the conclusion in other words to the objection about Hereticks within wee grant they are within till cast out or gone out of the Church 1 John 2. 19. and if gone out how are they within and so if an orthodox professor will frowardly forsake all Churches and live alone or among the heathen how is hee within we speake onely in generall Reply Sixtly This hath not beene beleeved in the Church Answ Wee are not bound in every thing to be of the Churches faith and what wee have said before may satisfie here Reply Seventhly Without are Dogs c. Rev. 22. 15. not such as are faithfull holy c. Answ True properly such are without not these yet in some respects as hath been said others also may be without as such as forsake the Church c. as was before said more fully Reply Eighthly They that are without in the Apostles sense are Aliens from the commonwealth of Israel strangers from the Covenant of promise having no hope and without God in the world but we hope you will not passe such rash censure upon the brethren who bee not gathered into the society as set members Answ To say some beleevers may bee without in some respect is farre from such a censure the Scripture saith of Israel in their corrupt estate and defect of the Ordinances of God that they were a long time without God without Law without a teaching Priest yet that hard expression doth not equall them with the heathen much lesse to say some beleevers are without the visible Church in regard of visible Church communion and wee judge no otherwise of such then of our selves when wee were in the like case Reply Ninthly Let this interpretation stand and hee shall bee without also that is not subject to the censures of the community of the particular combination few or many without or with Officers and so all the reformed Churches that ascribe the Keyes to the Presbytery or Classis and not to the community and some amongst your selves if not most shall bee without also And therefore wee cannot thinke that approved Christians desiring seales are either without or not capable of Church censures if they offend though no set members for desiring seales they put themselves under the ordinances for a time and may be proceeded withall as offending members Answ This objection hath no colour without extreame straining of our application of 1 Cor. 5. 12. seeing wee never limited the position to Churches of the same judgement or in like degree of order to ours it is onely a forced odium which is cast upon us but wee can beare more at our brethrens hands neither doe we know any Church or elder that ascribes the power of the Keys to the Presbytery or Classis excluding the community amongst us Secondly for that objection that such put themselves under the ordinances of Christ for the time if with profession of faith and subjection to the government of Christ they desire seales it is something but that the very desiring of seales doth include such a subjection in it selfe being but for this or that act of administration
this case to assent the right way of Churches electing officers and injoying Ordinances against all corruptions that have beene in the Churches doth not make a nullity of the Ordinances themselves We may say that this conclusion riseth beyond measure The objections being thus answered we leave the conclusion to the judgement of the indifferent Reader CHAP. XII Reply TO the seventh consideration The practise of the Church of Strangers in London recorded by John Alasco is for differing from your judgment and practise in the point in question For first say they Paul testifieth that the Church it self without exception of any member of it is cleane or holy by the administration of baptisme Answ We confesse the same Reply Secondly They bold Communion with the Church of England as one with theirs Answ The Church of England they call it not but the English Churches and we deny not the same in an orderly way as they also required Testimony of their piety if any did but present a child to baptisme in their Church Wee have often professed this and by your owne grant most of the approved Christians amongst us are not members of the English Churches having renounced their right of membership and Commuion with the Church they were of there Reply Thirdly This order was observed by them to prevent the impostures of some that pretended to the English they were joyned to the Strangers contra Answ This was not the onely reason of their order for his words are All strangers doe not joyne themselves to our Church yea there are those that avoiding all Churches c. which plainely sheweth they looked further then such according to our practise even their owne country men fled for religion as we are they yet received them not till by publike profession of faith and subjection to discipline they joyned themselves to some Congregationall Church Secondly this sheweth what disorder and abuse of ordinances will follow from such a liberty to admit such as are not joyned to some Church for by this meanes many will neglect all order and discipline if they may but have the seales Thirdly to put all out of question that their practise and judgement in effect was the same with ours in this point note the first question propounded by them Are these Infants which you offer the â—eed of this Church that they may lawfully be here baptized by our Ministery CHAP. XIII THus farre wee have answered to the Reply made to the considerations in our answer to the 3. and 4. positions Now whereas wee tooke notice of three objections against our first consideration and answered the same It pleaseth the learned authour to take up onely two of them and with much inlargement to urge the same as his reasons against the positions and to apply our answers thereunto by which meanes our answers to the objections briefly set downe may seeme not so apt and full here as they would appeare in their proper places and therefore it will bee needfull for us to inlarge our selves somewhat in answering some passages at least in the reasons as they are here propounded before we come to the Reply Reply Reason 1. That sacred order God hath set in his visible Church c. Answ These words with all that follow whatever they may seeme to carry with them are nothing but a bare denyall of the positions in variety of expressions Reply For first The baptisme of John was true baptisme c. but hee never demanded of those hee received whether they were entered into Church Covenant c. Answ This wee had in substance before and is answered with all the other instances in this first reason in our answer to the Reply to the first consideration and in other places and therefore in vaine here to repeat the same And wee have observed more then once your plaine confession that the Apostles constituted Churches by baptisme even such Churches as they set Elders in by the election of the people Reply The second reason in substance is this because from Christ and the constant practise of the Apostles we learne that such as are called of God received the holy Ghost beleeve in the Lord professe their faith in him with repentance and amendment of life have a right to baptisme and desiring it are wronged if they bee deprived thereof Answ We grant the whole but as it is supposed in due order they must receive it so wee desire no more for wee grant upon these common grounds such have jus ad rem but not jus in re and the immediate fruition of them Reply Thirdly By a lively faith a man hath internal Communion with Christ by profession of the intire faith joyned with conformity of life in righteousnes holinesse and fellowship of love hee is a member of the visible Congregation or flock of Christ though no set member of a free Independent society and baptisme is a seale of our admission into the flocke of Christ not ever more but by accident of our receiving into a particular Congregation Answ This reason stands upon such a sense of the Catholik Church as cannot be found and it was before confessed that the Catholick Church consisteth of all true particular Churches as the parts of it And therefore how can a man be visibly a member of the whole and belong to no part thereof Secondly We deny not but such have a right to be in the particular Church and so to baptisme and all ordinances but as by such profession they are not members of any particular Church so neither have they immediate right to the priviledges thereof without admittance into the same Fit matter such are for a particular visible Church that professe the intire faith c. But it doth not admit them actually thereunto and your owne expression secretly implyeth as much when you say baptisme is a seale of our admission into the Church or flocke of Christ If baptisme bee the seale of our admission then there is an admission thereunto before baptisme but who doth admit and where and when is any admitted to the Church but in particular Congregations Can any bee admitted into a Church that whole Church being ignorant thereof but a man may professe the intire faith and live accordingly amongst the Heathen where neither any Church nor member of it take knowledge thereof and therefore bare profession doth not admit men but make them fit to bee received and admitted into the visible Church Your fourth Reason wee have had twice before and answered the same Reply To our answer of the first objection from the Instances of the Centurion Lydia the Jailour and the Eunuch First If where the holy Ghost is given and received and faith professed according to Gods Ordinance there none may hinder from being baptized soil by such as have power to baptize them then either such are members of the Church or baptisme is not a priviledge of the Church then it is not essentiall to baptisme in the
be taken in the first sense he remaines every way and in every respect by right a Minister as hee was before except he reject them and so dissolve the relation that was between them But if the question speak of an orderly censure of deposition unjustly then we judge of that case as we would do in any other censure of a member by excommunication therefore we say he is stil a Minister in foro interno before Christ for clavis errans non ligat Secondly in respect of that Church he hath stil right truly to minister to them and is their Minister though unjustly hindered in the execution of his Ministery as a member unjustly censured hath a true right to the Ordinances and membership though unjustly hindred from the same though in foro externo we grant to them or in their account he is no Minister as a person excommunicated is to them no member Thirdly in respect of other Churches if it doth appeare unto them that hee is unjustly deposed they may and ought to esteeme him still and receive him and have communion with him as a true Minister of Jesus Christ in the Church he doth belong to as they may do with a member unjustly cast out but til that appeare unto them they cannot so esteem and honor him being orderly deposed but must at least suspend their judgment til the case be cleared Fourthly we answer clearely and plainely to the chiefe scope of the question If a Minister bee unjustly deposed or forsaken by his particular Church and he also withall renounce and forsake them so farre as all Office and relation betweene them cease then is hee no longer an Officer or Pastour in any Church of God whatsoever you will call it And the Reason is because a Ministers office in the Church iâ— no indelible Character but consists in his relation to the flocke and if a Minister once ordained his relation ceasing his Office of a Minister Steward of the mysteries of God shall still remaine why should not a ruling Elder or Deacon remaine an Elder or Deacon in the Church as well all are Officers Ordained of Christ alike given to his Church Officers chosen and Ordained by laying on of hands alike but wee suppose you will not say a Deacon in such a case should remaine a Deacon in the Catholique Church therefore not a Minister Secondly wee shall now consider what is here said and first this language of a Minister in the usuall Church as a particular Church hath union with and is a part of the universall it is an unusuall expression to us and to the Scripture phrase and therefore beare with us if wee fall short of your meaning the usuall Church in England hath beene either the Arch-Deacons Church in the Deanaries or Diocesan in the Bishoprick or Provinciall or Nationall but wee hope that there is no such intended here yet to all this and the jurisdiction thereof particular Churches have been subject as parts there But if by usuall Church you meane a Classical Provinciall or Nationall Church wee must intreat better grounds for any of these and therefore wee must confesse our minde and meaning is not so that wee looke at a Minister of a particular Church in any such relation to the usuall and intermediate Church betweene it and the Catholique The second sense therefore we owne and acknowledge as before But whether this be contrary to the judgement and practise of the universall Church wee know not because it is hard for us know what the universall Church judgeth except we could heare it speake or see its practise if the onely head Prophet and Shepherd of the Church Jesus Christ be fit to declare her judgement we will be tryed thereby who we know hath sâ—t Elders in every particular Church Act. 14. 23. to watch over their particular flock Act. 20. 28. but not over any other Church that wee can finde Neither doth this destroy the unity or Communion of the Catholique Church nor of particular Churches one with another as is said for Churches may enjoy brotherly Communion one with another without such stated formes under the power and authority of one another as hath been shewed before Reply For if he be not a Minister to other Churches then are not the Churches of God one nor the Communion which they have together on nâ—r the Ministers one nor the â—â—â—cke which they feed one Answ In what sense is intended to have the Ministers one and flocke one we doe not see If you meane one by one visible Government over the Catholique Church wherein there is a subordination of Churches and Ministers you must at last rise to Oecomenicall Pastor or Councell that must be the supreme which can scarce ever be had If you meane an unity by brotherly Communion in offices of love and mutuall helpefulnesse of Churches and Ministers without usurpation such an unity and Community is not destroyed and the argument doth not follow Cannot many distinct societies ot Townes or Corporations make up one County except the Major or Constable in one Towne be a Major or Constable in others also By this Reason the Deacon of one Church is the Deacon of all or else the unity is destroyed Reply If the Pastor derive all his authority from the Church when the Church hath set him aside what right hath he to administer among that people Answ True but we say he derives all his authority from Christ by the Church indeed applying that office to him to which the authority is annexed by the institution of Christ hence being the Minister of Christ unto them if they without Christ depose him they hinder the exercise of his Office but his right remaines Reply As they give right to an unworthy man to minister amongst them if they cal him unjustly so they take right from the worthy if they unjustly depose him Answ We grant there is a parity in foro externo but as in the call his outward cal consists in the election of the calling and the acceptation of the called to compleat his power of administration Now this by Christ in his Church may be destroyed in a just censure without his consent but cannot unjustly be wrung from him without his consent therefore he may hold his right till either hee be justly deposed or willingly relinquish the same upon their injurious interruption of the use of his right Reply And whereas you say the Minister is for the Ministery and the Office for the execution and so the Pastor and the flocke are relatives and therefore if their election gave him authority among them to feed their casting him off hath stripped him of the same power they gave him Aâ—su Wee grant it is so yet the execution may bee unjustly hindred though the right and Office remaine But we may well retort this argument upon the Minister of the usuall or Catholicke Church Thus if the Minister bee for the Ministery and the Office for
without those ordinances of Gods Worship and Communion of Saints which hee called us unto and our soules breathed after or should wee forsake the publique Assemblies and joyne together in private separated Churches how unsufferable it would then have been the great offence that now is taken at it is a full evidence And if in Cities or some such great Townes that might have been done yet how was it possible for so many scattered Christians all over the Countrey It is true we might have suffered if wee had sought it wee might easily have found the way to have filled the Prisons and some had their share therein But whether wee were called thereunto when a wide doore was set open of liberty otherwise and our witnesse to the truth through the malignant policy of those times could not bee open before the world but rather smothered up in close prisons or some such wayes together with our selves wee leave to bee considered Wee cannot see but the rule of Christ to his Apostles and Saints and the practise of Gods Saints in all ages may allow us this liberty as well as others to fly into the Wildernesse from the face of the Dragon But if it had been so that the Godly Ministers and Christians that fled to New-England were the most timorous and faint hearted of all their Brethren that stayed behinde and that those sufferings were nothing in comparison of their Brethrens for why should any bâ—ast of sufferings yet who doth not know that the Spirit who gives various gifts and all to profit withall in such times doth single out every one to such worke as hee in wisdome intends to call them unto And whom the Lord will honour by suffering for his Cause by imprisonment c. hee gives them spirits suitable thereto whom the Lord will reserve for other service or imploy in other places hie inclines their hearts rather to fly giving them an heart suitable to such a condition It is a case of Conscience frequently put and oft resolved by holy Bradford Peter Martyr Philpot and others in Queene Maries bloody dayes viz. Whether it was lawfull to flee out of the Land To which their answer was that if God gave a spirit of courage and willingnesse to glorifie him by sufferings they should stay but if they found not such a spirit they might lawfully fly yea they advised them thereunto Those Servants of Christ though full of the spirit of glory and of Christ to outface the greatest persecuters in profession of the Truth unto the death yet did not complaine of the cowardize of such as fled because they deserted them and the Cause but rather advised divers so to doe and rejoyced when God gave liberty to their brethren to escape with their lives to the places of liberty to serve the Lord according to his Word Neither were those faithfull Saints and servants of God uselesse and unprofitable in the Church of God that fled from the bloody Prelates The infinite and onely wise God hath many workes to doe in the World and hee doth by his singular Providence give gifts to his Servants and disposeth them to his Worke as seemeth best to himselfe If the Lord will have some to beare witnesse by imprisonments dismembring c. wee honour them therein if hee will have others instrumentall to promote reformation in England wee honor them and rejoyce in their holy endeavours praying for a blessing upon themselves and labours And what if God will have his Church and the Kingdome of Christ goe up also in these remote parts of the world that his Name may bee known to the Heathen or whatsoever other end hee hath and to this end will send forth a company of weake-hearted Christians which dare not stay at home to suffer why should wee not let the Lord alone and rejoyce that Christ is preached howsoever and wheresoever And who can say that this work was not undertaken and carryed on with sincere and right ends and in an holy serious manner by the chiefe and the body of such as undertooke the same The Lord knows whether the sincere desires of worshipping himselfe according to his will of promoting and propagating the Gospel was not in the hearts of very many in this enterprise and hee that seeth in secret and rewardeth openly knows what prayers and teares have been poured out to God by many alone and in dayes of fasting and prayer of Gods servants together for his counsell direction assistance blessing in this worke How many longings and pantings of heart have been in many after the Lord Jesus to see his goings in his Sanctuary as the one thing their soules desired and requested of God that they might dwell in his house for ever the fruit of which prayers and desires this liberty of New-England hath been taken to bee and thankfully received from God Yea how many serious consultations with one another and with the faithfull Ministers and other eminent servants of Christ have been taken about this worke is not unknowne to some which cleares us from any rash heady rushing into this place out of discontent as many are ready to conceive Wee will here say nothing of the persons whose hearts the Lord stirred up in this businesse surely all were not rash weake-spirited inconsiderate of what they left behinde or of what it was to goe into a Wildernesse But if it were well knowne and considered or if wee were able to expresse and recount the singular workings of divine Providence for the bringing on of this Worke to what it is come unto it would stop the mouths of all that have not an heart to accuse and blaspheme the goodnesse of God in his glorious workes whatever many may say or think wee beleeve after-times will admire and adore the Lord herein when all his holy ends and the wayes he hath used to bring them about shall appeare Look from one end of the heaven to another whether the Lord hath assayed to do such a Worke as this in any Nation so to carry out a people of his owne from so flourishing a State to a wildernesse so far distant for such ends and for such a worke Yea and in few yeares hath done for them as hee hath here done for his poore despised people When wee looke back and consider what a strange poise of spirit the Lord hath laid upon many of our hearts wee cannot but wonder at our selves that so many and some so weak and tender with such cheerfulnesse and constant resolutions against so many perswasions of friends discouragements from the ill report of this Countrey the straits wants and tryalls of Gods people in it c. yet should leave our accommodations and comforts should forsake our dearest relations Parents brethren Sisters Christian friends and acquaintances overlooke all the dangers and difficulties of the vast Seas the thought whereof was a terrour to many and all this to go to a Wildernesse where wee could forecast nothing but care
