appoyntment of the rest one of them translated it into latine which was sent to me and now is by him out of latine translated into English Now that the Reader may see how much he is abused by this false translation of that wrighting I will publish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very wrighting it selfe verbatim without alteration of a syllable as I received it from them and then compare this translation with it The Latine copy word for word Nos infra-scripti Pastores Ecclesiae Belgicae in civitate Amsteldamensi a viro Reverendo D. Pageto fideli pastore in Ecclesiâ Anglicanâ ejusdem civitatis nec non a venerandis fratribus Senioribus ac Diaconis ejusdem Ecclesiae Anglicanae specialiter requisiti ac fraternè rogati ut privatum nostrum judicium in causa vocationis quae ab universâ Ecclesiâ praedictâ videtur expeti Reverendi Clarissimi Doctissimique viri D. DAVENPORTII sincerè declarare atque exponere non recusemus idque in casu illo unico particulari spectante Baptismum eorum infantium qui in Ecclesiâ Anglicanâ baptizandi offeruntur Re totâ utrinque benè intellectâ ritè perpensâ et ad normam Verbi Dei ordinemque receptum in Ecclesijs Reformatis harum Provinciarum in quibus praedicta Ecclesia Anglicana sese membrum profiretur sub Classe Amsteldamensi probè examinatâ sincerè ac coram Deo in bonâ conscientiâ responsum damus atque declaramus Nihil magis nobis in votis esse quam ut praedictus D. Davenportius cujus insignis eruditio et singularis pietas ab omnibus fratribus Anglicanis apprime probatur laudaturque quemque hoc ipso nomine nec non ob alias virtutes ejus laudabiles etiam ipsi D. Pageto charissimum esse intelligimus ad ministerium Ecclesiae Anglicanae praedictae legitime promoveatur Bonum insuper ipsius Zelum ac studium de parentum ac susccptorum istorum liberorum praeuiô aliquô examine privatô in religione Christianâ instituendô quam maximè quidem nobis probari de re ipsâ tamen ita nos statuere ut praedictum illud examen quantum Ecclesiae Anglicanae feret aedificatio instituatur sed si fortè vel parentes susceptoresve istud accedere ac subire renuant vel ob temporis brevitatem aut alijs justis de causis fieri illud non queat vel etiam qui accesserint fratris vel fratrum examinantium judicio non videbuntur pro isto tempore satisfacere ipse infans cujus parentes susceptoresve constat esse Christianos quique Christianam religionem ad lectionem liturgiae Sacramenti Baptismi publicè coram Ecclesia profitentur a Baptismo propterea minime arceatur aut baptizarì recusetur sed ut ejusmodi ignorantes parentes susceptoresve post infantem baptizatum ulterÄus postea quoad fieri potest edoceantur quoniam scilicet infantes Christianorum suorum parentum susceptorumve vel inscitiam vel etiam ejusmodi inobedientiam ferre ac luere non debent Si quis tamen casus ullus alius obveniat quo minus infans oblatus baptizandus videatur ut tum totius presbyterij Anglicani vel etiam si necesse fuerit aut commodè fieri possit Classis Amsteldamensis judicium interveniat audiatur atque in eo acquiescatur Sic actum et transactum in aedibus D. Pageti Die 20. Ianuarij 1634. Ioannes le Mairius Iacobus Triglandius Henricus Geldorpius Rudolphus Petri. Iacobus Laurentius 2. The translation word for word We the underwritten Ministers of the Dutch Church in the citty of Amsterdam being specially and lovingly requested and desired of the Reverend Mr. PAGET a faithfull Pastour iâ— the English Church of the same city as also the the Reverend brethren the Elders and Deacons of the same English Church that we would not refuse sincerely to declare shew our private judgment about the calling of the Reverend most famous learned Mr. DAVENPORT which seemes to be desired of the whole Church aforesaid and that in this particular case alone concerning the Baptisme of those infants which are offered to be baptised in the English Church having well understood and duely weighed the whole matter on both sides and having throughly examined it according to the rule of Gods word and the order received in the Reformed Churches of these Provinces in which the aforesaid English Church doth professe it selfe a member under the Classis of Amsterdam we doe sincerely and in the presence of God with good conscience answer and declare that we desire nothing more then that the foresaid Mr. DAVENPORT whose notable learning and singular piety is much approoved and commended of all the English our brethren whom also in this regard and for his other commendable gifts we understand to be most deare unto Mr. PAGET may be lawfully promoted unto the Ministry of the English Church aforesaid we doe also greatly approove of his good Zeale and care of having some precedent private examination of the parents and sureties of these children in the Christian Religion yet touching the matter it selfe we doe so judge that this aforesaid examination be ordained so farr as may stand with the edification of the English Church but if haply the parents or sureties shall refuse to come and undergoe this examination or if for the shortnes of time or for other just causes it can not be done or if those that doe come shall not seeme for that time to satisfye the judgment of the Brethren one or more that doe examine them that yet the infant whose pareÌ„ts sureties are manifest to be ChristiaÌ„s which publickly before the Church doe professe Christian Religion at the reading of the leiturgie of the Sacrament of Baptisme shall not therefore be excluded or deprived thereof but that such ignorant pareÌ„ts sureties be further instructed after the infaÌ„t be baptised to wit because the infaÌ„ts of ChristiaÌ„s ought not to beare suffer the punishmeÌ„t of the ignorance or yet of such disobedience of their pareÌ„ts or sureties If yet any other case fall-out whereby it may seeme that the infant presented should not be baptised that then the judgment of the whole English Presbytery or also if need be and if conveniently it may be done that the judgment of the Classis of Amsterdam be obtayned and rested in So was it done and transacted in the house of Mr. PAGET the 28. day of Ianuary 1634. Here it must be noated that the Answerer pretendeth to publish this wrighting 1. So as it was done and transacted in his house the 28. day of Ianuary 1634. 2. So as it was written downe and read before him when they enquired of him whether he for his part did rest therein and he signifyed his consent with them These things being premised J demand by what pretence will the Answerer defend or excuse this his translation Let me without offence desire to know why he hath translated quorum parentes susceptoresve constat esse Christianos whose parents and suretyes are
to refuse those that are unworthy which very thing we see to descend upon them by Gods ordinance To which purpose also the Professours of Leyden distinguishing betweene Election and Ordination Synops pur Theol Disput 24 Sect. 32. 33. conclude that jus pastores eligendi est penes Ecclesiam ac proinde plebi commune cum presbyteris Ius eos ordinandi solis presbyteris est proprium c. The right of chusing their pastors is in the Church and therefore common to the people with the Elders The right of ordayning them is proper to the Elders Now that this Assertion may be vindicated from the reproach and suspition of Novelty or Singularity Proved 3. wayes 1. Text of Scripture 1. Act. 1.5 v. 23. I will reduce the proofes of it to three heads 1 Texts of Scripture 2 Consent of times 3 Evidence of Reason The first text is in Act 1 where at a meeting of about 120 persons the choyse of one to succeed in the place of Iudas being propounded by Peter the multitude pitched upon two men Ioseph surnamed lustus and Matthias whom they esteemed meetest for that worke v. 24.25 in reference to the description which Peter had before given of the man that might be judged fitt for that ministry having considered and concluded of two men whom they knew and judged to be such as best answered that description they commended them to God in prayer and because Apostles must be immediately called of God they gave forth lotts which fell upon Matthias whom thereupon they numbred with the eleven Apostles v. 26. Here are three Actors the Apostles calling upon the people to chuse and directing them therein according to the mind of Christ the people freely nominating those whom they judged fittest according to that direction and leaving that to the Lord which was peculiar and proper to him in such an extraordinary case to declare immediatly which of those two whom they had nominated it pleased him to sett apart to the Apostleship Hence I argue that The Apostles did not chuse Ioseph and Matthias alone but the wholl Church chose them by consent Therefore the choyse of the Minister belongeth not to some few how learned soever but to the wholl Church Ob. 1 What can be excepted against this Argument That the people did not chuse them Ans but desired God that he would chuse one But 1. so much as in that case could be left to the people the Lord left to them viz the nomination of two which was an inchoat choyse seing the full choyse must be made of God immediately the nature of that office so requiring 2. He substituted no other power under himselfe above the Church no not the Apostles themselves in that case What then Ob. 2 That this is an extraordinary case and toucheth not the calling of ordinary Pastors Ans But though the choyse by God immediately signified in the use of lots is extraordinary yet the suffrage of the people is ordinary Which seing God would not suffer to be neglected in such an extraordinary case much lesse will he dispense with the rejecting of it ordinarily 2. Act. 6.1 The second Text is Acts 6 where the multitude the number of Disciples being by this time increased and multiplyed are called together about the choyse of a Deacon In this buisenes the Apostles only directed them Vers 3. according to the mind of Christ what manner of one they should chuse leaving them to theyr liberty of chusing him whom they judged to be fittest for that service Vers 6. whom having chosen they presented him to the Apostles and they without gayn-saying having prayed layd theyr hands upon them Hence I argue in the words of the Affrican Synod in Cyprian thus Cypr. Epi. 68. If the Apostles would not chuse even Deacons without the consent of the people much lesse would they obtrude Pastors upon them without their consent For there are more greater causes that require the Churches consent in the choyse of Pastors then of Deacons The third Text is Act. 14 where it is sayd of Paul 3. Act. 14.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Barnabas that when they had by the suffrage of the people chosen Elders in every Church c. In which place some translatours in stead of chosen by consent read ordained 1. contrary to the use of the same word in another Scripture where themselves translate the same word in the passive particle chosen of the Churches 2. contrary to the consent of expositours upon that place 2. Cor. 8.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Calvin Beza Bullinger Musculus Brentius Arias Montanus Erasmus c. 3. contrary to the civill custom whence that word practise was brought into the Church it being taken from the custom of the Athenians in choyse of their Magistrates which they performed two wayes 1. By lots whence they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. By holding up of hands whence they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. contrary to the nature of the thing Voet. desp caus pap lib. 2. Sect. 2. cap. 12. 1. Tim. 4.14 Cap. 5.22 for there election is spoken of which was done with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the holding up of hands not ordination which was afterwards done with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 laying on of hands as if election and ordination were one and the same thing whereas there is as much difference betweene them as is betweene the Election and Coronation of a King or the choyse installment of a Magistrate in his office This being granted that the people chose their Elders by consent hence I argue In the time of the Apostles the power of chusing was in the people without whose consent and preceding choyse the Apostles obtruded none upon them by they re owne Authority Therefore it ought to be so now This Argument when the authors of the admonition propounded D. Whitgift excepted against it saying that howsoever in the Apostles time this use was of having the consent of the Church in the choyse of their Pastor Cartw. Reply par p. 32. yet now it were pernicious and hurtfull To whom Mr. Cartwright replyeth breifely and fitly See how unaduisedly you condemne the Churches of Geneva of all France and certaine of the German Churches which keepe this order Idem ibid. p. 33.34.35.36 who also in the same place fully answereth the Archbishops five pretended differences betweene those times and these whereunto for brevityes sake I refer the Reader So much for the texts of Scripture 2. Consent of times The second proofe of the peoples right to choose their Pastor is from the consent of times First For the first three hundred yeares after Christ to Constantines time Ecclesiasticall hystoryes are cleare for it without contradiction The Ancients in the Affrican Synod in Cyprians time are expresse full in this point they in the Councell of Nice consent with them herein Cypr.
the second Section he sayd it is against modesty and conscience to pronounce so certainly touching the issue of things to come and yet himselfe useth the same confident asseveration in a case more improbable as will appeare to any man or to himselfe if he reduce his reasoning and discourse to prove such disputes as I have used about myne owne desireablenes to be a want of modesty or prudence into a Syllogisme The 23. Section examined of the Ansvverers rejecting the counsail of the Elders when matters have bene referred to them if he thought they would conclude against his purpose THe usefullnes of the Eldership in the Church being considered with the Honour which the Holy Ghoast putteth upon those who are called thereunto should warne all men to take heed of contemning them or occasioning others to dispise them First Act 14. p. 155. Their usefullnes appeareth in that the Holy Ghoast directed Paul and Barnabas to ordaine Elders by voyces in every Church Which text Mr. Nowell in this Catechisme alleadgeth to shew that there were in the well ordered Churches certaine Seniors chosen and joyned with the Pastor and thereby he would shew that the Pastor should not excommunicate alone without the judgement of the Church This place being so understood we may from hence noate two things to declare the usefullnes of such officers 1 Thess 5.12.13 1 Tim. 4.14 Act 15.6.23.16.4 Ambros in 1 Tim 5. 1. that they were appoynted to every Church 2. That they were solemnly ordayned being commended to the Lord with prayer and fasting which is not used in slight matters It appeareth also in that they are joyned by the wisdom of God with other officers of as necessary use in the Church as the members are in the body 1 Cor. 12.28 Secondly The Honour which the Holy Ghoast putteth upon them is very great as appeareth first in their imployments which are honourable services as to assist the Pastor 1. In admonishing offenders 2. In imposition of hands at the ordaining of officers 3. in consulting and counsailing about Church affaires the Apostles refused not their helpe herein and this use of them continued as Ambrose sayth till it was altered by the sloath or rather pride of Teachers who would seeme to be some body by doing all things alone 2. In the titles wherewith he honoureth them being thus imployed calling them (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb 13.7 17.24 Leaders (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thess 5.12 Rom 12.8 Presidents (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act 20.28 1 Cor. 12.28 Overseers (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Chron. 19.8 1 Tim. 3.2 1 Tim. 5.17 1 Thess 5.12.13 1 Tim. 5.17 Heb. 13.17 Governments 3. In the qualifications required to be in them viz. to be such as doe the duety of their place in the feare of the Lord faythfully and with a perfect heart wise vigilant sober of good behaviour blamelesse In a word they must not be destitute of any good property whereby they may be fitted to rule well 4. In the carriage which the Holy Ghoast injoyneth the people to use towards them in they re well discharging their duety As to acknowledge them and to esteeme them very highly in love to account them worthy of double honour And to obey them Now then if any man shall despise this office as of no necessary use in the Church of God or if any shall goe about by disparadging speeches to disable them from doing the worke of their place or to discourage and dishearten them in it by a needles though true publishing their imperfections much more if the reports be untrue and mere ungrounded reproaches the injury is not only personall to the men but publick and common to the wholl Church which is much blemished either for want of it officers or for want of care to make a good choyse and to see that they discharge their duety as they aught and much disordered whilest those who should be admonished by them are now armed against them as men branded with a marke of partiality and insufficiency and disorderly walking and that by their Pastor and in print In which respect for the prevention of such dangerous consequences or effects it will be worth the while that we examine this second complaint concerning his slighting the Elders which I will breifely dispatch insisting principally upon those things which he calleth me to examine by mentioning my name which he wrighteth at length as his manner is least else it may be the Reader should forget that I am the marke he shooteth at thorough all these The Answerer sayth this complaint is a very unjust slander Ans Reply 1. If it be a slander it must needs be unjust for no slander can be just Yea if it be a slander it is a very great one for it is not against a private but a publick person a preacher of the Gospell and their Pastor and that not whispered in the eares of one but published to the view of many But if it be true the Answerers sinne is double 1 that he gave just cause of this complaint in a case not of private but of publick injury by depriving of his flock not of civill but of spirituall liberties to the violation of that order which Christ hath setled in the Church 2. That he unjustly chargeth them with a slander and so maketh himselfe guilty of calling good evill yea of the same sinne whereof he accuseth them viz slander For the more cleare and full understanding and judging of what is sayd on both sides it must be observed that the first three pretended answers are mere evasions and diversions of the Reader from the matter of the Complaint For First They doe not complaine of those decissions and determinations which have bene made by most voyces in the Eldership but of those which have bene hindred and rejected by him nor of his giving sentence by his authority alone but of his rejecting the authority of the Eldership and interposing the authority of the Classis to hinder their proceeding in things which might have bene ended amongst themselves nor that those resolutions which have bene concluded in Consistory have bene transacted without consent of most but that some considerable conclusions which most have agreed upon have bene by him rejected without sufficient cause So that unlesse he can acquitt himselfe of rejecting those determinations which have bene made by most voices in the Elderships and of hindring their proceeding in things which might have bene ended amongst themselves and that without sufficient cause the complaint appeareth to be just in this particular and no slander Secondly They doe not complaine of his opposing contradicting or rejecting their opinions and counsailes when they were against right and truth or hurtfull to the Church or to any member thereof but when matters have bene agreeable to truth and right and for the good of the Church upon unjust pretences of the Elders insufficiency and
are at rest as Mr. Parker Dr. Ames Mr. Forbes some are absent as Mr. Hooker Mr. Weld Mr. Peter 4. that he so interweaveth his discontents against the Elders the complaints of the members with the passages which concerne me that in many things I could not cleare my selfe without saying some thing also in their just defence which I have done sparingly and but when it was made necessary by his joyning us together 5. that he hath so frequently mentioned my name almost in every passage that I could not make a satisfying Reply on myne owne behalfe without examining almost the wholl booke which I was constrayned to doe also more particularly and according to the order of his Sections then else I would least it should be thought that I had bene unable to answer what I had praetermitted Wherein what I have written the Reader seeth but he knoweth not what I could have added and therefore is to be intreated to suspend his censure concerning what I have said till he may understand the reasons whereby I am able to justifye such particulars 6. that for the helpe of the Reader in comparing the Reply with the Answer I have inserted his owne words every where 7. that I thought it unaequall to cause the Reader to lay out his mony and spend his precious houres upon a fruitlesse discourse of our personall concernments onely and therefore have added many things upon this occasion for his intellectuall advantage whereby the Reply is made much larger then else it should have bene The benefit whereof will I hope with Gods blessing recompence his expence of mony or time upon it Which I beseech the Father of lights and of spirits to grant for the advancement of his truth in the hearts of many Amen The faults escaped correct thus 1. Words or points to be altered p stands for page l for line r. for read P 6. l 7. r. all together p 25. l 25. r operantis p. 32. l 6. r. Emden for Ments p 46. l 2. r. answereth p 48. l 27. r holesom l 37. r up p 54. l. 14. r injury p 55. l. 27. r consequence p 56. l 3. r open p 58. l. 27. r specially p 61. l. 2. r of for to p. 62. l. 1. and. p. 70. l 7. r 20. for 21. p. 79. l 23. r that the Doct p 81. l 26. r held p. 88. l 11. r in ter Veer where he p. 89. l 4. r with arrogating p. 118. l 29. r to the. p 148. l 5. r yet p 174. l 2. r counsail p 177. l 27. r was for w as p 191. l 33. r against it for against it p 223. l 12. r impute p 242. l. 2. r the for th p 245. l 7. r was for wae p 265 l 23. r. injustice p 266. l 20. r devised p. 268. l 7 8. r further p 288. l 31. r these p 295. l 4. r either for neither 2. Words or points to be added a stands for add p 9. l 20. a about after satisfactioÌ„ p. 59. l. 8. a. secondly before Is. p. 61. l. 16. a. not after p. 82. l. 1 a. he after fit p. 106. l. 19. a the before Iesuits p. 113. l. 15. r. moneths absence p. 163. l. 36. a. of marriages after condition p. 165. l. 14. a. after day p. 183 l. 17. r. ministers p. 202. l. 1. a. that after not p. 213. l. 14. r. constitution p. 229. l. 3. a. is after it 3. Words to be blotted out d stands for dele p. 9. l. 15. d. h in where p. 56 l. 13. d. First p. 66. in the margin d. s. in epist p. 82. l. 31. d. s in places p. 86. l. 31. d. s. in Maties p. 106. l. 19. d. the before Machiavells p. 138. l. 10. d. be Other faults which doe not so much hinder the Readers understanding I leave to his owne observation As when t is put for c s for c ei for i for e u for n p for b. s for f. m for n. n for m. y for i. c. A Table added by a Friend wherein the Reader for his better understanding is to take notice that the first figure sheweth the page the latter sheweth the line in the page Action CHristian actions of a twofold nature 277. 26 Ames Dr. Ames defended 77. 12 Commended 79. 12 What workes hee was author of 80. 1 His fitnesse for Pastorall office 81. 12 His remoove from Franeker to Rotterdam justified 83. 1 Dr. Ames not for promiscuous baptising 160. 14 Dr. Ames opinion of Synods 224. 36 Dr. Ames judgement about the power by which the Church ought to be governed 242. 20 Answer Three things required to a right answer of complaints 1 Two things required to a true answer 1 Answerer Answerer defective in his answer in the requisites thereto 2. 31 Answerers subtill devises to prejudice the Reader 7. 20 Answerers fallacie in putting that for a cause which is no cause 9. 25 Answerers judgement and practise agree not 12. 20 Answerer found faulty from his relation of a father 20. 6 from the place 20. 35 from the time 22. 10 Answerer found guilty of depriving the Church of those whom they desired notwithstanding all his answeres for the clearing of himselfe 55. 1 Answerer diverteth the Reader 51. 5. and 64. 19. and 68. 18. and 209. 30. Answerer prooved guilty of sinne in opposing the persons whom the Church desired 65. 8 It hath bene the Answerers course to injury the Church 77. 7 Answerer not willing to accommodate the Replyer about promiscuous baptising 126. 1. and 130 22. Answerer obtruded a false translation of the five Dutch Ministers writing upon the Reader 129. 12. Answerer contradicteth himselfe and the Classis about the insufficiency of the Elders about baptising 169. 12 Answerer hindreth the agreemeÌ„t of the Elders concerning the Replyers preaching notwithstanding all his pretended answeres 218. 12 Answerers needlesse jealousies kept Mr. Weld out from preaching when the Elders desired him 221. 27 Answerer notwithstanding his answeres found guilty of subjecting the Church under an undue power of the Classis 232. 22. Answerer joyneth with the enemies in an old cavill what the due power is by which the Church should be governed 253. 15. Answerer injurious to Christ and to the truth while hee thinkes to leave the complaynants under suspicion of adhearing to some sect 236. 22 Answerer found guilty of giving unto the Classis power to keepe out such men as the Church desired 243. 31 Answerer found guilty of giving unto the Classis power of making lawes 257. 7. Answerer found guilty of bringing matters violently unto the Classis 264. 9 Answerer found guilty of subjecting the Church under the Classis without consent â—68 1 Answerers answers about his pulpiting against the Replyer examined 278. 19 Answerer armes his opposites against himself and all Non-Conformists 282. 23 Answerer describeth not the persons right whose infants are brought to baptisme 314. 2 Attersol Mr.
