Answers we have studied not onely to answer to the Reply but have taken in what sundry others godly learned object against our principles but without mentioning scarce any time their Names of which we are sparing for no other reason but because we honour the men from our very hearts and could wish though differently minded from us in some things as Melanchthon did in another the like case to live and die in their bosomes The name of this servant of Christ now asleep is an oyntment poured out and precious to us we could therefore have wisht it our portion to have answered the Booke without the least reflecting upon him but the necessity herein is unavoydable This onely we adde that whatever weaknesses may passe from us let them not bee imputed to those servants of Christ that set us on work and have wanted leisure to review what is here done Every one may not bee in all things of the same mind with us for they may meet us in the same end though they use not the same arguments or become followers of us in the same path yet we know wee are not alone in any thing but may safely say this much that what is here defended is generally acknowledged and received in these Churches of Christ A DEFENCE OF THE NINE POSITIONS CHAP. I. Concerning the Title WHereas it is called a new Church-way wee little expected that Brethren studious of Reformation who have been so exercised with imputations of novelty would have so readily and in the frontispice cast the same upon us who with them desire to walk in the first wayes of our Lord Jesus Christ and his holy Apostles but as in most substantiall points of Church-order wee goe along with the best reformed Churches so wee doubt not to make it good that wherein wee pressing after further Reformation seeme to differ from them yet wee build upon Scripture grounds acknowledged by many godly and Learned Reformers in our English and other reformed Churches which if the Lord have in mercy given us further â—…ight or rather opportunity to practise then they had let it not bee imputed to us for novelty A new edition of the old Church-way of godly Reformers in some things perhaps corrected and amended is no new Church-way or if it be thought the mending of some crooks in the old way make a new way wee answer with Junius in a case not unlike Vt cunque nâ—…vam esse videâ—…tur 〈◊〉 quaecunque sunt vetera fuerunt nova ac non propterâ—…a novâ—…tatâ—â— nomine vitiosa nisi forte novam pro renovatâ restitutâ accipitis quo sensuâ—… novam esse hanc viam agnosciâ—â—â— One thing more in the Title page the Reader is to take notice of that whereas it is said This Treatise of Mr. Ball was penned a little before his death and sent over 1637. it seemes to bee a mistake of the Printer for the Nine Questions themselves were sent over 1636 the answer returned 38 but miscarrying another was sent 39. from which time wee longingly expected a return but partly for the reason rendred in the Epistle and what else wee know not wee never in so many yeares received any till this printed Reply by a Friends meanes came occasionally to our hands 1644. Concerning the Epistle to the Reader Whereas the publishers of this Treatise impute unto us or some related to our Cause That we are the Volunteers such as cry up this way and forward to blow such things abroad in the world which pressed them to make this Controversie publique 1 Wee may truly professe before the world that our Epistle sent with our former Answer proceeded from a spirit of love and peace with an humble willingnesse to receive further light by the holy and just Animadversions of our reverend and belâ—â—â—d Brethren which wee earnestly expected as men 〈…〉 after the truth 2 That wee were altogether ignorant of the 〈◊〉 of that our Answer and in that it was published then was not without our utter dislike wee have neither sounded trumpet nor struck up drum to any if any such volunteers wee heartily grieve that there are any differences between Brethren much more that they should bee published most of all if before they bee privately debated and brought to some head by mutual consent are thought fit to be sent out to publique considerations 3 For our Brethren in England we know no reason to question the truth of that Apology of our Brother Mr. Thomas Weld in his answer to W. R. pag. 2. Obj. 3. Answ 1. where he professeth in the name of himselfe and others of our way a lothnesse to appeare in the case and that although they had Bookes of this subject ready for the Presse yet by joint consent they suppressed them happily to the detriment of the Cause being unwilling to blow a fire and whether they appeared in Pulpit or Presse without instigation and how sparingly hee appeales to all the godly to judge 4 Lastly wee desire our Brethren to consider the date of Mr. Ball his Booke printed for stinted Liturgies one chiefe part of this controversie and the Printed answer to the Nine questions and let that resolve the question who of us came first Volunteers into the field and if any through weaknesse or zeale without knowledge have been too clamorous to cry up New-England way with reproach to others wee desire the world to take notice that they have neither patent nor patterne from us so to doe who came not hither proudly to censure others but to reforme our owne CHAP. II. Qu. 1. That a stinted Forme of Prayer and set Liturgie is unlawfull Reply THis Position cannot beare that meaning which you give it if you take it according to our minds and the plaine construction of the words We never questioned why you made not use of a Liturgie c. Answ Let our Answer bee viewed and it will appeare that wee had just cause to premise those distinctions of Formes of Prayer into private and publike and publike into such as are imposed by others or composed and used by Ministers themselves before their Sermons otherwise we must have involved such in the Position as wee doe not condemn Now if your generall thesis justly admit such limitation to publike imposed Formes where shall wee finde any set stinted imposed Liturgies but in Churches of the Papacy or Prelacy no Reformed Churches stinting or imposing their Formes of Prayer but leaving Ministers and people at much liberty Onely the English Liturgy therefore is such according to the plaine construction of the words 2 Concerning your minds in the Position wee deny not but you might intend to draw from us an approbation of stinted Liturgies in generall that so you might have to stay the separation of people from your Liturgy whereof you complaine but by that it appeares plainly what your chiefe scope and ayme was in the Position according unto which wee thought it most safe and pertinent for us to
answer And this wee did the rather for our reason mentioned in our letter because though all of us could not concurre to condemne all set Formes as unlawfull yet wee could in this viz. that though some set Forms may bee lawfull yet it will not follow that this of the English Liturgy is therefore to remove all obscurities and breake all snares and resolve the question in the true intent of it wee were forced to distinguish of Formes and so touch the true Helena of this controversie and therefore if any shall narrowly observe Mr. Ball his large defence of set Forms in generall they shall finde those wings spread forth in a very great breadth to give some shelter and warmth to that particular Liturgie then languishing and hastening through age and feeblenesse towards its last end Reply It is true people separate from our Liturgie because stinted not because this or that or ours in particular Answ If because it's stinted then because yours for we know none properly such but yours and it may well bee one offence to all godly consciences that yours are so imposed and stinted as they bee though it is hardly credible to us so farre as our observation reach that the main causes of the godly withdrawing from your Liturgy should be the stinting of it when so many corruptions in Matter and Forme have been objected against it by the best godly Reformers And seeing the same persons will joyne with Prayers of godly Preachers though they use the same forme of prayer usually and so in a large sense freely stinting themselves thereto though not properly in such sense as your Liturgy is stinted Reply But say you such set Formes used by Preachers are disliked also and your reasons especially the two last why you admit not a stinted Liturgie conclude against both in our understanding Answ Wee deny not but some may dislike the constant use of such Formes especially when studiously framed with elegancy of phrases and as the manner of some is but doe any we now speak of condemne all use thereof or withdraw from them that use them which is now the case in hand For our parts wee neither know such men or if we did we should condemn such minds As for our Reasons in generall or the two last you mention in particular it passeth our understanding to conceive how any such inference can bee made if the Reply had formed the inferences from our arguments it may bee wee should have seene more by the helpe of such spectacles But passing over what we say to the Position as we interpret it you think fit to advertise us of some things which are six Reply Advert 1. Your reasons why you accept not a stinted Liturgie are ambiguously propounded and so that such as looke at stinted Liturgies as images forbidden Command 2. may easily draw your words to their meaning Answ If our Reasons themselves being sound and unanswered by you contain any thing that may be drawn to such a Position that cannot arise from the ambiguousnesse of words which are plaine but from their abuse who mis-apply them Reply Advert 2. The Reasons you bring against a set forme of Prayer doe hold as strong against a set forme of Catechisme confession and profession of faith blessing baptizing and singing of Psalmes Answ 1 Concerning forms of Catechismes and confessions of Faith if religiously and perspicuously framed wee account them of singular use though abused by men nor without some sacred allowance yet from hence to infer the like use of set Formes of prayers neither our reasons nor any other will in force for Catechismes and Confessions as well as Psalmes in the nature of the thing require in some sense a set and limited Forme but publike prayers though they may admit of a set and comely order in the generall to prevent errour yet of their owne nature they require no set Forme for God gives us no new matter or doctrine daily to be beleeved but he gives new matter of new affection in prayer daily 2 If by set Forms of Catechismes and Confessions bee meant according to the termes of the Question stinted Formes like stinted Liturgies i. e. beyond or short of which Ministers may not teach or Christians beleeve and professe then wee should say the same of these as wee doe of stinted Formes of Prayer wee confesse there is danger in casting by all Formes of Confessions and Catechismes lest through the instability of ungrounded and heady men pretending new light or searching after further light the Churches adhere to nothing and their Faith as the learned Leyden Professors terme it become fides horaria or menstrua The faith of an houre or moneth and then cast it off the next And on the other side there is danger that by imposing such Confessions too far that which is indeed further light be supprest wee therefore thinke it usefull and needfull to pave out such high wayes of Catechismes and Confessions so as the subjects of Christ Jesus our King and Law-giver may walke therein without shackles reserving liberty for further future light in points lesse cleare yet standing in a readinesse alwayes to confesse and hold fast the present truth which appeares most cleare 3 Concerning Forms of blessing baptizing singing Scripture Psalmes there is a far differing reason from this case for the Lord himselfe hath left us Formes in these cases not onely for instruction but allowing the use of the same as Numb 6.23 c. Luke 10.5 Matth. 28.20 2 Chron. 29.30 and therefore such may bee used as hee hath left yet the Lord hath not imposed some of these at least to bee used alwayes and onely in his Churches much lesse doth hee allow any man to impose their own Forms upon his Churches or conforme to such as are tyrannously imposed Reply Third Advert We have not called you at this time to witnesse for or against the corruptions of the Common-prayer-book this you fall upon by straining the sense of our demands Answ Wee have spoken to this before and we thinke whatsoever your intent and desire was yet the nature of the thing and the case it selfe gave us a just call to testifie against it especially seeing the corruptions then increased in England and the impositions were more rigid and violent Reply The reasons you bring against the Communion-booke wee cannot approve them all the exceptions against it wee know but to esteem the whole for some corruptions found therein a Monument of Idolatry that we have not learned Answ The Answer calls it not a Monument of Idolatry for some corruptions onely found in it though the corruptions in matter and manner bee objected as the first reason why wee used it not but being never commanded of God greatly abused unto Idolatry and superstition and of no necessary use the same that was in Popery for substance which are the usuall arguments for abolishing Images Ceremonies and all Monuments of Idolatry and wee marvaile how any
worships and the following reformed Churches those of Scotland Geneva and divers others in France and Switserland c. whose Doctrines rites and administrations wee doubt not will bee confessed more pure then English Churches It would bee too tedious and in these knowing times needlesse to search all records and to compare the puritie of the prayers and rites of these with former times wee read of very few formes used for 300. yeeres some short ones they had which are retained yet in our Liturgie with many more and these formes they had not imposed nor stinted which is the great offence of this untill about the yeere 406. and there wee read in the Milevitan Councell that no prayers should bee used in Churches but what were either composed of able and sufficient men or approved by the Synods and this was determined onely in regard of the ignorant Ministery of those contentious and hereticall times as Chemnitius observes ne forte aliquid contra fidem vel per ignorantiam vel per minus studium sit compositum If the Roman Bishops did multiply as indeed they did excessively unlesse their owne admirers erre grossely rites and formes of prayer yet it is well knowne how long it was ere the Churches in other places submitted to their power so that this comparison might well have beene spared To conclude though wee say not that all Churches since 200. yeeres after Christ were so miserably decayed that the faithfull might not without sinne communicate with them yet wee may bee bold to say many of them were so corrupt that the faithfull did not nor could not communicate in many parts of Gods worship without sinnes of ignorance conforming to the corruptions themselves and that if they had seene and discovered the evill of them they ought and we beleeve would have abstained from divers ordinances in regard of the corrupt administrations of them yea after all meanes used to purge them out and not prevailing they ought and would have withdrawn themselves to more pure Churches or erected such amongst themselves Reply The prayers of the Ministers conceived or stinted in a set forme bee not his private prayers but the publike prayers of the assembly but you will not say the people ought not to joyn with their pastour therein if ought bee amisse for matter manner or both Answ There is a wide difference betweene the whole Liturgie so imposed and so clogged as is before shewed and such prayers of the Minister having something amisse But you may put the case so as it would bee unlawfull for people to joyne in such prayers also as if the Minister for matter usually pray to Saints for manner turne himselfe and fix his eye on a Crucifix Reply It is all one to the people in this case whether the fault bee personall as some distinguish or otherwise knowne beforehand or not knowne for if simple presence defile whether knowne before hand 〈◊〉 not all presence is faultie and if simple presence defile not our presence is not condemned by reason of the corruptions knowne whereof wee stand not guiltie Answ First we distinguish not here between personall and ministeriall faults but object against the personall act of him that joynes with that whole Liturgie and so in the corruptions of it as hee must needs doe that joyns with the whole not onely saying Amen to them but as is knowne he takes his share in those shreds of prayers Responds c. which in Mr. Cartwrights judgement is so absurd as makes a man seeme out of his wits And therefore his personall actuall conformitie must needs carry guilt and therefore there is more then simple presence in this case as is cleare to any understanding Secondly it is not all one whether the faults bee knowne or not knowne beforehand as appeares plainely 1 Cor. 10.27 28 29. where wee see if a man come to a feast and know not they eate with reference to the Idoll nor that any take offence he may eate without asking any question but if hee know such things he may not eate Besides publique sinfull actions of Ministers are either 1 Accidental occasional or 2ly known appointed in a stated service now the frailties of a Minister which accidentally fall in and are not known before nor are any part and essence of the service unto which men that come doe or should take themselves to bee called hinder not communion because they doe not prae se ferre by their presence to attend and observe them but the corruptions of the Liturgie are knowne and appointed and to which and with which the imposers call others to joyne as in a stated service to God the use of which if it bee an humane frailtie in Gods Ministers not yet convinced of the evill thereof yet for those to communicate herein who know such evills have surely passed the bounds of frailtie and infirmitie because in this action of prayer there is not onely communion by way of presence as it is in hearing the word but communion of action publique prayer being the common action of the whole Church towards God There can be no prayer by any man offered to God but there will be some humane frailties attending on it if therefore for this cause wee should reject communion in prayer wee should reject the ordinances of God and never joyne in any prayer in this world but the corruptions of the Liturgie are not such but that they may bee more easily cast off then kept This case stands not in tolerating faults in another as the reply makes it but in actuall joyning with the sinnes of another wherein hee that joyneth is involved and therefore whether they bee corruptions that may bee tolerated or not in another yet if sinnes they may not bee practised and so joyned in with another And therefore the case you put of communion with any person obstinate in errour till hee may bee convinced is nothing to this purpose For wee must not joyne with him in his error no not an houre though wee may tolerate him a moneth Reply Hath not Christian wisedome and experience of humane frailties lessoned you deare brethren to beare one with another in matters of greater consequence then any have or can bee objected truely against the forme of prayer in use among us Answ The Lord hath lessoned us to tolerate and beare with many humane frailties not onely in one another but also in our deare brethren abroad but to joyne with the best of men in conformitie to knowne and grosse corruptions in worshipping God or to stoop so low to the insolent tyranny of usurping Prelates as to beare on our backs their whole Liturgie and the corruptions thereof wee confesse wee have not yet learned and now wee hope never to goe to that schoole againe to learne the same Reply And why such corruptions should not bee ascribed to humane frailtie we see not For if a godly Minister make use of a booke in things which hee judges