and temptations onely in hopes of enjoying Christ in his Ordinances in the fellowship of his people was this from a stupid senslesnesse or desperate carelesnesse what became of us or ours or want of naturall affections to our deare Countrey or nearest relations No surely with what bowells of compassion to our deare Countrey with what heart-breaking affections to our deare relations and Christian friends many of us at least came away the Lord is witnesse What shall we say of the singular Providence of God bringing so many Ship-loads of his people through so many dangers as upon Eagles wings with so much safety from yeare to yeare The fatherly â—are of our God in feeding and cloathing so many in a Wildernesse giving such healthfulnesse and great increase of posterity what shall wee say of the Worke it selfe of the kingdome of Christ and the form of a Common-wealth erected in a Wildernesse and in so few yeares brought to that state that scarce the like can bee seen in any of our English Colonies in the richest places of this America after many more years standing That the Lord hath carryed the spirits of so many of his people through all their toylsome labour wants difficulties losses c. with such a measure of chearfulnesse and contentation But above all wee must acknowledge the singular pity and mercies of our God that hath done all this and much more for a people so unworthy so sinfull that by murmurings of many unfaithfulnesse in promises oppressions and other evils which are found among us have so dishonoured his Majesty exposed his worke here to much scandall and obloquie for which wee have cause for ever to bee ashamed that the Lord should yet owne us and rather correct us in mercy then cast us off in displeasure and scatter us in this Wildernesse which gives us cause with Mich. 7. to say Who is a God like our God that pardoneth iniquities and passeth by the transgressions of the remnant of his heritage even because he delighteth in mercy Though we be a people of many weaknesses and wants yet wee acknowledge our God to have been to us a God of many mercies in respect of that sweet peace which he hath taken away from so many Nations yet continuing the same to us in respect also of that liberty wee have in Gods house the blessed Ministery of the Word the sweet unity and communion of Gods Churches and Ministers increase and multiplication of Churches Christian government in the Common-wealth and many other mercies wee enjoy but especially the gracious presence of Christ to many of our soules in all these But wee will not insist much upon this subject being perswaded it is in the consciences and hearts of many of our dear Countrey-men to thinke that we should be an object of love and tendernesse to that State and people by whose Laws and unkind usages we were driven out into a wildernesse rather then to bee judged as desertors of our Brethren and the Cause of Christ in hand with whom excuse us if we now speak plainly it had been far more easie unto many of us to have suffered then to have adventured hither upon the wildernesse sorrows wee expected to have met withall though we must confesse the Lord hath sweetned it beyond our thoughts and utmost expectations of prudent men But passing by this wee must desire the Reader to beare with us a little in removing that apprehension that wee are the great stumbling block in the way of Reformation which if it were true it had been better we had been driven so farre into this wildernesse as never to have been heard of more Concerning our affection to this blessed worke of a publique Reformation of the Nation in generall and the particular Churches or Congregations of the Land in particular as it is best knowne to God so wee thinke it is not unknowne to men not onely here by our daily prayers for it and sometime solemne seekings of God about it but also we have given some testimonies thereof both by private Letters and the publique motions of some of Gods eminent servants among us tending that way We conceive two things specially in our Doctrine and practise that may seem to bee stumbling blocks in the way of this publique Reformation which we shall here remove The first is our practise wherein wee seem so much to differ from the reformed Churches in receiving to our Churches onely visible Saints and beleevers This we doe freely confesse that our practise and judgement doe evidence this to all that we thinke reformation of the Church doth not onely consist in purging out corrupt Worship and setting up the true but also in purging the Churches from such profanenesse and sinfulnesse as is scandalous to the Gospel and makes the Lord weary of his owne Ordinances Esay 1. And wee doubt not but this was in the hearts of many if not most of Gods servants to desire a separation of the precious from the vile in the dispensing of Gods ordinances and if the charity of some be of larger extent herein then others this hinders not agreement in the maine This day hath discovered what kinde of people are to bee found every where in the Parishes of England Can light and darknesse Christ and Belial agree together Popish episcopall enemies and haters of all godlinesse and reformation cleave together in one Church of Christ with the Saints of God Yet neither our Doctrine nor practise do prescribe and limit the way of attaining this reformation whereby any should justly from our example stand off from concurring in such a publique worke It is true where there is no Church relation but a people are to begin a new constituting of Churches reformation is to be sought in the first Constitution This is our case But where corrupted Churches such as we conceive the Congregations of England generally to be are to be reformed there we conceive that such Congregations should bee called by able Ministers unto repentance for former evills and confessing and bewayling their sins renew a solemn Covenant with God to reform themselves and to submit unto the discipline of Christ By which meanes such as refuse so to doe exclude themselves and others by the severity of Discipline should bee purged out if falling into sinne they remaine impenitent in the same What some particular persons may have said or done contrary to this our profession wee cannot say nor doe we justifie but wee know nothing that hath come from us to the contrary to weaken the hands of godly reformers or to perswade the people to separate from the Congregations if by any meanes they might attaine with toleration of what can be the reformation thereof with the liberty of Gods true worship therein If indeed that cannot bee obtained but men contradict and blaspheme them as Paul separated the Disciples so wee see no other remedy the faithfull have in such a case The second stumbling block may be our
is not this fulfilled in these times which wee wish may well bee laid to heart The second thing which wee conceive may chiefly hinder this closing is that point of Church government which concernes the power and liberties of particular Churches or Congregations and here wee must acknowledge the distance is too great For on the one side wee cannot see either by Treatises or by the Directory for Worship that Congregations are acknowledged to bee compleat Churches especially standing among other Churches or that any power or liberty is given to them to administer Church censures no not so long as they administer rightly according to the rule but all such power is taken indeed from the Churches though in words they are perswaded that it is to strengthen them and if this also come down from the Catholick Church and so to lesser Synods the greater part having power over the lesse as it were jure divino it will strike sore at the liberties and power of particular Churches But what here to say of the distance on the other hand wee cannot tell wee see or read nothing but that our deare and honoured Brethren doe freely imbrace communion of Churches in consultative Synods for the brotherly helpe of each other and the weaker Churches yea and in a doctrinall way to declare the will of Christ and to threaten his judgements against such as shall refuse wholsome counsell and withdraw communion from such as wilfully refuse to heare what is propounded according to the minde of Christ And what should we here say but on the bended knees of our soules intreat our reverend Brethren to consider what power any or many Churches can challenge over another to require them to give up their right to them to rule in common if a sister Church furnished with Officers shall refuse the same or what rule bindeth the Churches of an hundred or any such civill division to come into such a combination with those Churches rather then others if that refusing Churches have just reasons to object against such Churches or their Officers We think the more voluntary and free such consociations are the better Here we shall be bold to propound this one thing viz. Why may not the fifth and sixth Articles of agreement publikely professed to the world in answer to the Prelaticall petition obtaine amongst our Brethren that it may appeare to the disappointment of their hopes that the Prelates being downe the agreement would be easie as is there said Viz. Ar. 5. Each particular Church hath her owne power and authority and the use and benefit of all the ordinances of Christ neither is there any thing to be done without the expresse or tacit consent of the Congregation in matters which are proper and peculiar to a particular Church whether in election or ordination of Ministers or in admitting or excommunicating of members Ar. 6. It is in many respects expedient both for the members of each Church whether Ministers or people and for the right governing and well-being of the particular Churches in a Nation professing Christian Religion that besides their particular Assemblies and Elderships they meet by their Commissioners Ministers and Elders in greater Assemblies that matters that concern all the Churches within their bounds respective may with common advice and consent be agreed upon for their good and edification And we hope the Lord may yet have such a mercy for England if the crying sins thereof bee not still impenitently against this glorious shining light of the Gospel persisted in which wee confesse is our greatest feare Godly Brethren wee hope would agree if Englands sins hinder not We confesse it was the saddest newes that this yeare came unto our eares that the Kingdome of Christ is hardly like to obtaine so much jealousie there is lest the discipline of Christ should crosse the licentionsnesse of this age yea that generally there is no more regard of the solemn Covenant especially in personall reformation then if it were never made that many reject the reformations they seemed to desire at the first These with other sad things come to our eares which sadden our spirits Oh England England our beloved England wilt thou not be made cleane when will it once bee wilt thou still return the Lord Jesus graciously striving with thee for to save thee such an unkind answer We will not have this man reigne over us hast thou not yet learned so much wisdom as to kisse the son no not now when he is angry and the sword in his hand That voice of God soundeth oft in our eares when wee thinke of England Put off thine ornaments that I may know what to doe unto thee but for ought we heare the pride of England did never so much testifie to their faces as now when sackcloth and ashes were more suitable The Lord humble the hearts of our deare Countrey-men or else wee feare the yoake of Christ will never be born and how the Lord Jesus will beare and indure that we tremble to think But what doe we thus to take upon us and let loose our Pen so far pardon we beseech you Christian Reader this seeming boldnesse it is our hearty affection to the peace and prosperity of our deare Countrey and the Saints of God in it that have drawn these things from us Say not what calling have these thus to admonish and censure us Censure we doe not that we would doe onely to our selves but faithfully to admonish and exhort in the Lord we hope we may presume Neither have we taken upon us this whole weighty worke of our owne minds but at the request and call of divers our reverend Brethren whose voice herein we looked upon as the voice of God nor have wee accepted that call out of any lust we have to contend or enter the lists of disputation with any Wee love the peace of the Churches and unity and concord with all our deare and godly Brethren too well to have any such ends And though wee are not unwilling to receive and consider any returne that may bee made and we hope with a mind to submit to the truth yet wee must professe Two things chiefly inclined us to undertake this worke First to cleare up such truths as we conceive to bee according to the minde of Christ which were obscured by this Reply Secondly and that especially hoping that what wee should write would tend rather to a peaceable healing of offences and differences then otherwise and therefore have presumed to Preface thus farre and so to present these our affectionate requests to our deare Brethren and Country-men which wee heartily recommend to their serious consideration and to the blessing of God who onely can incline the hearts of men to attend to any thing of God set before them though wee bee the meanest and weakest of many to take upon us thus to speake to our deare Country-men yet through the grace of Christ who put us into the Ministery we
have bestowed a great part of our labour in these parts neither we hope altogether in vaine which makes us somewhat the more engaged and encouraged to write as we doe And now having thus farre in this Epistle and in the Booke following testified our love to the truth and desires of the peace unity reformation and prosperity of our beloved England and the Churches of God therein wee commend both to the consideration of the Reader and all to the grace and blessing of Christ Jesus and rest From New-England Novemb. 28. 1645. THO. ALLIN THO. SHEPARD ADVERTISEMENTS TO THE READER TO the Epistle of the Author of this Reply wee say nothing because it savours for the most part of love and desire of unity which we thankfully acknowledge onely we cannot but take notice of two passages 1 A complaint made against some standing affected New-England ward who have carryed it so as if a chiefe part of holinesse consisted in separation and that therefore some have separated from all private and publique communion there others from all publique but not from private others from the Sacraments onely allowing publique communion otherwise To which wee answer that as the Church fell by degrees into universall pollution by the Apostasie foretold to bee under the Man of Sin so by degrees it recovers out of it againe If therefore separation reach no farther then separation from sinnes and such sinnes of Churches wherein our selves in joyning with them must bee involved wee suppose such separation all due respect and love reserved and professed to the Churches themselves cannot justly bee accounted unwarrantable and 't is the profession of the Author in his Epistle to plead for communion with the Churches of Christ no farther then they hold communion with Christ If any transgresse these bounds either in respect of private or publique communion in England wee must professe openly that if any mourn for it wee are or would bee companions with them in that griefe Whose heart bleeds not to see Gods flock scattered and needlesse rents made that scarce Truth or errour can now adayes bee received but it is maintained in a way of Schisme directly contrary to the gathering and uniting Spirit of Jesus Christ A wide Conscience calls evill good and therefore can communicate with any evill a strait Conscience cals good evill as Gerson observes and therefore can readily separate even from that which is good When rash and sudden men are grown masters of their Consciences it troubles not them from whom they divide nor whither they run in separate wayes when weak yet godly men are under the tendernesse yet much darknesse of Conscience being very timorous of wayes that are evill grow many times shy at least in simplicity are led from wayes that afterward are found to be lawfull and good 'T is the usuall misery of English spirits either to spin the Spiders web and swallow down all corruptions in Churches or so to breake downe the gap in forsaking corruptions utterly to abandon the Churches themselves The wine of causelesse separation hath a spirit in it if God graciously prevent not that hurries men headlong to strange distances that in separating from publique they separate from private in separating from corrupt Churches as no Churches they separate from the purest even those of their own in separating from pollutions of Gods ordinances at last they fall to the storming of some if not to the utter renouncing of all the Ordinances themselves we mourne wee say for such evills and could with bended knees desire our deare Countrey-men to consider whether this bee the Spirit of Christ Jesus that so carries them to reject them whom the Lord Jesus hath not yet wholly forsaken and not rather with one heart and with bowells of compassion if any liberty can bee procured to study how to heale the bleeding breaches and manifold evills of sick and sinfull England that in their owne recovery from pollutions the whole may arise and share alike with them therein tolerating with all long-suffering many things amisse mourning daily after the Lord till such times come wherein he wil give his people his ordinances not only in purity but also in power when the Lord shall be one and his name one Zach. 14. 9. over all the earth As for our selves wee look not upon our departure to these parts to be a separation rigidly taken but a lawfull secession or a heavenly translation from corrupt to more pure Churches by the hand of our God and how far we allow of separation the ensuing Treatise will declare 2 The second is That we dissent one from another as much as others from us and perhaps the lesser part of us Answ We confesse we know but little and that but in part and therefore if we should say that in some things we did not dissent we should not speak the truth nor say that we were sinfull men yet this we must speak to his praise whose we are and whom we serve with our spirits in the Gospel of his Son that although Satan hath been oft busie to make breaches among us yet the Ministers of Christ have been hitherto generally if not all of one heart and mind in the maine and principall things of his Kingdom amongst us and which is observed by many where ever differences are sown yet the Ministers never disagree and that although some differences have and doe arise before their convening together yet they never yet met but grace hath over-wrestled corruption peace trouble and truth errour and so have most sweetly accorded in one the thoughts of which Christ-like peaceablenesse of spirit and love as it oft sweetens many other sorrows so we desire to bee spared herein and that this our crowne may not bee taken from us by such passages suggesting great differences as these be Now for the Reply it self we desire the Reader to consider that we had neither time nor Bookes ready at hand to consider some of the quotations made in the margent and therfore being such testimonies as cast not the ballance one way or another we have passed most of them by with silence It had also been easie for us to have Analysed more orderly the words of the Reply then as they are set downe but because we would not doe the least wrong we have set them down as we finde them in the Book not every passage for that were needlesse but those things wherein there seemes to bee any observable matter of dispute between us nor are we conscious of doing the Author the least wrong in setting down his own words as hereafter you find them We confesse that in sundry of our Answers we have studied not onely to answer to the Reply but have taken in what sundry others godly learned object against our principles but without mentioning scarce any time their Names of which we are sparing for no other reason but because we honour the men from our very hearts and could wish though differently