Attersol not for promiscuous baptising 161. 27 Balmford Mr. Balmford defended 93. 34 Baptising Examples against promiscuous Baptising 32. 1 Arguments for promiscuous Baptising answered 118. 31 Scriptures for promiscuous Baptising answered 121. 31 The question cōcerning promiscuous Baptising stated 132. 5 Things premised about promiscuous Baptising 132. 22 Fower grounds against promiscuous Baptising 133. 25 The opinion of learned Writers concerning promiscuous Baptising 134. 1 The ends and uses of baptisme against promiscuous Baptising 140. 21. Promiscuous Baptising offensive 143. 19. Promiscuous Baptising amoung the Reformed a building of things destroyed 145. 21 Promiscuous Baptising against Godly custome 153. 9 Promiscuous Baptising not maintayned by them that seeme to favour it 156. 23 Pretences for promiscuous Baptising answered 163. 8 Promiscuous Baptising not an order of the Dutch Churches but a disorder crept in 175. 15 Confessions and Cannons of the Dutch Churches against promiscuous Baptising 175. 22 Custome about baptising such as that it may justly be called promiscuous Baptising 300. 34 Baptisme Baptisme is an ordinance belonging to the Church 312. 1 Basil Basil for peace sake remooves his dwelling 16. 31 Beza Beza not for promiscuous baptising 158. 19 Beza his opiniō of Synods 228. 11 Beza his carriage when Erastus his booke was published after the authors death 323. 27 Brownists Nearnesse to or distāce from the Brownists but a false rule to trie truth or errour by 10. 2 Brownists errours 280. 35 Burthen What a Burthen is 52. 36 The Burthen of the Complaynants being deprived of those whom they desired grievous by the concurrence of many respects 53. 6 Certainty Humaine Certainty stādeth with a contingency of future events 28. 10. Choosing Power of Choosing Ministers in the whole church 36. 24 the termes explicated 36. 30 the position layd downe as the Affrican Synod Professours of Leyden hold it 37. 8 Proofe of the position reduced to 3 heads 37. 23 Argumēt from the Scriptures 37. 25. Argument from consent of times 40 6. Argument from the evidence of reason 43. 10 Power of Choosing the Church cannot give from her 46. 12 Choyce In Choyce of Ministers there is in cases a necessary use of the combination of Churches 230. 33. Church In what sense Church is taken 36. 33. Church is deprived of her power two wayes 47. 35 Power to governe granted to the Church by witnesses in all ages 237. 21 The order of the Church of Franckford for the power of the Church 243. 13 What authority the Church hath about lawes 258. 10 Classis What the Classis requireth of Ministers which are to be ordained 68. 36 Two things blame worthie in the Classis 9. 12 The Classis repaired unto about the Replyers settling without his consent approbation 185. 34. The proceeding of the Classis after the Replyer had refused his call 193. 1 The Classis assume in some particulars more power then the the Prelates 223. 25 What power is due to Classis over particular Churches by vertue of combination 227. 19 The object of Classicall combinations of Churches 228. 7 Classis power borrowed derived from particular Churches 229. 3. Classis power not a prerogative of jurisdiction but of estimation 229. 27 Classis power not to deprive particular Churches of their power but to strengthen them in the exercise thereof 230. 10 Wherein the Classis power is undue and usurped 231. 26 The undue power of the Classis in making lawes 252. 26 Concerning resting in the determinations of the Classis 271. 14 Classis require more power then the Apostles when they required the Replyer to baptise those which were not members of the Church 287. 10 The Church of Antioch warranteth not the Classis 290. 32 Collection Concerning a Collection which the Answerer calls a recōpense of the Replyers labours 284. 2 Combination What kind of Combinatiō is lawfull among Churches 226. 11 The reasons of the lawfullnesse of Combinations 227. 3 Combinations of Churches in some cases expedient and necessary 230. 30 The Answerers Comforts are the Replyers also 34. 26 Complaynants Complaynants complaints no evill weedes 17. 31 Complaynants vindicated and the Answerer refuted 18. 6 Complaynants defended about their not advising with the Replyer 29. 1 Complaynants cleared of oppositiō unto the worthie servants of God 67. 24 Complaynants vindicated from slaunder in 8 particulars where in charged by the Answerer 88. 28. Complaynants assertions found true notwithstanding the answeres of the Answerer 209. 9 213. 26. Complaint What a Complaint is 3. 24 Complaints not unjust in themselves 3. 28 Fower things required unto an unjust Complaint 3. 29 Complaints of weake ones not to be sleighted 5. 23 Complaints of the Complaynāts unjustly called unjust 4. 10 Conference Conference betweene the Answerer and the Replyer defectively reported 117. 3 Confession Threefold Confession with the observations upon it in the protestation reviewed 18. 17 Contention Contention twofold good and bad 17. 36 Crispe Ia. Crispe vindicated from preaching wherewith the Ansvverer chargeth him 285. 17 Customes Of Customes the evillnesse of them and unlawfullnesse of building any practise upon them 30. 32 Good Customes should not lightly be broken 151. 25 Good Customes of a divers nature 152. 1 Denomination Denomination may follow the better part not the greater 21. 24 Difference Differences in opinion must in cases be borne with 58. 11 In cases of Difference there is necessary use of combination of Churches 231. 16 Elders Vsefullnesse and honnour of Elders 207. 31 Elders cleared from the charge of the Answerer about depriving the Church of her right 49. 15. Elders cleared from partiality 210. 34. Errour Errour ariseth frō the perversenesse of passions 63. 11 Errour in men one cause of harsh censuring of others 63. 29 Examples Examples in disquisition of truth not to be rested on 32. 8 Excommunication In Excommunication there may be good use of the combination of Churches 231. 8. Father What a Fathers duety is towards his children 20. 7 Fenner Mr. Fenners judgment about the power by which the Church should be governed 238. 25 against the Answerer 239. 29 Fleeing Fleeing justified by examples 104. 2. Fleeing not fearing them that can kill and not fainting may stand together 104. 23 Fleeing is sometimes a confessing to the truth 105. 14 Fleeing or a voluntary banishment is in some cases worse then some imprisonment 105. 13 Forbes Mr. Forbes defended 85. 32 commended 87. 30 Generall Generall good to be preferred 12. 32. Hooker Mr. Hooker defended 68. 25 Mr. Hooker not the cause of disturbance but the Answerer 116. 19. Mr. Hooker cleared frō Scisme 246. 1. Iacob Mr. Iacobs judgment about Classis and Synods for substance the same with Beza and Calvin 236. 4. Intentions It is lawfull to judge of mens Intentions 234. 1 Law Three things required to the making of a Law 256. 14 Lawes and orders differ 257. 30 Learned Learned mens judgements not sufficient to justify any thing or condemne it unlesse their grounds be found sufficiēt
If he say the complaint is unjust in the second respect it must be shewed that the cognisance of a Church-greivance referred to them by the members doth not belong to the Consistory which I suppose he will not undertake If he say the complaint is unjust in the 3. respect their owne protestation in the conclusion of the greivances will answer for them that their end in taking that course was that some lawfull course might be taken by the Elders for the redresse of those greivances and in case that should be neglected to free them selves from the guilt of those evills when they should have done their uttermost indeavours for the redresse of the same If he say the complaint is unjust in the fourth respect as too much aggravating the offeÌ„ce the Answerer himselfe cleareth theÌ„ thereof in the preface of his booke where he justifyeth the harshest expressioÌ„s used by the Complainants the very title of the printed paÌ„phlet which many mislike saying If the coÌ„plaints be just then is the title just being framed according to the contents specâ—all subject of the booke c. It remayneth therefore that he find some other respect in which the complaints may be said to be unjust else it will be concluded that the are just notwithstanding any thing said by him to the contrary in that pretended answer that him selfe hath dealt unjustly in calling them unjust complaints Of W. B. of such others as haue subscribed theeunto Here it would be inquired what copy of the complaints the Answerer meaneth If he meane the written copy why doth he meÌ„tioÌ„ only W.B. name coÌ„cealing the rest seeing they all subscribed it as well as he If he meane the printed copy which I call the pamphlet why are the other subscribers joyned with him seeing they knew not of it before it was published freely expressed their dislike of it afterward If the publishing of it only be the injury where of he complaineth why are the subscribers blamed who knew not of it nor approved it If the subscription to the written copy be the offence what did W. B. more then the rest that he is named alone This Riddle needeth an Oedipus Is it because though he be formost in standing yet he is the least in understanding and by the printer of the Brownists noated to be a Simplician as the Answerer scoffingly and injuriously declareth in his praeface If so no man will prayse his fortitude howsoever they may his policy who chalengeth so weake an Antagonist to the feild Or is it that the Reader may apprehend that to be some weake jury which hath such a foreman that so he may slight the complaint the more for W.B. sake If so the Reader is abused For neither was the complaint subscribed by him alone but by the rest many whereof the Answerer knoweth to be no Simplicians nor were the rest induced to complaine or subscribe the complaint exhibited in Consistory by his example or perswasion Secondly suppose they had bene weaker men then they are it is not safe for any man upon such a praejudice to slight theire complaints seing the Lord doth otherwise who saith For the oppression of the poore Psal 12.5 for the sighing of the needy now will I arise saith the Lord I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him In which last word puffeth at him is expressed both the pride and policy of those that oppresse the poore and needy And commonly circumventing wits and scornfull spirits goe together Prov. 29.8 Ephes 6.9 Prov. 24.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lucian de Sect. so Salomon joyneth them in a Proverbe saying Scornfull men bring a citty into a snare And as there is not respect of persons with God so for men it is not good to have respect of persons in judgement which even the Areopagites discerned by the glimmering twilight of nature therefore gave judgement in the night that they might not observe the persons of the speakers but attend to the things spoken by them And the Christian reader I hope will be ashamed that the best of the heathen should goe beyond him in such a point of Iustice Also an answer to Mr. J. D. As he did answer them so he hath answered me also that is boath alike untruely unfitly insufficiently yet with this difference that upon me alone he hath spent more bitternes and gall then upon them altogether which the understanding Reader will easily apprehend to be an argument of his guilt and weaknes to manadge his cause in those passages that concerne me For commonly when reason and judgement is unable to help then the passions grow tumultuous and rise up disorderly at least to make a noyse with impotent clamours as bores and pesants sometimes confusedly assemble and with hideous shoutings thinck to affright the enimy or to give others occasion to thinck they have the victory But here I have a few questions to propounde 1. Quaere Why this Answerer mentioneth my name in the title page of his booke Is it because I am mentioned in the printed pamphlet But he knoweth I protested against that in print in favour of him though he hath ill requited me 2. Quaere Why he wrighteth it so at length both there and throughout his whole booke Js it to ingratiate himselfe with any by opposing me 3. Quaere concerning the matter of his answer 1. whether any report of passages made by me in that wrighting be proved untrue by him 2. Whether the Scriptures alleadged by me be faythfully handled by him or doe not serve fully to the purpose for which I produced them and whether all of them be alleadged by me against the baptisme of some infants as he pretendeth and why he answerth not other passages in that letter to the Classis but only insisteth upon 2. or 3. texts of Scripture in the pretended purpose whereof he abuseth his Reader and what end he had in pretending to answer in such a manner my protestation which was made in his favour 4. Quaere Why he compelleth me thus to contest with him in print seing he knoweth I have declined all contention with him by wrighting or word 5. Quaere Why he bringeth others upon the stage also both Reverend ministers dead and farr absent and the Elders of his owne Church when he pretendeth only to answer W. B. and I. D If he say the Complainants mentioned theire names who knoweth not how easily and fairely he might have declined any speech about them at least Sect. 5. p. 28. Sect. 6. p. 32. Sect. 28. p 76. 77. tending to their reproach notwithstanding that Yea de factô he hath declined the same in the cases of other men Why might not alike answer have served concerning those also 6. Quaere Why seing he would answer me without cause in print did he not answer my threefold wrighting by it selfe or refer me to the answer of the complaints or the Complainants to the answer
of my wrighting in cases paralell and coincident but so implicateth and involveth the one in the other that he compelleth me to reply upon almost his whole booke His answer to these I expect in his reply The Praeface examined IN examining the Praeface I may not omit to acquaint the Reader with two subtile insinuations whereby if he be not forewarned of them he may easily and at unawares be causelesly praejudiced Two subtil devises The first is an old trick of Sophistry called a fallacy of the composition For pretending to answer two wrightings the one made by me the other made and subscribed by diverse well affected members of his Church he so confoundeth them with a booke published by W. B. which in my printed protestation I called an injurious pamphlet as if those wrightings and this printed booke were one and the same For having spoken of that pamphlet in respect of the title publishers and post script he telleth the Reader that the first part of that pamphlet was made by Mr. D. and the 2. part subscribed by others Who reading these passages would not conclude us to be authours of the pamphlet For which cause let the judicious Reader be intreated to understand that a difference must be made betwixt that pamphlet and those wrightings For the printed booke wherein also those wrightings are contayned I called a pamphlet not in respect of those 2. wrightings considered as written for private use but in â—espect of the joynt printing and publishing of them in forme of a booke with such a title and postscript and in this respect onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quia implet omnia loca it is properly called a pamphlet because by this meane that which was before private and intended so to be at least comparatively became now as it were to fill all places and to be made common Whence it is evident that the same thing may be called a pamphlet when it is printed which yet is no pamphlet being only written So then if he undertake to answer the pamphlet let him deale with the authors of it my selfe have protested against it in print and all the Subscribers except W. B. disclaime it But if he will answer the wrightings let him deale fairely with us and not joyne us with the authours of the pamphlet nor abuse the Reader by telling him of a first and second part of the pamphlet but professe to deale with the wrighting which he shall find me ready to defend so farr as concerneth my part The second is a common practise of subtile Oratours whose custome is to raise some sinister suspicion of ill purposes or intendments in the opposite party that so whatsoever they shall say may be either slighted or suspected For this purpose he laboureth to perswade the Reader that partly affection to the Brownists partly disaffection to Classes and Synods and the government of these Churches and partly private discontents have bene the strong motives whereupon these wrightings were made whether by them or me The untruth of which suggestions will the more appeare if we single out some persons whom by name he thus reproacheth And first not to speake of the printed pamphlet nor of any that had a hand in it which both they and I disclaime I will cleare my owne purpose in that threefold wrighting whereof he speaketh As for my renoune and fame for learning and guifts in preaching which he intimateth These titles as I assume not Quomodo luctantes Antagonistas altius attollunt quo vehementius illidant Cypr. epist 2. lib. 2. so I suspect he ascribeth them with no other mind then wrestlers have towards their Antagonists whom they lift as high as they can that they may give them the greater fall afterwards First whereas he saith that threefold wrighting was partly against the classis partly against him the reader may see another politick devise of his to joyne the Classis with him selfe for his owne advantage as if my wrighting were intended against them where as I have all wayes professed my reverent esteeme of theÌ„ as also I did in those three wrightings mentioned by him which were not at all intended nor framed against theÌ„ as he misinformeth the Reader only I doe justly bewayle two things 1. their credulity that they have suffered them selves to be abused so much by misinformations and that from thence they have bene plunged more then where to be wished into the guilt of partiality by to much adhaering to one party with to apparent neglect of the other though in this case the more considerable 2. They re injurious depriving the Church of they re right in the free choyse injoyment of men whom they unanimously desired for they re Pastors without giving them due satisfaction the aequity of they re so doing Which a man may say having respect to some particular persons with out condemning all and in reference to a particular miscariage without condemning all use of Classes and Synods Secondy Whereas he sayth that Fallacia non causae ut causae being discontented that my calling amongst them did not succeed I had an hand in wrighting against them for not desiring me he useth another fallacy which is when that is put for a cause which is no cause For though I had cause to be discontented that my calling did not succeed and that by his fault yet that disconteÌ„t did not cause me to wright as appeareth in that I did forbeare wrighting 6 moneths after he had hindred my setling there but the clearing of mine innoceÌ„cy was the cause of my wrighting whereunto I was compelled by his repoaches Sect. 5. Ans 3. 21. Sect. 40. Ans 3. Thirdly Whereas he sayth that comming nearer to the Brownists in this question about Baptisme then to us it is therefore the lesse marvayle c. I answer 1. Himselfe in diverse places of his booke freeth me from any such affection to the Brownists as might cause me to wright against him in favour of them Therefore herein he contradicteth himselfe 2. Nearenes to or distance from the Brownists is but a false rule whereby to trye trueth or errour If the Brownists be nearer to the trueth in this matter then this Answerer why should not I come nearer to them then to him Is it not safe to come nearer to the Brownists in holding a truth then to the Libertines in a danberous errour Will he say the Brownists hold no trueth or that we may not lawfully hold the trueth with them that it may appeare we differ from them or that no man can wright in defense of any trueth which they hold without siding against him 3. It would be knowne whom he meaneth by us when he sayth nearer to the Brownists then to us 1. If he meane the Elders of his Church his owne words will contradict himselfe For of them he sayth these three have diverse times professed themselves to be
of the same opinion with Mr. D. touching the Baptisme of infants Sect. 23. Ans 5.1 p. 63. If he meane the subscribers which with the Elders are the best part of his Church their complaint against him for this difference sheweth how farr they differ from him herein 3. If he meane the Classis the wrighting of the five Dutch Preachers which he sayth was by all the Ministers of the Classis Sect. 19. with one consent afterwards approved and confirmed will witnes against him For there they thus expresse themselves We doe greatly approve of his good Zeale and care of having some precedent private examination of the parents and suretyes of these Children in the Christian religion Sect. 12. And a litle after We doe so judge that this fore said examination be ordayned so farr as may stand with the aedification of the English Church Thus farr they agree wholy with me how soever in the words following being abused by causeles jealousies and suspitions suggested by the Answerer they concluded according to his mind Fourthly when he sayth that I had an hand in wrighting complaints against him I answer 1. If he meane my two first wrightings to the Classis they were a breife narration by way of account of passages betweene us that the Classis might rightly understand those passages about which they had bene misinformed 2. If he calleth that my third wrighting shewne to one or two of the members about the time of my departure from Amsterdam a complaint he miscalleth it For it was only a just and necessary defense of my innocency against misreports The same imputation of Brownisme he layeth upon those members of his owne Church which subcribed the complaints but how unjustly the Reader may easily apprehend Sect. 31. p. 87. For those of them who were such before have in theire joyning with his Church left theire separation as he sayth and diverse of them he knoweth were never of them nor doe hold with them in the point of Seperation as it is urged and practised by them Therefore I hope the wise-hearted Reader will not suffer himselfe to be prejudiced against them or me or what we shall wright or have written by such vayne pretences whereof they are able and ready to aquitt themselves in print as may appeare in due time Whereas upō occasion of the title of the pamphlet generally disliked by the complainants he sayth As is the one so is the other If the complaints be just thē is the title just if the title be a vile title thē is the booke also vile I answer 1. He continueth still to jumble the pamphlet the complaints together that the Reader may be deceived in thinking boath to be one which is a fallacy as we have formerly shewen 2. it will not follow that if the complaints be just the title of the pamphlet is just For the very pamphlet considered as it hath bene expressed is an unjust thing when the complaints might justly be exhibited as they were Besides they that condemne the title of the pamphlet doe condemne the whole title page which they condemne for the misapplication of Scriptures to this case and too much harshnes of language Because they hope and so doe I that these actions whereof they complaine doe proceede but from errour of judgement or from some curable distemper of affections in the Answerer And then the complaint will be just though the title be found unjust else the whole title page of the pamphlet will be more justifyed by many then we wish it should considering his eminency in the Church Whereas he sayth I find no just ground that these opposites bring for their complaints nor any due proofe of their many reproofes Jf it please the Reader to examine Sect 4.5.6 and Sect. 23.24.25.26.27.28.29.30.31 with those intercurrent Sections concerning me by comparing the answer and reply with their complaints it will appeare that he hath not so much cause of comforting him selfe against their allegations as from my heart I wish he may have That which he addeth concerning the single uncompounded policy whereof Mr. Iacob speaketh shall be examined in its due place here after when he striketh at the same man againe upon as litle occasion given him whom yet he might have spared being dead and so not able to answer for himselfe At least he might have freed him from suspition of Brownisme whose defense of the Ministers and Churches of England against Mr. Fr Iohnson is extant in print concerning whom more hereafter In the meane time I must professe that I doe not find in examining the complaints of the members or in their private speeches that they are opposite to the Answerer further then himselfe opposeth their injoyment of that liberty and power which himselfe in expresse words acknowledgeth to be due to the Church From which his practise so farr differeth that it seemeth to sweigh his Iudgement in some particulars a contrary way wherefore let the Answerer agree with himselfe and reconcile his owne judgement and practise and for ought I know the opposition betweene him and these members will cease It had bene a worke both more comfortable to himselfe and proffitable to the Church for him to have done right to the Church rather then to have justifyed an injury and to have stopped the course of contentions rather then to have opened the sluces thereof by publishing this booke and persisting so stiffly in an unwarrantable way Nature and Religion I confesse teach and warrant selfe preservation but neither of them warrant a man under pretence of answering for himselfe to calumniate others and under pretence of a defensive warr against enimyes to invade spoyle confoederates and freinds Nature teacheth particulars to lose them selves in promoving the generall good as the fire to descend and the water to ascend rather then there should be a Vacuum And Religion teacheth Christians 1. Cor. 6.6 7.8 rather to suffer wrong then either to doe wrong or by too contentious righting a mans selfe to expose our Profession to reproach Both Nature and Religion ratifie this Maxime Salus populi suprema lex esto The good of many must be preferred before our private benefit or content How defective the Answerer hath bene herein is too manifest But I leave that and spare him Only For a conclusion to prevent another prejudice I doe earnestly intreat the Christian reader to beware how he suffer himselfe to be caried away with any mans confidence though he professe a readines to suffer reproach for his opiniōs knowing that it is not the suffering but the cause that maketh the martyr Never theles farr be it from me to approve any that reproach men with their errours when they seeke the truth in love of it seing we all know but in part and we are ignorant of more then we know by farr but let every man according to the rule try all things and hold fast that which is good 1.