proposition so they will much take off the edge of the Reply For it will appeare that all conformitie of Ministers and people to any parcells of that booke at such a season as this was is a farre differing case from those that are put in some of the replies 1 To the first reply then wherein you put it beyond imagination that such a practise should bee scandalous or offensive wee know not what you have observed in some particular congregations neere you but what ever have beene the opinions of men formerly concerning this practise yet you know that the booke in generall hath been condemned of all godly reformers and the use of any part of it hath been counted burdensome to many for the reasons named But of later times as the booke and conformitie thereto was urged more hotly so the spirits of very many grew more zealous against it and began to loath it and to withdraw wholly from it many very inquisitive about the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of joyning with it at all and your selves complaine of the withdrawing of many from joyning in the ordinances where it was used so that wee see not but at least in some persons and at some places and times it might probably bee offensive and scandalous so to practise 2 Wee looked not onely to the offence of those in your owne congregations but to the imboldning and hardning of Papists in honouring any part of their portuises above the formes of other reformed Churches abroad and you cannot bee ignorant how many of the Lords witnesses now asleepe have testified of the offence and danger thereof Reply 2 You say if the booke were an Idolothyte yet latent offence doth not oblige Answ The offence in this season and as all things stand cannot bee latent complaint is made of the offence taken by many and therefore it is evident Reply 3 The booke so farre as it is sound and good by your confession is no Idolothyte nor taken out of the Masse booke in such sense as you object but rather the Masse and other prayers added to it Popery is a scab cleâ—…ving to the Church and many truths belonging to the Church as her proper Legacy were stolne and heaped together in that Denne And why the true man may not challenge his goods where ever hee finde them or the theefe plead title to the true mans goods by prescription wee know not Answ First wee judge the whole booke an Idolothyte and whence you gather that wee confesse the contrary of any part of it as it stands apart in relation to that whole wee know not Secondly that it was taken out of the Masse booke was proved by the confession of King Edward and other evidences are many but you say not in such sense as wee object But rather è contra Masse c. added to it c. But where to finde such a legacy bequeathed to the Church in the Testament of our Lord Jesus Christ wee could never yet see So that wee rather feare all those formes of prayer of marriage burialls visitations of the sick confirmation c. are rather the copper counterfeit coyne of a well growne Antichrist whereby he cousened the Churches when hee stole away the golden Legacy of Christ rather then any part of the true Churches Legacy and therefore it had been more happy for the Churches that they had never challenged the same but let the theefes prescription to have been a good plea to hold them still this further we adde when we say it was taken out of the Masse-booke wee understand Masse-booke in a large sense as it is commonly taken for to speake narrowly it was collected out of three Popish bookes the first part of publique Prayers exbreviario the second part viz. the order of administring Sacraments Matrimony visiting the sick and burialls è Rituali 3. the order of consecration in the Supper the Epistles and Gospels and Collects è Missali as the forme of consecration of Bishops and Priests was taken è Pontificali as the Author of Altare Damasc shews pag. 612. Thirdly because those words Popery is a scab c. may bee a seed of much evill an Egge out of which a Serpent may bee hatched if men zealous of mouldy formes may but have time againe to set upon it if the wheele of these evill times through Gods judgement on this wanton age turne the Prelates or other zelotes for this Liturgie uppermost wee shall therefore crave libertie to examine this speech more narrowly And because as it is said unumquodque ex suâ origine rectissime judicatur wee shall trace the steps of the first times and so downeward to see what sound parts of Liturgie there was on which this scab is supposed to grow 1. Our blessed Saviour taught his Disciples a blessed forme which though it may bee lawfully and comfortably used the rather not being of mans but the Lords composing yet it is evident hee never appointed his people to use it as their onely forme and therefore the Apostles in the primitive Church in that heavenly prayer Acts 4. did not attend to the words and forme of this prayer though they might have this in their eye as the comon rule and direction how to powre out their prayers to God for particular things which may be an everlasting witnesse against their usurpations that will limit the Churches to their formes which the Lord Christ would not doe to his owne 2. In the first 300. yeeres after Christ wee read of few formes that the Churches used and those rather short ejaculations then set formes but contrarily wee read frequently of the exercise of their gifts in prayer They prayed sine monitore quia de pectore saith Tertullian i. e. They prayed without a Promptour because from the heart which as Zephirus observes was in opposition to the prompted formes then in use amongst the Pagans Wee read also what they prayed for viz. pro inimicis pro imperatoribus pro statu seculi pro morà finis c. but of any set formes we read not Their persecutions and dayes of afflictions preserved them from formalitie in prayer and taught them how to finde their hearts and knees and tongues to poure out their soules to God while under the Altar they were pouring out their blood 3. But after the Churches had enjoyed peace for some space of time wherein securitie usually makes insensible and insensâ—…blenesse formall then indeed wee read of set and imposed formes which the rather prevailed in regard of the grosse and palpable ignorance of a blind ministry under a more learned Prelacy and therefore it is well observed by Chemnitius that the third Councell of Carthage decreed this ut nemo in precibus c. viz. that no Minister in his prayers either names the Father for the Sonne or the Sonne for the Father but when hee comes to the Altar to direct his prayers alwayes to God the Father and that no man use his owne formes
them vers 27. what he spake vers 28. of Apostles and other gifts set in the Church he applyes also to them Chap. 14. whereas he speaks of the exercise of divers gifts in that Church when the whole Church came together vers 23 so he speaks the same of himself an Apostle vers 6. When I come c. We take notice of divers reasons alledged from the Chapter that he spake of the Catholick church but they doe not inforce it for grant such things are true of the Catholick church in a sense viz. that in it God works all in all in it are diversities of gifts c. yet the Apostles scope is to speak to this Church as hath been shewed and all are truly applyable unto it this Church came behinde in no good gift Chap. 1.7 this Church was one body vers 27. and baptized into one body whether Jews or Gentiles bond or free the members of this Church needed the helpe one of another must not make schismes in the Body must care one for another c. yea Apostles as well as other gifts were in the church 1 Cor. 3.1 1 Cor. 14.6 So that from the scope and drift of the Apostle all these Offices and gifts might be and were set in Corinth and therefore this place will not evince a Catholick organicall body yet we mean not that Apostles were wedged in here but they were set also in every church as also Teachers are in every church but each according to the nature of the Office the one limited the other not Secondly we deny not but in this discourse the Apostle also vers 12 13. intendeth the whole mysticall body of Christ which is one Christ neither doe we deny that these gifts of Apostles Prophets c. are given to this Church but this will not prove it to be an organicall Church For what is this body of Christ this one Christ into whom all are baptized c. It is properly the whole company of true beleevers in all ages and so containes the invisible body of Christ which Catholick body of all ages cannot properly make an organicall body and be it so that this body is visible having visible ordinances baptized and drunk into one body yet the Apostle respects the â—…eall union of all the members to Christ and therefore I 〈…〉 understand spirituall and effectuall baptism containing the inward vertue with the outward sign Again the Apostles were 〈◊〉 for the gathering 〈◊〉 of the elect amongst all the heathen and 〈◊〉 but that proves not all those elect who also are a part of Christs sheep John in â—â— were an organicall Church or a part of it till called and added to the Church In a word Apostles Prophets c. were given to and set in the mysticall body of Christ as the chief object had and for whose sake and good they were intentionally ordained of Christ but not set in it as one organicall body for the actuall and immediate administration of the visible ordinances of Christ to it but thus 〈…〉 as gathered into such Church societies as the Lord hath 〈◊〉 for that end and in this sense we agree with 〈◊〉 Mr. 〈…〉 of the right 〈…〉 pag. 2â—…1 Aâ—â— saith he to what â—…nd and to what first principall subject hath the Lord given reason and the faâ—…ulty to discoâ—… as it is Peter John c. as to the first subject and to them as for their good No no it is 〈◊〉 and for the race of mankind The case is just so here 1. Cor. 12. â—…8 God hath set Apostles c. We say also it is just so here as God hath given reason in respect of the end to mankinde first and then to the individuâ—â— so God hath set in the mysticall Church for the good of it as chiefly intended by Christ Apostles Prophets c. but now as in the 〈◊〉 all dispensing of this gift of reason for the good of mankinde Reason is not given to any such body as the whole race of mankinde to descend to John Peter c. but first to John Peter and all the individualls that so by induction of all particulars the whole kinde of reasonable man may be made up and the end attained and so it is here God in giving Officers and gifts for the good of the mysticall body of Christ firstly yet in execution gives these Officers and sets them in particular Churches that by the edification and perfection of all particulars the whole may be attained Thirdly Apostles Prophets and all gifts and offices in generall and indefinitely are given to the Church indefinitely considered but particular officers Paul Cephas Apollo Titus Arabippus c. are given or set in particular Churches we mean according to the severall natures and extents of their offices As unto Bees in generall ingiâ—â—â— a power to gather honey and order themselves in their hives but in their exercise of this power it is given to the severall swarms in the hives who have their Queens c. to order themselves But as this power in generall makes not a universall organicall body of Bees no more here an universall organicall Church Lastly to speak more particularly we conceive that the place in the utmost latitude of it is meant of the mysticall body that one body into which all are baptized vers 13. And that the fundamentall mistake of our Brethren is this that because the Church here mentioned hath Organs and politicall Officers in it that therefore it must needs make one politicall Church where some Organs are to rule in common and every part is to be subject to the whole For although the mysticall Church hath Organs and politicall Officers in it yet it follows not therefore that it is one politicall body For the invisible Church conjoyned with the visible hath politicall Officers set in it and given to it as invisible as well as visible in respect of Gods generall designation and particular application of them to this whole Church yet it follows not that they are one politicall body by actuall combination thereunto actuall combination we say for although Christs institution must warrant and prescribe all forms of politicall bodies yet it will not be found that ever there was any politicall Society without actuall combination whether civill or sacred whether nationall or more particular The mysticall Church may be said to be organicall in respect of the Officers amongst them in the severall parts thereof every part being a part of the whole spiritually though not politically But it doth not thence follow that the whole is one politicall body but mysticall Politicall Officers may and must suppose some part of the Church to be visible but not that the whole should be Politicall For the Apostles by extraordinary Commission for their time were officers of visible beleevers fit matter for a combination as well as of particular combinations yet it follows not that visible beleevers existing out of combinations were a politicall Society that
communion together in the Jewish policy and yet were not one politicall Body so the Churches of Galatia might have communion together yet were distinct Churches not one Church aâ—… also the Churches of New England have sweet and blessed commâ—…nion yet are distinct And though the Churches of Galaâ—…ia were called a whole lâ—…mp as is objected yet were they thus by politicall combination or as Dr. Downam to mould up a Diocesan Church compares the first Church to a great lump of dough or batch of bread out of which particular Churches were formed into many loaves or not rather called a lump by spirituall union and relation common profession and fraternall communion being all the same Countrey-men so also the Apostles had Church communion yet were not a politicall body Kingdoms so may have civil communion and commerce yet not be one Kingdom Objection 6 If the Keys be given to a particular Church under the notion of the Spouse of Christ a flock of redeemed ones c. and then much more to the Catholick visible Church which is the Spouse of Christ and flock of redeemed ones primarily and to a particular Church onely secondarily but the first is affirmed by such as deny such a Catholick Church Ergo. Answ 1 It is true the notion of a flock of redeemed ones of the Body and Spouse of Christ Kingdom House c. doe agree primarily to the Church not of this but of all ages and secondarily to the Church of this age Colos 1.18 Ephes 5.25 26. and 2.19 2 The Church which is the Body of Christ existing in this age the Keys are given to it primarily in comparison of particular Churches coexisting with it as to the chief object and end but not to it as a politicall Body in respect of actuall and immediate dispensation thereof for as we have oft said if in respect of Politicall dispensation the Keys belong firstly to the Body of Christ as his Spouse and redeemed ones then the Church invisible as invisible rather then visible must have the dispensation of the Keys primarily 3 It is not said that the Keys are immediately given to a particular Church abstractly as a number of redeemed but as consociated and politically combined And in this respect that may be attributed to the part a particular Congregation of redeemed ones which cannot be attributed to the whole Ex. gr such a Congregation is combined so is not the whole nor can be such a Church may choose a Pastor over it but so cannot the whole so a man may tell the particular Church who may convene together not so the whole Thus far through the helpe of Christ we have endevoured to clear the first Point propounded concerning a Catholick instituted Church We come now to prove the second Point viz. That Jesus Christ hath instituted in the Gospel a particular Church of one Congregation in which and unto which the actuall and immediate dispensation and participation of all instituted Worship doe regularly and ordinarily belong And here we shall shew 1 What such a particular Church is 2 How the dispensation of Church power and priviledge do belong unto it For the first we shall declare our selves in these Five Propositions 1 It must be a visible Society for One man cannot make a Church nor can many visible beleevers living severally without society in severall Nations make One Church 2 It 's not every Society of visible Professors that doe make a Church for then every family of such Professors are a Church Then two or three which our Brethren so much condemn are a Church and then a Society of Women professing the truth may be a Politicall Church then many members of severall Churches met to hear a Sermon or any like occasion make a Church then a number of Professors may constitute a Diocesan Church or any like form for out of this block That any number of beleevers made a Church Dr. Downam hewed out his Diocesan Church and so made a fit seat for his Diocesan Mercury Lastly then particular Churches should have no more any set Form prescribed then Civill government which is as variable as humane wisdome sees meet for hence a particular Church may be melted into any form or mould of civil Society for imagine a number of professing beleevers cohabiting either in a City Hundred Wapentake Shire Province Nation Empire c. there shall then be so many forms of Churches contrary to the principles and unanswerable arguments of our best Reformers who accounted it a great absurdity that the heavenly Kingdome of Christ should be moulded and framed according to the weaknesse of humane wisdome and policy 3 It must therefore be a Society combined and that by a Covenant explicite or implicite for it must be such a combined Society where the whole have power over its members now whatever power one hath over another if it be not by way of conquest or naturall relation as the father over the childe it is by covenant as husband and wife Master and servant Prince and people other powers are but usurpations it is noted as a prophane speech in Bronnus who professed he knew no other rule of Justice then for the greater to subdue the lesse Again it is such a Society as hath an ordinate power to subject it self to Officers by electing of them to administer ordinances amongst them but this is onely a federall Society Again it is such a Society to the making up of which is required something more then faith Acts 5.14 Beleevers were added to the Lord or to his Church so that they were first beleevers before they were added to the Church for there may be a number of beleevers converted at one Sermon and immediately scattered into many Towns or Countreys Now if faith professed alone makes not a Church but somewhat more is required what can that be but foederall combination Lastly that the dissolution whereof doth unchurch a people doth constitute a Church but breaking the combination dissolves the Church whether by consent schism or when God himself removes the candlestick Ergo. 4 Though a Church be such by combining and so subjecting themselves to the power of others yet it must not be herein illimited but according to the form and mould expressed in the Word for if they have this power to combine as many and as largely as they will then a Diocese Province Nation may combine and so put themselves under the power of a Diocesan Provinciall Nationall society which is unlawfull for the Church must be such a form as a man may ordinarily bring offences unto it according to Matth. 18. Tell the Church but that cannot be in a Diocese much lesse in a Province or Nation where the Members can neither take notice of the offence nor ordinarily so much as consent unto any censure acted by any Officers in such a Church nay further if their power be unlimited they may choose a Diocesan Pastor one or many to feed all or one to