of the people in joyning with the reading of this Liturgy or so much of it as is read usually by such Idol-priests First concerning the Liturgy it selfe if you respect the matter and forme or manner of it it would bee too tedious to rip up what for matter hath been objected by the godly Reformers Consider but two things objected strongly by Mr. Cartwright against the forme or manner of it First that it is taken out of the Popish Masse-book concerning which hee affirmeth that although there were nothing in it unlawfull or against the Word of God which saith hee I wish there were not yet no Word of God no reason nor example of the Ancient Churches Jewish or Christian will permit us to use the same formes and ceremonies viz. with Papists being neither commanded of God nor such as there may not bee as good as they and rather better established yea considering how neare the Papists live amongst us it were more safe to conforme to the Ceremonies of the Turks that are farre off And this hee speaketh of the forme of Liturgy as well as Ceremonies Cartw. reply to Whitgifts answer to the admonition to the Parliament pag. 131 132. And although you seeme to make light of this objection after page 15. end yet in a like case when Whitgift had said it is not materiall that Deanes Canons came from the Pope Cartwright replyeth thus It is as if hee had said it skilleth not if they came out of the bottomlesse pit for whatsoever commeth from the Pope who is Antichrist comes first from the Devill Cartw. Reply pag. 204. Secondly hee objecteth that absurd manner of chopping and interrupting the prayers of which Mr. Cartwright saith That if any man should make such a supplication to a Prince he would thinke him to make his supplication before hee knew what to ask or that hee had forgotten some piece of his suit or that he were distracted in his understanding Much more might bee added but wee have onely touched this sore and in the words of that learned and zealous Reformer that it may appeare neither the opinion of that Booke nor the reasons against it are so new or proper to the Separatists as is pretended Now what comfort can anygodly conscience have to joyn in or conform unto such a form of Worship as this is Further consider the administration of the Sacraments according to the Book as we speak still of joyning in it who knows not that such must subject their children to that grosse Idol of the crosse and see and approve the pollution of Gods Ordinances with the same and at the Lords table joyne in that Idolatrous gesture of kneeling and therefore how the godly can joyn lawfully in the whole or such parts as those Idol-priests dispense let all Non-conformists judge and it is well knowne how superstitiously precise such are in pressing all conformity to every gesture and ceremony prescribed in their Booke which they so idolize as they have good cause being that which maintaines them Secondly if wee consider the imposition hereof by the Prelates and late strict pressing thereof upon the people to be present and conforme fully to it as well as upon Ministers to use it The very yeelding of conformity thereto doth miserably cast away the liberty purchased by Christ to his Churches inthrall the Churches to Antichrist and lift up the power of Antichrist in his tyrannous usurpations upon the Churches of Christ Thirdly we might adde the dangerous consequences and scandals that follow from admitting this Liturgy which being touched in our answer to the first Position we here passe over These things considered it appeares not onely that there was need to disprove the first part of your disjunction which you declined in stating the question but also the truth of the Position it selfe is confirmed Now let us consider your proof of the second part of your disjunction which is thus Reply If in respect of the Minister then it is not lawfull to joyn with such an one in any Ordinanee of God For if the Minister make it unlawfull then all communion in any part of Gods Worship with such Ministers is unlawfull and so the Churches in all ages of the world the Prophets our Saviour Christ the Apostles and the faithfull in the Primitive Church sinned in holding communion with such when the Priests were dumbe dogs c. but we never read that the Prophets our Saviour Christ the Apostles did ever forbeare themselves or warne the faithfull not to communicate with such in the ordinances of Worship Our Saviour charged the Disciples to beware of the leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees but never forbad them to communicate with them in the ordinances of God Answ To this we answer First that if you speake to the case in hand of those unable and ungodly Ministers of England Readers as they are called of the Common-service wee grant it is not lawfull to communicate in a stated way with them in any ordinance of Worship properly Ministeriall in any act that private persons may performe wee may communicate with them but not in Ministeriall worke as Sacraments for although being imposed on any Church as Ministers and so received by them their Ministeriall acts are not a nullity yet if wee speake of the lawfulnesse of such their act of receiving them then the Church sinneth in choosing them or being imposed in receiving them and submitting to their Ministery being such as are utterly contrary to the rule of Christ and rejected of him And by the like reason the godly sinne in receiving Sacraments c. from them as Ministers of Christ knowing they intrude into that office and have no authority by the rule of Christ so to doe Wee may heare a private gifted Christian prophecy but if hee intrude without a lawfull calling into the Ministery we may not receive him nor approve of him therein Cyprians speech is commonly noted that Plebs maxime habeâ— potestatem vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi yet the occasion of it is not so generally observed which is this Plebs obsequens praeceptis Dominicis Deum metuens à peccatore proposito separare se debet nec se ad sacrilegia sacerdotis sacrificia miscere â—um ipse maxime habet potestatem eligendi c. that is the people observing divine precepts and fearing God ought to separate themselves from a wicked Minister neither joyne themselves to the sacrifices of a sacrilegious Priest seeing they chiefly have power of choosing worthy Ministers and rejecting unworthy Secondly wee see no demonstrative argument that the Priests and Pharisees were wholly unable for the worke of those times as these wee speake of are for though the Priests Esay 56. 10. were dumb dogs that cannot barke yet it seemes by the place to be meant actually rather then habitually through their slumbering or security there mentioned not telling the people of their sinnes nor warning them of judgements rather
then of their totall inability Men of good parts and able gifts may be actually such dumb dogs as seldome preach or never to purpose and bee spiritually ignorant through much prophanenesse yet not totally deprived of common gifts It is most evident that the Pharisees were blinde yet taught the people and hence the Disciples were permitted to heare them but what is this to the question which is of unable as well as of ungodly Ministers Thirdly suppose some of the Priests and Levites were unable yet the Ministery of the Old Testament was limitted by God himselfe to the tribe of Levi and that by succession which is farre otherwise in the New Testament being left to the Churches election and therefore they had no power to reject them o◠withdraw from them when they had ministred the ordinances of God Fourthly suppose some of them were not called of God being not lineally descended of that tribe yet those things wherein the faithfull Christ and his Apostles and others did communicate with them were necessarily commanded of God viz. sacrifices offerings c. in the Temple which seale of God we see not stamped upon this Liturgy in question to make it currant And thus Peter Martyr answereth in the like case that though there were many pernicious doctrines taught by Scribes Pharisees and wicked Priests yet sacrificandi ritus c. the rites of sacrificing were not changed for the same oblations were offered which the Law commanded and therefore the Saints might use them having the word of God conjoyned with them Fifthly what you grant concerning Christ his warning his Disciples to take heed of the leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees no doubt hee did the like concerning the corruptions of the Priests in their administrations of Gods ordinances and wee doubt not but you will acknowledge that the Prophets and Apostles did or ought to abstaine from all actuall communion with those corruptions and the Lord Jesus out of question did abstaine which being so wee may retort this argument thus in regard of conformitie to ceremonies If it bee not lawfull to partake in the Ordinances of God where wee must actually joyne with such ceremonies then Christ the Prophets and Apostles must not have joyned in any ordinance of God in severall ages of the Church when worse or as ill corruptions were admixed with that worship But they never refused the ordinances of worship for such corruptions Therefore wee should not now for these ceremonies abstaine put case for kneeling at the Lords Supper c. If you please to solve this knot the same answer will serve our turne as well Reply It is not for private Christians to withdraw themselves from the ordinances of worship and communion of the Church because such are permitted to deale in the holy things of God whom they judge or know unfit when men joyne in the worship of God with unworthy Ministers they doe not countenance them their place and office but obey the commandement of God who requires their attendance upon his highnesse in that way and meanes Answ First wee grant it is not alwayes for private Christians so to leave the communion of a Church in the ordinances of God for such a reason but if they have first done their part according to their place to reforme or cast out such an unworthy and unable ministry and cannot or see no hope to procure one sufficient to edifie the Church hee may and ought to betake himselfe to some other Church where hee may bee edified and it is a great mistake to thinke in the constitution of the Gospell that a Christian cannot reject all fellowship with such Idoll Priests but hee must forsake the ordinances of Christ or rent off from the Church when indeed hee deprives himselfe of many ordinances in joyning with them and attaines them in forsaking of them Secondly if we consider wherein the outward call of all Church Officers in the New Testament lies viz. in a great part in the choice of the Church or at least in their after consent and receiving of them being chosen by others for them Act. 1. and 6. and 14. how can any godly man receive submit unto or acknowledge such unable wretches by receiving Gods ordinances from them as Ministers but they must needs countenance them in their places and set up to themselves an Idoll or meanes of worship to edifie themselves which God never appointed for let it bee proved that ever God appointed readers of a Liturgie to edifie the people Answ Thirdly but that to joyne in worship with such should bee to obey Gods command who requires attendance upon himselfe in that way and meanes wee thinke it a speech not so throughly digested if wee carry in our eye the case now in hand concerning these Idoll Priests and Silver shrines For where can they shew any such command or why hath it been suffered by any of our Brethren that the godly living under such Priests have been so frequently absent from them reading the liturgy to heare their Sermons Nay why have they not told them they were bound to attend upon God in hearing their Sir John read at home Wee appeale to all consciences whether they would approve of any godly man that would rest in such meanes and not call him to leave all his outward conveniences for some godly able Ministry or at least not to attend on them but get where they may bee better edified Reply To goe no further then the Text you quote Hosea 4. 6 7. Because thou hast despised knowledge I have rejected thee properly the Text speaketh of the ten Tribes and the Priests amongst them who worshipped the Calves c. whom the Lord threatens to reject but neither this nor any other Text proves that people joyning in worship with such doe countenance them in their places Answ The Text proves that God rejects such Priests as these are just like Jeroboams Priests of the meanest of the people and that was all it was alledged for and that receiving such as Ministers doth countenance them in their places was proved before And if it bee meant of Jeroboams Priests as you say the approved practise of the godly in those dayes 2 Chron. 11. 16. will well justifie and lead us to reject and leave these also Secondly there seemes to bee foure arguments why the people should withdraw from these kind of Priests First in regard of their miserable perishing for want of knowledge by their meanes Secondly because the people in receiving them rejected knowledge as Calvin notes upon the place Thirdly because God would take a time to disburthen the Church of them whence Drusius in locum wisheth utinam tales bodie à ministerio amoverentur Fourthly because the Lord would cast off their children from being his for this sinne as Calvin also notes upon the place the promise of shewing mercy to a 1000. generations being chiefly annexed to the observers of the second Command and the instituted
meanes of worship which those Priests never were Reply On the contrary if you will extend this Text to all unworthy Ministers of what sort soever whom the Word of God condemns as not approved Ministers of God c. Answ Wee intended no other sorts then such as wee have in hand the unable and ungodly Idoll Priests of England and therefore this discourse concernes us not For wee freely confesse that it is lawfull in divers cases at least for a time to communicate with such unworthy Ministers as may bee contained in your description but that people must and ought to joyne with such in the worship of God and sinne if they separate from the ordinances as you say the Scriptures alledged teach not this so evidently that wee can see as 1 Sam. 2. 12 13. 17. 24. that imputation Verse 24. They make the Lords people to transgresse doth not depend immediatly on Verse 13 14. 17. but on Verse 22. 23. where they are charged to have layne with the women the other passages being interrupted by the story of Samuel and his Mother Verse 18 19. 20 21. So Jer. 8. 8 9. Micah 3. 11 12. containe onely threats against wicked Ministers but not a word to prove people ought to joyne with them c. Phil. 1. 15. speaking of such as preach and preach Christ though not of sinceritie doth not reach such Ministers as the word condemnes for many such may be approved Ministers by the Word having a call according to the same but wee shall not contend in this case wherein wee doe not dissent so that Christians bee left to their lawfull libertie of withdrawing from Ministers grossely wicked and Teachers of false Doctrin or idle and unsufficient when they cannot reclaime them or remove them in the use of all lawfull meanes within their power Reply The reasons whereby the ancient Churches condemned the Donatists and Catharists for their voluntary and seditious separations and the moderne Churches condemne the Anabaptists for their renting from the body of Christ will hold against separation from the Prayers of the Congregation because they are read by an ungodly Minister Wee deny that wee teach or hold such separation because read by an ungodly Minister as is sufficiently shewed before but what we speak is against conformitie to and communion with the corruptions of the Liturgie especially used by an unable as well as ungodly Minister and therefore the arguments mentioned will hold against our proposition just as the accusations and imputations of Donatisme Puritanisme Anabaptisme which the Prelates cast upon all Non-conformists and men studious of reformation will hold and fasten upon them which is nothing at all Reply The second Proposition where the whole Liturgie is used though by an able and godly Minister it is not lawfull to joyne in prayer in that case Wee cannot bee of your judgement herein for in the times of the Prophets and our Saviour Christ as great abuses no question were found c. but they never taught people to separate from the holy things of God Answ First wee must still mind the Reader of the true and full state of the question which in our answer is of joyning in prayer with and when that whole Liturgy is used and hee that joynes with that whole Liturgie must needs bee supposed to have actuall communion with all the corruptions thereof what ever they bee and therefore though this Proposition reach to the practise of able and godly Ministers yet let none thinke wee plead herein separation from their ministery but onely that people may not conforme with them to any corruption in worship and by this proposition also the Author might easily have seene that wee denied the other which was woven in with this not because of the ungodlinesse of the Minister alone as hee carried his dispute but chiefly in respect of the corruptions of the worship together with the unlawfulnesse of such a ministery that is both unable and ungodly Secondly concerning the argument it runs as full for conformitie to all the corrupt ceremonies of the booke as the corrupt worship it selfe therein as was said before cleare the one viz. non-conformitie to ceremonies shew a reason why you will separate from the Sacrament because you will not kneele according to the booke and you answer your argument here alledged against us but the reply proceeds Reply And if presence at formes of prayer bee not lawfull by reason of the corruptions alledged there can bee no visible societie named since 200. yeeres after Christ or thereabout wherein a Christian might lawfully joyne in prayer reading the Scriptures hearing the word or participation of the Sacraments their Doctrines prayers rights being lesse pure then ours but no man wee hope will bee so bold as to affirme the state of the Churches within 200. yeers after Christ to bee so miserably decayed that the faithfull could not without sinne hold communion with them in the foresaid ordinances of God Answ First this argument holds as strongly for conformitie to the ceremonies as to the whole booke of Common Prayers as was said before Secondly this is a dangerous kind of reasoning from the practise of the faithfull in corrupt times of the Church especially when they are declining and growing clouds of darkenesse and superstition overspread the Churches It is no breach of charitie to thinke that through the iniquitie of the times the godly lived in many evils through ignorance and weakenesse which after light is come into the Churches wee ought to abandon wholly these are times of light and of the consumption of Antichrist and time for us to abolish his Liturgies and corrupt formes of worship as well as Images ceremonies c. Who doe not pitie the weaknesse of godly Bilny and others that seeing some grosse corruptions were yet so devoutly obedient to the Church as they called it in many grosse superstitions and the like may bee said of those former times and wee see not but this reason will goe farre in justification of communion with many false worships of Antichrists that are not grosly idolatrous Thirdly it is a great charge upon those times to say no visible societie throughout the world can bee named since 200. yeeres after Christ that was not lesse pure then England in Doctrine rites c. It may bee that as generally Churches were corrupt so they contemned and censured such as professed more puritie but that there were some visible assemblies more pure may bee conceived by that testimony given to Aerius and many orthodox Christians with him though condemned for a Hereticke in that which wee all now hold to bee an undoubted truth also after the Waldenses casting off the Pope and his will worships and the following reformed Churches those of Scotland Geneva and divers others in France and Switserland c. whose Doctrines rites and administrations wee doubt not will bee confessed more pure then English Churches It would bee too tedious and in these knowing times