that may be well sayd quod volenti non fit injuria and that quilibet potest recedere a suo jure yet the cases must be such as wherein a man is not tyed to mainetaine his liberty with so strong a bond as the bond of reason nature of the rules of Christian aequity and of the freedom of the law of God It is free for a man not to eate or drinck this or that but not to eate or drinck at all and so to starve himselfe it is not free and in this case volenti fit injuria Husbands parents and masters have by the very instinct of nature and aequity of Christs law freedom to provide for those that depend upon them and so must carefully use this theire freedom may not wholly put from themselves the care of their provision education c. nor give theire consent to the making of any law or to the bringing in of any custom whereby theyr freedom should be restrained or annihilated in this point Thus farr he Now to prevent all mistakes it will be convenient to answer a question or two that may be propounded upon this occasion Quest 1 What if a Minister be put in by a patron without the choyse of the people going before may such a minister be thought to have a lawfull calling Ans Though that act of the patron be not sufficient to make him a lawfull Pastor to that people yet the after consent of the people Dr. Ames â—n 2. Manduct by acceptance and submission may make it good As in wedlock the after consent of parents or partyes doth often make that a lawfull state of marriage which before without that was none and in government acceptance and submission doth make him a King which before was an Usurper though in their order these actions be rather consequents then causes of that calling So it is betweene minister and people Quest 2 What if the Church neglect to call a Minister or desire and consent upon one that is unmeet either for doctrine or manners In such cases Ans Mr. Cartwr 1. Reply p. 35. the ministers and Elders of other Churches round about should advertise first and afterwards as occasion should serve sharpely and severely charge them that they neglect not this care of electing a fitt one and that they forbeare such election of one unfitt or if it be made that they confirme it not by suffering him to excercise any ministry And if either the Churches round about doe fayle of this duety or the Church which is admonished rest not in their admonition then to bring it to the next Synod and if it rest not therein then the Prince or Magistrate which must see that notbing in the Churches be disorderly and wickedly done aught to drive that Church from that election to another which is convenient Thus Mr. Cartwright So that in his judgement other Churches have no power of hindring a faulty election but by admonition which power every Christian hath in another for his good Nor can the Magistrate forbid the choyse which the Church hath made or would make unlesse the man upon whom they pitch be so unfitt either for doctrine or manners that the making of such a choyse will be wickedly and disorderly done Having thus declared what we hold de jure populi concerning the Churches right in the choyse of their Ministers Now we come to enquire de facto whether their complaint be just concerning the injury wherewith they charge the Answerer in this particular taking the rise of ensuing passages from those words wherein he mentioneth my name after a provoking manner in this Section I leave it to their consciences to consider Ans pag. 19.3 whether now also they would not have kept silence if they could have brought in Mr. D. even according to this corrupt order used by us as they complaine of it To prove that the Answerer doth not behave himselfe as becommeth a Pastor in governement their first evidence is Reply that he depriveth the Church of that liberty and power which Christ hath given it in the free choyse of their Pastor Now a Church is as well deprived of their liberty in chusing when the men â—â—ply whom they desire are without sufficient cause shewen to the Church kept out as when men are without their approbation obtruded upon them They complaine of both these injuries of the first in this and the following Section of the second in the sixth Section That in this Section they complaine of the first of these injuries appeareth by the instances which they produce for proofe of it in the fifth Section So then their complaint in this and the next Section is that they are deprived of the liberty and power of the free choyse of their Pastor which Christ hath given them in that they are deprived of worthy men whom they have generally desired but have bene hindered that either they could not chuse them or having chosen could not injoy them and this hath bene done against them without sufficient cause alleadged against the men whom they have desired And the person whom they particularly charge with this unjury is the Answerer Let us now consider how he doth defend himselfe And this he endeavoureth to doe diverse wayes Pag. 18. Ans 1. First by putting the blame from himselfe upon the Classis and not upon their persons so much as upon the very government established in these Churches 1. Reply 1. Here it must be remembred that the Complainants produce the holy records of the ancient charter of priviledges which of old was granted unto particular Churches in this case Pag. 19. Ans 4 which also the Answerer himselfe coÌ„fesseth so clearely to warrant their claime and to justifye this plea that he hath as he sayth both publickly taught in the exposition of those 2 places Acts. 6.3 and 14.23 and doth still acknowledge that the free consent of the people is required to the lawfull calling of a Minister and afterwards he sayth Pag. 22. Ans 8. that to deprive the Church of that liberty power c. must be an heynous crime and no lesse then Sacriledge This crime how great soever it is the Reader will find that he chargeth upon the Classis how justly let him see nor will he be able to cleare himselfe of slandring the very government and order of discipline established in these Churches unlesse he can shew out of the Nationall Synods that it was established for an order in these Countryes that the Classes should have power to deprive the Churches of the Ministers whom they desire or have chosen without shewing sufficient cause for the Churches satisfaction which is the greivance complained of by these subâ—â—ibers 2. If it be not true of them the more heynous the accusation is the more greivous the slander is and so much the more greivous in him who is many wayes obliged to them and whose testimony against them will be
8 particulars to which I will answer severally and breifly To the first That they charge him with pressing others upon the Congregation In answer Ans whereunto he sayth I doe not clayme any more to my selfe then one voyce Nor doe they charge him to arrogate 2 voyces But who knoweth not that some one voyce may drowne many voyces Reply As appeareth in sundry passages in theyr Consistory Ans To the second That he abuseth his interest in the Magistrates and Classis he answereth Reply not by denying it but by calling for witnesses whereas what need witnesses when the fact it selfe proveth it As the examination of the former Sect evinceth Ans To the third That he sayth Reply they involve the Magistrates in the same guilt with him 1. Theyr owne wordes shew that theyr complaint is against him not the Magistrate and so the imputation of slander may be retorted upon himselfe This will be more fully cleared in the reply to the 6. answer where the difference betweene the Magistrates requiring of this and his pressing of it will appeare 2. Nor is it so rare a case as is pretended that mens interest in good Magistrates may be abused Was not the Emperour Constantius abused by the Arrians under theyr shew of gravity to side with them against the Orthodox though the greater number by farr in the Synod at Ariminum Ans To the fourth That they extend this complaint to the Classis also What offence is there in this he addeth as if they were generally so blind and corrupt as to suffer themselves to be abused by me Reply As though learned and godly men may not be abused by theyr good perswasion of anothers good intentions to take part with him against those that are godly without cause Sozom. 8.14 Socrat. 6.9 Did not Theophilus of Alexandria by his policy prevayle with Epiphanius a man of much integrity to take his part against Chrysostom whereby he prevayled to procure his banishment out of Constantinople to the great greife of the godly which also caused much calamity in the Church and civill State Ans To the fifth that he sayth theyr reproach serveth to the clearing of him and that those that are unpartiall and wise in heart may conceive hereby that he hath obtayned this interest in them not by abusing and corrupting them but by walking uprightly before them Reply The Complainants doe not say that he got his interest either in Magistrates or Ministers of the Classis by abusing corrupting them but that he abuseth the interest which he hath gotten in them to the injury of the Church 2. Nor is an interest in wise and godly men an infallible signe of upright walking Indeed interest in God is a signe of uprightnes as in Noah Abraham Iob Moses Samuell David c. Because the Lord searcheth the heart and knoweth our thoughts afarre off but it is not so in mens acceptance who judging by the outward appearance are often deceived and may be deluded by false pretences Was not David a wise King And yet Ziba abused his interest in him and by misinforming him caused him to doe an iniury to Mephiboseth The Church to whom Iohn the Divine wrote was not destitute of wise men and of men able to judge yet Diotrephes so farr abused his interest in them as the Apostle describeth 3. Iohn 9.10 saying I wrote unto the Church but Diotrephes that loveth to have the preheminence amongst them received us not wherefore if I come I will remember his deeds which he doeth prating against us with malicious words and not content therewith neither doeth he himselfe receive the brethren and forbiddeth them that would and casteth them out of the Church Boath those had an interest the one in the Magistrate the other in the Church which they abused But I produce these examples not to compare the Answerer with them but only to shew that an interest may be gotten with wise and good men without upright walking and therefore this is no necessary consequence To the sixth and seventh where he sheweth what order the Magistrates set downe about having one that can speake Dutch The story which here he relateth cleareth three points 1. That it is no slander when they say that none of our Nation that come immediatly from England though never so fit and able shall be admitted but they must be forced to take one that can speake Dutch Himselfe in relating the story confesseth this to be no slander but a trueth 2. That it is no slander when they complaine of him as guilty of this injury For besides what he hath done towards the procuring of this it is evident that he was so farr from pleading or stirring up the Elders to joyne with him in petition for the altering of this order as that he pleadeth for it though they say it is to the unspeakeakle injury and greife of the Church 3. That it is no slander that they complaine of the Answerer for this and not of the Magistrate seing he urgeth it more vehemently then they seeme to doe For they propound it as a matter only in some respects convenient that the English preacher speake Dutch but he presseth it as necessary The former appeareth three wayes 1. in that caution which they give If it were possible wherein I suppose they meane with the consent and approbation of the Church for otherwise if they would obtrude one upom them they need not put in that proviso 2. In the reasons which they give for that they re desire which doe imply only an expediency viz that he may debate matters with the Classis and treate with the Magistrate on the Churches behalfe as occasion shall require which a man may doe by learning the language after he is setled though he have no Dutch before 3. Jn they re indulgence to me which the Answerer acknowledgeth in sayng that they were content to dispense with my want of the Dutch language which sheweth that they accounted it but an expediency with which they would dispense in a case of necessity The latter viz P. 31.6 that the Answerer presseth it as a matter necessary appeareth in his owne words when he sayth that a minister called to this place which can not speake Dutch is in great measure no better then a Dumbe Minister in respect of one speciall worke of his calling which is to give advise c. In the Classis If to sit in the Dutch Classis c. Be one speciall worke of the English Ministers calling then indeed his ability to speake Dutch is a necessary requisite without which he is but a dumb minister But how will this be proved For 1. Paul in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus and in the rest of his Epistles speaketh nothing of this property or duety nor is it any where else in Scripture revealed to be necessary how then is it a speciall worke of his calling 2. The Magistrates doe not presse this sitting in
can testifye I was content to come over for 3 or 4 moneths to helpe them And other agreement or promise I made none Now what need was there of any letters from the Eldership for so much 2. If there had bene any further purpose or agreement to come over by a private sollicitation without publick order yet in so doing no good order was transgressed Because it was agreed upon in the Consistory that it should be free for every member of the Congregation to procure any able minister to come thither for the tryall of his gifts the reason of which agreement as I can shew under the Elders hands was that the Church should not be ingaged unto any man if his gifts should not be approved by the Congregation So that the manner of my comming over was according to the order agreed upon amongst themselves 3. I could add if I thought it worth insisting upon that my comming over was not without his knowledge nor without the desire of the Eldership though not signifyed by any publick Act nor was it requisite in this case the premises being considered The Answer to the nineth Section examined concerning my resigning of my pastorall charge in London THree things are in this Section propounded by the Answerer or pretended rather 1. my not bringing with me an authentick testimony of my lawfull dimission Ans 2. My resignation of my place 3. His answer to my arguing from his preaching against that my resignation to prove that he never desired me for his Colleague Which particulars are now to be examined and answered severally and breifely Reply 1. For the first That this is a mere pretence will appeare if three things be considered 1. that he never required of me any such testimony therefore how doeth he know that I wanted it 2. If I had wanted a testimony it is well knowne to himselfe as well as to others that I could soone have had one 3. I did not want such a testimony as might satifye any man even Momus himselfe One of the Ministers of the Classis having read it sayd it was testimonium laudatissimum The Answerer intimateth that an ample testimony hath bene formerly given to him in other places Pag. 17.3 How ample his testimony was I know not but that myne was honourable and sufficient appeareth by what hath bene sayd 2. For the second seing J am chalenged thus in publick about the resignation of my pastorall charge in London and called to the barr of common censure to answer to that which my accuser objecteth against me both here and in other places of the booke concerning this matter I pray the Reader aequally to consider my defence wherein 1. I will speake something in thesi generally concerning the lawfullnes of that which he seemeth to condemne 2. I will add something in hypothesi for the justifying of what I have done in this particular In Thesi I am to shew that it is not unlawfull for a Pastor in case of extreame and apparent personall danger by flight to provide for his personall safety That this is lawfull appeareth 1. By the precept given by Christ to the Disciples and in them to all beleivers and particularly to the Ministers of the Gospell When they persecute you in this City flee into another Mat 10.23 Vnlesse he will say that rule is but temporary and of force only during the first Century which was the errour of Tertullian Haec scripsit Tertullianus contra totam Ecclesiam Hieron dâ— virisillustr wherein the wholl Church held contrary to him The Arguments which Tertullian produceth for justifying of his Errour I examined thoroughly before I tooke that course found them if I may say with reverence to so ancient a light in the Church of no weight This liberty of flight granted by that precept I have not read many that have denyed of later time onely an Anabaptist one Mr. Helwis who is fully answered in print Helw of the mystery of iniquity Mr. Rob of Rel. Com. P. 23 Mat. 10.5 P. Martyr in Epist ad amicum de de fuga Mat 28.19 Aug in Epist ad Honorat Epist 180. Also the same precept was argued by some others to be but temporary from the temporarines of that other precept Goe not into the way of the Gentiles c. Which indeed was shortly after abrogated But betweene those two precepts Peter Martyr judiciously noateth this difference viz that appeared to be temporary in that it was abrogated by Christ who after his resurrection expresly â—â—mmanded the contrary saying Goe teach all nations But this precept concerning flight in persecution is perpetuall because Christ never reversed it by any word in Scripture And upon this and other satisfying grounds Augustine is cleare concerning the lawfullnes hereof in the case of Ministers as wil appeare to him that shall read an Epistle of his written to that purpose 2. By examples of the servants of God who have done thus We may not expect examples of any Pastors in Scripture who did thus For till the ascention of Christ that gift was not given to the Church And after for the space of 300 yeares the persecutions were for the most part not personall but generall not against the person of the Pastor only in which case alone it is lawfull to flee but against the wholl Church in which case it was necessary Act. 7.25 Exod 2.12.14 3.4.18 that they should stay But of cases paralell hereunto we have instances of not a few As of Moses who being perswaded that God by his hand would deliver the Israelites yet for feare fled out of Aegipt where the Lord did not reprove him for so doing but reveale himselfe more fully to him then formerly 1 Kings 17 3.18-10.19.3.5 c. Acts 9.23.24 2 Cor 11.30 Great Eliah by the Lords appoyntment hid himselfe from Iezabells pursuit who had threatned him was not there in condemned by the Lord but incouraged and assisted The blessed Apostle of the Gentiles Paul to avoyd the lying in wayte of the Iewes was let downe by night through the wall of Damascus by a rope in a basket for which he was so farr from being condemned of his owne conscience inlightned by Gods holy Spirit of truth that he rejoyced in it afterwards and tooke the same course of flying from Iconium to Listra Ast 14.1 5.6 to avoyd violence The time would fayle me to speake of Iacob David Ieremy Baruch of those whom Obadiah hid by 50 in a cave and of those worthyes under Antiochus Heb 11. â— 37.38.39 of whom the world was not worthy who did wander up and downe in sheepeskinnes and goateskinnes in wildernesses mountaines and dens and caves of the earth and this they are said to have done by fayth Yea our blessed Saviour did also sundry times as our head sanctifye flight to all his members who are partakers of the fellowship of his afflictions and of this amongst the rest
manifest to be Christians when according to their wrighting it should be translated whose parents or suretyes are manifest to be Christians Here is or a disjunctive particle changed into and a particle copulative to the manifest alteration of the sense of their words That this is not the errour of the printer but done purposely by the authour appeareth from his constant private report that I refused to baptise the childreÌ„ of such whose parents were manifest Christians To make this good the Reader hath a false translation obtruded upon him I demand therefore if that disjunctive expression of the five Duth Ministers in their wrighting viz parents or suretyes were justifyable why doth he alter it into a copulative expression viz parents and suretyes If it were not justifyable why did he signify his consent with them and that he for his part rested therein 2. Why am J blamed yea rejected for not resting in it what will he what can he say in excuse thereof That the Dutch preachers were willing afterwards upon my shewing my dislike to change ve into que or into and and therefore he altered it I answer 1. such a thing was in speech but never done for when we began to take pen and paper and to wright downe agreements on both sides after some litle discourse they altered their minds saying that they had no commission to make any agreements till they had acquainted the Classis therewith which they would doe And after that time they never spake more of altering any thing So it stood and standeth to this day unaltered 2. Suppose it had bene altered by them as it was not yet the Answerer wil have no advantage thereby for he professeth to translate it according to that copy wherein he signifyed his consent with them and required that I should rest which is apparently falsifyed Fourthly He blameth me for complaining that he dealt extreamely with me and rejected all my labour for a peaceable composing prudent accommodating and brotherly ending of matters betweene him and me privately or by the counsail of the Elders of his owne Church nor would hearken to my advise without consent of the Classis All these reports he sayth are untruths And this wrighting he sayth witnesseth for him c. Three things I affirme in those wrightings and they are all true First that he rejected my labour for accommodation The truth of that appeareth in that himselfe said in the beginning of this Section that he offered that if any other convenient way of accommodation could be found out he would willingly hearken to it Let it be noated that he sayth any other and thereby plainly refused that which was propounded by me else why is any other way saught Secondly that he would not yeeld any brotherly moderation unto me and refused all meanes of accommodation The truth hereof appeareth in the meanes which he embraced or rather put those Ministers upon to propound to me having praepossessed them with causeles jealousyes when it is required that I should rest in a wrighting which himselfe is loath to translate aright that the Reader may know the wholl truth wherein I am advised to â—aptize all children whose parents or suretyes are Christians by which accomodation I shall be brought to doe the thing which I judge unlawfull For if a Christian surety may give right to an infant for baptisme whose parents are neither of them Christians and such midwives or nurses or others as take no future care of the child may passe for suretyes and must be accounted manifest Christians if they nodd the head or say yae at the reading or pronouncing of the formalier by the minister though no man knoweth what they are nor themselves it may be understand a word that is sayd to them who seeth not that the sacred ordinance of Baptisme is hereby made common and so to be promiscuously administred according to this wrighting Thirdly that he would not hearken to my advice without consent of the Classis 1. That this is true he must confesse unles he will deny his owne words for himselfe sayd so to me he knoweth it 2. The event sheweth it For though he would have me to rest in this wrighting without consent of the Classis yet he well knew this to be no way of accommodation hut a mere snare to me And now because the Answerer not only seemeth to charge me with obstinacy for not resting in that determination of the five ministers but also to insult as if J wanted warrant from the Scripture for myne opinion because I did not set it downe in wrighting that the question might be in wrighting discussed betweene us Sect. 11. which he offered as he sayth to some of the Complainants sundry times though the vanity of this pretence is in the former Section declared yet being thus againe chalenged in print I may not without injury to the truth any longer forbeare to give a publick account of my judgement in this matter But first my humble and hearty request to the Reverend ministers of these countryes especially to those in that part is that they will not impute it to any contentious disposition or to loue of disputes much lesse to a malicious desire of discovering theyr imperfections to the world least of all to an arrogant polupragmony in me as if I being a stranger assumed to my selfe to be a reformer of these Churches that I freely declare the grounds whereupon I refused to bind my selfe to observe that custom Thus casting my selfe upon theyr favourable construction and praying them aequally and judiciously to consider what J say I will with Gods assistaÌ„ce which I humbly begg proceed to declare my grounds after I have stated the question by shewing the issue and summe of that wrighting of the five ministers wherein the Answerer would bind me to rest The state of the question Breifly it was that I should administer the sacrament of Baptisme to all infants that are presented thereunto if those that present them whether they be parents or suretyes shall declare themselves to be Christians by professing Christian Religion at the reading of the leitourgy of Baptisme though the presenters are altogether unknowne to us yea though they will not or cannot satisfye the minister before that they are such as in whom the infant hath a right to baptisme This to be so will easily appeare to the intelligent Reader if he examine the wrighting which they sent to me The Answerer and the five ministers required it as a condition of my admittance to the pastorall office in that Church that I should rest in this wrighting By resting in it they meant as both he and they whom the Classis deputed to speake with me expressed themselves that I should promise to conforme thereunto which is in few words to administer baptisme promiscuously to all that are presented by whomsoever according to the custom of that place This being the true state of the question that