ordinances of Christ and priviledges of a Church which the other have not being out of that order of Christ prescribed in the Gospel in which order of a visible Church visible ordinances are to be dispensed as hath been proved before Reply If a Synod consisting of sundry members of particular Churches met together in the name of Christ about the common and publike affaires of the Churches shall joine together in prayer and Communion of the Supper we can see no ground to question it as unlawfull although that assembly bee no particular Congregation or Church hath no Pastour over them c. Answ That such an assembly may pray together is no question for every family may doe so and that they may receive the Supper also in a right order wee deny not for meeting where there is a particular instituted Church they may have Communion therewith in the Supper being many as well as few but whether they may as a Church being no politicall body but members of many Politicall Churches administer Church ordinances proper to a Church wee would see some reasons before wee can judge it lawfull so to doe for though some doe account such a Synod Ecclesia orta yet not properly such a Church as hath Ecclesiasticall power authority and priviledge belonging thereto they may consult and doctrinally determine of cases of that assembly Acts 15. but further to proceed we see no rule nor paterne Besides if such an assembly of many Churches may administer Seales why may not any other assembly of Church members or Ministers doe the same and so this power will be carried without limitation we know not how far if they once depart from a particular Church CHAP. VIII Consid 3. Reply TO the third consideration this whole reason as it is propounded makes onely against it selfe who ever thought that the Seales were not proper to confederates or the Church of God of old visible beleevers in the Covenant of grace were of the visible Church and in Church order according to the dispensation of those times though not joyned to the society of Abrahams family to exclude Job Melchisedeck c. because not of the visible Church is welnigh a contradiction and so to debarre known approved Christians c. Answ That this reason makes not against it self Mr. Ball himself hath cleared when he stated our consideration truely in the words following as will appeare however here he somewhat troubles the waters needlessely that the ground may not appeare for there is nothing in our answer which deny Melchisedech Job c. to bee of the visible Church according to the manner of those times indeed wee instance in them as persons under the covenant of grace not mentioning their membership in family Churches as being enough for our purpose if they had not right to Circumcision by vertue of their right in the covenant of grace except they joyned to the Church at first in Abrahams family and so after to the same Church in Israel and the more speciall Church relation in Abrahams family was required to Circumcision the stronger is the force of our reason not the weaker For so much the rather it followes that seales are not to bee dispensed to beleevers as such though visibly professing the faith except they joyne also to such a forme of the visible Church to or in which the seales are instituted and given Reply The true and proper meaning of this consideration is that as Circumcision and the Passeover were not to bee dispensed to all visible beleevers under the Covenant of grace but onely to such as were joyned to Abrahams family or the people of the God of Abraham no more may Baptisme and the Lords Supper be administred now to any beleevers unlesse they be joyned to some particular Congregation Answ These words rightly stating the consideration wee leave it to any indifferent reader to judge whether any way it make against it selfe or whether there was any cause first to darken it as was done in the former passage Reply The strength of it stands in the parity betweene Circumcision and Baptisme but this parity is not found in every thing as your selves alledge To unfold it more fully wee will consider three things First wherein the Sacraments agree and wherein they differ Answ It matters not in how many things the Sacraments differ so they agree in the thing questioned and though wee might raise Disputes and Queries about some particulars in this large discourse upon this first head yet seeing here is a grant of the parity in the point now questioned viz. Concerning the persons to whom Circumcision and Baptisme doe belong wee shall take what is granted and leave the rest For thus it is said Circumcision and Baptisme are both Sacraments of Divine institution and so they agree in substance of the things signified the persons to whom they are to be administred and the order of administration if the right proportion be observed Now that we hold the right proportion in the persons may appearâ—… First in that as was granted Circumcision sealed the entrance into the Covenant but this Covenant was not simply and onely the Covenant of grace but that whole Covenant that was made with Abraham whereby on Gods part they were assured of many speciall blessings whereof Lot and others not in this Covenant with Abraham were not capable and whereby Abraham his seed and family were bound for their part to be a people to God and to observe this signe of the Covenant which others in the Covenant of grace were not bound to Answ Secondly as is granted it was Abraham and his houshold and the seed of beleeving Jewes that were the persons to bee Circumcised and therefore not visible beleevers as such for then Lot had been included so by right proportion not all visible beleevers as such but such as with Abraham and his family are in visible Covenant to bee the people of God according to the institution of Churches when and to which the seale of Baptisme is given and therefore as all family Churches but Abrahams being in a new forme of a Church were excluded so much more such as are in no visible constituted Church at all Reply Secondly As for the proposition it selfe certaine it is Circumcision and the Passeover were to bee administred onely to the visible members of the Church i. e. to men in Covenant professing the true faith but that in Abrahams time none were members of the visible Church which joyned not to Abrahams family wee have not learned Answ The proposition wee see is granted yet it is obscured divers wayes to which wee answer First whereas it is said these members of the Church were men in Covenant professing the true faith True but where not in any place but in the Church of Abrahams family and so after in the Church of Israel Secondly what faith not onely faith in the Messiah for life and salvation but withall faith in the promises made to
A DEFENCE OF THE Answer made unto the Nine Questions or Positions sent from New-England Against the REPLY THERETO BY That Reverend servant of Christ Mr. JOHN BALL Entituled A Tryall of the New Church-way in New-England and in Old Wherin beside a more full opening of sundry particulars concerning Liturgies Power of the Keys matter of the visible Church c. is more largely handled that controversie concerning the Catholick visible Church tending to cleare up the Old-way of Christ in New-England Churches By Iohn Allin Pastor of Dedham Tho. Shepard Pastor of Cambridge in New-England Veritas nihil crubescit praeterquam abscondi Tertul. Sua silentia amat Spiritus per quae nobis illabitur seque insinuat cupidis non gloriae sed cognoscendae veritatis Melanct. Let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph and upon the top of the head of him that was separated from his Brethren Deut. 33.16 London Printed by R. Cotes for Andrew Crooke and are to be sold at the Green Dragon in Pauls Church-yard 1648. The Preface to the Reader IT was the profession of the Lord Jesus before Pilate when he questioned with him about his Kingdome John 18.37 That for this cause he was born and came into the world to beare witnesse of the truth Many truths about the spirituall Kingdom of Christ hath he imparted to us if therfore we be born into the world or sent into this Wildernesse to beare witnesse to his truth it is unto us reward sufficient that we should be witnesses thereunto even to the utmost parts of the Earth Wee confesse wee have been too slow in this service of Christ not having to this day set forth an unanimous Confession of that Form of wholsome words which is Preached received and professed in these Churches of the Lord Jesus and which we are not unmindfull of though our distances and other difficulties may delay the opportunity But this in the meane time we professe in generall That so farre as wee know there is the same blessed Spirit of Truth breathing in the Ministery of the Country the same Faith embraced and professed in the Churches which is generally received as the Orthodox Doctrine of the Gospel in the best reformed Churches and particularly by our godly learned Brethren of England and Scotland And though errours have sprung up among us and some are gone out from us that we feare were not of us yet wee have borne witnesse against them and by the blessing of God by the breath of Christ in the mouths of his servants they have been blasted Neither doe we understand that these Churches are accused of any errours about the saving truths of the Gospel and therefore we thought our selves not so much called of God to such a Confession at present as to cleare up to the world those Truths we professe about the kingdome and government of Christ in his Churches which is the great worke of this age and of this nick of time And yet here also we feare that we have been too slack for though it bee said VVee are the Volunteers such as cry up this way c. and so it seemes wee are apprehended to bee one cause of these present differences yet if things be well weighed we may seem rather to bee farre behinde in the duty that lyes upon us Indeed some briefe Answers sent over to some particular persons to satisfie Brethren what our practise is with some briefe touch of our reasons rather then to discâ—…sse those points have been printed by some without our knowledge or assent upon what grounds they best know And some short Treatises by some reverend Brethren have been published to declare their affectionate desires of the unanimous endevours of all our deare Brethren for a generall and holy Reformation But what hath been said or done that either may justly offend the minds of the godly provoke their spirits disunite their affections or hinder a godly Reformation Yea wee have been too slow to cleare our Doctrine and practise from the many objections harsh interpretations and manifold criminations cast upon the same wherein wee feare our lothnesse to intermeddle in these Controversies for feare of making the breach wider amongst Brethren and our desire rather to attend what light we might receive from others in these points wherein wee professe our selves seekers after the truth have made us guilty of neglect in this our duty But now we see our selves pressed hereto by a necessity of justifying our wayes against the many aspersions cast upon them as well as against the Reasons used against them for wee perceive by the first Letter of our Brethren how the with-drawing of Christians from the Liturgy was imputed to us and by this Reply both in the Epistle and divers passages wee cannot but see what apprehensions are raised of us yea many are apt to think that if we had said nothing yet our very act in forsaking the Churches of God in our deare native Country and the Cause of Christ there together with the practise of these Churches thought to bee so different from the reformed Churches have been not onely a great weakening to the hands of the Godly that have stood by the Cause of Christ but also have caused great disturbance to the Reformation in hand To which much might be said but that wee should exceed the bounds of an Epistle Yet let us intreat all the Godly wise to consider and look back upon the-season of this great enterprise undertaken by us and the manner of our proceedings in it with the admirable workings of Gods Providence first and last about it and we think though we were silent they may easily satisfie themselves whether this was of God or men a sinfull neglect of the Cause of Christ or a manifest attestation to the truth by open profession against Corruptions of Worship in use and for the necessity of reformation of the Church and that confirmed by no small degree of sufferings for the same For was it not a time when humane Worship and inventions were growne to such an intolerable height that the consciences of Gods saints and servants inlightened in the truth could no longer bear them was not the power of the tyrannicall Prelates so great that like a strong Current carryed all down streame before it what ever was from the law or otherwise set in their way Did not the hearts of men generally faile them Where was the people to bee found that would cleave to their godly Ministers in their sufferings but rather thought it their discretion to provide for their owne quiet and safety Yea when some freely in zeale of the Truth preached or professed against the corruptions of the times did not some take offence at it judge it rashnesse and to bee against all rules of discretion who since are ready to censure us for deserting the Cause Many then thought it is an evill time the prudent shall hold their peace and might wee not say this is not
c. yet should leave our accommodations and comforts should forsake our dearest relations Parents brethren Sisters Christian friends and acquaintances over looke all the dangers and difficulties of the vast Seas the thought whereof was a terrour to many and all this to go to a Wildernesse where wee could forecast nothing but care and temptations onely in hopes of enjoying Christ in his Ordinances in the fellowship of his people was this from a stupid senslesnesse or desperate carelesnesse what became of us or ours or want of naturall affections to our deare Countrey or nearest relations No surely with what bowells of compassion to our deare Countrey with what heart-breaking affections to our deare relations and Christian friends many of us at least came away the Lord is witnesse What shall we say of the singular Providence of God bringing so many Ship-loads of his people through so many dangers as upon Eagles wings with so much safety from yeare to yeare The fatherly care of our God in feeding and cloathing so many in a Wildernesse giving such healthfulnesse and great increase of posterity what shall wee say of the Worke it selfe of the kingdome of Christ and the form of a Common-wealth erected in a Wildernesse and in so few yeares brought to that state that scarce the like can bee seen in any of our English Colonies in the richest places of this America after many more years standing That the Lord hath carryed the spirits of so many of his people through all their toylsome labour wants difficulties losses c. with such a measure of chearfulnesse and contentation But above all wee must acknowledge the singular pity and mercies of our God that hath done all this and much more for a people so unworthy so sinfull that by murmurings of many unfaithfulnesse in promises oppressions and other evils which are found among us have so dishonoured his Majesty exposed his worke here to much scandall and obloquie for which wee have cause for ever to bee ashamed that the Lord should yet owne us and rather correct us in mercy then cast us off in displeasure and scatter us in this Wildernesse which gives us cause with Mich. 7. to say Who is a God like our God that pardoneth iniquities and passeth by the transgressions of the remnant of his heritage even because he delighteth in mercy Though we be a people of many weaknesses and wants yet wee acknowledge our God to have been to us a God of many mercies in respect of that sweet peace which he hath taken away from so many Nations yet continuing the same to us in respect also of that liberty wee have in Gods house the blessed Ministery of the Word the sweet unity and communion of Gods Churches and Ministers increase and multiplication of Churches Christian government in the Common-wealth and many other mercies wee enjoy but especially the gracious presence of Christ to many of our soules in all these But wee will not insist much upon this subject being perswaded it is in the consciences and hearts of many of our dear Countrey-men to thinke that we should be an object of love and tendernesse to that State and people by whose Laws and unkind usages we were driven out into a wildernesse rather then to bee judged as desertors of our Brethren and the Cause of Christ in hand with whom excuse us if we now speak plainly it had been far more easie unto many of us to have suffered then to have adventured hither upon the wildernesse sorrows wee expected to have met withall though we must confesse the Lord hath sweetned it beyond our thoughts and utmost expectations of prudent men But passing by this wee must desire the Reader to beare with us a little in removing that apprehension that wee are the great stumbling block in the way of Reformation which if it were true it had been better we had been driven so farre into this wildernesse as never to have been heard of more Concerning our affection to this blessed worke of a publique Reformation of the Nation in generall and the particular Churches or Congregations of the Land in particular as it is best knowne to God so wee thinke it is not unknowne to men not onely here by our daily prayers for it and sometime solemne seekings of God about it but also we have given some testimonies thereof both by private Letters and the publique motions of some of Gods eminent servants among us tending that way We conceive two things specially in our Doctrine and practise that may seem to bee stumbling blocks in the way of this publique Reformation which we shall here remove The first is our practise wherein wee seem so much to differ from the reformed Churches in receiving to our Churches onely visible Saints and beleevers This we doe freely confesse that our practise and judgement doe evidence this to all that we thinke reformation of the Church doth not onely consist in purging out corrupt Worship and setting up the true but also in purging the Churches from such profanenesse and sinfulnesse as is scandalous to the Gospel and makes the Lord weary of his owne Ordinances Esay 1. And wee doubt not but this was in the hearts of many if not most of Gods servants to desire a separation of the precious from the vile in the dispensing of Gods ordinances and if the charity of some be of larger extent herein then others this hinders not agreement in the maine This day hath discovered what kinde of people are to bee found every where in the Parishes of England Can light and darknesse Christ and Belial agree together Popish episcopall enemies and haters of all godlinesse and reformation cleave together in one Church of Christ with the Saints of God Yet neither our Doctrine nor practise do prescribe and limit the way of attaining this reformation whereby any should justly from our example stand off from concurring in such a publique worke It is true where there is no Church relation but a people are to begin a new constituting of Churches reformation is to be sought in the first Constitution This is our case But where corrupted Churches such as we conceive the Congregations of England generally to be are to be reformed there we conceive that such Congregations should bee called by able Ministers unto repentance for former evills and confessing and bewayling their sins renew a solemn Covenant with God to reform themselves and to submit unto the discipline of Christ By which meanes such as refuse so to doe exclude themselves and others by the severity of Discipline should bee purged out if falling into sinne they remaine impenitent in the same What some particular persons may have said or done contrary to this our profession wee cannot say nor doe we justifie but wee know nothing that hath come from us to the contrary to weaken the hands of godly reformers or to perswade the people to separate from the Congregations if by any meanes they might