needlesse to search all records and to compare the puritie of the prayers and rites of these with former times wee read of very few formes used for 300. yeeres some short ones they had which are retained yet in our Liturgie with many more and those formes they had not imposed nor stinted which is the great offence of this untill about the yeere 406. and there wee read in the Milevitâ—n Councell that no prayers should bee used in Churches but what were either composed of able and sufficient men or approved by the Synods and this was determined onely in regard of the ignorant Ministery of those contentious and hereticall times as Chemnitius observes ne forte aliquid contra fidem vel per ignorantiam vel per minus studium sit compositum If the Roman Bishops did multiply as indeed they did excessively unlesse their owne admirers erre grossely rites and formes of prayer yet it is well knowne how long it was ere the Churches in other places submitted to their power so that this comparison might well have beene spared To conclude though wee say not that all Churches since 200. yeeres after Christ were so miserably decayed that the faithfull might not without sinne communicate with them yet wee may bee bold to say many of them were so corrupt that the faithfull did not nor could not communicate in many parts of Gods worship without sinnes of ignorance conforming to the corruptions themselves and that if they had seene and discovered the evill of them they ought and we beleeve would have abstained from divers ordinances in regard of the corrupt administrations of them yea after all meanes used to purge them out and not prevailing they ought and would have withdrawn themselves to more pure Churches or erected such amongst themselves Reply The prayers of the Ministers conceived or stinted in a set forme bee not his private prayers but the publike prayers of the assembly but you will not say the people ought not to joyn with their pastour therein if ought bee amisse for matter manner or both Answ There is a wide difference betweene the whole Liturgie so imposed and so clogged as is before shewed and such prayers of the Minister having something amisse But you may put the case so as it would bee unlawfull for people to joyne in such prayers also as if the Minister for matter usually pray to Saints for manner turne himselfe and fix his eye on a Crucifix Reply It is all one to the people in this â—ase whether the fault bee personall as some distinguish or otherwise knowne before hand or not knowne for if simple presence defile whether knowne before hand or not all presence is faultie and if simple presence defile not our presence is not condemned by reason of the corruptions knowne whereof wee stand not guiltie Answ First we distinguish not here between personall and ministeriall faults but object against the personall act of him that joynes with that whole Liturgie and so in the corruptions of it as hee must needs doe that joyns with the whole not onely saying Amen to them but as is knowne he takes his share in those shreds of prayers Responds c. which in Mr. Cartwrights judgement is so absurd as makes a man seeme out of his wits And therefore his personall actuall conformitie must needs carry guilt and therefore there is more then simple presence in this case as is cleare to any understanding Secondly it is not all one whether the faults bee knowne or not knowne before hand as appeares plainely 1 Cor. 10. 27 28 29. where wee see if a man come to a feast and know not they eate with reference to the Idoll nor that any take offence he may eate without asking any question but if hee know such things he may not eate Besides publique sinfull actions of Ministers are either 1 Accidental occasional or 2ly known appointed in a stated service now the frailties of a Minister which accidentally fall in and are not known before nor are any part and essence of the service unto which men that come doe or should take themselves to bee called hinder not communion because they doe not prae se ferre by their presence to attend and observe them but the corruptions of the Liturgie are knowne and appointed and to which and with which the imposers call others to joyne as in a stated service to God the use of which if it bee an humane frailtie in Gods Ministers not yet convinced of the evill thereof yet for those to communicate herein who know such evills have surely passed the bounds of frailtie and infirmitie because in this action of prayer there is not onely communion by way of presence as it is in hearing the word but communion of action publique prayer being the common action of the whole Church towards God There can be no prayer by any man offered to God but there will be some humane frailties attending on it if therefore for this cause wee should reject communion in prayer wee should reject the ordinances of God and never joyne in any prayer in this world but the corruptions of the Liturgie are not such but that they may bee more easily cast off then kept This case stands not in tolerating faults in another as the reply makes it but in actuall joyning with the sinnes of another wherein hee that joyneth is involved and therefore whether they bee corruptions that may bee tolerated or not in another yet if sinnes they may not bee practised and so joyned in with another And therefore the case you put of communion with any person obstinate in errour till hee may bee convinced is nothing to this purpose For wee must not joyne with him in his error no not an houre though wee may tolerate him a moneth Reply Hath not Christian wisedome and experience of humane frailties lessoned you deare brethren to beare one with another in matters of greater consequence then any have or can bee objected truely against the forme of prayer in use among us Answ The Lord hath lessoned us to tolerate and beare with many humane frailties not onely in one another but also in our deare brethren abroad but to joyne with the best of men in conformitie to knowne and grosse corruptions in worshipping God or to stoop so low to the insolent tyranny of usurping Prelates as to beare on our backs their whole Liturgie and the corruptions thereof wee confesse wee have not yet learned and now wee hope never to goe to that schoole againe to learne the same Reply And why such corruptions should not bee ascribed to humane frailtie we see not For if a godly Minister make use of a booke in things which hee judges lawfull for matter and manner the corruption of him that useth it according to his judgement from what cause can it spring but humane ignorance and frailtie Answ First the learned replier is very apt to forget the termes of the Proposition which
but by the necessity of nature and invincible hinderances foreseen by Christ and intended by him And therfore as the Lord limiting his Church to one Nation united it into that form of a Nationall Church ordaining one place stated times and duties of Worship and one Government for the same so now the Lord neglecting all such things hath ordained a compleat administration of all his ordinances in particular Congregations and therefore if there be no other instituted visible Church but of a Congregation and Seals in their administration be given to the Church our first consideration will still hold firm But seeing in so vast a subject to say little is to say nothing and there is scarce any Truth in this wilie age but is almost disputed out of countenance and much darkned with humane evasions and seeing much depends upon this controversie it may be so most usefull before we come to the defence of our argument to take into consideration the nature and order of the visible Church of Christ Catholick and particular We are not ignorant of the knots and difficulties of this question which of late have so much exercised the minds of many Godly-learned And we think the notions of a Catholick Church as it is now held being but newly taken up amongst godly Reformers who formerly ran in another channell as is ingenuously confessed by some according to the truth this new-birth seems not yet so formed to its distinct proportions as time may bring it unto and it might make us afraid being the weakest of many to venture upon so diffuse and knotty a question when we look upon our own insufficiency to such a task and the Learned labors of such in this Point whom we reverence in the Lord yet when we consider of what great weight and moment the clearing up of this Truth would be unto the orderly proceedings of the great Work of Reformation in hand 2 How unavoydably it lyes in our way in this Work the Lord hath called us unto and that he sometimes doth vouchsafe to speak by weak ones that the praise may be his own in hope of his blessed guidance which we depend upon herein taking the light of his Word in our hands we shall rather as learners then otherwise venture to propound what is suggested to us herein Concerning which having digressed a while we shall return we hope with some advantage of clearer evidence to justifie the first argument of the Answer against what is said in the Reply CHAP. V. A digression tending to clear the state of that controversie concerning a Catholick visible Church in respect of the nature unity visibility and priority of the same THe world hath been long troubled with the equivocation of the word Church and therefore as it is needfull we shall labor to set down our thoughts as distinctly and plainly as we can in certain Propositions that may be some ground of our discourse Propos 1. The true Church of God is the whole number of Elect and called ones out of the world to fellowship with Jesus Christ their Head with whom they make up one mysticall body Ephes 1. 23. This whole Church is of the same nature and one in essence from the beginning of the world to the end for this Church Christ laid down his life Ephes 5. 26. Joh. 10. 15. and therefore he adds vers 16. such as are not yet of his fold actually shall be brought into the same viz. by effectuall calling that there may be one Shepheard and one sheepfold wherby it appears that the whole fold of Christ to which he stands as one Shepheard contains all his members and sheep to the end of the world and it is one fold in relation to Christ that one Shepheard Propos 2◠This one entire body of Christ doth naturally fall under various notions and considerations as omitting others when it is considered according to the adjuncts of visibility and invisibility which are onely adjuncts of the same Church as is generally observed by Divines In respect of the inward union which every such member hath with Christ the Head by the Spirit of Christ and by Faith whereby we are united to him it is called invisible because this union is not visible to men In respects of some visible fruits and manifestations of faith to the judgment of men it is called visible and hence though true beleevers be onely univoce and properly members of this body of Christ yet to men that judge onely by outward effects many hypocrites equivoce and improperly are accounted of the Church and hence the Scripture frequently speaks of visible Churches as if they were all really Saints Propos 3. As this Church comes to be visible so it becomes a fit and capable subject of visible policy and visible communion with Christ their Head and one with another in all the visible ordinances of Christ a capable subject we say or matter fit for such a state for by its visibility it self it is not so having yet no more then a spirituall relation to Christ and one another no visible combination one with another for visible beleevers may be so scattered in severall Countreys that they cannot make up one Society Propos 4. And therefore we add That there is no way for this Church to enjoy actuall visible communion under the visible government of Christ and in the visible instituted ordinances of Christ but in a Society A thousand uncombined persons meeting occasionally in one place though their naturall relations were as near as brethren yet have no power of government or actuall communion in any Civill priviledges if they stand not in relation to one another as a combined Society as after shall be shown so here And therefore Acts 2. 41 42. first they were added to the Church and then followed their fellowship in all the ordinances of the Church as after will more fully appear And hence it is said Acts 5. 14. Beleevers were added first they were beleevers standing in that spirituall relation to Christ and his whole body and then added to the Church by visible combination Propos 5. There is no visible society of a Church who hath actuall and immediate right unto and communion in the visible government of Christ and the dispensation of his instituted Worship and ordinances but such a Society as the Lord Jesus hath in the Gopel instituted and ordained for that end We say actuall and immediate right unto the same for though a beleever quâ beleever have an immediate right and actuall enjoyment of such benefits of Christ as necessarily and immediately flow from his internall union with Christ as justification adoption c. and such right to Christian communion with all the Saints in their prayers gifts c. as flow from his spirituall relation unto them yea and also he hath a true right to all benefits purchased by Christ in a due order and manner yet we say instituted priviledges and ordinances doe not
Churches are moulded up into one Politicall Body either de jure or de facto or that it is possible as the case stands so to be and then the similitudes would be of some use Thirdly in a Kingdom or Army suppose they never meet yet there is such politicall union as fully reaches the politicall communion for which end it was combined viz. that they should enjoy peace and justice in and by a just Government or by the protection of the Army But if such a politicall Body were combined to have such communion as a church-Church-communion is then it would require conventing together as elswhere we shall more fully manifest For our parts we do not see that Christ hath ordained the whole Catholick church as One to have politicall communion together which is impossible And therefore we see no need of such a Politicall combination but as he hath ordained a Brotherly communion of counsell and helpfulnesse one to another as need requires so a spirituall relation and brotherly consociation of Churches together is union sufficient for such a communion And thus far we have endevored to take away all those arguments which are built upon the generall considerations of the unity visibility and priority of the Catholick church which we leave to the consideration and examination of the judicious We shall now as the Lord shall helpe us come to cleare the state of this knotty controversie as we think it ought to be stated and carryed Viz. What is that form of a Politicall Church which Jesus Christ in the Gospel hath instituted and appointed as the subject of Church power of government and administration of all the ordinances of the Gospel for actuall communion with Christ and one with another therein And here give us leave before we enter into the question it self to make a little further use of our former similitude for illustration and then we will shew where the ne plus ultra as we conceive must stand It hath been shewed in respect of the body of mankinde that although much may be said for the unity visibility and priority thereof before any parts of it yet no reason will inforce that it is the first subject of Civill power c. in respect of actuall administration and immediate enjoyment thereof and so here in respect of the Church We will now add but this one thing more that notwithstanding all such reasons yet in execution for the good of the whole the least civill society yea a family may be and is the first subject of civill power and priviledges of civill government so the least politicall Church society may be the first subject of these Keys of Church power in the exercise thereof and of immediate communion in all visible ordinances and we think that there by Divine institution it is seated and the edification and perfection of the Catholick Church may best be attained thereby Concerning Families we see no footsteps in the propagation of mankinde from Adam and Noah of any soveraign or universall government further then in the first Fathers of mankinde after whom as they increased families went out and combining made cities and so Common-wealths by mutuall consent as in Gen. 10. and other Stories appear except by the tyrannous usurpations of some as Nimrod the rest were brought under and this no doubt amongst any free people is still the most orderly just and safe way of erecting all forms of civill government Families to combine into Townes Cities Kingdomes or Aristocraticall States But here some will say If so that according to this similitude a particular congregation may be the first Church that have the Keys of Church power and Church communion then as families should combine into Towns and Cities and they into greater Common-wealths for the good of all mankinde so here these first Churches may not stand independently but ought to combine into greater Bodies till they come to be one whole Church to this we say this will not follow upon this evident reason because civill societies and government thereof is herein left to rules of humane prudence by the Lord and governor of the whole world and therefore may admit various forms of Government various Laws and Constitutions various priviledges c. according as men shall conceive best for themselves so they be not against the common morall rules of equity and the good of those Societies but here in the Kingdom of Christ as wee must attend what kinde of Church he hath instituted so we must cleave to such rules priviledges and forms of government and administrations as he hath ordained not presuming to goe one step beyond the same And hence it is not in the power of any Church to alienate the power rights or priviledges Christ have set in the same or to mould up any other politicall Churches then he hath appointed and here we conceive stands immovably the ne plus ultra of this similitude between the visible Church and the estate of mankinde in reference to power and government c. All which things well weighed to us seems to overthrow all such intermediate forms of Churches or the usuall Churches as Mr. Ball calls the same as Classicall Provinciall Diocesan Nationall Patriarchicall c. which we see not how according to the rule of Christ they can be constituted either descendendo from the common nature of the Catholick Church or ascendendo from the combination of particulars except institution can bee found for the same We find indeed that some endevor to build such forms upon the foundation of Morall principles and the Law of nature as That God hath given government to be over a multitude and that of many Societies as well as persons that one Society may not suffer as well as one person and that therefore must be given of the God of grace to a society and multitude of little Churches power of externall government To which we answer 1 That there is no such principle in nature that generally binds free Societies to submit to one common government must many Kingdoms c. by consequence all kingdoms combine in government lest one kingdome bee hurt â— must Moab Ammon Edom Tyre Sydon Judea c. being so contiguous in near vicinity to each other combine in one government 2 Is it not as suitable to morality and reason in such combinations that they set up One to rule over them when many grow ignorant evill or heady to preserve peace and prevent wrong as to set up many 3 Did Abraham Lot Melchisedeck and such family Churches walk against grounds of morality and nature that did not so combine We might add more but forbear but we could desire our dear Brethren to be wary of scattering such principles for though in the matters of the Church and Worship and Government of Christ grace doth not destroy nature yet look as a particular Church constitution and government was never erected by the Law of nature but Divine institution so for the
governing of many over one why should there not be the like institution But to come more near to the case it self we shall endeavour to clear two things 1. That there is no Catholick politicall Church society instituted by Christ to which the actuall administration and participation of Church government and communion in the instituted ordinances of Christ is given as to the first subject thereof 2. That the true form of all Church societies instituted by Christ to which he hath given the actuall administration and immediate participation of Church government and all other instituted ordinances as the subject thereof is onely Congregationall First concerning the first to make our discourse more distinct and plain we shall premise here that we doe not here at all take in or respect that question about the power of the Keys whether it be in the fraternity or guides we shall God willing have a fit place to speak something of it but here that we may not intermingle things we look onely at the true subject in which and unto which the actuall and immediate dispensation and participation of Church government and outward ordinances is given by the institution of the Gospel And here we first reason thus Such a Church society as Christ instituted the Apostles of Christ constituted and governed in But the Apostles never constituted such a Catholick church society or governed it in such a manner as is said Ergo. The Proposition is evident because the Apostles were to do whatsoever Christ commanded in Matth. 28. 20. and were sufficiently furnished with power and wisdome so to doe Besides the Apostles having all power from Christ as hee received from the Father John 20. and the whole number of beleevers being then at the fewest there was never since such an opportunity or possibility to constitute such a Church if Christ Jesus had instituted such a thing The assumption or second part of the reason is proved thus If the Apostles ever constituted and administred in such a Church catholick it was either that at Jerusalem mentioned Acts 1 2. c. or that assembly that met Acts 15. for we meet with no other that can with any colour of reason bee supposed But neither of these were such a constituted Church Ergo. 1 Concerning the Church named Acts 1. carryed on Acts 2. c. we freely grant it was a constituted Church wherein the Apostles with Elders and Deacons afterward chosen did govern for as it is called a Church Acts 2. 47. so likewise we see there were in it elections Act. 1. 6. and administrations of instituted ordinances of worship Acts 2. 41 42. admission of members Chap. 2. 41 47. and by the same reason there might have been excommunication also But that this Church was not the Catholick Church we prove thus If it were the Catholick church then it was such either in respect of the whole essence of the Catholick church or in respect of representation but neither ways Ergo. The first it could not be because it consisted at the first but of 120. which was a very small part of the Catholick number of visible beleevers for 1 Cor. 15. 6. there were above 500 Brethren to whom Christ appeared at once which was but some few weeks before besides all that in the Jewish Church were converted and baptized by John which were very many yea if we speak of the Catholick church properly all the Jewish Church not yet dissolved were part of the Catholick church of that age visible Lastly if it had been the Catholick church beleevers being already of it could not be said to be added to this as Acts 5. 13 14. Secondly it was not Catholick in respect of representation for if so then in respect of the Apostles onely as the Catholick guides or in respect of the whole assembly with them Acts 1. not the first for then the Apostles onely should have had power to set apart Barnabas and Matthias but it is evident that that election was by Peter himself committed to and acted by the whole company called the Brethren and Disciples Acts 1. 15 16 26. where it appears that as he spake to all so it was concluded with the common suffrages of all Secondly if so because the Apostles were Catholick guides then where-ever they met was a Catholick church yea where two or three or any one of them was there was the Catholick representative church and so many such churches for any two or one had the catholick power as well as all Paul ordains rules and orders of discipline in all the churches as well as if all the Apostles had met 1 Cor. 7. 17. 1 Cor. 16. 1. 2 That assembly was not the representative catholick church because first there were the women in the same now women are no way capable of being messengers to represent churches secondly besides these could not be representative messengers from other churches because this was the first constituted church we see no colour of reason that there were any other constituted visible churches before this Lastly all the actions of that Church mentioned especially those in Acts 2. 41 42. of admission of members baptism word seales fellowship day by day in such ordinances choice of Deacons c. speak aloud against a representative Church we should rather have heard of constitutions censures c. from such a representative Catholick church of generall counsell Object We are not ignorant what is said to the contrary viz. That it was the Catholick Church because they elected a Catholick officer for the whole Church viz. an Apostle Ans To which we answer 1 All the Catholick church and guides thereof had no power so to do no more then a particular church being a case reserved to Christ himself else Pauls argument to prove his Apostleship had not been strong because he was not called by man but by Christ himself and had seen the Lord c. Gal. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 9. 1. 2 The act of the Church was onely a preparatory act thereunto with an after consent the election was properly done immediately by a lot and what was done might as well be done in the first particular Church guided by the infallible spirit of the Apostles as by the Catholick Church it self Object Secondly it is objected Many of these were men of Galilee which by their habitation could not pertain to the Church in Jerusalem Answ True the Apostles and others were of Galilee but they had forsaken all to follow Christ and were commanded by Christ to remain a time at Jerusalem and then to goe forth to Samaria Judea and the utmost parts of the earth Acts 1. 4 8. and therfore no Church relation in Galilee could hinder them from joyning in this first constituted Church or give any colour that they came as members representative from any Churches in Galilee And so much for the plea for a Catholick church from Acts 1. c. Now concerning that which is supposed of