Chrisme and exorcisme although ancient are well abolished we would desire also that not only superfluous but also unfit questions were omitted also although Augustine in a certaine epistle would excuse it with a certaine interpretation but he calleth it infirmum commentum and that fitly And therefore the practise of those Churches in putting the question to the father of the child is more suitable to the rule because in the Covenant which God maketh with the parents the right of the infant to baptisme is founded and the power and care of educating the child in that fayth lyeth upon them To let passe this digression The custom of those times concerning men of yeares though it doe not every way touch the case of infants yet it sheweth the piety of those times and the judgment of the Ancients concerning the point in question de suscipientibus baptismum And howsoever in those times some superstitious rites were used in baptisme and some errours in Doctrine are to be found concerning the absolute necessity of baptisme to salvation yet not one of them so farr as my small reading hath inabled me to discover defended such a promiscuous administration of it as that wrighting of the five Ministers required as necessary or lawfull But if any man will wrest that conclusion of those Ancients in Cyprian to patronize this course whereof Cyprian speaketh thus Cyprian lib. 3. epist 10. haec fuit in concilio nostra sententia A baptismo atque a gratiâ Dei qui omnibus misericors benignus pius est neminem per nos debere prohiberi Let him know that those words if they be taken apart from the rest may seeme to favour the errour of universall grace as well as promiscuous baptising And indeed they countenance boath alike that is neither of them at all being considered in Cyprians intendment in that epistle which was to answer Fidus who held that infants of two or three dayes old ought not to be baptised arguing from Circumcision which was not administred till the eight day and from the bodily uncleanenes of infants at that age Cyprian in answer to his first Argument sheweth him that Circumcision was a shadow which is now vanished and in answer to the second used those words Acts 10.15 and concludeth thus Si etiam gravissimis delictoribus c. If remission of sinnes be given to the most greivous sinners when they afterwards beleive and repent and baptisme is not denyed to them how much more ought it not to be denyed such infants They that know how streight Cyprian was in nullifying the baptisme of those who had bene baptised by haereticks and such as were out of the Church cannot imagine that any helpe may be expected from him for warranting the administring of baptisme to their infants who are out of the Covenant Now if any thinck that there is some colour for the justifying of this course to be found in the capitulation of Charles King of Sycily with the Sarazens Speed Chron lib. 9. cap. 10. in the life of Edw. 1. at the seidge of Tunis in Africa the third Article whereof was that such as were willing might freely receive the Sacrament of Baptisme Let him understand that that agreement was only to establish the free excercise of Christian Religion not to warrant promiscuous baptising which was not at all in question at that time Thus the records of ancient times are against this disorderly custom and concerning the judgment of later times since the reformation if enough have not bene said already more shall be added in answeare to the seventh pretence Only that I may omitt nothing that I meet with in my reading which may seeme to carry any colour of favouring that custom though but in the letter I have produced those two instances of former times and will now add to them two or three of latter times In whom I purpose not to examine or censure their expressions but onely to shew that this evill custom is not maintained nor to be defended by what they have written First I will beginne with that question which excercised the Ministers that met in the Classis at Neocomum Beza epist 9. Whether the infants of excommunicates are to be baptised and in whose fayth seing their parents are not members of the Church The occasion whereof was this A certayne man of a very wicked life having 4 bastards and thrise deceived the Church with hypocriticall confession and promises was excommunicated together with his harlot The question was whether the fourth bastard begotten after their excommunication should be baptised The Ministers of that Classis declared their judgment which they sent in a letter to Beza thus we are of opinion that the infant being borne of such desperate parents is not included in the promise of blessing and therefore should not be baptised till it come to that age wherein it may make profession of its owne fayth unlesse the parents returning againe to God by true repentance be againe received into the bosome of the Church or it be presented by certaine godly persons who will bind themselves by promise to performe the duety of parents to the child Vnlesse perhaps because it is borne within the Church it should be baptised for the fayth of the Church Thus they Epist 10. Beza wrighting to them his judgment in this matter distributeth those who are not to be accounted members of the Church into fowre sorts farr different one from another To omit the former three as being not in question the fourth sort is of those who being elect of God and ingrafted into Christ yet falling through infirmity and giving offence unto others are delivered unto Sathan that godly sorrow may worke in them repentance Of this last sort sayth he is the question Concerning whom he first supposeth diverse things 1. That they are such of whom we may judge in charity that their estate is not desperate 2. That though they are great sinners yet they are not Apostates which forsake the Church nor joyne themselves with adversaryes in persecuting the truth 3. That some difference is to be made betweene Turkes and excommunicate Christians or Papists 4. It is hard to judge whether infants belong to the Covenant in respect of their first parents profession or not Secondly Vpon these suppositions he concludeth that the infants of excummunicates that remaine in the Church may not lawfully be denied baptisme But this he delivereth with two provisoes or caveats 1. That a fit surety bind himselfe to the Church for the holy education of the child 2. That upon this occasion the Minister doe at that time seriously exhort the father being present to repentance in the presence of the Church before he baptise the child Which he sayth was frequently done in their Churches viz in Geneva Thus he Concerning whose answer I will propound two or three considerations First Though Beza was a very Reverend judicious Divine yet in matters of faith
his call to a pastorall charge 2. Because the five Ministers propounded their private judgment nakedly without shewing their grounds from the Scripture so that they seemed to me to deale by their authority not by argument Now the mere authority that is the bare affirmation of godly and learned men is lesse to be regarded then their reasons and yet their reasons without the word are of no value in Divine matters For all men are lyars apt to be deceived and so to deceive impossibility of erring being proper to the Scriptures which therefore are only fit to be the Canon or rule for the ordering of Ministers concerning their wholl behaviour in the house of God 1. Tim. 3.14.15 Mat. 21.13 Mat. 12.3 Hence Christ and his Apostles 1. reproved disorders by Scripture so Christ did the profaning of the Temple 2 justified things well done by Scripture so Christ did the pulling of the eares of corne 3. resolved answered questions by Scripture so Christ did Mat. 19.4 Mat. 15.4 Mat. 22.29.32 Acts. 2.1.34 Act. 15. in the case of Divorce 4. confuted errours by Scriptures so Christ did the Pharisees and Sadduces 5. confirmed and proved Doctrines by Scriptures so Peter proved the resurrection and ascention of Christ c. 6. gave advice and made orders not by their owne authority but by the direction of the Holy Ghoast which immediate assistance seing we want light must be fetched from Scripture if we will guide others safely by our counsayle without which learned men may erre have erred and doe erre therefore their judgments must be tryed and judged by it and no further be rested in then they agree with it According to that of Ierom Quod ex Scripturâ non habet authoritatem câadem facilitate contemnitur quâ acceptatur Hieron in Math. 23. That which hath not authority from the Scripture is as easily despised as received Seaventh pretence It is the custom of these Churches which all 7. Pretence that are admitted by the Classis doe promise to observe This pretence the Answerer insinuateth in that which he sayd about the forme of Mr. B. calling Ans which was to minister the word and the dependances thereof according to the order of these Reformed Churches and especially with these which are combined with the Classis of Amsterdam Concerning that expression some thing more may be noated in the examination of the seventeenth Section and when we come to the eight and twentith Section For the present Reply we will oppose besides all considerations which have bene formerly alleadged or may be heareafter two things to this custom to prove that this cannot be the order of these Reformed Churches but must be only a disorder crept in and prevayling by mens ossitancie and sleepines which is Sathans best opportunity for the sowing of tares which I shall demonstrate thus First oppose the Confessions of the Reformed Churches to this custom Ham. Confess Sect. 13. and it will be found that they cannot stand together for when they described qui sunt baptisandi who are to be baptised speaking of infants they say they must be the children of persons that are in the Covenant (a) Helvet poster cap. 13. of the people of God (b) Helvet prior art 21. et Bohem c. 21. of holy parents (c) Gallic Art 35. of those to whom the promises belong (d) Belgic Art 34. who are inserted into the Church and only them (e) Saxon confess Art 13. the true children of Abraham (f) Suevit cap. 17. such as are in alike condition as they were who had right to Circumcision amongst the Iewes Now compare with this doctrine of the Reformed Churches the practise of that place as it hath bene declared and it will appeare that their owne Confessions plead against this custom And how can that be called the order of these Reformed Churches which agreeth not with the doctrine of these reformed Churches Secondly oppose the Canons of the Synods of these countryes to this custom and the thing will be manifested In a Synod held at Dort in the yeare 1578. Art 59. It was referred to the judgment of the Ministers and Elders whether there be any lawfull cause brought by any why the child to be baptised should be deferred from Baptisme and in Art 61. It was ordered that the fathers before they bring their children to baptisme shall goe to the Minister or an Elder that the Church may have notice of the partyes that are to be baptised And in Art 62. They are appoynted to acquaint the Minister what name they will give the child and to shew him how they will educate the child in that Religion In a Synod held at Middleborough in the yeare 1581. the 22. question It is demanded whether the parents of children doe goe first to the Minister or Elders and certify them that they desire to have their children baptised before to see whether they judge it meet to receive such witnesses or not In Art 75. It is questioned whether the Minister should be rebuked when he baptiseth children whose parents appoynt witnesses which stand not for religion Ans The parents shall be wonted as much as is possible that they first speake with the Ministers before they present their children to baptisme c. In a Synod held at Vtricht in the yeare 1590. Art 1. It is decreed that Baptisme is to be administred according to the ordinance of Christ without Godfathers to bind themselves only the father and mother to promise to trayne it up in the Religion Now compare the Canons of these Synods with the custom of that place and they will be found so farr to varye from it that it will appeare not to be the order of these reformed Churches but a disorder crept in as we have said before I will conclude this examination of pretences used in defence of this unwarrantable custom with the judicious censure of Dr. Ames who knew well the miscarriage of this disorder in these countryes De conscientia Cap. 27.4 Incuria illa idcirco neutiquam potest excusari quâ promiscuè sine disermine admittuntur quicunque et a quibuscunque offeruntur Therefore that carelesnes can by no means be excused whereby all promiscuously and without difference are admitted to baptisme by whomsoever they are presented And so much shall suffice for the examination of the twelfth Section and for declaration of the grounds whereupon I durst not bind my selfe by promise or otherwise to rest in the judgment of those five Ministers that is to conforme to the custom of this place in administring Baptisme promiscuously to all that are presensed and by whomsoever The Answer to the 13. Section examined Of the order agreed upon in the Consistory THat which here he calleth an order will upon examination be found very farr from accommodating me I will wright it downe as I received it from the Elders out of the noate which I have in
keeping Ian. 19. 1634. The Consistory being gathered Elders and Deacons together it was demanded whether that all persons being no members should be sent unto Mr. D. to desire the baptisme of their children and to make confession to him for his satisfaction in his administration of that Sacrament The answer was by all voyces yea if Mr. D. can be persuaded thereunto And for the better and more convenient bringing of the parents or presenters of the children to the Minister it is agreed by most voyces in Consistory that Th A. the Coster shall bring or direct the partyes to the Ministers house Afterward this question was propounded by the Answerer written downe in these words Whether if persons ignorant being willing to receive instruction allthough not presently able to render a reason shall be sent away by him or admitted to witt they approving of the doctrine of baptisme taught in these Churches and as by us usually is propounded A Copy of this pretended order with the questionw as brought to me by some of the Elders to see what answer J would make to them boath Which when I had considered I found the order too short and the question captious First for the order J let these five things be duely weighed 1. The Answerer dateth this order Ian. 15. which the Elders date Ian 19. as he dated the ministers wrighting to me Ian 28. which themselves in their latine copy to me dated Ian 20. which difference is not of much consequence only it sheweth that it is not safe for the Reader to be too confident of the Answerers memory 2. Where as I propounded three wayes of accommodation as the eleventh Section sheweth here is but one of them propounded in the Consistory 3. That one is otherwise propounded then I expressed it For I did not desire that all whose children should be presented to baptisme should be sent to me but only that it should be so when it fell into my course to administer that Sacrament my motion being that we might not performe it joyntly but severally and alternis vicibus neither did I require that they should make confession to me but that I might speake with them before they presented them in publick that I might have some knowledge of them by private conference with them to prevent publick disturbance 4. The course whereupon they agreed for accommodation was not sufficient For 1. many present their children to Baptisme that acquaint not Th. A. with it before hand The Answerer told me that they come many times in the sermon time no man having knowledge thereof before How shall Tho A. send such to me 2. They that doe acquaint him with their purpose of presenting their children what if they will not come to me upon his persuasion Who seeth not that I am in such cases and the like as farr to seeke for accommodation as if no order had bene made I told the Elders that this would not be sufficient unlesse it were added that no infants should be presented in publick to baptisme whose parents are not members of the Church before the minister had received satisfaction concerning the parents in private To this purpose I required that a firme order should be made in the Consistory to secure me from further trouble about this point which the Elders promised and indeavoured to effect as I was told but the Answerer resisted it refusing his consent thereunto without the consent of the Classis 5. The offer which he pretended that he voluntarily made for the inlarging of this order and my further accommodation to wit that he would send to me those parents that should come to him c. and so departing from his right he was content to referr the wholl worke of examination to my discretion is a vaine boast of false liberality For. 1. few if any come to him to advertise him thereof 2. If he should speake to them they would chuse and it may be refuse and make contention if a firme order were not made to prevent it 3. His referring of the wholl worke of examination to me was cast in for a pretence to evade the first meane of accommodation propounded by me and by the second course Sect. 11. which J propounded for accommodation also it may appeare that this offer was not for the accommodation which I desired but to hinder it rather Secondly for the question Any one may see it was captious For. 1. Why doeth he speake only of knowledge when I would as he knoweth be satisfyed concerning other things as well as their knowledge 2. Why doeth he speake of the measure and degree of knowledge so obscurely and suspiciously 3. Why was this question added to the order Was it not to shew that the order should no further stand then he received satisfaction in my answer to his question And hereby two things are manifested 1. that the order was not absolute but conitionall if I could be persuaded thereunto 2. that I did not approve of this order as sufficient as may further appeare in my dislike of his question whereunto if my answer had bene to his content to what end did he procure the five Ministers to signe that wrighting which was sent to me afterwards as him selfe confesseth in the beginning of this Section It had bene superfluous and to no purpose if the matter had bene before concluded amongst our selves For a Conclusion of this Section to satisfye the Reader that this was to be called rather a proposition or motion about an order to be deliberated upon then an order perfected by mature deliberation these Considerations may be added to what hath bene said 1. That with this pretended order a question was joyned and my answer to boath was required This sheweth that the order was not absolute but to be assented to by the Answerer if my answer to his question should please him 2. That in that order it is expresly sayd yea if Mr. D. can be intreated c. which againe sheweth that it was no absolute order but to stand if I could be intreated c. So that this could not be called an order till the Answerer had bene satisfyed about myne answer to his question and till I had yeelded to what by this order should be propounded to me 3. That when the order was brought to me though the word satisfaction and content was spoken of by me as a word fit to be in the order yet I demanded how this could be done by that order upon the reasons before mentioned in my fifth proofe of the defectivenes of that order 4. That upon my mislike of it the order was left with me to peruse and to add what I thought requisite as it was fit it should seing the end of it was my satisfaction 5. That before J had polished and perfected that order to my content the letter of the five Ministers was brought to me which then put me out of hope till the Elders againe promised me