attaine with toleration of what can be the reformation thereof with the liberty of Gods true worship therein If indeed that cannot bee obtained but men contradict and blaspheme them as Paul separated the Disciples so wee see no other remedy the faithfull have in such a case The second stumbling block may be our Doctrine and practise about Church-Government when wee give Discipline as well as other Ordinances to particular Churches not subjecting them to any Government out of themselves but onely to take the brotherly counsell and helpe one of another But how this should hinder a generall Reformation we see not for if every Church so reforme themselves as is aforesaid and have such Officers over them as the rule of the New Testament requires 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 2. wee need not feare to betrust the Church having such Officers with that power which we conceive Christ hath given to the same other Churches watching over them counselling and admonishing them in the Lord. But if there be not such a reformation of the Churches nor such guides set over them the power of the keyes in a Presbytery of such Pastors as may not be according to the rule may as much abuse them as a particular Church may doe and it may be to the hurt of many who would use them better in their own Congregations then they can in a Classis being over-voted there And we cannot conceive but both the care of reforming the matter of a Church and the recalling of the power of government to the Church tends much to further this worke of reformation no way to hinder the same And if wee might obtaine that of our deare Brethren which wee humbly crave viz. That our Doctrine and practise might be taken candidly according to our plaine meaning and declarations and not represented unto the World under such shapes and formes as make it seeme rigid all one with the most rigid Separatists Donatists Arminians Socinians c. we should hope that we shall goe for lovers and friends to a godly and generall Reformation not for disturbers of the same but the contrary dealing we meet with too too oft through the mistakes of Brethren This learned Author Mr. Ball though in the Epistle he desired us to rest assured that although he had conceived such thoughts of us as leaning to separation yet he would gladly receive every syllable from us that should dislodge such thoughts yet against our plaine profession sometime he will needs fasten the opinion of separation upon us and very frequently sets Mr. Robinson in a parallel with our opinions as if we generally went that way in those things which are well known to be the Doctrine of many of our godly and best reformers The Learned may plainly see how easie it had been for us and upon better grounds to have filled our margents with quotations out of Papists and Prelates as parallel with many passages of this Reply but we have purposely abstained from so doing that we might not cast any blur or provoke the spirits of brethren And seeing we are inforced to wipe off such aspersions we humbly desire our beloved Brethren whose learned labours wee honour to beare with us if we lightly touch this sore for wee confesse it brings blushing into our faces and sadnesse to our hearts to read so often such harsh imputations cast upon us which we cannot conceive but falling from such pens they breed a strange loathing of us in the stomachs of many that read bookes without serious examinations thereof First how oft doe wee meet with that imputation that wee make none members of a visible Church but such as are really saints and beleevers contrary to our frequent profession That visible saints that are such in judgement of charity are fit matter of the Church Secondly that we make a vocall Church Oath or Covenant the essentiall forme of a Church when as wee frequently acknowledge that this Covenant which constituteth a Church is either implicite or explicite and that Congregations in England are truly Churches having an implicite covenant and it is far from our practise to use any Oath in our Covenant and strange to us to read so many Pages against our Church Oath and swearing to a Covenant to make our courses horrid and too too rigorous Thirdly that we set up a popular government making the Elders of the Church no more but moderators c. and that Ministers recâ—…ive their power from the people are their servants and administer in their name as Mr. Ball and others object when we oft professe the contrary that all authoâ—…ity properly so called is in the hands of the Elders and the liberty of the people is to bee carryed in a way of subjection and obedience to them in the Lord neither doth it follow from any Doctrine of ours no more then from the ordination of Pastors by the Presbytery that they are their servants c. Fourthly that if a Congregation reject a Pastor for no fault they take both nomen esse the name and nature of a Pastor from him For this the Reader is referred to our Answer of the twenty fift Question of the thirty two questions sent unto us where nothing at all is said but reference is made to our answer to the nine questions amongst which the seventh being of this very point our answer is quite contrary to what is imputed to us Our words are these Concerning the Minister himselfe thus deposed c. we conceive though hee bee by them deprived of the execution of his Ministery amongst them yet untill hee accept of a call to another people hee still remaine a Minister of Christ in whose account hee hath true right of administration among the people Now if hee remaine a Minister of Christ and have true right to administer let any judge whether wee take away nomen or esse or that wee make Church censures worke ex opere operato clave errante as is also imputed to us Many such mistakes we finde but let these suffice to informe the Reader how wary hee had need bee in receiving such reports against brethren and this charity wee have cause the more earnestly to crave of all that they would reserve one eare to heare what their poore out-cast brethren can say for themselves because wee are placed at such a distance and disadvantage that oft-times it is not possible for us to take notice of such objections and return an answer under a yeare or almost two years whereby Satan hath a marvailous advantage to work strange thoughts and distastefull affections towards us and fasten them so deeply that hardly they will bee taken off again But thus it falleth out too too frequently that when Brethren otherwise deare to each other differ in their judgements and breake out to open contention about the same they are very apt to make the opinions of the contrary party as unpleasing and absurd to the judgement of others as may bee whence
false Church We thinke it needlesse to recite more testimonies Aliquando honus dormitat Homerus A good memory may sometimes fall asleep and not see that which is sometimes most obvious and visible But what other arguments they have are or may bee common to others studious of Reformation as their arguments against ceremonies are common with Non-conformists and therefore if some of our grounds bee found in them it doth not follow they are â—…afts taken out of the same quiver and peculiar to them as you object Reply These reasons shall be common to all that plead for the purity of Gods Ordinances which were never taken to bee sound and true either by the Reformed Churches abroad or by the godly Brethren at home dead or living or yet by the most of the Brethren amongst whom they live and â—…old society or by any Minister and society holding the unity of the Spirit in the hand of peace thâ—…se 1400 years and upward unlesse within these few dayes and that by a few onely Answ Here is a great colour of Novelty and singularity objected to be in the grounds and reasons of the Letter used against conformity to the Liturgy but it is easie to conceive that the same common grounds of all Reformers may be justly carryed on against such further corruptions as they never â—…aw not attending their owne principles in such particulars as was said before of the first Reformers that purged out salt creame oyle c. not the crosse c. and so here it may fall out that as the Lord is pleased to let in more light in this or that particular corruption so upon common grounds it is rejected though yet but one or few apply those grounds to such a particular case Neither here was the number so few as is pretended when this Reply was drawn up or else at least it is much increased of late time since the Assembly and Parliament in England have so openly in their Directory witnessed against such stinted Formes and generally the Churches of Scotland renounced that Liturgy of yours as a piece of Popery Besides all the Orthodox Churches in New-England and Holland and many godly in England Reply As yet wee thinke most of them that have separated are not so farre gone as to condemne all our Assemblies as no Churches of Christ Answ By this you seeme to insinuate that notwithstanding our acknowledgement of your Churches and Ministery wee may justly bee accounted amongst those wee properly call Separatists but it is but your thought of most of them without ground contrary to their generall profession in their publique confessions and apologies And therefore we see no reason of it or that it toucheth us but passing these generalls let us come to the matter more particularly Reply Your judgement concerning the Position you deliver in three Propositions for so many they bee for substance in respect of the persons reading the Liturgie or the thing in selfe that is read as if any part of the Liturgie be read put case some few select prayers onely by an unable and ungodly Minister it is unlawfull say you for the people to joyne in that case But if unlawfull for the people to joyne when an ungodly Minister readeth some few select prayers it is either in respect of the Minister or the prayers themselves not of the Prayers themselves for they be select and choyce faultlesse in respect of matter and manner 〈◊〉 is taken for granted unlesse thâ—… distribution bee is no purpose if in respect of the Minister then it is not lawfull to joyne with such an one in any ordinance of God whatsoever In that you analyse our two Propositions into three we shall not contend but follow your method yet wee cannot but marvaile at the liberty that is taken in stating the first Proposition both leaving out and adding such things as will not stand with the termes in our Answer and indeed this is too frequent in divers places of this Reply which gives a great colour of strength unto the arguments but when they come to be scanned it will discover the impertinency of them For 1 Although the Answer distinguisheth of the Liturgie either of the whole or of some select prayers which may bee conceived to bee lesse offensive yet the application of this of select prayers is onely made in the second proposition of the Answer no way intended in the first Neither doth the Answer confesse those prayers as you say to bee choyce and faultlesse for matter and manner but which may bee conceived lesse offensive 2 Whereas the Proposition is of an unable and ungodly Minister such unlearned Idol-Priests that are countenanced and established by the Liturgie and can doe no more then read the same to the unspeakable hazard and ruine of a multitude of soules you carry along your arguments onely in the terme of an ungodly Minister which leaves out one chiefe ground of our proposition viz. unable To reduce therefore this proposition unto its true state which the answer puts it in which is thus If the question bee of joyning in prayer with and when that whole Liturgie is read or where that which is used viz. though not the whole is read by an unable and ungodly Minister wee see not how it can bee lawfull to joyne c. where that which is read by an unable and ungodly Minister cannot have reference to the select prayers but onely was put in to reach the whole case lest any should say may we not joyne therefore if they read not all as sometimes such doe not for haste to the Alehouse Beare-baitings c. And the case is so well known to our selves and others what the manner of such Priests is how farre they are from making any choyce of select prayers or having any skill indeed so to doe that if any bee more superstitious then others they would soonest choose them so that it was farre from our thoughts to impute it to them to read the select prayers onely The question being rightly stated the argument will halt very much For wee say it is unlawfull in both respects and the rather when jointly considered and therefore you should first have justified the whole Liturgy or so much as such Idol-Priests use to read to bee lawfull and also the standing and calling of those men before the argument can hold both which you have wholly left naked without proofe and argue onely about the lawfulnesse of joyning with an ungodly Minister in the Ordinances of God which will not reach this case If one should affirme it is unlawfull to goe to Mattens or Evensong when the whole is read or that which is read 〈◊〉 done by a popish Priest and you should answer then it is either because of the Prayers or the Priest Not the first for the prayers if select may bee good and faultlesse and not because of the Priest for then wee may never joyne with an ungodly Minister in the Ordinances of God
wisheth utinam tales hodie à ministerio aâ—…verentuâ—… Fourthly because the Lord would cast off their children from being his for this sinne as Calvin also notes upon the place the promise of shewing mercy to a 1000. generations being chiefly annexed to the observers of the second Command and the instituted meanes of worship which those Priests never were Reply On the contrary if you will extend this Text to all unworthy Ministers of what sort soever whom the Word of God condemns as not approved Ministers of God c. Answ Wee intended no other sorts then such as wee have in hand the unable and ungodly Idoll Priests of England and therefore this discourse concernes us not For wee freely confesse that it is lawfull in divers cases at least for a time to communicate with such unworthy Ministers as may bee contained in your description but that people must and ought to joyne with such in the worship of God and sinne if they separate from the ordinances as you say the Scriptures alledged teach not this so evidently that wee can see as 1 Sam. 2.12 13.17.24 that imputation Verse 24. They make the Lords people to transgresse doth not depend immediatly on Verse 13 14.17 but on Verse 22.23 where they are charged to have layne with the women the other passages being interrupted by the story of Samuel and his Mother Verse 18 19.20 21. So Jer. 8.8 9. Micah 3.11 12. containe onely threats against wicked Ministers but not a word to prove people ought to joyne with them c. Phil. 1.15 speaking of such as preach and preach Christ though not of sinceritie doth not reach such Ministers as the word condemnes for many such may be approved Ministers by the Word having a call according to the same but wee shall not contend in this case wherein wee doe not dissent so that Christians bee left to their lawfull libertie of withdrawing from Ministers grossely wicked and Teachers of false Doctrin or idle and unsufficient when they cannot reclaime them or remove them in the use of all lawfull meanes within their power Reply The reasons whereby the ancient Churches condemned the Donatists and Catharists for their voluntary and seditious separations and the moderne Churches condemne the Anabaptists for their renting from the body of Christ will hold against separation from the Prayers of the Congregation because they are read by an ungodly Minister Wee deny that wee teach or hold such separation because read by an ungodly Minister as is sufficiently shewed before but what we speak is against conformitie to and communion with the corruptions of the Liturgie especially used by an unable as well as ungodly Minister and therefore the arguments mentioned will hold against our proposition just as the accusations and imputations of Donatisme Puritanisme Anabaptisme which the Prelates cast upon all Non-conformists and men studious of reformation will hold and fasten upon them which is nothing at all Reply The second Proposition where the whole Liturgie is used though by an able and godly Minister it is not lawfull to joyne in prayer in that case Wee cannot bee of your judgement herein for in the times of the Prophets and our Saviour Christ as great abuses no question were found c. but they never taught people to separate from the holy things of God Answ First wee must still mind the Reader of the true and full state of the question which in our answer is of joyning in prayer with and when that whole Liturgy is used and hee that joynes with that whole Liturgie must needs bee supposed to have actuall communion with all the corruptions thereof what ever they bee and therefore though this Proposition reach to the practise of able and godly Ministers yet let none thinke wee plead herein separation from their ministery but onely that people may not conforme with them to any corruption in worship and by this proposition also the Author might easily have seene that wee denied the other which was woven in with this not because of the ungodlinesse of the Minister alone as hee carried his dispute but chiefly in respect of the corruptions of the worship together with the unlawfulnesse of such a ministery that is both unable and ungodly Secondly concerning the argument it runs as full for conformitie to all the corrupt ceremonies of the booke as the corrupt worship it selfe therein as was said before cleare the one viz. non-conformitie to ceremonies shew a reason why you will separate from the Sacrament because you will not kneele according to the booke and you answer your argument here alledged against us but the reply proceeds Reply And if presence at formes of prayer bee not lawfull by reason of the corruptions alledged there can bee no visible societie named since 200. yeeres after Christ or thereabout wherein a Christian might lawfully joyne in prayer reading the Scriptures hearing the word or participation of the Sacraments their Doctrines prayers rights being lesse pure then ours but no man wee hope will bee so bold as to affirme the state of the Churches within 200. yeers after Christ to bee so miserably decayed that the faithfull could not without sinne hold communion with them in the foresaid ordinances of God Answ First this argument holds as strongly for conformitie to the ceremonies as to the whole booke of Common Prayers as was said before Secondly this is a dangerous kind of reasoning from the practise of the faithfull in corrupt times of the Church especially when they are declining and growing clouds of darkenesse and superstition overspread the Churches It is no breach of charitie to thinke that through the iniquitie of the times the godly lived in many evils through ignorance and weakenesse which after light is come into the Churches wee ought to abandon wholly these are times of light and of the consumption of Antichrist and time for us to abolish his Liturgies and corrupt formes of worship as well as Images ceremonies c. Who doe not pitie the weaknesse of godly Bilny and others that seeing some grosse corruptions were yet so devoutly obedient to the Church as they called it in many grosse superstitions and the like may bee said of those former times and wee see not but this reason will goe farre in justification of communion with many false worships of Antichrists that are not grosly idolatrous Thirdly it is a great charge upon those times to say no visible societie throughout the world can bee named since 200. yeeres after Christ that was not lesse pure then England in Doctrine rites c. It may bee that as generally Churches were corrupt so they contemned and censured such as professed more puritie but that there were some visible assemblies more pure may bee conceived by that testimony given to Aerius and many orthodox Christians with him though condemned for a Hereticke in that which wee all now hold to bee an undoubted truth also after the Waldenses casting off the Pope and his will