a Catholick church representative in Act. 15. If it were such then in respect of the Apostles the catholick Officers onely or in respect of the body of the Assembly also but in neither respects Ergo. 1 Not the first for then as was said any one Apostle may make a representative Catholick church having the whole power as much as all of them together for though they would meet oft to consult and assist one another yet not for defect of power in any one and we think our brethren here will not say it was in respect of the Apostles alone supposing here they acted rather as Elders with the rest then out of their Apostolicall power 2 Not in respect of the whole Assembly for then that assembly must consist of the messengers of all the particular Churches and the decrees should have been directed to all the Churches but neither of these can appear For first wee read of no other messengers but those from Antioch and how to evince more then the Scriptures reveal is hard Secondly if we look back and consider how far the Gospel was spread before this assembly it will appear very strange and absurd to suppose such a thing for Paul had been in Arabia before ever he came to Ierusalem Gal. 1. 17. and when he and Barnabas were sent out from Antioch Acts 13. they went to severall Islands and Countreys as Cyprus Paphos Salamis c. besides what other places scattered Christians and Apostles had preached in now there is no probability of messengers sent from all these places Secondly the decrees were expresly directed to the Gentiles beleeving in Antioch Syria and Cilicia where it seems this question had troubled the minds of the Disciples Acts 15. 23 24. which was far short of the Catholick church neither is it proved that the Churches of Syria and Cilicia had any messengers there much lesse that all the Churches had their messengers Object But it is said they might have had their messengers there if they would and therefore they were bound to the decrees as of a generall Councell Answ It must first be proved that all Churches had lawfull summons to send their messengers to that Assembly before there can be laid any blame on them for neglecting the same or they be all tyed to the decrees of such an Assembly as a generall Councell which seems to us not so much as probable much lesse to be proved by any where the Scripture is so silent Arg. 2. Every politicall Body is constituted by the combination of all the members into a Society But Christ hath not instituted that the Catholick church should combine into a Society Ergo. Propos Proved because there can be no instances given of any free Society civill or sacred that was under policy but that it arose from combination How came Israel to be one Nationall church but by a National covenant and that before it had Officers or how comes any nationall provinciall classicall Church that are pleaded for to be such but by some such combination Why is this Church of this Classis not of another but by combination Secondly in a politicall body the whole hath power to order every part but this power among persons that are free is onely by combination Assump Proved first because Christ never instituted that which is impossible as this is for the Catholick visible Church in every age so to doe Secondly Christ ordained combination for communion in his Worship but this communion also is impossible to the Catholick church as one Ergo. Thirdly corrupt Churches are visible Churches but it is hard for us to beleeve or any to prove that Christ hath instituted such combination of all Churches Asian African European American corrupt and uncorrupt for prudent men may easily foresee the heavy consequents thereof Argum. 3. Every Politicall Church by the institution of Christ hath power to elect her own Pastor or Pastors over it But the Catholick visible Church hath not such power Ergo. Proposit Proved This all Scripture examples shew that every Church or flock of beleevers had her Pastor Act. 14. Tit. 1. Secondly according to our Brethrens principles if a particular Church may choose a Pastor much more the Catholick because all priviledges are primarily given to the Catholick church and what belongs to the part of a similar Body as a part that much more belongs to the whole Assump Proved first If the Catholick church may choose Pastors over it then they may make Apostles because Catholick Pastors over the Catholick Church Secondly the Reasons against an universall Bishop are strong here as that their office is not described in the Word nor their power able to reach all Churches If it be said that the Catholick church can choose her Pastors in the parts or particular Societies which are Pastors of the Catholick church though not Catholick Pastors of the Catholick church Answ If this be meant of the particular Churches choosing Pastors over themselves who are in some respects for the good of the whole as being partes partium and so partes totius then they come to our hand for thus it appears that there is no Catholick totum that is the subject of officers but in its parts But the question is Whether all particular Churches having the officers in them do make one political Body or Catholick church and so have power to choose Catholick Pastors Argum. 4. Christ Jesus instituted no such politicall Body as destroys Church policy But such a Catholick church politicall destroys policy Ergo. Assump Proved because it swallows up the power not onely of all Churches congregationall but all other forms of Churches by taking the power of excommunication from them for the power of excommunication is seated by Christ in that Church from which there can be justly no appeal for Matth. 18. the power of excommunication is seated in such a Church as whatsoever it binds on earth is bound in heaven by the highest Judge in the highest Court and from the sentence of this highest court and Judge how can there be any appeal But now supposing such a Catholick church having power of excommunication and that as the highest Church hence no inferior Church can binde on earth so as that the same is bound in heaven seeing appeales may be made from them to an higher power on earth Object If it be said that the sentence of an inferior Judge proceeding rightly as in an inferior Sanhedrin is ratified in heaven yet may we appeale from him Answ We deny that the sentence of every civill Court doth binde in heaven in the sense of our Saviour for every civil Court hath not this promise of binding and loosing the power of the Keys not belonging to the civill Magistrate Secondly suppose there were such a binding in civill Courts and appeals may be yet made from them yet this is because there is supposed a supreme Court in being to which the appeale may be prosecuted and there determined as
of such Doctrinall power as the pattern Acts 15. holdeth forth and which is all that Learned Mr. Rutherford conceives to belong to a generall Councell for thus he saith Verily I professe I cannot see what power of jurisdiction to censure scandalls can be in a generall Councell there may be some meâ—â— Doctrinall power in such a Councell if such could be had and that is all And how a Nationall Provinciall or Classicall Synod being lesser parts of the whole can put forth such acts as the whole cannot do ipsi viderint 'T is true a particular Church may formally cast out a scandalous member according to the rule Matth. 18. yet the argument from proportion will not hold in respect of the power of excommunication in greater assemblies against any particular Church offending though other means appointed by Christ we deny not for if excommunication casteth out an offender out of all Churches then such a particular Church cannot be excommunicated except it could be cast out of it self though it may be deprived of the communion of other Churches Lastly if it be no sin as is said but a crosse that the Catholick Church cannot meet to put forth its supposed intrinsecall power then let the particular Churches enjoy that power till the Catholick Church can meet 2 It seems to us very strange that the Lord Jesus should institute such a supreme power in a Catholick Body which as is said de jure should be till the comming of Christ and yet should be interrupted by the sin of man so many ages and which for ought appeares never orderly met to this day Object 3. If all Pastors be Pastors of the Catholick Church then there is such a Catholick Church but all Pastors are Pastors of the Catholick Church Ergo. Answ If it be meant thus that they are Pastors of some particular part of the Church and in that respect in the whole and for the good of the whole the good of every part redounding to the good of the whole yea if some Pastorall care also be intended towards other Churches and to fetch in such as are yet not of the Church we grant all this according to the meaning of that place 1 Cor. 12. 28. formerly opened by us But if this Argument intend that they are Pastors of the Catholick Body as of One Politicall Church then we deny the Assumption upon this ground because a Pastorall Office consists properly in having a charge and power over those to whom he is a Pastor Act. 20. 28. but he hath no charge of the whole for if so he must give account to Christ of the whole neither hath he power over such a Catholick church being never chosen by it nor it subjecting to him If it be said such are made Pastors by Ordination of the Presbyters not the election of the people who onely appropriate him to themselves who is a Pastor of the whole Church then he is either a Catholick Pastor that hath power to intermeddle in all Churches as the Apostles had which we think none will yeeld them or else they are Pastors onely in name without power which is absurd Nor doth the similitude of a Physitian made Doctor of Physick at large by a Colledge of Physitians helpe in this case For it suppâ—seth him to be made such a Doctor before he be elected by any people to exercise this faculty which applyed to this case of a Pastor as having Ordination to make him a Pastor at large before election to this or that people is utterly against all examples of Scripture as Acts 1. 6. 14 Object 4. That which belongeth to a little part of a similar body quâ talis belongs to a greater part much more and therefore if the immediate exercise of the Keys belong to a single congregation then much more to the whole and to any greater part of the whole Answ 1 Such as say that the Catholick Church is a similar Body had need explicate themselves For to speak properly and strictly by this rule every particular visible beleever being a part of the whole as a totum aggregativum must have nomen naturam totius and so every beleever is a Church or if they so divide this Catholick similar body as to make a particular Congregation that can joyn in Gods ordinances the minimum quod sic then particular visible beleevers considered as existing out of these Congregations cannot be members formally of the Catholick visible Church 2 We acknowledge the Catholick church considered as visible and invisible is one spirituall or mysticall body yet this Catholick body is under no Catholick policy but onely in the severall parts of it as hath been proved before and in this respect the Church which is spiritually one body is politicè many bodies so that the parts of this spirituall toâ—um are not distinct bodies spirituali relatione for then every company of women are a Church body but politicâ combinatione and hence though the Catholick church be one similar body spiritually due cautions and interpretations observed yet it is not one similar Body politically and hence every society of beleevers is not a Church Hence though it be true that what belongs to a part of a similar body as a part belongeth much more to the whole and that therefore what belongs to a particular Church belongs much more to the whole It is true in this sense viz. what belongs to the part of the whole as spirituall and so participates the nature of the whole belongs much more to the whole because the whole is spirituall yet what belongs to the part as politicall doth not much more belong to the whole because the whole is not politicall Exempli gratiâ consider a particular Congregation as a number redeemed called to Christ espoused to him this much more belongs to the whole and so if any priviledge belong to them as such much more to the whole Yet consider a Church as a combined Body so what belongs to this part belongs not to the whole For it belongs to the part to elect and enjoy constantly Pastors over it but this doth not belong to the whole as a totum The Catholick mysticall Church is indeed the prima materia out of which politicall Churches by their combination are formed but it is no first formed politicall similar Church whence every particular Church immediately participates of the nature of that whole having in it partem talis materiae partem formae Object 5. If there be Church communion between all Churches then there is one Catholick Church but there is Church communion of all Churches in hearing receiving Sacraments exhorting one another praying one for another c. Ergo. Answ We deny the consequence for there may be a fraternall Ecclesiasticall communion not onely internally but externally without such an union as makes one politicall combined Body such as here we dispute of as two or three Congregations may have communion together
and yet not be one politicall Body Twenty synagogues might have communion together in the Jewish policy and yet were not one politicall Body so the Churches of Galatia might have communion together yet were distinct Churches not one Church as also the Churches of New England have sweet and blessed communion yet are distinct And though the Churches of Galatia were called a whole lump as is objected yet were they thus by politicall combination or as Dr. Downam to mould up a Diocesan Church compares the first Church to a great lump of dough or batch of bread out of which particular Churches were formed into many loaves or not rather called a lump by spirituall union and relation common profession and fraternall communion being all the same Countrey-men so also the Apostles had Church communion yet were not a politicall body Kingdoms so may have civil communion and commerce yet not be one Kingdom Object 6. If the Keys be given to a particular Church under the notion of the Spouse of Christ a flock of redeemed ones c. and then much more to the Catholick visible Church which is the Spouse of Christ and flock of redeemed ones primarily and to a particular Church onely secondarily but the first is affirmed by such as deny such a Catholick Church Ergo. Answ 1 It is true the notion of a flock of redeemed ones of the Body and Spouse of Christ Kingdom House c. doe agree primarily to the Church not of this but of all ages and secondarily to the Church of this age Colos 1. 18. Ephes 5. 25 26. and 2. 19. 2 The Church which is the Body of Christ existing in this age the Keys are given to it primarily in comparison of particular Churches coexisting with it as to the chief object and end but not to it as a politicall Body in respect of actuall and immediate dispensation thereof for as we have oft said if in respect of Politicall dispensation the Keys belong firstly to the Body of Christ as his Spouse and redeemed ones then the Church invisible as invisible rather then visible must have the dispensation of the Keys primarily 3 It is not said that the Keys are immediately given to a particular Church abstractly as a number of redeemed but as consociated and politically combined And in this respect that may be attributed to the part a particular Congregation of redeemed ones which cannot be attributed to the whole Ex. gr such a Congregation is combined so is not the whole nor can be such a Church may choose a Pastor over it but so cannot the whole so a man may tell the particular Church who may convene together not so the whole Thus far through the helpe of Christ we have endevoured to clear the first Point propounded concerning a Catholick instituted Church We come now to prove the second Point viz. That Jesus Christ hath instituted in the Gospel a particular Church of one Congregation in which and unto which the actuall and immediate dispensation and participation of all instituted Worship doe regularly and ordinarily belong And here we shall shew 1 What such a particular Church is 2 How the dispensation of Church power and priviledge do belong unto it For the first we shall declare our selves in these Five Propositions 1 It must be a visible Society for One man cannot make a Church nor can many visible beleevers living severally without society in severall Nations make One Church 2 It 's not every Society of visible Professors that doe make a Church for then every family of such Professors are a Church Then two or three which our Brethren so much condemn are a Church and then a Society of Women professing the truth may be a Politicall Church then many members of severall Churches met to hear a Sermon or any like occasion make a Church then a number of Professors may constitute a Diocesan Church or any like form for out of this block That any number of beleevers made a Church Dr. Downam hewed out his Diocesan Church and so made a fit seat for his Diocesan Mercury Lastly then particular Churches should have no more any set Form prescribed then Civill government which is as variable as humane wisdome sees meet for hence a particular Church may be melted into any form or mould of civil Society for imagine a number of professing beleevers cohabiting either in a City Hundred Wapentake Shire Province Nation Empire c. there shall then be so many forms of Churches contrary to the principles and unanswerable arguments of our best Reformers who accounted it a great absurdity that the heavenly Kingdome of Christ should be moulded and framed according to the weaknesse of humane wisdome and policy 3 It must therefore be a Society combined and that by a Covenant explicite or implicite for it must be such a combined Society where the whole have power over its members now whatever power one hath over another if it be not by way of conquest or naturall relation as the father over the childe it is by covenant as husband and wife Master and servant Prince and people other powers are but usurpations it is noted as a prophane speech in Brennus who professed he knew no other rule of Justice then for the greater to subdue the lesse Again it is such a Society as hath an ordinate power to subject it self to Officers by electing of them to administer ordinances amongst them but this is onely a federall Society Again it is such a Society to the making up of which is required something more then faith Acts 5. 14. Beleevers were added to the Lord or to his Church so that they were first beleevers before they were added to the Church for there may be a number of beleevers converted at one Sermon and immediately scattered into many Towns or Countreys Now if faith professed alone makes not a Church but somewhat more is required what can that be but foederall combination Lastly that the dissolution whereof doth unchurch a people doth constitute a Church but breaking the combination dissolves the Church whether by consent schism or when God himself removes the candlestick Ergo. 4 Though a Church be such by combining and so subjecting themselves to the power of others yet it must not be herein illimited but according to the form and mould expressed in the Word for if they have this power to combine as many and as largely as they will then a Diocese Province Nation may combine and so put themselves under the power of a Diocesan Provinciall Nationall society which is unlawfull for the Church must be such a form as a man may ordinarily bring offences unto it according to Matth. 18. Tell the Church but that cannot be in a Diocese much lesse in a Province or Nation where the Members can neither take notice of the offence nor ordinarily so much as consent unto any censure acted by any Officers in such a Church nay further if their power be unlimited