the wholl drift of it which is to deny me that liberty in Holland which the Dutch Churches have in England by a grant of Edw 6 to Iohannes a Lasco under the broad seale of England which is continued to this day 2. I told them the danger of that expression quorum parentes susceptor esve whereby I am required to baptize all infants that are brought if either their parents or suretyes are Christians For by this rule the children of Iewes Turkes and Pagans of all sorts may be baptised if a Christian present them Then they seemed willing to alter that and began to wright but fell off againe from their purpose saying that they would acquaint the Classis with what I sayd And so the wrighting remaineth unaltered in my hand to this day To the fourth If these two words intreatyes and persuasions signifye one and the same thing without any difference in the sense I grant all to be true which he sayth so that to their desire of my accepting the call it be added upon the condition premised But if by intreaty he meane mere desires without arguments to worke upon my affections and by persuasions he meane intreatyes backed with arguments to worke upon my judgment affections then I grant intreatyes were used but not persuasions For I doe not remember one argument used by them to induce me but rather a professed declining thereof saying that they came not to dispute Concerning the second Classicall meeting It is true that then I sent them a wrighting by advise of one of the three ministers whom they deputed to speake with me the end thereof was to relate the truth concerning passages betweene the Answerer and me to prevent and remove misreports 2. to persuade them by reasons not to require it of me as a condition of my calling to rest in that wrighting 3. to acquaint them with my desire of more time propounded by me to the Elders and accepted by them wherein had the Classis condiscended to so aequall a motion it might have bene much for the peace of the Church I am certaine I intended nothing else in it But they were herein overswayed by sinister suggestions arising from a jealousy that if I had bene in for a time the desire of the congregation would be more strong towards me where as my true purpose was in that time if J could not conforme to their orders to order matters so that they who much desired my setling there might be willing to thinck upon some other and my purpose was to have given the best helpe I could for the setling of some other whom they should desire in a way of peace and concord To conclude All that I aymed at in that motion was either to accept their call with satisfaction to my conscience or to desist with the content of the members that so no disturbance might arise for my sake As for the deputation here spoken of the ministers deputed only againe prayed me to yeeld to that wrighting as before There were two of the Elders present at this time with some others witnesses hereof From us they went to the Classis and the same afternoone returned to me with this answer or to this effect That the Classis did judge that I had time enough already to understand the orders and customs of the Dutch Church and to satisfye my selfe concerning the conformity required in that wrighting yet they were content that I should proceed in assisting Mr. P. the moneth following till the next Classis but required of me that if in the meane space I could not yeeld that I should then desist voluntarily else they must be constrayned to complaine to the Magistrate Which message I received in the presence of diverse witnesses and promised to doe accordingly This J promised and performed I confesse only for the Churches peace and myne owne yet disliking their injurious manner of proceeding which I am content to passe by with such a touch till further provocation Concerning the third Classicall meeting It is true that having occasion of absence May. 1. at that time I left my mind in wrighting with one of the Elders both in Latine and English to the end that he or they whom the Consistory should depute to be at the next Classis might either report by word or shew in wrighting myne answer as should be thought most expedient It is also true that in that wrighting I signifyed that my mind was wholly turned away from accepting that call viz upon those termes and that I did voluntarily desist viz as the Marriner doeth voluntarily cast some goods into the sea in a storme to prevent a greater hurt and that I complained at the same time of the Answerers unbrotherly usage of me in such particulars as are there mentioned Neither were those complaints unjust as the Reader may partly perceive by what hath bene sayd may more fully when the Answerer shall attempt to cleare himselfe of the particulars there charged upon him which here he doeth not neither indeed can he Concerning the Magistrates requiring of them to desist It would be knowne by whose procurement this was done And for him that stirred them up thereunto my hearty prayer is that he may escape the judgment of God by judging himselfe for that unrighteous act Else I feare he will find that injuryes done against a Church in such important cases are no small sinnes Concerning an answer made to my wrighting by some whom the Classis deputed thereunto That answer was never communicated to me though I have heard a report thereof Had J perused it I should have either yeelded or replyed as the case had required Had this Answerer bene of the same mind with them to suppresse this treatise as they did their wrighting which I beleive was more in offencively penned the adversaryes might have wanted that cause of insulting and reproaching us for these contentions and jarrs which now they seeme to have The answer to Sect 20. examined concerning my pretended preaching in a private house THat the truth of this passage may appeare the Reader may be pleased to understand 1 that after my desistance from the publick worke I would have returned to my owne Country but that it was now more unsafe and hazardous for me so to doe then formerly by a malicious and false report suggested against me in England by one in Amsterdam whose name I will conceale for some reasons at this time this audacious Sycophant was not ashamed to informe that I had in the pulpitt rayled against the government of England against which the Answerer and the wholl Church are able and I hope ready to testifye for my innocency in that particular yea any that have heard or knowne me I thinck will undertake for me that I am farr from rayling at any time much more in the pulpitt and myne owne conscience abundantly cleareth me thereof in the sight of God Yet this report was too easily received and
ill craved my assistance with much importunity My wife accompanied me thither and the Mrs. of the house where we lodged was pleased to accompany my wife being a stranger in these countryes which I had no cause to refuse but to take thanckfully and besides her not one member of the Church went along with us unles the mayd which attended her sucking child be a member which I thinck she is not Now what was to be blamed in this This the Reader shall ordinarily find that the Answerers complaints both against me and others have no other roote but the evill surmises of his owne jealous fancy pluck up that roote and the most of his complaints will dye of themselves His Answer to the 22. Section examined containing a wrighting first left with a freind or two and afterwards without my consent or knowledge printed MY defence of Answering his untrue reports in my wrighting and of having it in the hands of one or two freinds that might speake in the cause of the dumbe maintaine myne innocency in my absence the Reader shall find in my reply to the second Section Now the cavills which are to be found in this Section against that wrighting are to be examined First It is an injury to call that wrighting injurious which was a necessary declaration of the truth against slanders which were first secretly spread abroad by him in private speech afterwards by a large letter which he sent to his frend at N. in England now are by him scandalously published not only against me ego enim non sum tanti but against men of eminent worth and noate both living and dead Secondly How justly that wrighting is called a true report of passages the Reader will see by comparing what is sayd on both sides and how unjustly he excepteth against that title Thirdly When I assured the Reader that this English copy is a true translation out of the latine by this English copy I meant not which is printed For there are diverse faults in that it appeareth to have bene printed out of a very imperfect copy but that which I wrote As for his exception against it that having twise used that odious phrase pro imperio imperiously in the second place it is left out in my translation Repl The phrase is but a true expression of the thing let the odious thing be mended and the odious phrase shall not be used In the meane space the expression must be suitable to the action For is it not actus imperij an imperious act to deny a man convenient time for satisfaction about a matter of such consequence and to bind a man to observe customs and orders without shewing the aequity thereof Some would have called such an act tyranny and so shall I upon further provocation 2. As the use of the phrase is condemned so the omitting of it once in the translation is reproved Forgive me that wrong I thought he would see how unwilling I was to fasten their imperious dealing with me upon the Readers apprehension by repeating the word imperiously againe But let it stand in this second place also seing the Answerer will have it so and he shall find me with Gods assistance prove it to be a fit expression 3. Is my translation untrue because this word is once omitted Let the learned Reader judge whether it be necessary to the truth of a translation that every latine word be rendred into English especially when the sense giveth it sufficiently in the sentence If this be not to seeke a knott in a bulrush I know not what is Fourthly In my first wrighting how unable the Answerer is to discover any untruth in my report of the private conference betweene us the Reader will see by my examination of his Sect 11. in my Reply and will be further cleared hereafter Fifthly In my second wrighting he seemeth to find a foule untruth or falsification after his usuall manner of expressing himselfe both in the superscription and subscription thereof But what is it I sayd that those instructions were delivered by the Elders of the English Church deputed But 1 that translation sayth not by the Elders but to the Elders and that both in the superscription and in the subscription Is it not strange that he should then falsifye the translation when he complaineth of falsification in the translatour 2. suppose it had bene to the Elders deputed and that by Elders I meant any lawfully deputed by the Eldership yet I spake and wrote truely For I left the wrighting with Mr. W. who was deputed before by the Eldership having also told Mr. Wh of it praying him to communicate it with the rest that one or two Elders that should be deputed by the rest might present it to the Classis and having respect unto that agreement with them I used that expression before the meeting in confidence that it would have bene so ordered by them Now if no such deputation was made afterwards what is that to me who stiled the Elder by that title which best expressed my purpose and expectation neither was I in towne to alter it afterwards nor did I ever heare that no deputation was made in the Consistory till now The issue of all this deepe accusation what is it now but as when a great expectation was of the mountaines birth which was fained to be with child after which nothing appeared but a litle mouse running thence How just the complaint is also of his want of brotherly moderation I have noated in my reply to his Sect. 12. Sixtly In that which he speaketh concerning my third wrighting he multiplyeth injuries 1. In misreporting my intent in the three wrightings which was not to make him odious to the Classis nor to teach the Elders how to fill their mouthes with reproach of him nor to stirr up and incense the Congregation against him but ingenuously and candidly to report the truth whereunto I was called and compelled for the necessary clearing of my selfe for the remove all in some and prevention in others of causeles praejudices and jealousyes which already did or by my silence might arise in their minds against me by his suggestions Would the wrighting of those things accuse undermine and defame him It is a signe that his cause is not very good And if my wrighting those particulars be a fault who is to blamed for it but he who constrained me thereunto 2. In charging me with unjust uprayding of him for myne assistance of him and with a vaine boasting of my selfe To convince him of ill requiting me yea of rewarding evill for good I remembred what labour and patience I had excercised for his and the Churches peace This was no uprayding much lesse unjust nor vaine boasting but a just declaration of the truth the case requiring it and a sad complaint of his unthanckfullnes How he hath answered it will appeare in the examination of Sect. 2. 8. and 40. Whereunto as he
partiality as in the cases instanced by them Thirdly They doe not complaine of his rejecting the counsaile of the Elders only by shewing his particular judgment as one Deacon may oppose the opinion of another in their owne session or as in a Senat Civill or Ecclesiasticall there may be difference and so opposition of opinions amongst men without rejecting such conclusions as are made by most voyces in things lawfull and aequall but of this they complaine that he so opposeth and rejecteth their power in some cases that he unjustly depriveth them of their power upon untrue pretences of their partiality and insufficiency to judge Fourthly In his fourth answer his accusing the Elders of partiality insufficiency is propounded by him but the grounds thereof or the proofes of it are not declared and so upon the matter just nothing is sayd Fifthly In his fifth answer he pretendeth just cause of his excepting against three of the Elders as partiall in this controversy about me And to make this cable strong he twisteth three causes as cords together that they professe themselves to be of the same opinion with me touching baptisme Ans 2. that they have by their example allowed and countenanced the meeting of diverse at a private excercise upon the Lords day after the Sermons were ended 3. that they made an act for my preaching amongst themselues as an assistant for a certaine time c. These are new crimes which former ages have not heard of Reply and after times will wonder at if all things be considered For the first Is it the sinne of partiality in the Elders to hold with any man in disliking and witnessing against evill customs as this promiscuous administration of baptisme is declared to be or to joyne without scandall or Schysme in a private excercise after the publick are ended or to make an act for a mans preaching amongst them as an assistant the publick necessity requiring it and the Church generally desiring it for a convenient time that he might understand those orders and customs of the Dutch Church whereunto his conformity is expected before he bind himselfe thereunto If so then to hold the truth to joyne in a peaceable and inoffencive use of private helpes for aedifycation and to provide for the publick good peace is an argument of partiality in an Elder The vanity of this pretence is manifest Let us see his second proofe Secondly Ans To prove them partiall he produceth another consideration viz that the Elders have made like complaints as these Complainants heretofore of his bringing matters to the Classis violently without their consent The Classis hath judged them parties Be it so 1. Is not this alleadged against himselfe For Reply now it appeareth not to be the complaint of some members only who might unjustly complaine thorough ignorance or misinformation but even the Elders who are eye witnesses of all that passeth in Consistory have made the same complaint Will not any man conclude that matters are injuriously carried indeed when not only some of the members but the Elders themselves also complaine thereof As for the Classis judging of them parties how easily may the Elders demand their grounds and proofe thereof and in case of want of sufficient evidence appeale from their sentence to the Scripture And is it not possible may we thinck to find partiality as well in the Classis as in the Consistory I wish they had expressed more aequanimity in the carriage of this buisenes for their owne and the Churches sake Ans Thirdly If that proofe fayle he hath one more which will hold as he imagineth Euen the Elders themselves have acknowledged that when some such complaints as these have bene brought unto them they had no power to judge thereof Reply The Answer of the Elders which is here reported is not necessarily to be understood as an acknowledgment of their want of power de jure by right to judge thereof but may be understood as a declaration or rather a complaint of their want of power defacto by other mens taking it out of their hands without right Now if that power which belongeth to them be taken from them without their consent and so before it be given and without warrant of the word and so before it be due it is no partiality to assume that by a due clayme which was unduely withheld from them and it is no presumption in them if knowing their right they give a new judgment of that thing which they had formerly waved not knowing that they had power to judge thereof So much for his pretences against them for partiality In his sixth answer he undertaketh to shew their insufficiency wherein Ans that he be not mistaken he professeth not to speake of that common insufficiency that is in all men c. but he excepteth against their insufficiency in some speciall cases and namely in such particulars whatsoever have bene already judged and determined in the Classis Reply So then Whatsoever the Classis shall take upon them to judge though it were unduely and disorderly brought to them shall bind the Church so as it must rest therein that they shall not meddle in it though they are not satisfyed about the aequity of their proceeding in it and though they doe not shew sufficient warrant from the word for their judgment and determination And this must hold in all cases whatsoever Me thincks the Answerer should upon a review voluntarily revoke this expression or that the Classis should professe against it in publick as some of the ministers have affirmed to me in private that they doe not assume any such power to themselves or if they be silent the provinciall Synod should provide that convenient meanes may be used to stop the spreadings of such an errour for many dangerous consequences which their wisdoms I doubt not will foresee following thereupon To me it is manifest that no Nationall Synod in these Countryes ever gave power to the Classes thus farr to deprive particular Churches of the right of judging things proper to themselves within themselves Neither is there one word in these complaints which being fairely construed for augâ—t I can discerne according to the intent and expression of the Complainants themselves requireth any thing but what the Nationall Synods have ordered and appoynted to be done for and to all the Churches and which the Classes if they be true to their owne rules in their first constition must see performed So farr are they from attempting the innovation and alteration of discipline and government so long practised in these reformed Churches Sect 24 25. 26. examined THeir second proofe of his depriving the Elders of their power in government for the good of the Church is Compl. that he hath protested against their judgment in matters which might have bene ended in the Consistory and in that respect aught not to have bene brought to the Classis yet he hath carryed them
thither This passage I would have passed by Reply if his frequent mentioning my name in the 25. and 26. Sections had not compelled me to examine it The cases wherein they complaine that he hath nedlesly waved the judgment of the Elders are three 1. concerning an order that should have bene made for my accommodation in the question about promiscuous administring Baptisme to all that are brought in that place Sect 25. 2. about be an agreement amongst the Elders that a convenient time should be given me to goe on in assisting the Answerer to see if in that time I could obtayne that this question might be layd aside and informe my selfe more fully concerning the orders and customs of the Dutch Church whereunto my conformity was required Sect 26. 3. Concerning his refusall to let Mr. Weld preach though he confessed he had nothing against him without consent of the Classis c. ibid. Whereby it appeareth that they doe not complaine of his seeking advise of neighbour ministers simply and absolutely but 1. in certaine cases there mentioned And therefore they doe not in their wrighting divide the one from the other into severall Sections for that is his owne contrivement but relate all together in one intire Sentence 2. the cases produced by them are such wherein the matter might have bene determined and concluded by the Eldership without violation of any order established in the government of those Churches 3. The matter was so carryed by him in this needles appeale to the Classis that their agreement was nullifyed These things being premised the insufficiency of his five answers in the 24. Section will be obvious to the indifferent Reader in particulars thus For the first His thincking that the Elders erre in their judgment in such cases as these in question is not a sufficient ground of an appeale as may appeare in reason For so no cause should be ended in their Consistory though the Elders unanimously consēt in their judgment if the Pastor differ from them out of an obstinate will without giving sufficient reason of his dissenting and then to what end are the meetings of the Eldership Whereas he calleth upon them to prove it by Scripture they may with better warrant require him to prove by Scripture the lawfullnes of such appeales in such cases for which they find no word commanding or approving them For the second Unlesse he can prove those agreements amongst the Elders to be sinnes and unfruitfull workes of darkenes he will be found guilty of a double sinne 1. that he opposed the Elders without just cause 2. that he misapplyeth Scripture to justifye his unjust opposition of them For the third It is granted that as Councills may erre so may Consistoryes much more easily and that all obedience aught to be in the Lord. But with all that the protesters against them aught to declare the aequity of their so doing from Scripture or good reason which hath not bene done by the Answerer For the fourth The pretended reason whereby the Answerer would justifye this Act taken from the very foundation of government and institution of diverse judicatories to take away disagreement strife controversies or different pleadings among men will not helpe him in the cases questioned unlesse he can prove 1. that the Classes are of the same use by Divine institution for the helpe of Pastors which have the assistance of their Eldership Deut. 1.12 with Cap. 17.8 whereof that judicatorye was for the helpe of Moses who was not able alone to beare the cumbrances and strifes of the people and of the Kings of Israel afterwards which they deny 2. that the causes in question which he carryed from the Consistory to the Classis 2. Chron. 19 8 9.10 are of the same nature with those causes betweene blood and blood betweene law and commandment statutes and judgments which were deferred to the Levites the Preists and cheife of the Fathers of Israel that men might be warned by them that they trespasse not against the Lord. This also they deny and may justly accuse him of misapplying the Scriptures noated by him in the margine 5. To the fifth It is true that the power of the Elders in government had not bene overthrowne by his bringing any matter unlawfully unto the Classis if it were the manner of the Classis in such cases to remitt the matter to the Consistory againe But what one instance can he produce in the particulars whereof they complaine or in any other case brought by him to them wherein the matter was remitted to the Consistory Why so It was not because the buisenesses were so weighty that it hath bene agreed in the Synods that they shall not be proceeded in without advise of the Classis nor because they concerned many Churches and therefore require the consent of all What then It was because the Elders could not satisfye him nor he them as he intimateth in the answer before But why was he not satisfyed Because he would not be satisfyed unlesse the matter might be carryed according to his will For no sufficient reason was given by him against it at that time So then if he will end a buisenes in the Consistory there it shall be ended but if he see that it will be carryed against his mind there it shall not be ended there but be taken out of their hands and carryed to the Classis where he knoweth how to bring his purpose about Thus he hath two strings to his bow But in the meane time is not the power of the Elders in governmēt overthrowne thereby Sect. 25. Jn the 25. Sect. they speake of an agreement amongst the Elders to make an order that those who were not mēbers of that Church should make themselves knowne to me Compl that I might be satisfyed concerning them before they should present their children to Baptisme in publick which they say would have ended that difference betweene us but he protested against it If this complaint be just is it not a greivance let us weigh his fowre answers to it Ans 1. He sayth there was no order made therefore they speake untrue and they know not what Reply Neither doe they say an order was made but it was agreed that one should be made What untruth is in this If any Is it not in his accusation 2. He sayth there is no evidence in theire Church booke that either the Elders had so agreed or that he had protested against it Nor doe they say it is recorded in the Church booke For how could it be recorded when it was never made and that by his hindring the making of it 3. He sayth If such an order had bene peremptorily resolved upon there had bene just reason for him to have protested against it seing the Consistory hath no power c. Travers de Discipl Ecelcs p. 121. But herein he opposeth Mr. Traverse who in his elaborate treatise de disciplinâ Ecclesiasticâ speaking of the