therefore impossible both in regard of distance of place and variety of language almost ever to meet in one so much as by representation and that not onely by accident as may befall a particular Church by sickness persecution c. but by the necessity of nature and invincible hinderances foreseen by Christ and intended by him And therfore as the Lord limiting his Church to one Nation united it into that form of a Nationall Church ordaining one place stated times and duties of Worship and one Government for the same so now the â—…ord neglecting all such things hath ordained a compleat administration of all his ordinances in particular Congregations and therefore if there be no other instituted visible Church but of a Congregation and Seals in their administration be given to the Church our first consideration will still hold firm But seeing in so vast a subject to say little is to say nothing and there is scarce any Truth in this wilie age but is almost disputed out of countenance and much darkned with humane evasions and seeing much depends upon this controversie it may be so most usefull before we come to the defence of our argument to take into consideration the nature and order of the visible Church of Christ Catholick and particular We are not ignorant of the knots and difficulties of this question which of late have so much exercised the minds of many Godly-learned And we think the notions of a Catholick Church as it is now held being but newly taken up amongst-godly Reformers who formerly ran in another channell as is ingenuously confessed by some according to the truth this new-birth seems not yet so formed to its distinct proportions as time may bring it unto and it might make us afraid being the weakest of many to venture upon so diffuse and knotty a question when we look upon our own insufficiency to such a task and the Learned labors of such in this Point whom we reverence in the Lord yet when we consider of what great weight and moment the clearing up of this Truth would be unto the orderly proceedings of the great Work of Reformation in hand 2 How unavoydably it lyes in our way in this Work the Lord hath called us unto and that he sometimes doth vouchsafe to speak by weak ones that the praise may be his own in hope of his blessed guidance which we depend upon herein taking the light of his Word in our hands we shall rather as learners then otherwise venture to propound what is suggested to us herein Concerning which having digressed a while we shall return we hope with some advantage of clearer evidence to justifie the first argument of the Answer against what is said in the Reply CHAP. V. A digression tending to clear the state of that controversie concerning a Catholick visible Church in respect of the nature unity visibility and priority of the same THe world hath been long troubled with the equivocation of the word Church and therefore as it is needfull we shall labor to set down our thoughts as distinctly and plainly as we can in certain Propositions that may be some ground of our discourse Proposition 1 The true Church of God is the whole number of Elect and called ones out of the world to fellowship with Jesus Christ their Head with whom they make up one mysticall body Ephes 1.23 This whole Church is of the same nature and one in essence from the beginning of the world to the end for this Church Christ laid down his life Ephes 5.26 Joh. 10.15 and therefore he adds vers 16. such as are not yet of his fold actually shall be brought into the same viz. by effectuall calling that there may be one Shepheard and one sheepfold wherby it appears that the whole fold of Christ to which he stands as one Shepheard contains all his members and sheep to the end of the world and it is one fold in relation to Christ that one Shepheard Proposition 2 This one entire body of Christ doth naturally fall under various notions and considerations as omitting others when it is considered according to the adjuncts of visibility and invisibility which are onely adjuncts of the same Church as is generally observed by Divines In respect of the inward union which every such member hath with Christ the Head by the Spirit of Christ and by Faith whereby we are united to him it is called invisible because this union is not visible to men In respects of some visible fruits and manifestations of faith to the judgment of men it is called visible and hence though true beleevers be onely univoce and properly members of this body of Christ yet to men that judge onely by outward effects many hypocrites equivoce and improperly are accounted of the Church and hence the Scripture frequently speaks of visible Churches as if they were all really Saints Proposition 3 As this Church comes to be visible so it becomes a fit and capable subject of visible policy and visible communion with Christ their Head and one with another in all the visible ordinances of Christ a capable subject we say or matter fit for such a state for by its visibility it self it is not so having yet no more then a spirituall relation to Christ and one another no visible combination one with another for visible beleevers may be so scattered in severall Countreys that they cannot make up one Society Proposition 4 And therefore we add That there is no way for this Church to enjoy actuall visible communion under the visible government of Christ and in the visible instituted ordinances of Christ but in a Society A thousand uncombined persons meeting occasionally in one place though their naturall relations were as near as brethren yet have no power of government or actuall communion in any Civill priviledges if they stand not in relation to one another as a combined Society as after shall be shown so here And therefore Acts 2.41 42. first they were added to the Church and then followed their fellowship in all the ordinances of the Church as after will more fully appear And hence it is said Acts 5.14 Beleevers were added first they were beleevers standing in that spirituall relation to Christ and his whole body and then added to the Church by visible combination Proposition 5 There is no visible society of a Church who hath actuall and immediate right unto and communion in the visible government of Christ and the dispensation of his instituted Worship and ordinances but such a Society as the Lord Jesus hath in the Gopel instituted and ordained for that end We say actuall and immediate right unto the same for though a beleever quâ beleever have an immediate right and actuall enjoyment of such benefits of Christ as necessarily and immediately flow from his internall union with Christ as justification adoption c. and such right to Christian communion with all the Saints in their prayers gifts
c. as flow from his spirituall relation unto them yea and also he hath a true right to all benefits purchased by Christ in a due order and manner yet we say instituted priviledges and ordinances doe not immediately flow from spirituall union and relation to Christ and his members but are dispensed by Christ to his people mediately and in such an order as he hath in wisdome ordained and this the nature of visible government and ordinances of Christ necessarily requires And hence it is that although the Church in its nature and essence and in respect of its spirituall union and relation to Christ and one another profession of the same faith c. have been always one and the same in all ages yet both the visible government and ordinances of Worship and also the instituted form and order of Church-societies hath been various according to the wisdome and will of Christ whereby it appears that the order government forms of visible Church-societies to which actuall enjoyment of visible ordinances doe belong cannot justly be deduced from the common nature of the Church Cathoilck or any respects of reason or logicall notions under which it may fall but onely this depends upon the will and pleasure of Christ who hath in all ages instituted the forms and orders of such Societies to whom the actual enjoyment of instituted ordinances was given And hence the argument for a nationall form of a Church to be in the New Testament as wel as in the Old drawn from the common nature essence profession of faith c. of the Church in all ages falls flat to the ground for by the same reason it must then be in families onely now as it was about Abrahams time Proposition 6 Hence it follows that the true state of this great dispute about a Catholick Church so far as tends to clear up to what Church the actuall administration of Church-government and all instituted Worship belongs doth not lye in the consideration of the common nature essence unity visibility or any other notions under which it may fall but the true state lyes here concerning the nature order form of such visible Societies as Christ Jesus by Divine institution in the Gospel hath reduced his visible members unto for the actuall and immediate enjoyment of all his instituted ordinances And therefore with due respect to the Godly-learned be it spoken we conceive many large disputes in this question fall short of the issue that is desired and intended for what if it be granted 1 That there is a Catholick visible Church which in some respects of reason as Mr. Ball saith is one that having partes visibiles is a totum visibile 2 That the visible Church is not onely a totum genericum in relation to all the particular Congregations as species specialissimae of a visible Church in generall which respect of reason in some sense we freely consent unto but also that it may fall under the notion of a totum integrale as some contend though we conceive in this notion they are so intangled in their own logicall principles as that they cannot get out without breaking them and flying to theologicall considerations yet we say what if that also be attained 3 Yea further what if this Catholick Church be in some respects of reason and order of nature also the first Church and particular Churches ortae 4 Yea further what if it were gained also by such disputes that the Keys and Officers Ordinances c. be given firstly to this Catholick Church as to the object and end We confesse we do not see that what our Brethren contend for is by all this obtained For first if the universall number of visible beleevers be one totum aggregatum yet it will bee hard to prove that these are one instituted and politicall Society that can enjoy visible communion together in visible Worship and government and yet more hard to prove that by the institution of Christ these all are to be actually governed as one totum Secondly what though the members of the Church Catholick be in order of time before particular Churches as being fit matter for them and constituting of them yet this proves not one politicall body before they combine but rather the contrary Thirdly be it so that this Catholick Church is the first Church to which Christ hath firstly given the Keys Ordinances Promises c. for which Christ firstly performed the Offices of King Priest and Prophet and what else soever can be said in this kinde yet all this may be in this respect that Christ looked at this Catholick Church firstly as the chief object and end for whose sake and good he ordained and gave all these things and this will not carry the cause for as the Church Catholick visible in this sense is the first Church in respect of the particulars so the invisible body of Christ is in nature and priority the first Church in respect of visible as visible for Christ no doubt firstly intends and gives all these things to the invisible Church as to the object and end of the same for whose good they are all ordained rather then for the Catholick visible Church which containes many hypocrites and reprobates within the verge of it But now if we speak of a subject of the Keys to which the actuall exercise and dispensation of Keys and instituted Ordinances belong who doe not see that in this sense the invisible Church quâ talis cannot be that instituted Society to which the Keys c. belong and by the same reason the Catholick visible Church quâ totum and quâ Catholick cannot be this instituted Society to which they are given It is a known rule in Reason that That which is first in intention is last in execution and so it is here first Christ propounds this end to himself to gather edifie perfect sanctifie save his Catholick Church Ephes 4.11 12. 5.26 and therefore institutes all ordinances as means to farther and attain this great design but in execution he may for all this give the Keys and ordinances in regard of the immediate exercise to any form of visible Societies that he shall be pleased to institute and it may be that will prove the least Society sooner then a greater And seeing our Brethren otherwise minded make much use of similies in this dispute we hope it will not be amisse for us to illustrate what we say by a similitude â—…tly to make our conceivings the more plain to all whose edification we seek and partly to discover the invalidity of many discourses of this nature and because similia arguunt fidemque faciunt as he saith viz. so far as rightly applyed we will therefore propound it in way of argument The similitude is this genus humanum or mankinde in generall is the subject of Civill government in generall and of all the priviledges thereof as the object and the end and let the question be whether this Catholick number of
who have right to choose their King or Generall may and doe some time or other convene Let the like be shewed in the Catholick Church that all Politicall Churches are moulded up into one Politicall Body either de jure or de facto or that it is possible as the case stands so to be and then the similitudes would be of some use Thirdly in a Kingdom or Army suppose they never meet yet there is such politicall union as fully reaches the politicall communion for which end it was combined viz. that they should enjoy peace and justice in and by a just Government or by the protection of the Army But if such a politicall Body were combined to have such communion as a Church-communion is then it would require conventing together as elswhere we shall more fully manifest For our parts we do not see that Christ hath ordained the whole Catholick church as One to have politicall communion together which is impossible And therefore we see no need of such a Politicall combination but as he hath ordained a Brotherly communion of counsell and helpfulnesse one to another as need requires so a spirituall relation and brotherly consociation of Churches together is union sufficient for such a communion And thus far we have endevored to take away all those arguments which are built upon the generall considerations of the unity visibility and priority of the Catholick church which we leave to the consideration and examination of the judicious We shall now as the Lord shall helpe us come to cleare the state of this knotty controversie as we think it ought to be stated and carryed Viz. What is that form of a Politicall Church which Jesus Christ in the Gospel hath instituted and appointed as the subject of Church power of government and administration of all the ordinances of the Gospel for actuall communion with Christ and one with another therein And here give us leave before we enter into the question it self to make a little further use of our former similitude for illustration and then we will shew where the ne plus ultra as we conceive must stand It hath been shewed in respect of the body of mankinde that although much may be said for the unity visibility and priority thereof before any parts of it yet no reason will inforce that it is the first subject of Civill power c. in respect of actuall administration and immediate enjoyment thereof and so here in respect of the Church We will now add but this one thing more that notwithstanding all such reasons yet in execution for the good of the whole the least civill society yea a family may be and is the first subject of civill power and priviledges of civill government so the least politicall Church society may be the first subject of these Keys of Church power in the exercise thereof and of immediate communion in all visible ordinances and we think that there by Divine institution it is seated and the edification and perfection of the Catholick Church may best be attained thereby Concerning Families we see no footsteps in the propagation of mankinde from Adam and Noah of any soveraign or universall government further then in the first Fathers of mankinde after whom as they increased families went out and combining made cities and so Common-wealths by mutuall consent as in Gen. 10. and other Stories appear except by the tyrannous usurpations of some as Nimrod the rest were brought under and this no doubt amongst any free people is still the most orderly just and safe way of erecting all forms of civill government Families to combine into Townes Cities Kingdomes or Aristocraticall States But here some will say If so that according to this similitude a particular congregation may be the first Church that have the Keys of Church power and Church communion then as families should combine into Towns and Cities and they into greater Common-wealths for the good of all mankinde so here these first Churches may not stand independently but ought to combine into greater Bodies till they come to be one whole Church to this we say this will not follow upon this evident reason because civill societies and government thereof is herein left to rules of humane prudence by the Lord and governor of the whole world and therefore may admit various forms of Government various Laws and Constitutions various priviledges c. according as men shall conceive best for themselves so they be not against the common morall rules of equity and the good of those Societies but here in the Kingdom of Christ as wee must attend what kinde of Church he hath instituted so we must cleave to such rules priviledges and forms of government and administrations as he hath ordained not presuming to goe one step beyond the same And hence it is not in the power of any Church to alienate the power rights or priviledges Christ have set in the same or to mould up any other politicall Churches then he hath appointed and here we conceive stands immovably the ne plus ultra of this similitude between the visible Church and the estate of mankinde in reference to power and government c. All which things well weighed to us seems to overthrow all such intermediate forms of Churches or the usuall Churches as Mr. Ball calls the same as Classicall Provinciall Diocesan Nationall Patriarchicall c. which we see not how according to the rule of Christ they can be constituted either descendendo from the common nature of the Catholick Church or ascendendo from the combination of particulars except institution can bee found for the same We find indeed that some endevor to build such forms upon the foundation of Morall principles and the Law of nature as That God hath given government to be over a multitude and that of many Societies as well as persons that one Society may not suffer as well as one person and that therefore must be given of the God of grace to a society and multitude of little Churches power of externall government To which we answer 1 That there is no such principle in nature that generally binds free Societies to submit to one common government must many Kingdoms c. by consequence all kingdoms combine in government lest one kingdome bee hurt i. must Moab Ammon Edom Tyre Sydon Judea c. being so contiguous in near vicinity to each other combine in one government 2 Is it not as suitable to morality and reason in such combinations that they set up One to rule over them when many grow ignorant evill or heady to preserve peace and prevent wrong as to set up many 3 Did Abraham Lot Melchisedeck and such family Churches walk against grounds of morality and nature that did not so combine We might add more but forbear but we could desire our dear Brethren to be wary of scattering such principles for though in the matters of the Church and Worship and Government of Christ