they may choose a Diocesan Pastor one or many to feed all or one to rule like Beza his Episcopus humanus with subjection in case of error to the censure of all nay hence we see not but they may choose an universall Pastor and so give away the power to one if all will agree In a word they onely may combine into a Politicall Body where the whole may excommunicate any part but this cannot be in a combination of many Churches into one whole because no particular Church is capable of excommunication for it is impossible to be cast out of it self as was said before 5 A particular Church therefore must be such a Society as is so combined together that it may ordinarily enjoy Church communion to exercise Church power to be fed by her Officers and led by them hence Titus was to set Elders in every Church and these Elders were such as could ordinarily feed them by preaching the Word as well as rule and govern them Now that such a Congregationall Church is the institution of the Gospel appears first by those many Scriptures that speak of the Churches of one Countrey and in small compasse as severall Churches not as one as the Churches of Judea Samaria and Galilâ—e Acts 9. the Churches of Galatia Gal. 1. 1. yea not only in one small Countrey but in Cities or near unto them we read of distinct Churches as Corinth though God had much people there yet it was one Congregation 1 Cor. 14. 33. and had another Church near to it viz. Cenchrea Also Rome whom the Apostle saluting sends also salutations by them to Aquila and Priscilla with the Church in their houshold which shew they were not far from that Church of Rome To these add that Jerusalem the first Church that was constituted by the Apostles and whose number was the greatest of any that we read of yet it was but one Congregation as is evident by Acts 1. and Chap. 2. 41 42. What is objected against this to prove it the Catholick Church was answered before other objections against this and like examples shall be considered in their due place as we meet with them But we shall not need to say much that a Congregation furnished with its Officers is a Church according to the institution of the Gospel but there are more objections against the compleatnesse thereof which yet is proved thus That Church which hath power of all the Keys given unto it for actuall administration within it self is a compleat Church But so hath a particular Congregation Ergo. The first part is evident because where all the Keys are with full power to administer the same there nothing is wanting the Assumption is proved thus If all those Officers to whom is given the authoritative power of exercising the Keys be given to a Congregation then all the Keys are so given to it but so it is for since Apostles and extraordinary Officers ceased there are no other Officers but Pastors Teachers and Rulers called sometimes Bishops sometimes Elders but these Officers are given to such a Church as is proved Acts 14. Tit. 1. 4. and is acknowledged in all Reformed Churches who ordain such Officers in particular Churches of one Congregation Ergo. Object 1. If it be said that though a Congregation hath such Officers as have the power of the Keys yet that such must combine with others in way of co-ordination to govern in common and so to be helped and compleated by them Answ We grant much help may be had by sister Churches and consultative Presbyteries but that which takes away the exercise of the Keys in point of government from the church to whom Christ hath given it doth not compleat it but take away and destroy the power and liberty of it for though the Pastor of a congregation may oft consent yet the major part of the Presbytery must carry it whether he consent or no and therefore his power is swallowed up Besides it seems to us a mystery that every Pastor even such as have no flock should be Pastors of the Catholick church and yet a Pastor should not have power to rule in his own flock over which Christ hath made him a Bishop and for which flock he must give account unto God Object 2. It cannot have a Synod which is one ordinance of God therefore it is not a compleat Church Answ By this reason a Classicall church is not compleat because it cannot have a Nationall councell nor a Nationall church because it cannot have a generall councell if it be said a classis have all ordinary meanes to a compleat church we say the like of a congregation Object 3. Though a Town or family being cast alone may govern as a compleat body yet when it stands in a common-wealth as in England it may not be so independent but submit to combinations so here when a particular Congregation is alone it may govern as compleat not so when amongst other Churches Answ If such a Town or family have compleat power and all civill Officers within it self it is not bound to submit to such combinations in a common-wealth except it be under a superior power that can command the same As Abraham having a compleat government in his family was not bound to combine with the governments he came amongst neither did he in prudence he ioyned in a league of amity and for mutual help with Aner c. but not to submit to their government so here a Church having compleat Officers is not bound to submit to such combinations except it be proved that any superior power of other churches can command the same Secondly though a family noâ— having compleat civill government in it self must combine where it stands in a commonwealth yet never to yeeld up its family-government over wife children and servants to rule them in common with other Masters of families no civill prudence or morall rule taught men ever so to practise and therefore why in such a case should a Church give up the government of it self to Pastors of many Churches to rule it in common and not rather as a Classis is over-awed by the Provinciall onely in common things so in congregations Pastors should govern their flocks and onely in things common be under a Presbytery If it be said That the Classis do act in such things only for in excommunication of an offender the offence is common to all We answer if so then why should not the Provinciall and Nationall Churches by this reason assume all to themselves from the Classis for the offence of one is common to all As also upon this ground why should not the Classis admit all the members of every Congregation under them for this also may concern them all Thirdly here is a great difference for civill Societies are left to civill prudence and may give up themselves to many forms of government but Churches are bound to use and maintain such order of government as
Christ hath set in the church and not to give it up to many no more then to one If testimonies were needfull we might produce Zanchi Zwinglius Parker Baines and others who are fully with us in this doctrine of a particular church yea Dr. Downam himself confesseth that the most of the churches in the time of the Apostle Paul did not exceed the proportion of a populous congregation and this confession puts us in minde of a witty passage of his Refuter or his Epistoler who against the Bishops maintains the doctrine of congregationall churches with us with whose expressions for the recreation of our selves and the Reader we will conclude The Papist saith he he tels us just as the Organs goe at Rome that the extent of a Bishops jurisdiction is not limited but by the Popes appointment his power of it self indifferently reaching over all the world Our Prelatists would perswade us to the tune of Canterbury that neither church nor Bishop hath his bounds determined by the Pope nor yet by Christ in the Scriptures but left to the pleasure of Princes to be cast into one mould with the Civill State Now the plain Christian finding nothing but humane uncertainties in either of these devises be contenteth himself with plain song and knowing that Christ hath appointed Christians to gather themselves into such Societies as may assemble themselves together for the worship of God and that unto such he hath given their peculiar Pastors he I say in his simplicity calleth these Assemblies the Churches of Christ and these Pastors his Bishops Thus much concerning the nature of a particular church and that it is instituted in the Gospel Now in the second place wee are to shew how church government and Ordinances are given to it as to the proper subject of the same Where we shall propound these Theses for explication of our selves First Though Pastourship considered as an office in relation to a people to feed them anthoritatively be one of these Ordinances given to a particular church Yet Christ hath given it for the gathering in of his elect unto the church and therfore wee grant some acts of the Ministery viz. the preaching of the Word is to be extended beyond the bounds of the church Secondly Seales and other Priviledges although de jure and remotely they belong to the catholique church or the number of beleevers yet de facto and nextly they belong properly to this Subject which wee speake of as wee hope to make good Thirdly They are not so appropriated to such congregations onely as to exclude the members of those congregations which are undeâ— the government of a common Presbytery or other formes of government for wee have a brotherly esteeme of such congregaâ—ions notwithstanding that tertium quoddam separabile of government as Mr. Baines cals it being a thing that commeth to a church now constituted and may be absent the church remaining a Church Fourthly although it be said by some Divines that as faith is the internall form of the church so profession of faith is the outward form and that therefore bare profession of saith makes a member of the visible church yet this must be understood according to the interpretations of some of them who so speak for there is a double profession of faith Personall which is acted severally by particular persons and common which is acted conjointly in and with a Society The first makes a man of the catholick number of visible Saints and so fit matter for politicall church-society the other makes a man of the politicall church formally and compleatly and in this latter sense profession of faith is the externall form of a visible church but not in the other Now that in and to this subject so professing the seals and other ordinances belong may be proved thus Argum. 1. First the seals and other Church-ordinances must either belong to the Catholick church as such or to the particular Church but these cannot belong to the Catholick in actuall dispensation whereof we now speak Ergo. For that Church which is uncapable of actuall dispensation of seales censures c. is uncapable of the participation thereof in an orderly and ordinary way But the Catholick number of visible beleevers as Catholick and out of particular Societies are not capable of dispensing the same Ergo. The Proposition is evident for it cannot be shewed that any Church in the New Testament was ever capable of participating in seals that was not capable of dispensing them at least not having a next power to elect Officers to do it The Assumption is evident from what hath been proved that it is no politicall Body the sole subject of Church administrations neither in the whole nor in the parts as existing out of Congregations Argum. 2. If the members of the Catholick church be bound to joyn into particular Societies that they may partake of seals c. then the seals are not to be administred immediatly to them for then they should have the end without the means But they are bound to joyn in such Societies for that end for otherwise there is no necessity of erecting any particular Churches in the world and so all the glory of Christ in this respect should be laid in the dust and these particular temples destroyed and thus a door of liberty is opened to many to live loosely without the care and watch and communion of any particular Church in the world Argum. 3. If the seals are to be administred immediately to beleevers or professing beleevers as such then they may be administred privately to any one where-ever he be found but that were very irregular and against the common doctrine of Protestant Divines who give large testimony against private Baptism or of the Lords supper neither doe we see any weight in the arguments of the Papists or Anabaptists alledged for the contrary Argum. 4. Lest we seem to stand alone in this controversies let the arguments produced by Didoclavius and him that writes concerning Perth Assembly against private Baptisms be considered and it will be found that most of them doe strongly conclude against administration thereof to any but Church-members Argum. 5. The learned Author Mr. Ball in this his dispute against our Conclusion yet in his Discourse let fall sundâ—y things that confirm it as when he describes the Catholick Church to be the Society of men professing the faith of Christ divided into many particular Churches Whence we argue if the Catholick church existeth onely in these particular Churches the seales must onely be given to them and the members thereof also That Baptism is a solemn admission into the Church of Christ and must of necessity be administred in a particular Society Whence three things will follow First that Baptism sometimes administred privately by the Apostles is not an ordinary pattern Secondly that Baptism is not to be administred to beleevers as such immediatly if of necessity it must be administred in a
one Assembly to edification then there was some other form of a Church besides Congregationall But so it was in Samaria c Answ We deny the consequences for when they grew to so great a number they might fall into more Congregationall Churches and so no other form arise from the multitude but we suppose you mean of such a multitude as is called a Church and therefore to answer to your Assumption we deny that any such multitude of beleevers as is here called a Church were so great as could not meet to edification And first concerning Samaria Reply That there was a Church gathered in Samaria will not be denyed for they received the Word and were baptized but that the Church in that City was onely a Congregationall Assembly is more then can probably be concluded Answ We grant a Church or Churches were gathered in Samaria and we accept your reason as good because they received the Word and were baptized where by the way you grant what we pleaded for before That the Apostles gathered Churches when they baptized them but that there was but one Congregationall Assembly lyes not in us to prove untill you prove that all the beleevers were called a Church or one Church which doth not appear in the whole story Acts 8. nor any other where that we can finde and it is very probable that as Philip converted and baptized so great a multitude at severall times and gathered them into the Church or Churches as he baptized them so he might gather severall Churches as well as one seeing that none doubt but that Congregationall Churches are an ordinance of Christ what ever men contend for beside And therefore be the number of beleevers in Samaria as great as you would have it it proves nothing Reply The Church at Jerusalem was one and distinct yet encreased to 3000 then to 5000 c. Answ Be it so the increase was very great yet so long as they are called one distinct Church it was one Congregation viz. untill they scattering by the persecution about Stephen Acts 7. 8. which is evident by these two arguments First Acts 2 41 c. where we see the 3000 added to the 120. they have their communion together described 1 In regard of their spirituall communion to be in the Apostles doctrine fellowship breaking of bread and Prayer verse 42. Secondly in regard of their outward communion in the good things of this life they bad all things common and sold their possessions c. verse 44 45 Now the manner of both parts of this communion in respect of time and place is described verse 46. viz. in their spirituall duties They continued daily with one accord in the Temple And secondly in respect of their outward communion in their States They eat their meat from house to house this latter requiring many tables and many houses to provide for them so that although in their outward communion it was in private houses yet their spirituall communion it was with one accord in one place viz. the Temple where they had room enough being the place erected for a Nationall Church and having favour with all the people were not interrupted therein by any persecution We need not step out of our way to reply to all that is said against this reason It is enough for us to note that they daily with one accord met and that in the Temple which is not answered by any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 This appeareth Acts 6. 1 5. where it is evident the election of Deacons was before and by the multitude verse 1. by the whole multitude verse 5. and this was the last Church-meeting and Church-act we read of before their scattering neither can it appear that the Jews and Grecians whose Widows murmured were two distinct Congregations but the contrary is evident in that the Deacons were chosen al by the whole and for the whole not distinctly so many for this and so many for that Church as it was needful if they were two Churches These proofs being so clear the inconveniences objected are of no force and sufficiently answered by many examples of as great Assemblies meeting ordinarily to edification as beside the Auditory of Chrysostome cited by others the Assemblies of Stepney in London Yâ—rmouth in Norfolk and others in our experience Beza a man not loving to hyperbolize saith that being in Paris there met at a Sermon 24000. And of a Synodall Assembly that they received the Lords-supper no lesse then 10000. Beza Epist. 65. Reply Without question the number of beleevers at Antioch was not small of which it is expresly said That a great number beleeved and that a great multitude were added to the Lord by the preaching of Barnabas c. and therefore we may think the Church rose to such a bignesse as could not well assemble in one Congregation Acts 11. 21. 14. 27. Answ 1 In that place Acts 11. 21. the great number that beleeved was the fruit of all the scattered Christians at Phenice Cyprus and Antioch for the hand of the Lord was with them all and their whole successe is summed up together nothing said before of the other places 2 Though Paul and Barnabas taught much people yet it proveth not that this much people were converted to the Church 3 Though much people were added to the Lord yet doth it follow they were more then could meet in one Congregation and if first Disciples were there called Christians must it needs be for their number and not rather for eminent likeness to Christ with other specialities of providence 4 It is expresly said the Church was gathered together Acts 14. 27. which is not meant of the Elders onely as if they onely could meet for Chap. 15. 30. They gathered the multitude together so that it was not such a number but might meet together in one place Reply The number of beleevers was great at Ephesus where Paul preached two years all that dwelt in Asia heard the Word a great door and effectuall ways open to him where the Shrines of Diana her Temple were in danger to be set at nought where those that used curious arts burnt their books openly which could not be done without great danger of the Church unlesse a great part of the City had beleeved Acts 19. 10 19 27. Answ 1 Be it so that many were converted and the Word grew mightily this proves not that all who heard Paul were of the Church of Ephesus for then all Asia should be of that Church Acts 19. 10. who did hear the Word both Jews and Gentiles As for the danger of the Shrines and Diana's Temple to be set at nought a little spark might kindle such fears and raise such outcryes in the covetous Craftsmen by whom the whole City was set in a superstitious uproare our own experience may teach how soon a prophane people will cry out against a faithfull Minister before he hath converted