office of the Elders whom he fitly calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he sayth it belongs to them to see that all things in the Church of God be honestly godlily and orderly done And therefore they are to signifye to the ministers if any from other parts come to dwell amongst them concerning whose Religion they are not satisfyed that they may be dealt with before they come to the Lords table Also IF ANY INFANTS ARE TO BE BAPTISED and if there be any thing of that kind which appertaineth to the knowledge of the Overseers for the proffitable and decent administration of the Church Neither is the Answerer only against Mr. Traverse in this but reason it selfe is against him taken from the very foundation of that office in the Church as appeareth in what is already sayd concerning them in the 23. Section compared with what hath bene by me declared against the disorder of promiscuous baptising in the 12. Section 4. He sayth If he had protested against such an order c. Such a protest might have served for a direction to the right use of their power but did not tend to the destruction thereof If it had bene a mere declaration of his judgment and resolution though delivered in forme of a protest and had bene strengthned with good reasons and had bene left to them to consider of it might have served for a correction and direction to the right use of their power without destroying it But when a peremptory and inflexible resolution of opposing what they shall doe against his mind in this matter is held foorth without arguments from the Scripture or good reason to convince them of the aequity of that stiffnes in opposing and when it is not left within themselves but carryed from them to the Classis that by the interposition of their power and authority the Consistory may be hindred from executing or making such an order who seeth not that as by the former they have no direction from him about the right use of their power so by the latter their power is destroyed in this particular which may be proved thus That Act whereby the Elders are hindred that they can not provide for the godly comely and orderly administration of the Church doeth deprive the Elders of their power in government for the good of the Church But this Act of the Answerer in hindring the ending of this difference about baptisme c. by interposing the authority of the Classis for that end was an hindring of them from providing for the godly comely and orderly administration of the Church Ergo. Which proposition will he deny The first But that is taken from the nature of the Elders office as hath bene shewne out of Scripture and reason before And he knoweth it to be true Will he deny the Assumption That is proved by what I have shewen in the 12. Section against promiscuous administration of baptisme as it is in that place whence it will appeare to be not godly nor comely nor orderly and therefore the Elders have power and are bound to provide that it be not done in that Church Sect. 26. In the 26 Section Their second instance whereby they would prove that he depriveth the Elders of their power in government for the good of the Church by carrying matters out of their hands which might and should have bene ended in the Consistory Compl. is that agreement which was amongst them that I should have a yeares time to goe on in assisting the Answerer c. Now let us see how this is answered Ans 1. First He sayth it is untrue that the Elders agreed I should have a yeares time Reply How unjust this chalenge is may appeare 1. By the report of the Elders themselves who say that it was referred to voyces and by voyces agreed that I should have a convenient time and it was particularly expressed by one of the Elders and not gainsayed by the rest that a yeares time would be convenient for that purpose 2. Not onely they but the Answerer himselfe sayth as much in effect For in the 18. Section he reporteth that I made this offer unto them that if the Consistory desired it I would continue as an assistant in preaching for a convenient time that I might therein acquaint my selfe with the Dutch ministers the orders of the Classis and Synod and state of this Congregation c. But though our Elders liked of this offer sayth he and thought good to desire him to remaine with us as an assistant as is before sayd yet I thought it not safe sayth he speaking of himselfe without first taking advise of the Classis Whereby it is manifest that the Elders liked of the offer as it was made by me But they knew that I was of opinion that lesse then a yeares time could not be convenient for those purposes and that I meant that time when I spake of a convenient time yet if they had agreed that six moneths or three monthes should be judged a convenient time I should have rested therein which seing they did not but liked of the offer as it was made by me it seemeth their purpose was to conclude for a yeares time Secondly In stead of answering Ans 2 he recriminateth those that divulge the secret affayres of the Eldership and that untruely Reply The former reply sheweth that the report is not untrue And that the Elders have unlawfully divulged this they put him to prove for they deny that it is unlawfull to acquaint the members with passages of this nature which are not to be kept secret in the Consistory when they tend to the injury of the wholl Church Thirdly His third answer is a mere evasion Ans 3 by putting off the fault from himselfe upon the Classis Reply the vanity of which pretence hath bene so often shewen already that I may well praetermit it here Fourthly Ans 4 In his fourth answer he pretendeth to give reasons for his carrying this matter into the Classis which are not reasons but mere pretences First That whilest matters were thus kept in suspence the cord of contention should have bene drawne out and lengthned But who seeth not that this would have cut the cord of contention asunder when a convenient time had bene given for the composing of things to a peaceable conclusion and when the people should see his regard of their desire and content so far expressed Secondly That in the Consistory where he hath most trouble he should have least assistance But by this course he would have lesse trouble in the Consistory the spirits of men being somewhat quieted and contented Besides I see not but he might have escaped many troubles there if he had not made troubles when he found them not Thirdly That in the administration of Baptisme in stead of an Assistant he should have a Resistant But how could he be a Resistant in Baptisme whose worke was only to assist in
preaching as myne should have bene if this agreement had stood Againe suppose after the expiration of that convenient time I had accepted of the pastorall calling how could I have bene a Resistant to him in Baptisme if either the Dutch Ministers could in that time have convinced me of the lawfullnes of that custom in which case J should have yeelded to it or if I could have procured the laying aside of that question by their consent with me in establishing those meanes which I propounded for accommodation Fourthly That hereby the calling of another minister would be hindred But 1. the event sheweth the contrary For that convenient time which the Elders would have given me was but 12 moneths Now though upon this pretence the Answerer opposed that yet those 12 moneths were spent before they had any and 9 moneths more before one was setled with them 2. My purpose in that proposition was to worke in that time for the peaceable setling of any faithfull man whom they should make choyse of if I saw not greater likelihood of my comfortable setling there then hitherto had appeared Wherein my true intent was to prevent the trouble and procure the peace of the Church as much as in me lay The fifth pretenc◠is coincident with the fourth and answered in that Sixtly The Classis would have bene offended which had formerly disallowed such an agreement about Mr. H. But 1 consider as great a matter as this hath bene done there without the leaue of the Classis when the Answerer had a mind to it Was not Mr. D for a yeare and more assistant to the Answerer in the same Church in preaching without leave or consent of the Classis 2. If the Classis would be offended for this it would be an offence taken but not given For what though they had formerly disallowed such an agreement of the Elders about the intertayning of M. Hook May not the Church doe such a thing without their allowance What rule is transgressed thereby If any Let the Answerer shew it If none then the Classis disallowed that act and would be offended at this causelesly 3. At most this would have bene an offence but to the spirits of the Classis who would have bene angry at it as a neglect of them only not as a sinne against God But the hindering of this agreement by their Pastor and the Classis is an offence to the consciences of some of the Church who are greived at it as a sinne against God both in the Pastor and the Classsis who have hereby streightned the liberty and weakened the power which Christ hath given the Church in procuring such spirituall helpes for their aedification as they find proffitable and desire with a generall consent especially there being no danger of haeresy and schysme whereby themselves or other Churches should be infected thereby Now compare these two offences together and it will appeare that the latter offence in this case was more carefully to be heeded and prevented then the former The seventh and last pretence is that he esteemed this agreement as an act of intrusion for me which he needed not to have feared nor would have by so injurious a course prevented if he had knowne me as he might have done by my wholl carriage in this buisenes Himselfe reproacheth me for standing so much upon his desiring me and now he feareth least I had some purpose of intruding my selfe How will these stand together One while he telleth the Reader that I would not accept the call another while that I will not be dismissed A strange case that I am so averse that they can not get me in and yet so intruding that they cannot get me out By this it may appeare that his spirit was much distempered by needles Iealousyes and groundles surmises which in these passages have caused much disquietment to himselfe and disturbance to others The 3. instance And that it may appeare that I wrong him not in saying thus his owne words about the third instance which they bring to prove that he depriveth the Elders of their power in governmēt for the good of the Church declare the same For speaking of Mr. Weld whom they accused him for hindring from preaching without leave of the Classis though he professed he had nothing against him he telleth the Complainants that he had some thing against Mr. Weld If they desire to know what he readily telleth them and all the world that he had something against his behaviour in generall which was an offence and trouble unto him It had need to be some great matter some will thinck that so farr sett him off from Mr. Weld as he there intimateth To prevent all wondring at the matter he roundly relates more dislikes then one But if you come to examine them they will appeare to be grounded upon needles jealousyes in his owne mind For his first dislike was because Mr. Weld refused to declare himselfe and to shew his opinion touching their present controversyes And have not others carryed themselves in the same manner as well as he which were greater strangers to him then Mr. Weld being not of his nation whom yet he hath not only willingly received to preach but also bene willing to have joyned with him in the pastorall office His second dislike of Mr. Weld was that he saw him most familiar with those that were his cheifest opposites So then there was opposition amongst them before I came and this opposition was raysed to such an height that the Answerer accounted it a trouble and offence to him that any minister should be most familiar with those whom he accounted his opposites and that upon feare least Mr. Weld should strengthen and animate them against him he was unwilling to have him preach That this feare may not seeme altogether causeles he telleth his Reader how Mr. H. preached against that in the afternoone which he taught in the fore noone The truth concerning this passage I have heard from diverse witnesses and have seene the noates of boath their sermons as they were taken by those that heard and doe find so farr as I can discerne by what I have heard or read that the Answerer tooke offence at Mr. H causelesly for that and that Mr. H. was called and in a manner compelled to say what he did at that time But that I may returne to Mr. W. was the Answerers feare of him retayned in his owne breast No he telleth us in his second answer that he desired the counsaile of the Dutch Consistory about this matter and their advise was that he should bring it to the Classis Thus the Answerer is troubled the Dutch Consistory is troubled the English Church also is troubled and all about his feare of Mr. Weld But was this feare well grounded was there sufficient cause for it Let himselfe speake and he will tell us yea he hath already told us in his third answer that upon further conference with Mr.
W he perceived in him a peaceable disposition and conceived that he would not give offence by his preaching amongst them It is well that his apprehension is rectifyed at last to perceive that which he did not before That conference did not alter Mr. W disposition but his owne persuasion of him so that the change was in the Answerer not in M. W. As a man in a ship thincks that the shore moves from him whereas the ship wherein he is is carryed from the shore so a man whose passions are disturbed suspecteth every man to oppose him When all was now quiet what course tooke the Answerer He telleth us that he made the same knowne to the Classis whereupon he was admitted to preach And why must this be made knowne to the Classis Is it against the government of these Churches that a stranger to whom the Answerer can impute no errour and in whom he preceived a peaceable disposition and conceived that he would not giue offence by his preaching amongst them being desired by the Church should be permitted to preach a sermon â— 2 or 3 in the English Church without leave of the Classis Can not the Elders doe so much without them Then the complaint is just that the Elders are deprived of their power in government for the good of the Church And seing whilest the Answerer seemed unsatisfyed the Dutch Consistory seemeth to apprehend it to be a case of some difficulty to permit Mâ— W. to preach but when the Answerer is satisfyed the Classis consenteth it appeareth that the complaint concerning the injury is justly against the Answerer at whose instigation and intreaty the Classis doeth interpose so farr in their matters though in this they can not be excused much lesse justifyed in that they assume a power to themselves of restrayning Churches from having the benefit of the assistance of a stranger and pass â—t in such a case without their leave which is more power then the government of these Churches giveth them or any prelates ever chalenged to themselves for aught I know Section 27. examined concerning the undue power of the Classis IN this and the fowre following Sections they make their third complaint of his government viz that he subjecteth that Church under an undue power of the Classis which they aggravate two wayes 1. by his indirect aymes in it for they conceive that he doeth it merely for his owne ends 2. by his irregular pitching upoÌ„ such meanes for the attayning of his ends For they say he doeth it without any warrant from the word of God For our more orderly and cleare proceeding in examining these five Sections I will premise some thing in thesi concerning the power of Classes and then descend to the hypothesis and try how just their complaint is Whereunto the Answerer compelleth me not onely by his frequent mentioning my name which he wrighteâ—â— at its full length every where in the next Section 30 times in lesse then three leaves of paper but also by his acensing me as an opposite to the government of these Churches by Synods and Classes This to be a mere slander the indifferent Reader will judge by what I have already said in examination of former Sections All lawfull Authority I am alwayes and shall be ready to acknowledge with due submission thereunto even when I freely testifye against all usurpation and tyranny and plead for the observation of those ancient limits and bounds which God hath set But I proceed to the matter concerning Classes Jt is not my purpose to speake of the originall of them nor of their antiquity nor to contend about the name given them much lesse to coÌ„demne all use of them Medull Theol lib. 1. Cap. 39 Sect 27. from which I am so farr that I freely confesse with Dr. Ames though the Answerer traduceth both him and me as otherwise minded that particular Churches as their Communion requireth and the light of nature the aequity of rules and the examples of Scripture teach may and in many cases ought to enter into a mutuall consociation and confaederation amongst themselves in Classes and Synods that they may use their common consent and mutuall helpe so farr at it may commodiously be done especially in those things which are of greater moment Provided alwaies that speciall care be taken that under pretence of helping the Churches they doe not hinder them by taking away and diminishing that liberty and power which Christ hath given them It was some such abuse that made Greg Nazianzen so bitter against Councells Epist 42. ad Procop. that he resolved to shun all such assemblyes Which Dr. Whittaker imputed to the evill event Contra. Camp p. 83. edit 1601. whereunto the ambition polypragmony of some men had brought matters who in stead of composing former differences ending those controversyes made new ones which agreeth with Nazianzens owne expression of the reason why evills were rather increased then diminished by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. For Contentiousnes and ambition prevayled more then reason And it may be some such provocation caused that learned politick man Hugo Grotius so to slight the authority of Classes and Synods Pietas Ordinum Holl. ac West-Fris as he did in that treatise which he published against Sibr. Lubbertus upon which Bogermannus published his Annotations learnedly and succinctly penned in defence of D. Sibrandus wherein for answer of that part which concerned the necessity and authority of Synods he referred Grotius to what Iunius had written against Bellarmine de necessitateeâ—p otestate Conciliorum wherein I fully agree with Iunius But we are now to speake of a more imperfect combination of Churches then that which is in provinciall Synods viz a Diocesan union of them in Classes Betwixt which and the imperfect combination of Churches in and about Geneva there is some difference For that is a voluntary conjunction of the smaller Churches with the greater in one Consistory for their helpe in their particular Church buisenesses the smaller Churches wanting men fit for the manadging of their Church affayres and making one presbytery Zanch. in 4. praecept with the next greater Church which being better fitted meete weekely in their owne Consistory and these with them But this is a combination which is betweene diverse Churches which having their severall presbyteryes or Consistoryes apart send their deputyes viz one Minister and one Elder to meete with the like deputyes from all other Churches Synops pur Theol. disp 49. Thes 5. in such a Diocesse or division at a time and place appoynted to handle such things as concerne many Churches in common and as could not be ended in the Consistoryes of the particular Churches Concerning these the question is in this and the following Sections for the discussion whereof I will propound two things to be considered in thesi or in generall 1. What kind of combination that is which is lawfull amongst Churches 2.