grace doth not destroy nature yet look as a particular Church constitution and government was never erected by the Law of nature but Divine institution so for the governing of many over one why should there not be the like institution But to come more near to the case it self we shall endeavour to clear two things 1. That there is no Catholick politicall Church society instituted by Christ to which the actuall administration and participation of Church government and communion in the instituted ordinances of Christ is given as to the first subject thereof 2. That the true form of all Church societies instituted by Christ to which he hath given the actuall administration and immediate participation of Church government and all other instituted ordinances as the subject thereof is onely Congregationall First concerning the first to make our discourse more distinct and plain we shall premise here that we doe not here at all take in or respect that question about the power of the Keys whether it be in the fraternity or guides we shall God willing have a fit place to speak something of it but here that we may not intermingle things we look onely at the true subject in which and unto which the actuall and immediate dispensation and participation of Church government and outward ordinances is given by the institution of the Gospel And here we first reason thus Such a Church society as Christ instituted the Apostles of Christ constituted and governed in But the Apostles never constituted such a Catholick church society or governed it in such a manner as is said Ergo. The Proposition is evident because the Apostles were to do whatsoever Christ commanded in Matth. 28.20 and were sufficiently furnished with power and wisdome so to doe Besides the Apostles having all power from Christ as hee received from the Father John 20. and the whole number of beleevers being then at the fewest there was never since such an opportunity or possibility to constitute such a Church if Christ Jesus had instituted such a thing The assumption or second part of the reason is proved thus If the Apostles ever constituted and administred in such a Church catholick it was either that at Jerusalem mentioned Acts 1 2. c. or that assembly that met Acts 15. for we meet with no other that can with any colour of reason bee supposed But neither of these were such a constituted Church Ergo. 1 Concerning the Church named Acts 1. carryed on Acts 2. c. we freely grant it was a constituted Church wherein the Apostles with Elders and Deacons afterward chosen did govern for as it is called a Church Acts 2.47 so likewise we see there were in it elections Act. 1. 6 and administrations of instituted ordinances of worship Acts 2.41 42. admission of members Chap. 2.41 47. and by the same reason there might have been excommunication also But that this Church was not the Catholick Church we prove thus If it were the Catholick church then it was such either in respect of the whole essence of the Catholick church or in respect of representation but neither ways Ergo. The first it could not be because it consisted at the first but of 120. which was a very small part of the Catholick number of visible beleevers for 1 Cor. 15.6 there were above 500 Brethren to whom Christ appeared at once which was but some few weeks before besides all that in the Jewish Church were converted and baptized by John which were very many yea if we speak of the Catholick church properly all the Jewish Church not yet dissolved were part of the Catholick church of that age visible Lastly if it had been the Catholick church beleevers being already of it could not be said to be added to this as Acts 5.13 14. Secondly it was not Catholick in respect of representation for if so then in respect of the Apostles onely as the Catholick guides or in respect of the whole assembly with them Acts 1. not the first for then the Apostles onely should have had power to set apart Barnabas and Maâ—…thias but it is evident that that election was by Peter himself committed to and acted by the whole company called the Brethren and Disciples Acts 1.15 16 26. where it appears that as he spake to all so it was concluded with the common suffrages of all Secondly if so because the Apostles were Catholick guides then where-ever they met was a Catholick church yea where two or three or any one of them was there was the Catholick representative church and so many such churches for any two or one had the catholick power as well as all Paul ordains rules and orders of discipline in all the churches as well as if all the Apostles had met 1 Cor. 7.17 1 Cor. 16.1 2 That assembly was not the representative catholick church because first there were the women in the same now women are no way capable of being messengers to represent churches secondly besides these could not be representative messengers from other churches because this was the first constituted church we see no colour of reason that there were any other constituted visible churches before this Lastly all the actions of that Church mentioned especially those in Acts 2.41 42. of admission of members baptism word seales fellowship day by day in such ordinances choice of Deacons c. speak aloud against a representative Church we should rather have heard of constitutions censures c. from such a representative Catholick church of generall counsell Object We are not ignorant what is said to the contrary viz. That it was the Catholick Church because they elected a Catholick officer for the whole Church viz. an Apostle Ans To which we answer 1 All the Catholick church and guides thereof had no power so to do no more then a particular church being a case reserved to Christ himself else Pauls argument to prove his Apostleship had not been strong because he was not called by man but by Christ himself and had seen the Lord c. Gal. 1.1 1 Cor. 9.1 2 The act of the Church was onely a preparatory act thereunto with an after consent the election was properly done immediately by a lot and what was done might as well be done in the first particular Church guided by the infallible spirit of the Apostles as by the Catholick Church it self Object Secondly it is objected Many of these were men of Galilee which by their habitation could not pertain to the Church in Jerusalem Answ True the Apostles and others were of Galilee but they had forsaken all to follow Christ and were commanded by Christ to remain a time at Jerusalem and then to goe forth to Samaria Judea and the utmost parts of the earth Acts 1.4 8. and therfore no Church relation in Galilee could hinder them from joyning in this first constituted Church or give any colour that they came as members representative from any Churches in Galilee And
so much for the plea for a Catholick church from Acts 1. c. Now concerning that which is supposed of a Catholick church representative in Act. 15. If it were such then in respect of the Apostles the catholick Officers onely or in respect of the body of the Assembly also but in neither respects Ergo. 1 Not the first for then as was said any one Apostle may make a representative Catholick church having the whole power as much as all of them together for though they would meet oft to consult and assist one another yet not for defect of power in any one and we think our brethren here will not say it was in respect of the Apostles alone supposing here they acted rather as Elders with the rest then out of their Apostolicall power 2 Not in respect of the whole Assembly for then that assembly must consist of the messengers of all the particular Churches and the decrees should have been directed to all the Churches but neither of these can appear For first wee read of no other messengers but those from Antioch and how to evince more then the Scriptures reveal is hard Secondly if we look back and consider how far the Gospel was spread before this assembly it will appear very strange and absurd to suppose such a thing for Paul had been in Arabia before ever he came to Ierusalem Gal. 1.17 and when he and Barnabas went sent out from Antioch Acts 13. they went to severall Islands and Countreys as Cyprus Paphos Salamis c. besides what other places scattered Christians and Apostles had preached in now there is no probability of messengers sent from all these places Secondly the decrees were expresly directed to the Gentiles beleeving in Antioch Syria and Cilicia where it seems this question had troubled the minds of the Disciples Acts 15.23 24. which was far short of the Catholick church neither is it proved that the Churches of Syria and Cilicia had any messengers there much lesse that all the Churches had their messengers Object But it is said they might have had their messengers there if they would and therefore they were bound to the decrees as of a generall Councell Answ It must first be proved that all Churches had lawfull summons to send their messengers to that Assembly before there can be laid any blame on them for neglecting the same or they be all tyed to the decrees of such an Assembly as a generall Councell which seems to us not so much as probable much lesse to be proved by any where the Scripture is so silent Argument 2 Every politicall Body is constituted by the combination of all the members into a Society But Christ hath not instituted that the Catholick church should combine into a Society Ergo. Propos Proved because there can be no instances given of any free Society civill or sacred that was under policy but that it arose from combination How came Israel to be one Nationall church but by a National covenant and that before it had Officers or how comes any nationall provinciall classicall Church that are pleaded for to be such but by some such combination Why is this Church of this Classis not of another but by combination Secondly in a politicall body the whole hath power to order every part but this power among persons that are free is onely by combination Assump Proved first because Christ never instituted that which is impossible as this is for the Catholick visible Church in every age so to doe Secondly Christ ordained combination for communion in his Worship but this communion also is impossible to the Catholick church as one Ergo. Thirdly corrupt Churches are visible Churches but it is hard for us to beleeve or any to prove that Christ hath instituted such combination of all Churches Asian African European American corrupt and uncorrupt for prudent men may easily foresee the heavy consequents thereof Argument 3 Every Politicall Church by the institution of Christ hath power to elect her own Pastor or Pastors over it But the Catholick visible Church hath not such power Ergo. Proposit Proved This all Scripture examples shew that every Church or flock of beleevers had her Pastor Act. 14. Tit. 1. Secondly according to our Brethrens principles if a particular Church may choose a Pastor much more the Catholick because all priviledges are primarily given to the Catholick church and what belongs to the part of a similar Body as a part that much more belongs to the whole Assump Proved first If the Catholick church may choose Pastors over it then they may make Apostles because Catholick Pastors over the Catholick Church Secondly the Reasons against an universall Bishop are strong here as that their office is not described in the Word nor their power able to reach all Churches If it be said that the Catholick church can choose her Pastors in the parts or particular Societies which are Pastors of the Catholick church though not Catholick Pastors of the Catholick church Answ If this be meant of the particular Churches choosing Pastors over themselves who are in some respects for the good of the whole as being partes partium and so partes totius then they come to our hand for thus it appears that there is no Catholick tâ—…tum that is the subject of officers but in its parts But the question is Whether all particular Churches having the officers in them do make one political Body or Catholick church and so have power to choose Catholick Pastors Argument 4 Christ Jesus instituted no such politicall Body as destroys Church policy But such a Catholick church politicall destroys policy Ergo. Assump Proved because it swallows up the power not onely of all Churches congregationall but all other forms of Churches by taking the power of excommunication from them for the power of excommunication is seated by Christ in that Church from which there can be justly no appeal for Matth. 18. the power of excommunication is seated in such a Church as whatsoever it binds on earth is bound in heaven by the highest Judge in the highest Court and from the sentence of this highest court and Judge how can there be any appeal But now supposing such a Catholick church having power of excommunication and that as the highest Church hence no inferior Church can binde on earth so as that the same is bound in heaven seeing appeales may be made from them to an higher power on earth Object If it be said that the sentence of an inferior Judge proceeding rightly as in an inferior Sanhedrin is ratified in heaven yet may we appeale from him Answ We deny that the sentence of every civill Court doth binde in heaven in the sense of our Saviour for every civil Court hath not this promise of binding and looâ—…ing the power of the Keys not belonging to the civill Magistrate Secondly suppose there were such a binding in civill Courts and appeals may be yet made from them yet this is because
rule like Beza his Episcopus humanus with subjection in case of error to the censure of all nay hence we see not but they may choose an universall Pastor and so give away the power to one if all will agree In a word they onely may combine into a Politicall Body where the whole may excommunicate any part but this cannot be in a combination of many Churches into one whole because no particular Church is capable of excommunication for it is impossible to be cast out of it self as was said before 5 A particular Church therefore must be such a Society as is so combined together that it may ordinarily enjoy Church communion to exercise Church power to be fed by her Officers and led by them hence Titus was to set Elders in every Church and these Elders were such as could ordinarily feed them by preaching the Word as well as rule and govern them Now that such a Congregationall Church is the institution of the Gospel appears first by those many Scriptures that speak of the Churches of one Countrey and in small compasse as severall Churches not as one as the Churches of Judea Samaria and Galilee Acts 9. the Churches of Galatia Gal. 1.1 yea not only in one small Countrey but in Cities or near unto them we read of distinct Churches as Corinth though God had much people there yet it was one Congregation 1 Cor. 14.33 and had another Church near to it viz. Cenchrea Also Rome whom the Apostle saluting sends also salutations by them to Aquila and Priscilla with the Church in their houshold which shew they were not far from that Church of Rome To these add that Jerusalem the first Church that was constituted by the Apostles and whose number was the greatest of any that we read of yet it was but one Congregation as is evident by Acts 1. and Chap. 2.41 42. What is objected against this to prove it the Catholick Church was answered before other objections against this and like examples shall be considered in their due place as we meet with them But we shall not need to say much that a Congregation furnished with its Officers is a Church according to the institution of the Gospel but there are more objections against the compleatnesse thereof which yet is proved thus That Church which hath power of all the Keys given unto it for actuall administration within it self is a compleat Church But so hath a particular Congregation Ergo. The first part is evident because where all the Keys are with full power to administer the same there nothing is wanting the Assumption is proved thus If all those Officers to whom is given the authoritative power of exercising the Keys be given to a Congregation then all the Keys are so given to it but so it is for since Apostles and extraordinary Officers ceased there are no other Officers but Pastors Teachers and Rulers called sometimes Bishops sometimes Elders but these Officers are given to such a Church as is proved Acts 14. Tit. 1.4 and is acknowledged in all Reformed Churches who ordain such Officers in particular Churches of one Congregation Ergo. Objection 1 If it be said that though a Congregation hath such Officers as have the power of the Keys yet that such must combine with others in way of co-ordination to govern in common and so to be helped and compleated by them Answ We grant much help may be had by sister Churches and consultative Presbyteries but that which takes away the exercise of the Keys in point of government from the church to whom Christ hath given it doth not compleat it but take away and destroy the power and liberty of it for though the Pastor of a congregation may oft consent yet the major part of the Presbytery must carry it whether he consent or no and therefore his power is swallowed up Besides it seems to us a mystery that every Pastor even such as have no flock should be Pastors of the Catholick church and yet a Pastor should not have power to rule in his own flock over which Christ hath made him a Bishop and for which flock he must give account unto God Objection 2 It cannot have a Synod which is one ordinance of God therefore it is not a compleat Church Answ By this reason a Classicall church is not compleat because it cannot have a Nationall councell nor a Nationall church because it cannot have a generall councell if it be said a classis have all ordinary meanes to a compleat church we say the like of a congregation Objection 3 Though a Town or family being cast alone may govern as a compleat body yet when it stands in a common-wealth as in England it may not be so independent but submit to combinations so here when a particular Congregation is alone it may govern as compleat not so when amongst other Churches Answ If such a Town or family have compleat power and all civill Officers within it self it is not bound to submit to such combinations in a common-wealth except it be under a superior power that can command the same As Abraham having a compleat government in his family was not bound to combine with the governments he came amongst neither did he in prudence he joyned in a league of amity and for mutual help with Aner c. but not to submit to their government so here a Church having compleat Officers is not bound to submit to such combinations except it be proved that any superior power of other churches can command the same Secondly though a family not having compleat civill government in it self must combine where it stands in a commonwealth yet never to yeeld up its family-government over wife children and servants to rule them in common with other Masters of families no civill prudence or morall rule taught men ever so to practise and therefore why in such a case should a Church give up the government of it self to Pastors of many Churches to rule it in common and not rather as a Classis is over-awed by the Provinciall onely in common things so in congregations Pastors should govern their flocks and onely in things common be under a Presbytery If it be said That the Classis do act in such things only for in excommunication of an offender the offence is common to all We answer if so then why should not the Provinciall and Nationall Churches by this reason assume all to themselves from the Classis for the offence of one is common to all As also upon this ground why should not the Classis admit all the members of every Congregation under them for this also may concern them all Thirdly here is a great difference for civill Societies are left to civill prudence and may give up themselves to many forms of government but Churches are bound to use and maintain such order of government as Christ hath set in the church and not to give it up to many no more then to