wee cannot understand but let this bee really made good that desiring seales it being a way that subjects themselves to the Church as members and the case will bee issued being understood of such approved Christians as the position speakes of Lastly to proceed against such as are not members or of another Church as with an offending member of our owne is not much unlike the proceedings of Victor in his contentious time or may sow the seeds of such usurpations which wee leave to the godly wise to consider of Reply Tenthly If upon good reason a passage of Scripture can bee cleared to prove that for which it was never alleadged by any writer wee are not to except against it for want of mans testimony onely in such cases our reasons must bee convincing but for the exposition of this Text wee have not observed one substantiall ground or approved author to bee alledged Dr. Ames shewing the necessitie of Christians joyning themselves to some peculiar Church giveth this reason Quoniam alias fieri non potest quin conturbentur signa illa quibus fideles ab infidelibus discerni possunt 1 Cor. 5. 12. But herein Dr. Ames manifestly sheweth that by them without heathens and unbeleevers must be understood and not beleevers though of no setled society for the time for thus wee conceive hee argueth The signes whereby the faithfull are to bee discerned from unbeleevers must not bee confounded but unlesse Christians make themselves actuall members of a Church the signes whereby the faithfull are discerned from unbeleevers will bee obscured and darkned and if this be his reason how can that Text bee alledged unlesse by men without infidels bee understood Answ First That we have reasons to alledge it in that sense and respect declared may appeare by our answers to your objections Secondly That wee have one approved authour so alleadging it viz. Doctor Ames shall appeare in cleering his meaning from your objections 1. Grant that by men without according to Doctor Ames his reason Infidels be understood by the Apostle yet how shall the signes discerning beleevers from unbeleevers bee confounded by such as joyne not to some particular Church if those beleevers doe not in some respect stand without amongst unbeleevers and the consequence is so plaine that the owne Syllogisme whereinto you cast his argument would have concluded so much if it had been suffered to speake out in the conclusion For in stead of saying except such joyne to some Church the signes will be darkned and obscured the reason rightly concluded would have said fieri non potest it cannot bee but the signes will bee confounded and therefore in his judgement it is unavoidable that such mix themselves with unbeleevers that are without indeed properly in the Apostles sense Reply Againe Doctor Ames lib. 4. cap. 17. speaking of Infants to be received saith it is required first that they be in the Covenant of Grace by outward profession c. Answ What you alledge here out of Doctor Ames wee confesse sheweth that hee was very large in his charity about the baptizing of Infants extending the same to the child of a Papist c. but it may seeme by some passages that hee understood by profession of faith such as live in the visible Churches and lookes at the child of a Papist as one of a visible Church for substance though so exceedingly corrupt but all this do not disprove that he understood 1 Cor. 5. 12. otherwise then hath been said What you alledge out of his second Manuduction concerning the Churches of England we consent unto neither doe wee deny seales to any if they demand them as members of any true Church in England and in an orderly way CHAP. X. Consid 5. Reply TO the first consideration If it bee repugnant to divine institution to admit of approved Christians lawfully baptized walking in the faith members of the visible Churches and partakers of Church priviledges amongst us to the Lords Supper or their children to baptisme because they bee not entered into Church-fellowship according to your order then it is unlawfull though no such evill consequences are to bee feared but if by accident some abuse should fall out the evill is to bee prevented by all lawfull meanes but the faithfull are not to be debarred utterly of the order of God whereto they have right and title by his free grant and gracious institution Answ Wee cannot but still complaine of this liberty which is taken in changing the termes of the question First that clause Members of visible Churches is not in the position nor is it maintained by us in that sense neither doe wee limit Church-fellowship to our order as it is called but acknowledge Churches defective in matters of order as was said in the answer and therefore it is an apparent wrong to us and to the readers so oft to put in such things as are not in the controversie Secondly If it bee unlawfull by divine institution may not evill consequences bee added and if both hold are not our reasons the more strong What needeth then such a Reply Thirdly We have oft granted a remote right but next and immediate we still deny and wee conceive no other order of God in his Churches to prevent such evils then by joyning to the instituted Churches of Christ Reply Seals may bee prophaned when the dispensers cannot helpe it but here is no feare or danger of such consequences necessary to follow for wee speake not of all sorts at randome but of Christians professing the faith intirely lawfully baptized knowne and approved to the wise and judicious visible members of the Churches amongst us sufficiently knowne to you or orderly recommended c. Answ The feare and danger in this case is more then so farre off can easily bee discerned though the limitations bee good in themselves yet the application of this description in the first part of it would open a doore wider then many can imagine for many such in the judgement even of the wisest comming in to this state of temptations prove farre otherwise even your selves being Judges if you were here wee suppose the experience of the discoveries God hath made in these late trials of England amongst forward professors will teach our brethren to consider how many professors may prove here Yet secondly if you add such as retaining their membership in your Churches are recommended unto us by your Churches or by known godly Ministers wee can then according to order receive them and avoid the confusion and inconveniences wee objected Thirdly if also it be taken into the description knowne and sufficiently approved of our selves then the doore is open to them to the communion of the Church and all the priviledges thereof though they cannot settle in the place of their present abode and this way of order would prevent the inconveniences but if wee come to put a difference any other way wee cannot avoid it but great offence will be given to
To this objection was spoken before onely we marvell why you say they must first partake of Seales when as Acts 2. they were baptized and added to the Church the same day and 't is granted the Apostles gathered Churches by baptisme Reply Such as for lack of meanes and opportunity cannot joyne in such estate er bee dispersed by persecution or destitute of Pastors or Teachers may for a time seeke the seales in other societies Answ The first instance is the thing in question and such as may come to any society to desire seales are not wholly destitute of meanes and opportunity to joyne viz. to that society The two other instances being of such as may bee supposed still to hold their right in a Church society the thing is granted by us in way of communion of Churches Reply The people also who are deprived of right and libertie to chuse their pastour may desire the seales of him that is set over them Answ This objection is easie for in desiring seales of him and submitting themselves to his ministry they doe now choose him however at first they opposed his comming But what is this to what ought to bee in an orderly way whereof wee speake Reply These propositions being allowed for currant a nation or people plunged into Idolatry or Infidelity or otherwise dischurched cannot by ordinary meanes recover into a Church estate wherein they may lawfully and according to Gods appointment desire or expect that the seales of the Covenant shall bee dispensed unto them Answ What should hinder if the whole nation would bee willing to recover themselves into Churches Indeed that is rare to be found that all will affect such a recovery But wee see nothing to hinder but all the nation or so many as are awakened in conscience to bewaile their Apostasie and lament after the Lord having especially the countenance of the supreme magistrate severall companies of Christians may combine in Churches so as may best suite with their edification chuse officers and injoy ordinances Nay è contra our Protestant Divines as Chemnitius Field Brentius Whitacher Luther c. make peoples power of electing their Ministers the best foundation of a peoples recovery of a true Ministry and Church estate Reply The fifth Proposition riseth beyond measure That no Christian can expect by the appointment of God to partake in the seales till hee have joyned himselfe in Church fellowship and in the call of the Minister We conceive you will not say that children and women have to doe in the call of the Minister If some part of the Church doe not consent in the call of the Minister must they separate from the ordinances of worship c. Answ The seeming swellings of this proposition will easily fall and run within bankes and bounds if it bee received in its true sense and meaning for by the call of a Minister must needs bee understood the voluntary subjection of all Church members to his ministery after hee is called as well as the act of election of him at the first It were irrationall to thinke a Minister is to bee chosen over againe whensoever a member is added to the Church And therefore our meaning was not hard to conceive and being so taken women choose their Minister that is voluntarily submit to him being chosen Children are subjected to him by their parents the dissenting part of the Church ought to submit to him being chosen and doe if they remaine under his Ministry and so in all other cases you have or can suppose Reply Here you say people must joyne in the call of a Minister before they can lawfully desire and bee admitted to the seales And another hath zealously affirmed It is a presumptuous sinne to choose an Officer not trayned up and â—ryed in debating discussing carrying and contriving Church affaires in admonishing exhorting comforting c. Lay these together and consider how long many a poore soule converted to the faith must bee compelled to want Gods ordinances Answ First it doth not answer the profession in the letter thus to joyne us with Mr. Robinson as another of the same sort as it were For such as would gladly receive every Syllable from us that may dislodge their thoughts of separation in us as wee are heartily desired to bee assured of in the Epistle to this Reply wee thinke would not so closely joyne us with such they would have us parted from and upon so little occasion and to so little purpose unlesse they doe much forget themselves Secondly when it cannot be denied but the choyse of Ministers is in the Church and that hands should not rashly bee laid on any man and Deacons the lowest Office should bee proved and then Minister being found blamelesse yea hee saith and these also proved implying that others also should bee so 1 Tim. 3. 10. what fault can be found with the substance of what either Robinson or our selves speake if our meaning and his were but charitably taken If his word bee over-zealous to say it is a presumptuous sin to doe otherwise what is that to us Thirdly For the delay of ordinances if both these be taken together in most cases it need not be long where God affordeth able and fit men for office But if some delay be and that a church want some ordinances and cannot by Communion with other Churches injoy them which is rare yet is it not better to forbeare some ordinances a while then miscarry in so great a worke as the choise of officers upon which the following comfort and good of the Church doth so much depend The demand following is answered in this whole discourse and wee hope not with words but proofes especially in our answer to the Reply in the first consideration neither doe wee see any such difficulty but that such Christians may as easily joyne to such a Church for a time as desire to injoy the ordinances and to sit loose from it for transient members we disallow not Reply If the propositions may stand for good I feare we shal scarce finde that ever in ordinary way the Sacraments were lawfully dispensed or received in the Christian Churches of God since the first foundation of them Answ If they bee taken in their true meaning and in that latitude we intend them wee see no such cause of scruple For what is more ordinary in all true Churches then for people first to chuse their Ministers then to receive the seals at their hands and this hath beene the way of Ancient reformers It is true many corruptions have beene in many true Churches and usurpations upon the right of the people in choosing their Ministers as also in administrations of the Ordinances themselves and oft in the Constitution of Churches But as the maintaining of any truth of God against those corruptions in worship c. doth not argue an unlawfulnesse of the ordinances in such Churches but convinceth onely the corrupt administration of them So in
gracious promise of the presence of Christ in his Churches who is the counsellour so we confesse to his praise that we finde the judgment of a Church of Saints in matters orderly carryed and gathered up from the various gifts of wisedome grace and experience of many Christians when need is to be a blessed priviledge of Gods people to enjoy and sanctified oft to the great good of his Saints and being neglected and slighted hath been oft followed with sad events Reply The nature of your Church-Covenant inferreth not a necessity of bringing every such businesse to the Church for you binde your selves mutually to watch one over another c. but this essentially tyeth not any man to a perpetuall residence in one place for then even occasionall absence should be a breach of Covenant without consent of the Church Answ We grant our Church-Covenant neither requires every businesse to come to publike counsell nor perpetuall residence in one place neither is it so held by us in judgement or practise Reply You say you bind your selves to no new duties but in the word of truth it is not required neither directly nor by consequence that no member of a Church should remove or occasionally bee absent from his habitation before hee have acquainted the Church whither he goeth and on what occasions c. Answ It cannot but grieve us to see how the Replyer still not content to take all things in the harshest sense but will also winde in other matters into his discourse which may make our practise seeme farre more rigid then it is First hee urges us as if wee brought all cases of remove and the occasions thereof as marriages c. to the counsell of the whole Church Secondly hee would by consequence inferre the like of occasionall absence and now hee weaves in that also as if it were practised by us to require men to acquaint the Church with the place whither they goe and the occasions of their occasionall absence which is farre from us Reply And if such businesse must bee determined on the Lords Day c. Answ Wee deny not but the best Churches through weaknesse and temptation may spend too much time in the most necessary administrations of censures or other affaires but to possesse the world with such feares upon so little ground may argue the authors charity concerning our wisdome and christian care of the Sabbath was not very great Reply As for the Covenant it selfe c. but if yee constraine men to meddle with things that belong not to them and winde them up higher then God would and straine every thing to the pitch you seeme here to doe a godly sober minde may well pause before hee make such a promise Answ If the authour had not strained and aggravated things beyond our meaning in the answer and our practise this would not have come to so high a pitch to trouble a sober godly mind we are perswaded that generally sober godly minds that have their pride and self-willednesse in any good measure mortified doe count the yoake of Christ according to our practise of this point to bee both easie and profitable neither doe wee require such a promise of any as was said but if any stumble at the fourth branch of the first reason from the nature of the Covenant let us a little here cleare that scruple when wee reason from the nature of the Covenant and branch our reason into foure things it is not to bee so taken as if every one of those foure things were made a distinct promise in our solemne Covenant for the fourth is but an inference from the three former as is easie to observe and indeed it was never made by us a part of the Covenant or a distinct promise of it either in our judgement or practise If because we extend our watch to the removals of brethren it be taken for granted that we require such a promise it will no more follow then that we require promises in admissions in a thousand cases to which our watch also extends Reply If any shall not meddle with every businesse of this kinde as questioning whether it doe belong to him or no or not aske the advise of the whole societie as knowing the most bee unfit to counsell in such a case doth hee breake his Covenant therein and so commit a sinne in a sort like the sinne of Ananias and Saphira Iudge your selves if in other cases you would not censure this to bee an high incroachment upon Christian libertie and a strict binding of mens consciences by humane constitutions Answ To extend our watch so farre as hath been said unto these cases of removalls from a Church to prevent sinne in abrupt breaking off and forsaking fellowship and to prevent the hurt and damage which the sheepe of Christ oft fall into in their unadvised breaking out of the fold the Lord hath placed them in and to further their best good in their removalls whatever is thought of it wee count it no breach of Christian liberty but a priviledge of the Saints to bee under such a watch and therefore if any shall neglect any duty that one owes to another so farre as it tends necessarily to those ends wee may well reckon it as a neglect of our Covenant but because it is offensive to compare this with the sinne of Ananias c. wee intreat our reverend brethren and the Christian Reader to consider that in the answer this stands in the third thing noted in the nature of the Covenant and hath reference to the duties of the Covenant in generall and is not applyed to this particular case by us nor well appliable in the manner here expressed Secondly it is moderated in the answer which saith in some sort hee shall commit that sinne If these things doe not satisfie wee wish it expunged or any other seeming harshnesse rather then offence be given to any Lastly that you may not impute unto us the infringement of Christian liberty herein wee would acquaint all men with these two things First that removals from one towne and Church to another and from full to new Plantations are frequently practised amongst us with consent and approbation Secondly that wee finde in experience that as there is in sheepe a wandring disposition so in this large Wildernesse wherein the Lord hath exercised his people with various temptations by liberties by offers of large outward accommodations by wants and straights by various opinions vented by Satan and his instruments c. In these respects the Sheepe of Christ are so subject many times to outrunnings that wee finde more then ordinary need of care and wisedome in this point of our watch in many cases and many that have broke loose from the counsels of their officers friends and of the Church have deepely smarted for it How sad a case is it when some brainsicke master of a family transported with a fancy an odde opinion will needs carry his whole
but of what is to bee required of such as joyne unto a Church for a Church may bee a true Church and yet be very corrupt as is generally observed by Protestant writers hoth out of the examples of some Churches in the New Teâ—â—ament and that of the Old in the great Apostasie thereof wee thinke in this same Doctor Fields expressions may be safely received Some professe Christ saith hee but not wholly and intirely as Heretiques some professe the whole saving truth but not in unity as Schismatiques some professe it in unty but not in sincerity as prophaine persons and Hypocrites some in unity and sincerity all these are partakers of the heavenly calling by profession of the truth and consequently in some degree and sort the Church c. But wee thinke that this is no argument that either Heretiques Schismatickes prophane persons or Hypocrites if convictively discovered that such are meet matter to be joyned to a Church Secondly when a worke of grace is required and desired of those who are to joyne to a Church the meaning is not as if wee allowed none to bee of the Church but reall Saints and such as give demonstrative evidence of being members of the invisible Church for we professe according to the Scripture and generall doctrine of all reformed Churches what ever their practise bee that it is not reall but visible faith not the inward being but the outward profession of faith whence men are called visible Saints that constitutes a visible Church which faith so professed is called visible not in the judgement of certainty from such infallible signes of it as may demonstrate the hidden being of it within but in the judgement of charity which hopes the best 1 Cor. 12 7 in the weakest Christian and meanest profession even when it sometimes feares the worst and is not able at the present to convince the contrary Thirdly this judgment of charity concerning the truth of anothers profession or that which is called the worke of grace is to be regulated by the word which Christ hath left as a compleat rule not onely of faith but also of love and charity to guide both in their acts unto their ends and hence large professions and long relations of the worke of grace though full of exceeding glory when humbly and prudently made wee exact not rigorously and necessarily of all because the rule of charity directs us not so to judge because many Christians may bee drawne to Christ and have a seed of faith yet may sometimes not know it sometimes remember not the working of it sometimes through bashfulnesse feare want of parts nor not trained up under a knowing Ministery not be able to professe it so fully and clearely hence also to keepe out others from Communion out of groundlesse feares that all their profession might bee in hypocrisie wee allow not because no man in his charity is to bee ruled by his feares but by the word hence also to account any unfit for the Church because their hearts cannot close with them or because they like not their spirits speake not with favour or any such like principles and yet can give no rule or convicting argument from the word why thus they doe we thinke is rigouâ— not charity regulated by the word for humane charity doth not make Gods Church but such persons which from God according to the rule of Gods charity is to receive and therefore the rule is to be attended here it is necessary to looke for a ground of certainty to faith but not for charity which cannot bee infallibly certaine of anothers estate and therefore upon a hopefull supposition that the premises their profession is true hopefully onely makes the conclusion The question â—eing brought to this narrow it will here lye viz. First Whether profession of the worke of grace and faith be not required of those that enter into the Church Secondly With what profession of the worke of grace charity according to a rule is to rest satisfied The first wee thinke is writ with the beames of the Sunne for it is evident that neither the Lord in the Old Testament Exod. 19. or in the New Testament Acts 2. and in other like Scriptures did call for a profession of the Doctrine of faith onely but especially of the worke of faith for when the Lord promised to be a God to his people Exd. 19. Deut. 29. it was not with this condition if they did beleeve his word to bee true c. but if they will heare his voyce and keepe his Covenant which in a prepared people is a manifestation of a worke of grace So when the Apostles were required to goe preach to all Nations and baptize them and teach them looke as they did require such a faith as was saving he that beleeveth shall bee saved so upon the profession thereof they did receive them as also appeares Acts 2. 38. which therefore could not bee of the doctrine of faith for that the devils doe and tremble and profane men of much knowledge may doe and yet unfit to bee received and therefore it was of the worke of faith and therefore Act. 8. 37. Philip not onely requires faith but a beleeving with all the heart of the Eunuch and upon such a profession baptized him and hence the Churches erected by the Apostles at Corinth Colosse Ephesus c. are called Saints and sanctified of God in Christ Jesus c. How was it because debito and de jure onely they should be so then all who heare the Gospell though they reject it might bee called a Church for de jure they ought to be so Or was it because there were some that were truely such amongst them and so in concreto are called a Church and body of Christ not onely so for there may be some visible Churches of visible Saints and yet none among them of the invisible Church unlesse any will thinke that to bee of the Church invisible is essentiall to the beeing and title of a visible Church and therefore it was from their profession of saving faith which they maintained being a Church as it was required to the gathering into a Church John Baptist also though hee baptized none into a new Church and therefore might require the lesse yet as he really promised remission of sinnes by the Messiah so hee required that very faith and repentance which might make them partakers of this heavenly benefit and therefore if what hee required they manifested by their profession and confession of sinnes it was not onely to beleeve the doctrine of faith but a saving worke of faith which they held forth And therefore it is not an outward profession of faith according to a Creed which is required for then a Papist is fit matter for a Church nor willingnesse to heare the Word and receive the Sacraments for then heapes of prophane persons are to bee received into the Church but it 's profession of a worke and saving worke