in the Church then in the Pope What that learned wrighter sayth of the Churches power in comparison with the Pope holds in all other paralell instances To these I may add those who have written concerning the right ordering of Churches according to the Scripture I will not stand to give a Catalogue of their names though I might be plentifull therein but will content my selfe with the three wrighters of this kind whom the Answerer pretended in conference with me to make for him and I shall shew them to be strongly against him Mr Cartwright and Mr. Fenner and Mr. Parker men of our owne nation Sect. 4. p. 53. 1. For Mr. Cartwright The very place in his booke whereunto the Answerer referred me I have examined before and have shewen how litle helpe he will have from him De Sacra Theol. lib. 7. p. 279. 2. For M. Fenner He speaking of the Ecclesiasticall presbytery distinguisheth betweene the Eldership of one particular Church which he sayth is properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Eldership of many Churches P. 277. 278. The Eldership of the first sort he sayth is a compound office wherein all the Elders doe in the name of the wholl Church administer all the buisenesses of the Church that is of the Lord by common authority and counsaile And for this purpose he alleadgeth many texts out of the old and new testaments These buisenesses he sayth are either judiciary or extrajudiciary Iudiciary buisenesses are such things as are to be defined by the judgment of the Church which are either matters doubtfull which must be defined by the Scriptures or censures to be administred Extrajudiciary buisenesses are Elections ordinations cheife care of disposing the holy treasures keeping of order in the assembly and all things which are to be done Yet in matters of greatest moment and which concerne the good or ruine of the wholl Church he sayth the Elders after consultation had among themselves must tell their opinions to the Church that if they have any thing to counsail or to object it may be brought in and afterwards the opinions and assent of all being declared matters are to be concluded unlesse it be necessary to referr the buisenes to a greater assembly of Elders for the avoyding or composing of differences which is then to be done when the difference is betweene the greater part of the Church And these matters of the greatest moment are the censures excommunication and absolution from it which is to be done in the assembly by the AUTHORITY OF THE WHOLE CHURCH orders also of the greatest moment to be made controversyes of fayth to be composed the elections and just deposing of Ministers other things aequall to these or greater then they all which must be thus transacted as he plentifully declareth from Scripture Thus I have faythfully translated the words of this eminent light in his time Mr. Dudley Fenner who was joyned with Mr. Cartwright in the publick ministry to the English Company in Antwerpe to whom and to that worke of his Mr. Cartwright in an epistle to him praefixed to that booke giveth a singular testimony comparing him to Moses who from Mount Nebo viewed the wholl land of Canaan as it were with one cast of his eye to whom the Answerer him selfe referred me wherein I admire his confidence as to one that made for him The Reader may see how he leaveth the wholl power of jurisdiction in the particular Church and bindeth them no further to make use of other Ecclesiasticall Senats out of themselves then necessity requireth and he doeth not acknowledge that it is a case of that necessity but when the avoyding of troubles and dissentions in the Church makes it necessary And when is that Not when one alone contentiously differeth from all the rest But when the difference is among the greater part And that in such a case the judgment of the wholl Church is first to be tryed and the opinions and assent of all being declared matters are to be concluded Idem ibid p. 280. Else where he sayth that the presbytery of many Churches is to compose and end such things onely as cannot be ended in particular Churches Act. 15.1 to 8. 2. Chron. 20.33 Act. 16.4 And these are cases either proper to those Churches which are brought to them or things common to many Churches and so taken up by them I demand of the Answerer whether he be of this worthy wrighters judgment or not If not why did he referr me to him for satisfaction If yea why is his practise so different from it For in this buisenes though of so great consequence that it indangered the breaking of the Church if I had not sat downe quietly and suffered wrong for peace sake the Answerer alone opposing the desire of the Elders and of the greater part of the Church and the buisenes being proper to the Church and which might have bene ended among themselves yet against the liberty and right of the Church if Mr. Fenners judgement be right he would carry it to the Classis that he might effect his purpose De polit Eccles lib. 3. Chap. 1. 3. For Mr. Parker He largely and strongly proveth this position potestas Ecclesiastica essentialiter primario in ipsâ Fcclâ—siâ tanquam in subjecto proprio residet The power ecclesiasticall doeth essentially primarily reside in the Church it selfe as in its proper subject The sense wherein he thus spake to prevent all suspicion of his pleading for popular confusion he declareth out of Zanchy who sayth Zanch in praecept 4. quest 3. toti Ecclesiae dedisse Christum claves sed ita ut in Ecclesiâ certi essent qui clavibus utantur ad salutem Ecclesiae honoremque Dei That Christ gave the keyes to the wholl Church but so that there should be certaine men that should use the keyes to the good of the Church and glory of God For the proofe of the former that the right of power is in every particular Church he useth five Arguments in the 6 7. chapters then in the 8. chapter he cometh to speak of the excercise and ordinary execution of this power which is he sayth in the Church-officers or rulers yet with this moderation that this dispensation of the Churches power in the officers be according to a well tempered forme partly Aristocraticall partly Democraticall the Church committing those things to the presbytery which it can not commodiously performe by it selfe and retaining that excercise of power which belongs to the dignity authority and liberty which it hath received from Christ Thus he wholy destroyeth that democraty or popular Anarchy which Beza justly condemneth in Morellius and is by some unjustly imputed to those that plead for a due reformation of Churches according to the rules of the word and the primitive patternes Of the first sort of things which the Church committeth to the Rulers because it cannot commodiously performe them by
sufficient evidence whereupon to ground so deepe an accusation as that of Schysme is If so let him shew it by Scriptures or good reason but with all to guide his judgment let him know that the mere preaching as assistant in a Church at the intreaty of the Church is not numbred among those common causes which by the order of these reformed Churches are appropriated to the cognition or consent of the Classes it is in it selfe to be accounted among the things which are proper to particular Churches And is it a Schysmaticall tenet to hold that things proper to particular Churches are under the power of particular Churches which are cheife in matters that are properly their owne what then will he say to that Canon of the Synod at Midleborough Those things shall not be handled in the greater assemblyes which may be ended in the lesser Can. 25. to the Canons of the Synod of 3 Nations Cap. 17. 18. to the Sinod at Emden Cap. 2. to that Canon in the Harmony of the Belgick Sinods that those matters only shall be brought into the Classes which cannot be ended in the Consistory cap. 7. art 6. See Zepperus lib. 3. cap. 5. Were these Synods schysmaticall Conventicles or were their Canons schysmaticall conclusions How then is this which I affirme schysmaticall To brand me with an imputation of schysme he spareth not these Synods which deliver the same thing in effect that I say and all those worthyes who have written concerning Ecclesiasticall discipline or the authority of Councills of whom we spake in the former Section or which have handled the power of particular Churches in chusing their owne Pastors of whom we spake in the foregoing Section Yea I wish he may not be found to beare false witnes against the truth it selfe in the Scriptures which we have declared in both those Sections to warrant so much as I have said in this matter 4. His fourth answer supposeth that eminent men may cause eminent danger by their private opinions The men in whom he instanceth I confesse were not inferiour to either of us in learning But that which he intimateth concerning opinions held by them which tended to the ruine and desolation of Churches if he apply it to this question about the power of particular Churches to admit of Ministers to preach as assistants I cannot acknowledge to be true upon the former grounds but if he meane any other opinions or practises it is nothing to the matter in question 5. In his fifth answer upon his observation that the Complainants in their particular greivances mention me he inferreth that their inordinate desire of me hath made this trouble to the Church But. 1. neither the ground nor the inference is right 1. Not the ground For they mention not me alone but others also 2 Nor the inference For will their complaining of injuryes done to them in a particular reference to me prove their desire of me to be inordinate By what medium Let him frame his Argument into a Syllogisme and it will appeare to be Sophisticall and ridiculous But I spare him 2. How easily may they or I upon the same ground warrant prove that his inordinate desire of having his owne will that I say no more hath made this trouble in the Church by drawing all the lines of the severall Sections in the circle and circumference of their complaint to that as the onely centre But I doe not affect in Circuitu ambulare 6. In his sixt answer which is to their parenthesis wherein they noate that he would have had others that to this day hold the same opinion Such is the invincible power of truth that his owne words concerning those two instances are sufficient to prove the thing which he would deny if what I have written in the 11. Section concerning his private conference with me be compared with what himselfe confesseth Mr. B wrote to him and with his owne acknowledgment of Mr. R. agreement with me in his third and last answer to that instance Nor is his desire of having them complained of for in the injoyment of either of them they had bene happy but his partiall sticking at that in me which he would have passed by in them The 29. Section examined Concerning the undue power of the Classis in making lawes IN this Section they produce the second proofe of the justnes their complaint of his subjecting the Church under an undue power of the Classis viz his giving them power to make lawes and orders whereunto whosoever will be ministers of that Church must submit For proofe hereof they give two instances 1. that they bind Ministers to observe the orders and customs of the Dutch Church 2. their second instance is concerning this order of promiscuous baptising which they made a coÌ„dition of my admittance to that Ministry The justnes of their laying the blame of boath these upon the Answerer they prove 1. Because some of the Dutch preachers themselves have declared their willingnes to cast off some of those customs if the vastnes of their Church would permâ—â— it 2. Because one of them said to the Answerer in the Classis upon occasion of his complaining of my not conforming to their orders you your selfe doe not conforme to all our orders 3. Because they have professed that they should have bene glad that the differences had bene ended among our selves 4. Because he hath of late required of the Elders that an order might be made in the Consistory that whatsoever minister shall hereafter be called to that Church should conforme to that wrighting of the five Ministers Now let us see what answers he pretendeth to make 1. to their complaint against the proceeding of the Classis in this particular 2. to their complaint of his giving this undue power to the Classis First To their complaint of the undue proceeding of the Classis Herein he answereth nothing to the purpose For he neither denyeth the fact nor giveth any satisfaction about the aequity of it In a word he so answereth as if he saught nothing else but how to evade answering and to get some hole to hide his head in Wherefore that the truth in this matter may appeare we will consider two things 1. de facto whether they have made such lawes and orders or not 2. de jure whether they have done it by a due or by an undue power 1. That they have made such lawes and orders can not be denyed For if the praescription of necessary observances be a law if the imposition of any thing with a binding power be a law if the decrees to the obedience whereof men are any way compelled are lawes the things instanced in to witt conformity to their ecclesiasticall customs and promiscuous administration of Baptisme according to the wrighting of the five Ministers were imposed as lawes upon me For did they not bind me to rest in that wrighting and to conforme to those customs
under no lesse paenalty then my not admittance to the pastorall worke in the English Church notwithstanding the unanimous desire of the Congregation Was not this to make them necessary observances The case is so cleare that the Answerer himselfe doeth not at all deny it 2. Let us see whether the power whereby they have done this be a due or an undue power And it will appeare to be undue if neither the Scripture nor the Nationall Synods nor the Church nor any good reason have given them any such power And this we will declare with Gods assistance distinctly in every one of them First The Scripture is so farr from giving the Classis any power of making lawes to bind particular Churches in cases of that nature that it doeth not once mention any such kind of combination nor doeth allow any such power to the deputyes of any Churches consulting together for their common good The Texts which Bellarmine alleadgeth for the power of Councills in making lawes are the same which the Answerer sometimes harpeth upon in this case but Iunius clearly sheweth that they make nothing to the purpose Deut. 17.8.10 Sect. 24. Ans 4. The first is Deut. 17. Which place the Answerer alleadgeth to prove the Classis to be an higher judicatory and above the Church Thou shalt doe according to the sentence which they of that place shall shew thee To which Iunius giveth 2 answers 1. The cases are not alike For in those times the mind of God was revealed to those Judges in obscure and difficult cases by signes and answers from God himselfe 2. He grants that the sentence of those Iudges was to be obeyed servatâ clausulâ salutari that holesom clause which Moses puts in being observed according to the sentence of the law Vers 11. which they shall teach thee So that the sentence of those Iudges did no further bind men to rest in it then it was according to the sentence of the Law And yet these were Iudges by Gods expresse appoyntment which the Classes have not to shew for their judicatory in the same manner as those Judges had Act. 15. 2. The other Text is Acts 15. alleadged by Bellarmine to prove the binding force of the decrees of Councills and by the Answerer Sect. 31. Ans 5. to shew the authority of the Classis whereunto Iunius giveth 2 answers also 1. Non sequitur ex particulari si custodienda fuerint decreta Concilij Apostolici ergo omnium servari oportere It doeth not follow from a particular that because the decrees of an Apostolicall Councill are to be observed therefore the decrees of all Councills must be so kept Cont. 3. lib 4. cap. 16. And whereas Bellarmine affirmeth that the question there was not defined by Scripture but by the voyces of the Apostles Iunius denyeth that any thing was ordayned in that Councill but from the Scripture as he had before demonstrated thereunto referreth the Reader And whereas Bellarmine sayth that the decree of the Apostles was not left to the examination of the Disciples but that they were simply commanded to obey Iunius chargeth him with falsely supposing two things 1. That the Apostles alone made this order For the Elders concurred with the Apostles in this sentence and the wholl Church all of them being taught by the spirit of truth to thinck the same thing And this he sayth is the manner of proceeding in those Councills where Christ is praesident 2. That the same respect is to be had to the determination of others as of the Apostles Which is an errour he sayth For it was the singular priviledge of the Apostles that they had immediate assistance of the Holy Ghost and infallibility in their Apostolicall determinations so that what they delivered was to be received without examination whereas the dictates senteÌ„ces of all other are to be examined by their wrightings wherby it appeareth that the Scripture acknowledgeth no such power of making lawes to be due to the Classes unlesse they can produce some other texts which when they shall be alleadged shall be further examined if God permit Secondly No generall Councills or Nationall Synods have acknowledged any such power to be due to Classes for aught I can find if any others have found out any such let them declare the Canon of such Councills and Synods wherein it was so concluded and the ground of such a determination being found sufficient I shall willingly receive it and submit thereunto In the meane space let it be considered that they who distinguish betweene Generall Nationall Provinciall and Diocesan Councills say that the two former have authority to make Canons but the two latter onely to see that the Canons imposed by the two former be observed Praef ad distinct 18 as may be seene in Gratian. Thirdly The Church hath not given them any such power nor indeed can it 1. It hath not as appeareth in their complaints of it as undue as a greivance and in the profession of diverse of the members that they never knew that the Church was so subjected 2 That it cannot appeareth in this that the Church it selfe hath no such power and none can give what they have not In what sense this assertion is to be understood and upon what grounds it is to be received we shall have occasion to declare in examining his answer shortly to follow whereunto I referr the Reader Fourthly That no good reason giveth the Classis this power of making lawes to bind particular Churches will appeare if two things be declared 1. what things are required to the making of a law 2. what instances they produce to shew the undue proceedings of that Classis herein First the things required to a law are these at least 1. a due authority or power orderly authorised thereunto 2. its consonancy and consent with the law of God 3. that it is referred unto and doeth respect the common good Secondly let the instances produced by them be brought to these rules and it will be found 1. that they want sufficient authority for making of such lawes 2. that such a law agreeth not with the law of God 3. that it is not referred to the publick and common good by what hath bene already said partly in this Section partly in the 12 Section and partly in other Sections The issue whereunto the instances drive is that the Classis excerciseth an undue power when it bindeth men to any observance upon no better ground then the mere custom of a place which is then done when â—hat custom is not warranted by the word For howsoever in civill administrations in Common wealths some customs have the force of a law Hist. 1. part 2. book 4. Chap. 15. Sect Vlp. li. 29 as Sir Walter Raleigh well observeth Yet in Church matters it will not hold the reason of Churches and Commonwealths being not the same But if the rule hold in Commonwealths that quod ab
and binding lawes for any thing expedient to the Common wealth Whereunto subjects are bound readily to submit 1. Pet. 2.13 Things properly called indifferent I doe not find in Scripture that ever Churchgovernours did advise perswade them much lesse charge cōmand them least of all make standing binding lawes to determine them nor doth that place in 1. Cor. 14.40 give them any such power nor have the Apostles themselves received any such authority from Christ as appeareth in the commission given them which was onely to teach men to observe and doe what Christ shall command them Mat. 28.20 Their office being onely ministeriall oeconomicall Christ reserving to himselfe the soveraigne lawgiving power as his praerogative For application of the premises to the case in question I demand whether this custom be thus imposed as a thing properly indifferēt or as expedient or as necessary in some considerable respect or as absolutely necessary If it be properly indifferent why doe they by command make the practise of it necessary If it be expedient let them shew the expediency of it leave men free If it be necessary in those considerable respects let it appeare that the contrary practise will be so offensive or disorderly that for the avoyding of that offence or disorder a minister is bound to doe it If it be absolutely necessary to godlines let the Scripture be shewē that cōmandeth that practise or forbiddeth the cōtrary His fourth answer is not worth a Reply His fifth answer maketh against himselfe For if they leave men at liberty about things indifferent c. wherein they are to be approved as walking according to the rule why doe they bind men by unaequall conditions to this custom which they neither doe nor can sufficiently declare to be commanded by Christ or to be warranted by the rule Let us now see what he sayth to the proofes of the justnes of their laying the blame of this miscarriage upō him rather then upō the Classis First They say that some of the Dutch Ministers themselves are willing to cast off some of their customs if the vastnes of theire Church did not force them thereunto Hereunto he giveth two answers 1. that things simply unlawfull are as well to be cast off in a great Church as in a small Reply True it is a duety as necessary to be done in the one as in the other yet it may more easily be done in the smaller Churches and therefore the sinne of the smaller Churches is the greater if they doe not cast off such an unwarrantable custom The vastnes of their Churches doth only excuse them a tanto not a toto 2. that in the smaller Churches in the villages the same order is observed But. 1. it hath not bene expresly required of any of the Ministers of those Churches as a condition of their admittāce as it was of me that they should rest in such a wrighting which bindeth them to baptize all that are brought 2. It may be questioned whether all the Ministers in those smaller villages doe so promiscuously administer Baptisme as they doe in Amsterdam seing such different sorts of people are not in those villages as in that Citty Secondly They say that one of the Ministers said to the Answerer in the Classis upon occasion of his complaining of my not conforming to all their orders why you your selfe doe not conforme to all our orders Hereunto he pretendeth to give five answers I say pretendeth For the first answer is no answer but onely a question who told this His second answer is that the mind of the Classis is not to be collected by the speech of one Neither doe they say that all of thē are of that mind but that one of them said so whereof it seemeth the rest shewed no dislike and so seemed to consent to it and more then one of them have bene heard to say as much as the Complainants affirme His third answer is that the speech of the Minister is not in right manner repeated by them But if the matter be right it is true in the substance of their report which is sufficient in this case what ever fayling may seeme to be in a circumstance His fourth answer is that this one Minister undertooke in wrighting to satisfye my objections and having replyed to myne answer received no answer to his second wrighting It is true I did not answer his second wrighting 1. Because that wrighting did not sufficiently answer my first 2. Because at that time I wrote to the wholl Classis in which respect there was no use of wrighting to one member of the Classis alone His fifth answer is The nationall Synod at Dort in things indifferent Kercken ordeningh Art 85. doeth allow Churches of other Nations in these Countreys to vary from their customs It is well they doe so and it is fit they should so doe But if it be so 1. why was it required of me that I should conforme to all the orders and customs of the Dutch Church 2. Why was I not allowed to vary from their customs in the practise of promiscuous baptizing seing I professed that I could not doe it with a good conscience and they gave me no grounds from the Scriptures to satisfye my conscience that I might doe it lawfully Thirdly They say that the Dutch Ministers have professed that they should have bene glad that this difference might have bene ended among our selves What sayth the Answerer hereunto Iust nothing And it was his wisdom to be silent here For what could he say He could not deny it and the confession of it to be true would discover him to have bene a greater impediment of the Churches desire and my accommodation then he was willing should appeare And I wish from my heart he had bene as silent in all the rest that I might have passed by all these injuryes in silence warrantably Fourthly They say that he hath required of the Elders that an order might be made in the Consistory that whatsoever Minister shall hereafter be called to that Church should conforme to that wrighting of the five Ministers Hereunto he pretendeth to give five answers but one good one were worth them all His first answer is onely a question as before who told this His second answer is in part negative but upon an ill ground viz because the Classis had already approved and confirmed it Concerning the vanity of that pretence enough hath bene spoken already yet in part he affirmeth it in saying that he shewed it to be unreasonable if that order should not be required of any other minister as well as of me But seing there was no good reason why it should be required of me what reason is there that it should be required of others Is it a good course to hide an injury done to one by professing to doe the same injury to many His third answer is that by the motion of a Dutch Minister and a