one If testimonies were needfull we might produce Zanchi Zwinglius Parker Baines and others who are fully with us in this doctrine of a particular church yea Dr. Downam himself confesseth that the most of the churches in the time of the Apostle Paul did not exceed the proportion of a populous congregation and this confession puts us in minde of a witty passage of his Refuter or his Epistoler who against the Bishops maintains the doctrine of congregationall churches with us with whose expressions for the recreation of our selves and the Reader we will conclude The Papist saith he he tels us just as the Organs goe at Rome that the extent of a Bishops jurisdiction is not limited but by the Popes appointment his power of it self indifferently reaching over all the world Our Prelatists would perswade us to the tune of Canterbury that neither church nor Bishop hath his bounds determined by the Pope nor yet by Christ in the Scriptures but left to the pleasure of Princes to be cast into one mould with the Civill State Now the plain Christian finding nothing but humane uncertainties in either of these devises he contenteth himself with plain song and knowing that Christ hath appointed Christians to gather themselves into such Societies as may assemble themselves together for the worship of God and that unto such he hath given their peculiar Pastors he I say in his simplicity calleth these Assemblies the Churches of Christ and these Pastors his Bishops Thus much concerning the nature of a particular church and that it is instituted in the Gospel Now in the second place wee are to shew how church government and Ordinances are given to it as to the proper subject of the same Where we shall propound these Theses for explication of our selves First Though Pastourship considered as an office in relation to a people to feed them authoritatively be one of these Ordinances given to a particular church Yet Christ hath given it for the gathering in of his elect unto the church and therfore wee grant some acts of the Ministery viz. the preaching of the Word is to be extended beyond the bounds of the church Secondly Seales and other Priviledges although de jure and remotely they belong to the catholique church or the number of beleevers yet de facto and nextly they belong properly to this Subject which wee speake of as wee hope to make good Thirdly They are not so appropriated to such congregations onely as to exclude the members of those congregations which are under the government of a common Presbytery or other formes of government for wee have a brotherly esteeme of such congregations notwithstanding that tertium quoddam separabile of government as Mr. Baines cals it being a thing that commeth to a church now constituted and may be absent the church remaining a Church Fourthly although it be said by some Divines that as faith is the internall form of the church so profession of faith is the outward form and that therefore bare profession of faith makes a member of the visible church yet this must be understood according to the interpretations of some of them who so speak for there is a double profession of faith Personall which is acted severally by particular persons and common which is acted conjointly in and with a Society The first makes a man of the catholick number of visible Saints and so fit matter for politicall church-society the other makes a man of the politicall church formally and compleatly and in this latter sense profession of faith is the externall form of a visible church but not in the other Now that in and to this subject so professing the seals and other ordinances belong may be proved thus Argument 1 First the seals and other Church-ordinances must either belong to the Catholick church as such or to the particular Church but these cannot belong to the Catholick in actuall dispensation whereof we now speak Ergo. For that Church which is uncapable of actuall dispensation of seales censures c. is uncapable of the participation thereof in an orderly and ordinary way But the Catholick number of visible beleevers as Catholick and out of particular Societies are not capable of dispensing the same Ergo. The Proposition is evident for it cannot be shewed that any Church in the New Testament was ever capable of participating in seals that was not capable of dispensing them at least not having a next power to elect Officers to do it The Assumption is evident from what hath been proved that it is no politicall Body the sole subject of Church administrations neither in the whole nor in the parts as existing out of Congregations Argument 2 If the members of the Catholick church be bound to joyn into particular Societies that they may partake of seals c. then the seals are not to be administred immediatly to them for then they should have the end without the means But they are bound to joyn in such Societies for that end for otherwise there is no necessity of erecting any particular Churches in the world and so all the glory of Christ in this respect should be laid in the dust and these particular temples destroyed and thus a door of liberty is opened to many to live loosely without the care and watch and communion of any particular Church in the world Argument 3 If the seals are to be administred immediately to beleevers or professing beleevers as such then they may be administred privately to any one where-ever he be found but that were very irregular and against the common doctrine of Protestant Divines who give large testimony against private Baptism or of the Lords-supper neither doe we see any weight in the arguments of the Papists or Anabaptists alledged for the contrary Argument 4 Lest we seem to stand alone in this controversies let the arguments produced by Didoclavius and him that writes concerning Perth Assembly against private Baptisms be considered and it will be found that most of them doe strongly conclude against administration thereof to any but Church-members Argument 5 The learned Author Mr. Ball in this his dispute against our Conclusion yet in his Discourse let fall sundry things that confirm it as when he describes the Catholick Church to be the Society of men professing the faith of Christ divided into many particular Churches Whence we argue if the Catholick church existeth onely in these particular Churches the seales must onely be given to them and the members thereof also That Baptism is a solemn admission into the Church of Christ and must of necessity be administred in a particular Society Whence three things will follow First that Baptism sometimes administred privately by the Apostles is not an ordinary pattern Secondly that Baptism is not to be administred to beleevers as such immediatly if of necessity it must be administred in a particular Society Thirdly joyning to some particular Society being an Ordinance of God of so great
their baptizing he records withall their adding to them the latter being an exegesis of the former and that the same day as being performed at the same time and indeed when a convert publickly professeth his faith in Christ is it not as easily done to reâ—…eive him to a particular visible Church as into the Catholick before Baptism but first to baptize them and then the same day to add or joyn them to the Church is altogether unprobable And that this adding was to a particular Church is sufficiently proved before The next place you may note is Acts 5.14 where the Holy Ghost omitting the baptizing of those beleevers yet speaks of their adding to the Lord as if the one implyed the other and that their adding to the Lord was by their joyning to the Church is evident by the opposition between verse 13 14. Of the rest durst no man joyn himself to them but beleevers were the more added to the Lord. 3 In the conversion of Samaria although so great a work is declared in so few words in one verse Act. 8.12 yet the text puts a manifest distinction of Philips doctrine between the things of the Kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ which plainly enough sheweth that they taught the observing of the order of the Kingdom of Christ as well as the Doctrine of the name of Christ the object of saving faith And this they received by faith and professed before they were baptized Now the first and most famous examples of the Apostles perswading that so they practised why should we doubt of their like practice in other examples when nothing is said that contradicteth the same as Acts 10. in the baptizing of Cornelius his house where so many were met and the Holy Ghost fell on all why should we think the Apostle Peter baptized them and left them out of the order of Christ wherein they should worship him and be edified in the faith If we doubt of it because the Scripture is silent therein we may as well question whether those beleevers Acts 4.4 9.35 vers 42. whether any of these confessed their faith or were baptized for nothing is said thereof So likewise Acts 11. where we read of many beleeving turning to the Lord vers 21. of the adding others to the Lord vers 24. but nothing of their confession of faith or baptism and yet they are called a Church whereby it appears that the holy Ghost sometime expresseth their baptism without joyning to the Church and sometimes joyning without baptism and sometime he expresseth both Acts. 2.41 And therefore hence we may conclude the like of the case of Lydia and the Jaylor considering the former practice of the Apostles and that the Apostle speaks so expresly of a Church at Philippi in the beginning of the Gospel Phil. 4. at which time we have no more conversions expressed but of those two families at least they were the most eminent fruits of Pauls Ministery at that time and it is very probable the Church was gathered in Lydia's house seeing Paul going out of prison to her house he is said to see the Brethren and comfort them so departing verse 40. Besides why might not the Apostle baptize them into that particular visible Church in such a case as well as into the Catholick or all Churches as some say they professing subjection to Christ in every ordinance of his with reference to that Church he had there constituted The fulnesse of power in the Apostles might doe greater matters without breach of order though no rule for us so to do neither is it strange from the practice of those times to begin a Church in a family seeing the Apostle speaks of Churches in three severall families Rom. 16.5 Col. 4.15 Phil. 2. which though many understand to be called Churches in regard of the godlinesse of those families yet if we consider First how many eminent Saints the Apostle salutes who no doubt had godly families not so much as naming their housholds much lesse giving them such a title but onely to these three named Secondly how distinct his salutations are first the Governors and then the Church in their house Thirdly that the Apostle doth not onely send his salutations to the Church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla Rom. 16.5 but also keeping the name of a Church he sends salutations from that Church to the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 16.19 All which doe strongly argue there is more in it then that they were godly families and therefore may perswade us that there were indeed constituted Churches in those Families though other Christians also might joyn with them Reply Thus having cleared our meaning and the consideration it self there will remain very few extraordinary cases if any of whom it can be proved they were not joyned to some particular Church when baptized as that of the Eunuch which as it was done by an extraordinary immediate call of Philip so to doe so also there was a speciall reason thereof the Lord intending thereby rather by him to send the Gospel into Ethiopia then to retain him in any other place to joyn with his Church And the Baptism of Paul who as without the Ministery of the Word he was converted by the immediate voice of Christ so he was baptized by the immediate call of Ananias so to do Now let us proceed to consider what further is replyed Answ The seals Baptism and the Lords-supper are given to the Church not onely in ordinary but also extraordinary dispensation True Baptism is not without the Church but in it an ordinance given to it The Sacraments are the seales of the Covenant to the faithfull which is the form of the Church tokens and pledges of our spirituall admittance into the Lords family Hence it is inferred that if the seales in extraordinary dispensation were given to the Church and yet to members of no particular Church then also in ordinary dispensation it may be so 1 It will not follow for first if the Apostle in extraordinary cases baptized privately will it follow that in ordinary dispensation it may be so Secondly if because the Ministery be given to the Church and extraordinary Officers were not limited to particular Churches will it therefore follow that in ordinary dispensations Ministers ought not to be given onely to particular churches Thirdly as we have oft said that seals belong de jure to all beleevers as such as members of the Catholick church they being given unto it firstly as to its object and end and all that are truly baptized are baptized into it and thus never out of it as being tokens of our spirituall admittance into the Lords family both in ordinary and extraordinary dispensation but doth it hence follow that actuall fruition of the seales of which the question is stated may ordinarily be had or given to such as set loose from all societies the Apostles had extraordinary power being generall Pastors over all persons
of God and where there is a Covenant there is the people of God c. Answ This assertion seems to us very strange to fall from that reverend and learned Author being a foundation of many inconveniences and absuâ—…dities and tending to overthrow the order of Christ in his visible Churches For First if this be so that every Society in Covenant with God be the Church of God then men may set up as many Forms of visible Churches as they please if the people be in Covenant with God visibly at least the Archdeacon with his Commissary Priests Churchwardens c. being in Covenant with God are a true Church So the Diocesan Bishop in his Cathedrall with his Clergy or any such Assembly are the Church of God or what other form-soever men will devise may goe for the Church of God and to them belong the seals and you may as wel say discipline and all Ordinances of God if they bee the true Church Secondly upon this ground every company of godly Christistians in Covenant with God meeting in fasting prayer c. are the true Church of God and to them as such the sealâ—… belong and sending for a true Minister of the Catholick church they may have Baptism and the Lords-supper administred and by the same reason discipline also yea if but two or three as you say being in Covenant with God meet together in their travail at an Inne c. are the Church of God especially every Christian family iâ—… the Church for they professe the entire faith joyn daily in prayer and thanksgiving receive the truth of God to dwell amongst them are in some measure obedient unto the commandâ—… of God and in Covenant with God And therefore being the Church of God why not call for a Minister and have seals ordinarily dispensed to them Thirdly upon this ground a company of Christian Women in Covenant with God are a Church to whom the seal â—… belong and who sees not how all orderly dispensation of Gods Ordinances and the whole order of visible Churches in the Gospel would be overturned by this assertion We verily beleeve this Author was far from admitting these things but the Position it self will unavoidably enforce the same Neither can we impute this assertion to any inconsideratenesse through heat of disputation For if any shall maintain the personall Covenant of people with God to be sufficient to constitute visible Churches and not admit a necessity of a more publick or generall Covenant explicite or implicite whereby a company of Christianâ—… are made one people joyning in one Congregation to worship God in his holy Ordinances and walk together in his wayâ—… they must of necessity acknowledge every Society in Covenant with God to be a Church as here is said and therefore admit all forms of Churches and all Families c. to be Churches and so bring in the confution objected which we desire may well bee considered All your Arguments stand upon that ground of personall covenant with God which is too weak to bear up that conclusion to make all such visible Churches to whom the seals belong as the absurd consequences thereof shew These Reasons and the Scriptures in the margent some of them will prove them fit matter for visible Churches and that they have a remote right unto the seals of that Covenant which we grant but they will not prove every Society of such to bee true Churches having immediate right to have the seals dispensed unto them Reply Fifthly If it be graâ—…ted that the seals are the prerogative of particular visible Churches known and approved Christians amongst us are members of such Churches and so to be esteemed amongst you c. and every visible beleever professing the pure entire faith admitted to the right and lawfull participation of the sacraments is a visible member of the true Church if he hath neither renounced the Society nor deserved justly to be cast out by excommunication or Church censure c. And if known and approved Christians members of our Churches comming to New-England shall desire to have their children baptized or themselves admitted to the Lords-supper before they be set members amongst you we desire to know upon what grounds from God you can deny them if you acknowledge our Churches Ministery and Sacraments to be true as you professe and the members of the Church be known and approved orderly recommended unto you Answ We grant all this here expressed for the substance however some reasons spoken unto before intermixed we passe over and to your question we frame a ready answer from your own words For first you grant that if such members have renounced that Society wherein they did partake of the seals they are not to be reputed members of it and this is generally the case of all approved Christians among us who though they doe not so renounce the Churches that bare them and gave them suck as no true Churches yet seeing they were grown so corrupt many ways as they could neither enjoy some needfull Ordinances nor partake in those they had without sin they have therefore renounced and forsaken all further communion with them and membership in them and so by your own grant neither themselves nor the Churches here can take them as members of your Churches to receive them under that respect Secondly if any yet have not so far renounced those Churches they belonged unto yet they are not orderly recommended unto us which also you grant ought to be and indeed otherwise we may oft receive persons justly excommunicate or such as are no members of Churches any where or otherwise under great offence as frequent examples amongst our selves doe sheâ—…e though the Church may think well of such as offer themselves What else follows in this Paragraph is the same in substance and much of it in words also that we have answered before and therefore we passe it over and that of the Jewish Church we shall speak to after As for that you desire leave to set down and us to examine what may be objected against that we affirmed That the distinct Churches named in the New Testament were Congregationall Societies we shall consider as followeth Reply The number of beleevers were so great in some Cities that they could not conveniently meet in one place as one Assembly to worship God according to his will and for their edifying as in Samaria Jerusalem Antioch Ephesus Answ Although we expected not Objections in this case against the currant Tenent of our godly Reformers Baine Parker c. with whom we joyn and we might refer you to them for answer to this beaten Objection of the Prelates yet we are not unwilling to examine what is said in this digression The Argument stands thus If the number of beleevers were so great in some City as could not meet in one Assembly to edification then there was some other form of a Church besides Congregationall But so it was in Samaria c. Answ