of grace which being ever required in the purest times is no novell invention of some more rigidly inclined in these things To the second with what profession charity according to rule is to rest satisfied Wee answer that there is a breadth in charity according to rule and profession of faith being but testimonium humanum or a mans owne testimony concerning himselfe therefore as in the most eminent profession potest subesse falsum there may bee hypocrisie latent it being no divine testimony so in the weakest profession of the worke of faith potest subesse verum id est there may be truth in the bottome hence man leaving all secrets to God the worke of grace wherewith charity is to be satisfied is one of these two First either with that which is onely verball and appeares to be false by conviction from the word Or secondly with that which appeares to bee reall which however it may bee false yet it is beyond the power of man to convince by a rule that so it is We confesse wee are fearefull as of opening the doore too wide so of shutting the doores upon any whom God would have us to receive in but for what yet wee see or read from the arguments here alledged in this Author or the writings of others godly learned wee thinke that Church charity is not to rest satisfied with the first but with the latter for let the profession of the worke of faith bee never so short or so weake let it be by their owne immediate relation or by question yet if it may but appeare to a regulated charity so as to hope that it is reall it is to rest satisfied then till God make discovery to the contrary wee intend not to heape up arguments nor answer scruples but these foure things seeme to evince as much 1 That the Apostles in the 3000. converted Acts 2. as they were very ready to receive them to the fold of Christ and therefore in one day immediatly received so many thousands which could not bee by large profession of every one so also they attended to the truth of that profession and therfore it was not bare profession of faith but as it is set downe for our patterne it was such a profession as was evidently joyned with humiliation pricking at the heart mourning and crying out before the Apostles What shall wee doe to be saved gladly receiving the word which are reall testimonies of some reall change from what they were but a little before and upon this ground the Apostles received them 2 The Apostles charge to Timothy 2 Tim. 3. 5. From such as have a forme of godlinesse and deny the power of it turne away if bare profession were sufficient why should Timothy turne from them but rather receive them who had a forme of profession And if it was in his power to avoyd them why should he not reject them and that not onely from private but Church communion also supposing them such as not o ney had a forme but might be by a rule convinced thereof 3 Lying and apparent untruth cannot make a man fit matter for a Church and therefore cannot bee a ground for charity to rest on that so he is but verball profession which appeares not to bee reall but false is palpable lying and indeed more fit to destroy the Church then to make the Church Hence Sanctius in Zach 14. 14 observes that the greatest enemies of the Church are such qui eum fidem retineant sanctitatem abjâ—cerunt 4 If bare profession of faith is a sufficient ground to receive men into the Church then an excommunicate person cast cut in one houre should bee immediatly received in againe if hee will but renew his generall profession of faith nay they the Indians in Maryland who will put on and put off this profession as their ghostly fathers the Popish Priests will bestow or withhold garments and shirts upon them should in charitie bee received into the Church But if it should bee asked how charity may know the reality of this profession we answer so long as the rule bee attended wee leave every one to the wisedome of Christ to make application thereof onely this we doe add in generall for more full satisfaction 1 Such a faith professed with the mouth which is confirmed by an innocent godly conversation in the life so as not to live in commission of any knowne sinne or omission of any knowne duty wee say this conversation makes faith appeare reall James 2. 18. Rev. 22. 14. wee conceive more is required to make a man appeare a fit member of a Church then of a Common-wealth to bee onely bonus civis and bare civility is sufficient for this latter but not for the former and therefore such a profession of faith is needfull as is confirmed by a not onely a civill but a godly life 2 Such a faith as is joyned with evident repentance and sorrow and mourning for sinne although there bee no experience alwayes of such a holy life antecedently seene for thus it was Act. 2. 37 38. for the riches of Christs grace is such as not onely to receive experienced christians into his family and house but also the weakest and poorest who may stand in most need of Christs Ordinances and that as soone as ever they seeme to bee brought in and therefore experience of a blamelesse life is not alwayes necessary for admission into the Church some think indeed that the Apostles received in the first converts Act. 2. 39. so soone because they had an extraordinary spirit of discerning but if they had so yet they did not receive them in here according to that for they received divers hypocrites in as Ananias and Sapphira c. and if all other of their acts in this chapter were exemplary why should this onely bee thought to be otherwise and extraordinary 3 When there is full and sufficient testimony from others of their faith and piety although their humiliation faith and conversation bee not so well knowne for wee see the Church received Paul when Barnabas had declared what God had done for him and if it may bee just to condemne another by the testimony of two faithfull witnesses it may not bee unchristian to receive an other into the fold of Christ much more readily upon the testimony of able and faithfull Christians especially then when they be not able openly and publiquely ro speake so fully for themselves and thus much for answer to the first question 2 Question Whether this profession is to bee judged by the Church Answer 1. The faithfull as they did at first combine into a Church so it is their duty to receive others to themselves as the Church did Acts 9. 26 27. encouraged by Barnabas and the Apostles and as the Apostle commands Rom. 14. 1. which although it was of fellow-members into their affections yet the proportion holds strong for receiving commers into the Church Joh. Ep. 3. 8 9 10. 2
Apostles ordinary and first leading practise and examples are for those Position not against them 2 You grant here that Acts 2. and 8. and 19. there was a profession of faith and promise of amendment of life and so wee must suppose though not expressed for how else could the Apostles distinguish such as gladly received the word from the mockers and others Now let us consider what kinde of profession this must bee by the story it selfe The Apostle Peter in his doctrine presseth three things 1. Conversion or repentance for their sinnes 2. Faith in Christ in those words Bee baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ Verse 38. 3. With many other words he exhorted them saying Save your selves from this untoward generation that is this was the scope of and substance of his exhortation which includes a gathering themselves to the Church Now the Text saith in respect of the first That they were pricked to the heart and cryed out Men and Brethren what shall wee doe 2. They gladly received the word that is of faith in Christ and the duty of obedience to the Gospell and how did all this appeare but by their profession and what kinde of confession can any man think such soules would make but a broken hearted gracious confession which to any discerning charity must be taken to argue a worke of grace so that the very character given of them by the holy Ghost in so briefe an History doth cleerely evince what we contend for Consider also the story Acts. 8. and first not to passe over what is said of Simon Magus of whom it is said Hee beleeved was baptized continued with Philip and wondered so that no doubt they took him for a true beleever but when Peter discovered his falsnesse see what hee saith Verse 21. Thou hast no part nor lot in this matter and the reason is For thy heart is not right in the sight of God Let any here consider that if hee had no part nor lot in Christ and baptisme c. because not right whether the Apostle Peter or the Church would have received him if such had been discovered before And for the Eunuch Philip requiring his profession of faith If thou beleevest with all thy heart looked for a sound worke of grace and though it was delivered in those words which are the Fundamentall truth That Jesus is the Sonne of God yet it includes true faith in him for salvation as we see our Saviour Christ takes that confession of Peter for true faith Flesh and â—lood have not revealed this to thee but my Father and promised to build the Church on this rocke Matth. 16. Yea it includes subjection unto him as the Sonne of God the Prophet and King of his Church and this is no rare but a common thing in the New Testament by one fundamentall truth beleeved and confessed to include true faith and profession of the whole truth that suites with that foundation as Rom. 10. 9. so expounded Verse 10 11. as being more then historicall faith so 1 John 4. 1 2. and 5. 1. The like characters of a penitent and gracious carriage and confession may be observed Act. 19. 17 18 19. And seeing you have given us this occasion to lay downe some grounds of our practise from the first patternes we shall add a word or two to take away the conceit of novelty which is imputed to us in this point as much as in any thing else Tertullian saith in his booke of prescriptions Wee admit no man to any disputation about divine things unlesse hee first have shewed us of whom he received the faith and became a Christian and secondly whether hee admit and hold the generall principles wherein all Christians doe and ever did agree otherwise proscribing against him as an alien from the Common-wealth of Israel And if in those times they were so strict in admitting men to disputations no doubt much more in receiving men to Church Communion But if this seeme not full enough take another in the Churches of old there were Catechumeni instructed for enterance into the Church by baptisme with whom they tooke much paines in sanctifying them before by fasting and prayer and often preaching to them And for their admission there were foure things in use among them 1. Nominis professio 2. Scrutinium 3. Abrenuntiatio 4. Fidei professio Their Scrutinium which they call Examen competentium or the examination of such as were competent or fitting for admission This Examen was very strict as is observed out of Alcuinus by learned * Chamier Fiant scrutinia ut explorentur saepius an post renuntiationum Satanae sacra verba datae fidei radicitus corde defixerint i. e. Let examinations be made that it oft may bee tryed whether they have deeply fixed in the heart the sacred words of their professed faith And what ever any may thinke of the strictnesse of that their discipline in this point Chamier gives a large testimony by way of approbation of the same whose words upon it are these Certe nemo improbare potest seriam in tam sanctis rebus diligentiam ne quantum fieri poterit lateant Simones c. i. Certainely no man can disallow such serious diligence to prevent profanation of sacred things lest so farre as it is possible such as Simon Magus may lye hid And saith hee the Apostles went before in their examples for Philip Acts 8. being demanded of the Eunuch What hinders mee that I may not bee baptized hee answereth not simply thou mayst but with this supposition added if thou beleevest with thy whole heart Now this profession of their faith was either by reciting the Creed in an eminent place before all the people and that praeclarâ â—iduciâ with full affiance as hee observes out of Clement and Augustine or else respondendo interroganti Sacerdoti per singula in subsidium forte pudoris aut memoriae i. e. By answering to the Minister propounding questions concerning their faith for helpe of their bashfulnesse or want of memory Also Beza in his Epist 14. Commending much the severity and zeale of former Pastors and Churches in this kind and bemoaning the negligence of such as followed from whence hee saith it is that the Church without a miracle could not rise out of its filth he concludes thus Itaque frustra disputabitur tum voce tum scriptis nisi conversione cordium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 initium instaurationis sumatur Reverend Mr. Hildersam in his treatise of the doctrine of the Lords Supper to that question whether the people that come to the Lords Table bee bound to make knowne their knowledge and spirituall estate to their Pastor Answers thus yes verily for seeing Matth. 3. 6. Acts 8. 37. God required of them that being of yeares of discretion were to bee baptized that they should make knowne to the Congregation or their Minister their faith and repentance hee doth every whit as much require this of them
no part of the Catholike Church and therefore not the whole is bound to submit to them and therefore indeed they have no office nor calling as Pastors or Teachers except it can be proved they be Evangelists Apostles or Prophets Reply If the people be few and simple they stand in more need of guidance from their owne Elders and other Churches If many and full of wisdome their liberty to choose is the greater and the greater wrong to bee deprived of it The practise of the Apostles and Primitive Churches shew this for many ages sometime men were propounded to the Church to be chosen sometimes the chiefe left wholly to them Answ 1 What is all this to the purpose what light or derection a Church need to receive the essence of a Ministers call lyes not in the propounding or advising of any to elect him but in the Election of such as have the true right so to doe which is still in the Church though few and weake if a true Church and yet you produce not one Scripture example of any Officer propounded by the Apostles or Elders to the Church to be chosen by them much lesse limiting the Church to consent thereto if they had nothing against him Reply In reason this is evident for the Childs consent is required in marriage but the more able he is to choose for himselfe the more liberty may Parents grant the lesse able the more watchfull must they be This similitude utterly faileth in two essentiall things that concerne the case for which it is applyed 1. Because a childe is under the authority of the parents whose right is such that a Childe cannot lawfully choose without them But there is no Church or others have such a right and authority over any Church in their choice of Officers 2. Whatsoever the power of parents bee yet the essence of the marriage consists in the mutuall consent and promise of the children that marry and so here the essence of a Ministers call must lye in the election of the Church and acceptance of the Minister which is not avoided but by the similitude confirmed Reply It is a duty of neighbour Churches to lend their helpe to their brethren in election of their Ministers when the Scripture willeth us to exhort one another or admonâ—sh one another it is not onely a command to every singular person towards his fellow but also to any whole company Answ Wee grant all this and that it is the duty of a Church bee it weake or strong to take all needfull counsell advise or exhortations and admonitions in so weighty a worke But if Churches or others shall impose upon any Church any Officer without their choice this is no brotherly helpe but unjust usurpation And if you understand Junius so as that Charitatis jure Communione sanctorum one Church have power to choose for another other wayes then by advising them to elect such an one for themselves wee see no reason for that nor doe wee thinke it is his meaning neither doth Paul Rom. 12. 12. lay any foundation of such usurpations but onely of mutuall brotherly helpfulnesse by counsell c. and the contrary is not Policy but some degree of tyranny Reply It is a blemish in the call of a Minister if either the people be not fit to choose or being fit they he shut out from the choice but this maime doth not make a nullity in his calling Answ If a people or Church bee never so weake which is here called unfitnesse yet Christ being amongst them and they making an orderly and good choice there can be no blemish in the call seeing the right is them and such a free choice will better stablish the conscience of any godly Minister in his call then if a Synod of the ablest Ministers should impose him without their free choice except it can bee proved that the right of election is in the Synod which we thinke will not bee done But bee they able or weake if the people be shut out it must needs make a great maim in his call and if they doe not consent nor submit to such a one called by others it will make it a nullity as was shewed before What authority hath hee to Minister to any Church if they will refuse him or who shall censure them for refusing by any rule of Christ Reply The saving truth of God and a lawfull Ministery are both essentiall to a true Church Answ Answ What then becomes of the Church when the Minister is dead Reply The true Church hath continued by the blessing of God where the election of Ministers hath beene given away by the people or taken from them Answ True but it hath been continued by the after consent and subjection of the people to their Ministers chosen by others else they must needs have broken a pieces and dissolved the Church or taken upon them to choose others to themselves which still shewes that the essence of the call is in the people What is said of the disorders of Ancient Churches in elections we passe over as nothing to this purpose That the Ministery might bee lawfull for substance where there were many defects in the manner of the call we grant the Church at length consenting to submit thereto in whom the true right is placed by Christ and therefore we passe over what followes to that purpose though wee might object against some passages in the discourse Reply As for the second branch of your answer we know not well your meaning if this be your minde that a Minister lawfully called and set over the Congregation is to bee esteemed a Minister in the usuall Church as the particular Church hath unity with and is part of the universall or Catholique and as a party baptized is not baptized into that Congregation onely but into all Churches and that the Ministery is one cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur as Cyprian speaketh and therefore though the Minister be unjustly cast eff by one Congregation yet hee is not to be esteemed as no Minister wee freely consent But if your meaning bee that hee is onely by right a Minister of that particular Congregation because unjustly deposed as formerly in the execution of his Office â—ee was a Minister to them onely and to no other society whatsoever or in what respect soever your opinion is contrary to the opinion of the universall and tends to destroy the unity of the Church and that Communion which the Churches of God ought to have one with another Answ First If our meaning be doubtfull seeing these expressions doe not well suite our notion nor fully enter into our understanding we shall give the meaning of our answer distinctly and then consider what is here said First there is a difference betweene the unjust leaving or casting off a Minister without all orderly proceedings against him and the unjust deposing him in an orderly way of Church censure if the question