speciall freind of myne c. the Dutch Ministers came to his house and made that wrighting That Reverend Dutch ministers love and paines I acknowledge with all thanckfullnes and am sorry that a learned and godly Brother of another Nation should shew himselfe more desirous of myne accommodation then myne owne countryman from whom in many respects I had cause to expect more favour and love then from forraigners especially seing their labour proved no more succesfull thorough the violence of a contrary streame of which enough hath bene said in former Sections His fourth answer chargeth me with untruth in my wrighting to the Classis that at his request alone they did in wrighting declare their private judgment But why did he not at least more roundly deny it if it be untrue For it may be true notwithstanding any thing sayd by him to the contrary For why might not that Minister propound it to the rest being thereunto prepared by the Answerers private intimations or intreaty But suppose the Minister propounded it of his owne accord yet what I wrote is true in the sense wherein I meant it For I spake of the Answerer alone not in reference to the Ministers of the Classis but in reference to the Elders of his owne Church and in this sense it is true that the Answerer considered with the Elders and the Church did alone propound it the motion came not from the Elders but from him onely in that sense But what is this to the order which he required the Elders to make in the Consistory which is the matter in question Is this a fit place to speake of passages betweene the five Ministers him when the Complainants charge him with seeking to make an injurious order in the Consistory Had not the twelfth Section bene a fitter place for this matter where it is purposely spoken of But I forbeare to gesse at the reason hereof Whereas he addeth if he had bene the onely secker thereof there is no cause for them that meane to deale uprightly to complaine of such a lawfull safe course I need not to add any thing in way of Reply thereunto having already said enough in the foregoing Sections to prove that that course was neither safe nor lawfull His fifth answer is a mere catching at an advantage which one expression in their wrighting seemeth to give him I say seemeth for it doeth it not really They say that they thinck no godly man will absolutely be bound to conforme to that wrighting To let passe his unworthy scoffes he accuseth them of a rash and praesumptious judgment for saying so whereas 1. they professe onely that they thinck so Now every thought though it may be rash is not to be accounted a praesumptious judgement 2. they doe not speake of suffering themselves to be bound to such a wrighting but of being absolutely bound to conforme to it And there is a great difference betweene those two expressions 3. My name is altogether needlesly brought in here as the Reader may well perceive But I passe it by But is his seeking to have that order made in the Consistory to bind all Ministers that shall be called in that Church proved to be lawfull and for the good of the Church by this or by any thing else he hath sayd in the 5 pretended answers If not It appeareth that no satisfaction is given to the Complainants by his answers And so their second proofe of his subjecting the Church under an undue power of the Classis which they produce for an evidence of his not behaving himselfe as he aught in his pastorall government remayneth unanswered Sect. 30. examined concerning the Answerers violent bringing matters into the Classis when he cannot have his will unjustly satisfyed in the Consistory IN this Section they produce the third proofe of the justnes of their complaint of his subjecting the Church under an undue power of the Classis to wit his violent bringing of matters to the Classis when he cannot have his will unjustly satisfyed Which complaint they agravate by the dangerous consequent or rather effect of it for they say he destroyes the power of the Church utterly often affirming they can doe nothing in these cases without the Classis And to prevent an objection against themselves about what they had said concerning the undue power of the Classis they professe their reverent esteeme of them for counsail advise in all difficult matters that cannot be ended in theire owne Consistory That what is said on boath sides concerning this matter may the more easily and clearely be understood these things must be premised 1. that they doe not complaine of his taking advise and counsail of the Classis in difficult matters For therein they say they esteeme reverently of them 2. Nor that they bring such matters to the Classis as cannot be ended in their owne Consistory But the thing they complaine of is 1. that he bringeth such things to the Classis as may be ended in the Consistory 2. that he doeth it violently that is without consent of the rest 3. that his principall motive or inducement thereunto is the satisfaction of his owne will 4. That he doeth it under a pretence that the Church can doe nothing in such matters to wit as those in question the making of an order for a decent and orderly performance of a Religious duety in a right administration of baptisme and the chusing of their owne Pastors when they pitch upon men abhorring all haeresy and schysme c. and craving the helpe of an assistant for a time in the Churches necessity which they truely say is a destroying of the power of the Church Now let us see his answers hereunto which are fixe 1. His first answer is It is no act of violence but a refuge against violence to refer those things to the Classis which men conceive to be unjustly done or delayed in the Consistory Reply Violence is either opposed to that which is just or to that which is voluntary In their complaint the sense seemeth carry it to boath and so that is violently done which is done both unjustly and without consent That he did it without consent the Answerer acknowledgeth but denyeth that he did it unjustly and retorteth the imputation of violence and injustice upon them either for doing or delaying some thing in the Consistory unjustly He is now become an accuser of them and plaintiffe and therefore according to his owne rule is to bring proofe If he say they did unjustly in making orders about such matters without the consent of the Classis let him shew what rule is transgressed thereby This he should have done before he had taken the matter out of their hands and carryed it into the Classis that they might have bene convinced of the aequity of his so doing If he can not Let him beare the just blame of slandering the Cōsistory in print and of depriving the Church of her due
power in her owne matters which the law of God and the Synodall canons of these lands acknowledge to be due to her in things of this nature as it hath bene formerly declared And therefore he need not scoffingly aske of these Complainants for their warrant or evidence that he destroyeth the power of the Church Those spoken of in Sect. 27. have given it Ioh. 12.7 if he will give the dayes leave to speake and the multitude of yeares to teach wisdom 2. His second answer accuseth them of folly and that order in the Church which they plead for according to the ordinance of Christ as a bondage servitude burthen oppression c. Reply They complaine that when he can not have his will unjustly satisfyed in the Consistory he violently without their consent bringeth matters thence into the Classis Jf this complaint be just it is not slight His carriage in late differences maketh it suspicious that the roote of the matter is in him For let the ground of these troubles be considered and it will be found that the thing for which he contendeth is not necessary either as a meane for Gods glory and the Churches aedification or as commanded of God nor is it injoyned in any Canon of these Belgick Nationall Synods nor is it expresly and particularly required by any Classis of any Dutch Ministers in their admission So that it is not difficult to determine from what distempered principle these disordered motions have arisen and who is to be accounted burthened in this respect As for the folly which he chargeth upon the Complainants that pretending to stand for the liberty of the Church they seeke to bring themselves into bondage the question is whether is the way of liberty or bondage to the Church That which Christ hath appointed or that which men without Christs warrant have devised If the way of Christ is the way of liberty the question will be which is the way of Christ whether that particular Churches have power within themselves to chuse a fit Pastor and to crave the helpe of one well knowne unto them in time of the Churches necessity to see that Baptisme be decently orderly administred or that they so depend upon Classes for their leave permission herein as to be hindred by them from doing any of these at their pleasure If the first is the way of Christ let the Answerer beware that he be not found a false witnesse against Christ and his wayes in making them wayes of folly and servitude c. If the latter be the way of Christ let him shew it and not say it onely I say shew and prove it by Scripture for the satisfaction of the people that depend upon his ministry And till he can doe that let him forbeare such expressions 3. His third answer is by asking what men should doe when they thinck the Elders to be in an errour Reply If a man thinck them to be in an errour what should he doe else but shew them their errour by the word and if the case prove difficult crave with common consent the helpe of other mens or Churches light as occasion shall require to make the matter cleare But the rule warranteth not any man upon his mere thought that they erre to carry the matters quite out of their hands power without their consent or declaring the aequity of his so doing to the satisfaction of the Church For upon such a pretence if the Classis be partially addicted to the Minister all Church proceedings will be hindred And hence it was indeed as Dr. Bilson observed that the frequency of Synods did diminish the authority necessity of the Consistorian meeting of Elders For after that the meeting of Synods twise a yeare was ordayned in the Councill of Nice and Calcedon the Elders began to be in lesse use and account the Synods as higher judges taking upon them the examination and decision of those things which were wont to be agitated in the presbyteryes What he sayth of the Hierarchicall Synods in that place will be found true also of the Classis by this course and much more seing they meete sixe times a yeare 4. His fourth answer needeth no other reply then what is made already to the like if not the same pretence in his fifth answer examined in the 23. Section whereunto J referr the Reader 5. His fifth answer is already replyed upon in examination of the 27. Section 6. His sixth answer also is replyed upon before in severall passages and the vanity of it discovered Sect 31. examined concerning his subjecting the Church under the Classis without their consent THe authority and power which they complaine that theyr Church is subjected under is still by the Complainants declared to be undue by another instance in that it is such as is not competent to any men that are not subject to errour and hereunto they add another aggravation viz that it is done without the Churches consent Lib. 3. Cap. 26. p. 370. M. Parker in his learned discourse of Ecclesiasticall policy sheweth at large that Churches are no furher under the authority of Synods then they have subjected themselves by their owne consent And as for binding men to rest in their determinations as if they were infallible both Dr. Whittaker and Iunius in shewing that Councills are subject to errour have given sufficient light for discovery of the evill of that practise But let us see what he answereth to this complaint in seaven particulars 1. His first is after his usuall manner It is untrue but when the Church is hindred from making an order for the decent orderly administration of holy things by their owne power under pretence of his taking advise of the Classis as it was in the question about Baptisme when J was required that for a coÌ„dition whereupon I was to be admitted or refused to rest in a wrightâ—ng of five Ministers no rule being shewne me by them from the Scripture to warrant their so doing these things shewed it to be true 2. His second answer is that the same thing may be alleadged against any Pastor in the reformed Churches But this is an injury to all reformed Churches and Pastors unlesse he can prove that in the fame particulars they subject their Churches to the same undue power of Classes and in the same manner as he hath done Which he never will be able to doe It is true that Classicall assemblies or such like are a speciall bond of union and sinew of government in them all but to argue from the lawfull use to justify the unlawfull abuse of them is unsound reasoning 3. His third answer is to their charging him with doing this under a pretence of asking and taking advise of the Classis Which he denyeth and sayth that he professeth openly the authority and power of Synods and Classis to be lawfull and necessary as well as their counsail and advise Neither doe they
of such as the word is preached to their parents Or what other use serveth it to His fourth answer is that the administration of the Sacraments is also a duety of the ministry to be performed by a Pastor to more then the members of his particular Congregation c. Reply 1. Here againe I must continue and renew my complaint that the Answerer proveth not the power of the Classis in the particular in question 2. To admit those that are knowne members of another Church to communion in the Sacraments upon fitting occasions I hold lawfull and doe professe my readines to practise accordingly but is this any thing to those who refuse to joyne with any Church concerning whom and such like the question is Is the administration of the Sacrament a duety of the ministry to be performed by any Pastor to such If he say yea let him prove it If nay why then am I blamed for refusing it His fifth answer is ill bottomed upon a false supposition that the practise of the Church at Antioch in sending to the Church of Ierusalem warranteth Classes to excercise such authority over particular Churches as is now questioned Reply 1. I say it is ill bottomed For it will be hard for him to prove 1 that meeting to be Classicall which was but of 2 Churches consulting upon an extraordinary occasion in a difficult case 2. That this meeting consisted of Ministers onely seing the text sayth that at Antioch they gathered the Church Act 14.27 What was that the multitude Act 15.30 and at Ierusalem the Church Apostles and Elders are joyned together in receiving those messengers Where the Church againe signifyed the Multitude v. 12. who are also called the wholl Church and brethren v. 22. 23. 3. That those that dwelt at Ierusalem dealt in the case of those at Antioch by way of Classicall jurisdiction and authority seing Paul and Barnabas were sent who were not inferiour to the rest of the Apostles either in authority or in the infallible direction of the Holy Ghost and they were sent principally for the stopping of the mouths of those Seducers which pretended that they were sent by the Apostles as the Apostles intimate in their epistle to the Church at Antioch Act. 15.24 4. That the Classes have power to impose their decrees upon other Churches that have no delegates with them as the Apostles did at that time upon all the Churches of the Gentiles v. 23.28 Cap. 18.4 2. As his answer is ill bottomed so it is ill built unlesse he can prove that it is a part of every ministers office to be excercised in governing the members of many other Congregations as well as his one combined in Classes which he doeth not goe about to doe nor will be able out of Scripture where no such property of a minister is expressed either in the Acts or Epistles of the Apostles 3. As his answer is ill bottomed and ill built so is it ill added to prove the power of the Classes in the matter concerning which the question is which it doeth not prove at all His sixth answer wherein he pretendeth to come nearer to the place Act. 20.28 and so he had need to doe for hitherto he hath gone farr enough from it is that the flock is attended by the labour of the Pastor that it may be increased which is done by the labour of faithfull ministers seeking to bring those into the fold which at first are no members of the Church Reply 1. If all this were granted yet it will not conclude the point in question as will appeare to him that shall frame it into a Syllogisme 2. It may be questioned whether this drawing into the fold be the pastorall attendance there meant though I doubt not that it is lawfull and a duety but it seemeth not to be intended in that charge left with the Pastors of Ephesus 1. Because the worke of the Pastor qua talis is to feed a flock already gathered 1 Cor. 14.2 Ioh. 4.39 Act. 8.4 with Ch 11.19.20 21. Mat 18.19 Iames. 5.19.20 not to gather a flock unlesse by accident God casting in some to heare by a providence as that unlearned man that came in amongst them whilest they were prophesying or in some such like way though I doubt not it is a pious worke a bounden duety for a Pastor to labour the gayning of others 2. Because the labour of bringing in others into the fold hath bene undertaken by those that were not Pastors with blessed successe the Lord giving this glory to his owne word made effectuall by his spirit and not limiting it as a priviledge peculiar to any office in the Church And therefore even those out of office also are bound to labour in it His seaventh answer is that to assist a Church that is destitute of their Pastor in convincing erronious personâ— judicially in the Church is a duety and yet may be required of a neighbour minister Therefore men may excercise some acts of their ministry towards such as are no members of their Congregation Reply 1. Here againe somewhat is said but nothing to the point For will it follow that because a Minister may helpe a neighbour Church in convincing those that erre that therefore the Classes have a right to exact of me as a condition of my admittance to the pastorall office to baptise those infants whose parents are not under my pastorall charge 2. Though it be true that it is required of a Pastor to be able to convince erronious persons and that when he doeth it according to Christs order it is a part of his pastorall worke yet will it follow that wheresoever he excerciseth that ability he doeth execute a part of his pastorall office If not to what use serveth this discourse His eighth answer is that my profession of my readines to baptise their infants who are not members of this Church if I may be satisfyed that they have a right to it by their membership elsewhere in regard of the communion among particular Churches doeth plainly refute my selfe Reply 1. The thing that I question is the power of the Classis to bind me to such a condition 2. Suppose I had expresly denyed them to have this power as indeed I doe by consequence in the places of Scripture alleadged by me against it how doeth this profession plainely or darkely or at all refute that He sayth diverse wayes 1. Then it is an errour to thinck that a Pastor may not excercise his ministry in some acts of it toward those who are no members of his Church But I have already shewen that the question betweene us is not whether I may lawfully baptise such but by what right the Classis can exact it of me in the manner aforesaid How will he make good this inference Because it is not lawfull for the Classis to exact it in that manner therefore is it not lawfull to be done Or because he erreth that holds it not lawfull
Mat. 5.37 yea is a rule for prevention of unlawfull oathes in ordinary discourse not for a tryall of mens being in Covenant 2. when Christ asked the blind men that came unto him for cure Mat. 9.28 Beleive yee that I am able to doe this In them yea was a sufficient answer in that case 1. Because it was joyned with suitable actions as their following him crying to him and saying Vers 27. Thou sonne of David have mercy upon us vers 27. Wherein they continued following him into the house 2. Which Christ accounted sufficient who knew what was in man and witnessed that they did inwardly beleive according to that profession in curing them after he had said according to your faith be it unto you vers 29.30 V. 29.30 To apply this I grant that the word yea is sufficient to testifye their being in Covenant at the time of administring the Sacrament who are sufficiently knowne by other tryalls to have true faith but what is this to those who are altogether unknowne For the 3. Where our Saviour Christ after he had opened diverse parables asked the Disciples Have yee vnderstood all these things They said vnto him Mat. 13.51 yea Lord. Here is no speech about their being in the Covenant What is this to the matter in question For it is not denyed that by saying yea men have testifyed their fayth sufficiently if their faith hath made it selfe otherwise knowne as it did in the Disciples but it is denyed to be a sufficient testification of faith in persons who are otherwise altogether unknowne The same answer may be given to that place in the fourth text where to Christ demanding Peter lovest thou me Ioh. 21.15 Peter answered yea Lord thou knowest that I love thee And Christ did know it by his weeping bitterly for his denyall of him and by the inward impression which he left upon Peters heart by his divine power when he looked upon him in the high Preists hall and before And so to Christ it was sufficient to say yea Lord and to referr himselfe to his knowledge of him But will it thence follow that it is sufficient for us if any one shall say so These are the places which he noateth for the use of the word yea and the Reader may see how litle to the purpose The same answers may serve to his other texts concerning Amen which are needlesly produced and serve not at all to prove the thing in question As for his other proofes taken from short expressions as in making of Covenants All that the Lord hath spoken we will doe or the like I marvayled much that the Answerer alleadged those which make wholly against him For 1. there is a great deale of binding force in this expression which is in no sort answered by the word yea 2. it was made by a people whom God had chosen out from all the world to be his peculiar ones upon experience of the admirable passages of his fatherly providence and upon their acquaintance with his wayes unto whom the people against whom I have excepted are in no sense to be compared 3. If the proofe which himselfe alleadgeth out of Iosh 24.15.16 c. be well examined Iosh 24.15.16.17 18.19.20 21.22.23 24.25 it will be found that they not onely understood the Covenant whereunto they bound themselves in those short answers but also the Covenant was propounded their assent to it required in another manner with more vehemency then a mere once declaring of it on Gods part or one short answer on their part seemeth to carry with it Secondly To prove that nodding with the head or some gesture of the body is a sufficient testification of a mans being in the Covenant so farr as to procure the admission of his child to baptisme he searched out the use of the latine and greeke words which serve to expresse that gesture and are used to shew the consent or dissent of the will in any matter But to what purpose I know not For it is not doubted that such words and gestures doe signifye the consent of the will nor that they are used in the worshipping of God nor that solemne covenants and professions of speciall persons in the Church are so expressed as the stipulation of ministers Elders and Deacons received into office and the profession of publick repentance before the Congregation are accomplished with saying yea and some gesture of body But will all this prove the point in question Surely no. For 1. the persons in the forenamed cases are members of the Church or sufficiently knowne to the Church but these are neither of that Church nor of any other or not knowne to be such otherwise those expressions would not be judged sufficient in a doubtfull case 2. they know and understand what is propounded to them and whereunto they give such a testification of assent which many of those of whom the question is doe not 3. the profession in those cases is made by the partyes themselves but in this by any nurse or other person in the parents absence yet those also are as unknowne as the parents yea such parents and sureties are so farr from being knowne to be beleivers that they are many of them notoriously knowne to live as without God in the world in all loosenes and profanenes In his third Answer he sayeth he cometh more particularly unto the places of Scripture alleadged by me I wish he may be found to doe so in the issue that we may find some ground for fayth to rest upon 1. For the first text Acts. 11.21.26 It is not professed by what words or signes they professed their faith conversion to God How can it be proved from hence that such as said yea and bowed their heads bodies in testimony of their approbation and liking thereof might not thereupon be admitted to baptisme and their infants Reply 1. It is enough that they satisfyed the Apostles that they beleived and turned to the Lord and that they did so in truth appeareth by the testimony which the Holy Ghost giveth them in that place It matters not by what words or signes more or lesse it was done but had there bene no more done then saying yea or nodding the head by persons otherwise altogether unknowne it would not have satisfyed 1. Because fayth and conversion to God doe appeare where they are in more and better fruits and evidences then those as himselfe I beleive would manifest if he were to handle that text 2. Because more reverent and religious respect was had in those times to the seales of the Covenant then to pollute them by such a promiscuous dispensing them as is used in Amsterdam 2. But what an unreasonable demand is that How can it be proved hence c For 1. I deny that such a saying of yea can be proved in the Apostles times to be a sufficient evidence of ones being a Christian and alleadge this