We deny the consequences for when they grew to so great a number they might fall into more Congregationall Churches and so no other form arise from the multitude but we suppose you mean of such a multitude as is called a Church and therefore to answer to your Assumption we deny that any such multitude of beleevers as is here called a Church were so great as could not meet to edification And first concerning Samaria Reply That there was a Church gathered in Samaria will not be denyed for they received the Word and were baptized but that the Church in that City was onely a Congregationall Assembly is more then can probably be concluded Answ We grant a Church or Churches were gathered in Samaria and we accept your reason as good because they received the Word and were baptized whâ—…e by the way you grant what we pleaded for before That the Apostles gathered Churches when they baptized them but that there was but one Congregationall Assembly lyes not in 〈…〉 prove untill you prove that all the beleevers were called a Church or one Church which doth not appear in the whole story 〈…〉 nor any other where that we can finde and it is very probable that as Philip converted and baptized so great a multitude at severall times and gathered them into the Church or Churches as he baptized them so he might gather severall Churches as well as one seeing that none doubt but that Congregationall Churches 〈◊〉 an ordinance of Christ what ever men contend for beside And therefore be the number of beleevers in Samaria as great as you would have it it proves nothing Reply The Church at Jerusalem was one and distinct yet encreased to 3000 then to 5000 c. Answ Be it so the increase was very great yet so long as they are called one distinct Church it was one Congregation viz. untill they scattering by the persecution about Stephen Acts. 7.8 which is evident by these two arguments First Acts 2.41 c. where we see the 3000 added to the 120. they have their communion together described 1 In regard of their spirituall communion to be in the Apostles doctrine fellowship breaking of bread and Prayer verse 42. Secondly in regard of their outward communion in the good things of this life they had all things common and sold their possessions c. verse 44 45 Now the manner of both parts of this communion in respect of time and place is described verse 46. viz. in their spirituall duties They continued daily with one accord in the Temple And secondly in respect of their outward communion in their States They eat their meat from house to house this latter requiring many tables and many houses to provide for them so that although in their outward communion it was in private houses yet their spirituall communion it was with one accord in one place viz. the Temple where they had room enough being the place erected for a Nationall Church and having favour with all the people were not interrupted therein by any persecution We need not step out of our way to reply to all that is said against this reason It is enough for us to note that they daily with one accord 〈◊〉 and that in the Temple which is not ansâ—…ered by any 〈…〉 2 This appeareth Acts â—… 1 5. where it is evident the election of Deacoâ—â— was before and by the multitude verse 1. by the whole multitude verse 5. and this was the last Church-meeting and Church act we read of before their scattering neither can â—…t appear that the Jews and â—…recians whose Widows murmured were two distinct Congregations but the contrary is evident in that the Deacons were chosen al by the whole and for the whole not distinctly so many for this and so many for that Church as it was needful if they were two Churches These proofe being so clear the inconveniences objected are of no force and sufficiently answered by many examples of as great Assemblies meeting ordinarily to edification as beside the Auditory of Chrysostome cited by others the Assemblies of Stepney in London Yarmouth in Norfolk and others in our experience Beza a man not loving to hyperbolize saith that being in Paris there met at a Sermon 24000. And of a Synodall Assembly that they received the Lords supper no lesse then 10000. Beza Epist. 65. Reply Without question the number of beleevers at Antioch was not small of which it is expresly said That a great number beleeved and that a great multitude were added to the Lord by the preaching of Barnabas c. and therefore we may think the Church rose to such aâ—… bignesse as could not well assemble in one Congregation Acts 11.21 14.27 Answ 1 In that place Acts 11.21 the great number that beleeved was the fruit of all the scattered Christians at Phenice Cyprus and Antioch for the hand of the Lord was with them all and their whole successe is summed up together nothing said before of the other places 2 Though Paul and Barnabas taught much people yet it proveth not that this much people were converted to the Church 3 Though much people were added to the Lord yet doth it follow they were more then could meet in one Congregation and if first Disciples were there called Christians must it needs be for their number and not rather for eminent likeness to Christ with other specialities of providence 4 It is expresly said the Church was gathered together Acts 14.27 which is not meant of the Elders onely as if they onely could meet for Chap. 15.30 They gathered the multitude together so that it was noâ—… 〈…〉 but 〈…〉 to gâ—…ther in 〈◊〉 place Reply The number of beleevers was great at Ephesus where Paul preached two years all that dwelt 〈…〉 heard 〈…〉 and effectuall ways open 〈…〉 the 〈…〉 of Diâ—…na her Temple were in danger to be seâ—… aâ—…â—…ought 〈◊〉 those 〈…〉 burnt their books openly which could not 〈…〉 great danger of the Church unlesse a great part of the City had 〈◊〉 Acts 19.10 19 27. Answ 1 Be it so that many were converted and the Word grâ—…w mightily this proves not thâ—â— all who heard Paul were of the Church of Ephesus for then all 〈◊〉 should be of that Church Acts 19.10 who did hear the Word 〈◊〉 Jewe and Gentiles As for the danger of the Shrines and Diana's Temple to be set at nought a little spark might â—…indle such fears and raise such out-cryes in the covetous Craftsmen by whom the whole City was see in a superstitious 〈◊〉 our own experience may teach how soon a prophane people will cry our against a faithfull Minister before he hath converted ten 〈◊〉 in a City 2 That they could not burn their books openly without danger to the Churches except a great part of the City beleeved seems a strange reason as if beleevers 〈◊〉 not professe openly except they had a great number to maintain them with club-law open profession in those times
yet it is beyond the power of man to convince by a rule that so it is We confesse wee are fearefull as of opening the doore too wide so of shutting the doores upon any whom God would have us to receive in but for what yet wee see or read from the arguments here alledged in this Author or the writings of others godly learned wee thinke that Church charity is not to rest satisfied with the first but with the latter for let the profession of the worke of faith bee never so short or so weake let it be by their owne immediate relation or by question yet if it may but appeare to a regulated charity so as to hope that is is reall it is to rest satisfied then till God make discovery to the contrary wee intend not to heape up arguments nor answer scruples but these foure things seemâ—… to â—…vince as much 1 That the Apostles in the 3000. converted Acts â—… as they were very ready to receive them to the fold of Christ and therefore in one day immediatly received so many thousands which could not bee by large profession of every one so also they attended to the truth of that profession and therfore it was not bare profession of faith but as it is set downe for our patterne it was such a profession as was evidently joyned with humiliation pricking at the heart mourning and crying out before the Apostles What shall wee doe to be saved gladly receiving the word which are reall testimonies of some reall change from what they were but a little before and upon this ground the Apostles received them 2 The Apostles charge to Timothy 2 Tim. 3.5 From such as have a forme of godlinesse and deny the power of it turne away if barâ—… profession were sufficient why should Timothy turne from them but rather receive them who had a forme of profession And if it was in his power to avoyd them why should he not reject them and that not onely from private but Church communion also supposing them such as not oneâ—…y had a forme but might be by a rule convinced thereof 3 Lying and apparent untruth cannot make a man fit matter for a Church and therefore cannot bee a ground for charity to rest on that so he is but verball profession which appeares not to bee reall but false is palpable lying and indeed more fit to destroy the Church then to make the Church Hence Sanctius in Zach. 14.14 observes that the greatest enemies of the Church are such qui cum fidem retineant sanctitatem abjecerunt 4 If bare profession of faith is a sufficient ground to receive men into the Church then an excommunicate person cast out in one houre should bee immediatly received in againe if hee will but renew his generall profession of faith nay then the Indians in Maryland who will put on and put off this profession as their ghostly fathers the Popish Priests will bestow or withhold garments and shirts upon them should in charitie bee received into the Church But if it should bee asked how charity may know the reality of this profession we answer so long as the rule bee attended wee leave every one to the wisedome of Christ to make application thereof onely this we doe add in generall for more full satisfaction 1 Such a faith professed with the mouth which is confirmed by an innocent godly conversation in the life so as not to live in commission of any knowne sinne or omission of any knowne duty wee say this conversation makes faith appeare reall James 2.18 Rev. 22.14 wee conceive more is required to make a man appeare a fit member of a Church then of a Common-wealth to bee onely bonus civis and bare civility is sufficient for this latter but not for the former and therefore such a profession of faith is needfull as is confirmed by a not onely a civill but a godly life 2 Such a faith as is joyned with evident repentance and sorrow and mourning for sinne although there bee no experience alwayes of such a holy life antecedently seene for thus it was Act. 2.37 38. for the riches of Christs grace is such as not onely to receive experienced christians into his family and house but also the weakest and poorest who may stand in most need of Christs Ordinances and that as soone as ever they seeme to bee brought in and therefore experience of a blamelesse life is not alwayes necessary for admission into the Church some think indeed that the Apostles received in the first converts Act. 2.39 so soone because they had an extraordinary spirit of discerning but if they had so yet they did not receive them in here according to that for they received divers hypocrites in as Ananias and Sapphira c. and if all other of their acts in this chapter were exemplary why should this onely bee thought to be otherwise and extraordinary 3 When there is full and sufficient testimony from others of their faith and piety although their humiliation faith and conversation bee not so well knowne for wee see the Church received Paul when Barnabas had declared what God had done for him and if it may bee just to condemne another by the testimony of two faithfull witnesses it may not bee unchristian to receive an other into the fold of Christ much more readily upon the testimony of able and faithfull Christians especially then when they be not able openly and publiquely ro speake so fully for themselves and thus much for answer to the first question 2 Question Whether this profession is to bee judged by the Church Answer 1. The faithfull as they did at first combine into a Church so it is their duty to receive others to themselves as the Church did Acts 9.26 27. encouraged by Barnabas and the Apostles and as the Apostle commands Rom. 14.1 which although it was of fellow-members into their affections yet the proportion holds strong for receiving commers into the Church Joh. Ep. 3.8 9 10. 2 If they bee to receive them they must by some meanes know them to bee such as they may comfortably receive into their affections a little leaven leavening the whole lumpe 1 Cor. 5. 3 The Officers of the Church who are first privately to examine them and prepare them for admission are to shew the Church the rule on which the Church is to receive them and themselves are ready to admit them Act. 10.37 Can any forbid water c. This rule was best seene by that publike profession before the whole Church and if no just exception bee made as none should bee without conviction they are to be admitted by the Officers with the consent of the members hereunto for if publike profession is needfull at least before the Church though not the world alway as Didoclavius observes to the entrance into the Covenant and Church by baptisme wee see no reason but persons formerly baptized and entering anew into the Church but they should openly
communion with him as a true Minister of Jesus Christ in the Church he doth belong to as they may do with a member unjustly cast out but til that appeare unto them they cannot so esteem and honor him being orderly deposed but must at least suspend their judgment til the case be cleared Fourthly we answer clearely and plainely to the chiefe scope of the question If a Minister bee unjustly deposed or forsaken by his particular Church and he also withall renounce and forsake them so farre as all Office and relation betweene them cease then is hee no longer an Officer or Pastour in any Church of God whatsoever you will call it And the Reason is because a Ministers office in the Church is no indelible Character but consists in his relation to the flocke and if a Minister once ordained his relation ceasing his Office of a Minister Steward of the mysteries of God shall still remaine why should not a ruling Elder or Deacon remaine an Elder or Deacon in the Church as well all are Officers Ordained of Christ alike given to his Church Officers chosen and Ordained by laying on of â—…ands alike but weâ—… suppose you will not say a Deacon In such a case should remaine a Deacon in the Catholique Church therefore not a Minister Secondly wee shall now consider what is here said and first this language of a Minister in the usuall Church as a particular Church hath union with and is a part of the universall it is an unusuall expression to us and to the Scripture phrase and therefore beare with us if wee fall short of your meaning the usuall Church in England hath beene either the Arch-Deacons Church in the Deanaâ—…ies or Diocesan in the Bishoprick or Provinciall or Nationall but wee hope that there is no such intended here yet to all this and the jurisdiction thereof particular Churches have been subject as parts there But if by usuall Church you meane a Classical Provinciall or Nationall Church wee must intreat better grounds for any of these and therefore wee must confesse our minde and meaning is not so that wee looke at a Minister of a particular Church in any such relation to the usuall and intermediate Church betweene it and the Catholique The second sense therefore we owne and acknowledge as before But whether this be contrary to the judgement and practise of the universall Church wee know not because it is hard for us know what the universall Church judgeth except we could heare it speake or see its practise if the onely head Prophet and Shepherd of the Church Jesus Christ be fit to declare her judgement we will be tryed thereby who we know hath set Elders in every particular Church Act. 14.23 to watch over their particular flock Act. 20.28 but not over any other Church that wee can finde Neither doth this destroy the unity or Communion of the Catholique Church nor of particular Churches one with another as is said for Churches may enjoy brotherly Communion one with another without such stated formes under the power and authority of one another as hath been shewed before Reply For if he be not a Minister to other Churches then are not the Churches of God one nor the Communion which they have together on nor the Ministers one non the flocke which they feed one Answ In what sense is intended to have the Ministers one and flocke one we doe not see If you meane one by one visible Government over the Catholique Church wherein there is a subordination of Churches and Ministers you must at last rise to Oecomenicall Pastor or Councell that must be the supreme which can scarce ever be had If you meane an unity by brotherly Communion in officeâ—… of love and mutuall helpefulnesse of Churches and Ministers without usurpation such an unity and Community is not destroyed and the argument doth not follow Cannot many distinct societies of Townes or Corporations make up one County except the Major or Constable in one Towne be a Major or Constable in others also By this Reason the Deacon of one Church is the Deacon of all or else the unity is destroyed Reply If the Pastor derive all his authority from the Church when the Church hath set him aside what right hath he to administer among that people Answ True but we say he derives all his authority from Christ by the Church indeed applying that office to him to which the authority is annexed by the institution of Christ hence being the Minister of Christ unto them if they without Christ depose him they hinder the exercise of his Office but his right remaines Reply As they give right to an unworthy man to minister amongst them if they cal him unjustly so they take right from the worthy if they unjustly depose him Answ We grant there is a parity in foro externo but as in the call his outward cal consists in the election of the calling and the acceptation of the called to compleat his power of administration Now this by Christ in his Church may be destroyed in a â—…ust censure without his consent but cannot unjustly be wrung from him without his consent therefore he may hold his right till either hee be justly deposed or willingly relinquish the same upon their injurious interruption of the use of his right Reply And whereas you say the Minister is for the Ministery and the Office for the execution and so the Pastor and the flocke are relatives and therefore if their election gave him authority among them to feed their câ—…sting him off hath stripped him of the same power they gave him Answ Wee grant it is so yet the execution may bee unjustly hindred though the right and Office remaine But we may well retort this argument upon the Minister of the usuall or Catholicke Church Thus if the Minister bee for the Ministery and the Office for the execution and so the Pastor and flock be relatives then hee that may justly for ever be hindred of all execution of the Ministery and hath no power to censure his flock or cannot so much as justly approve and admonish them for the same surely hee hath a poore Office and Ministery but such a Minister that hath no particular Congregation that is his flock under his charge may justly be excluded out of all Churches and cannot censure or reprove his Catholique or usuall Church for the same therefore he is indeed no Minister and and hath no Office in the Church of God â—…HAP XVII Position 8. THat one Minister cannot performe any Ministeriall act in another Congregation Reply The Preaching of the Word and publique Prayer in the Congregation meet together solemnely to worship God c. are properly Ministeriall c. Answ Concerning our true sense and meaning in our answer to this Position wee have spoken in the second consideration of the second and third Positions to which wee referre the Reader onely here wee must ingenuously confesse that our expression That a Minister exercising in another Church doth it not by vertue of any calling but onely by his gifts is not so cleare but may occasion stumbling yet the the next words following doe fully expresse our mindes viz. that he doth not put forth such a Ministeriall act of authority and power in dispensing of Gods Ordinances as a Minister doth performe to that Church whereunto hee is called to be a Minister for so hee doth not performe any Ministeriall act with that authority hee doth to his owne which further cleares up our expression in the second consideration viz. that he is a Pastor of none but his proper flocke although some acts of his Office may extend beyond his owne flocke as we have shewed before and therefore in this sense we may still conclude that if the question be put to any Minister so exercising in another church which was once put to our Saviour By what authority dost thou these things let him study how to give an answer for wee have not yet learned it from this Reply We confesse there are some godly learned servants of Christ who possibly may bee otherwise minded and thinke that a Minister preaching in another Congregation doth it onely as a gifted man as the Refuter of Doctor Downam with others in former times of Reformation beleeved also But we desire that if any difference appeare herein it may bee no prejudice to the same cause for substance wee maintaine if by sundry lines wee all meet at last in the same point FINIS Vid Pet. Mart. Loc. Com. de Excom Brins Watch part 3. capâ—… 10. Jun. lib. 1. paral 6. G. Apol. cap. 7. Q. 2. Ibid. p. 138. Peter Martyr in 1 Kings 12. verse 31. Pet. Mart. Com. Loc. de Idol in praeâ—… l. 1. Iohn 2.15 16. Conc. Miliv Can. 12. Tertull. Apol. cap. 30. Vid. Chemnit Ex. de Innoc. Sanctorum Vid. Birth of Heresies out of Elasopolitans Comment Pet. Mart. loc â—…om de Idol Whit. de Eccle. 1 Cor. 15.47 Vid. Brightm An. in Loc. Cypr. lib. 3. Epist 13. Cypr. lib. 4. Epist 7. * Right of Presbyt pag. 482. Page 22. Page 68. Tertul. lib. 4. Com. Mar. * Calvin Epist 332. Chamier de Euchar cap. 13. Reply To the second Consideration of the Answer Pet Mart. de Excom Loc. Com. * Officiall Lib. 1. cap. 6.7 Rev. 2.2 and 3.9 Acts 2 38.8 â—…7 19 17 18 â—… Cham de Bap. lib. 5. cap. 1â—…