Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	learned_a	pastor_n	reverend_n	3,088	5	16.4121	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A80164	Vindiciæ ministerii evangelici revindicatæ: or The preacher (pretendedly) sent, sent back again, to bring a better account who sent him, and learn his errand: by way of reply, to a late book (in the defence of gifted brethrens preaching) published by Mr. John Martin of Edgefield in Norfolk, Mr. Samuel Petto of Sandcroft in Suffolk, Mr. Frederick Woodale of Woodbridge in Suffolk: so far as any thing in their book pretends to answer a book published, 1651. called Vindiciæ ministerii evangelici; with a reply also to the epistle prefixed to the said book, called, The preacher sent. By John Collinges B.D. and pastor of the church in Stephens parish in Norwich.	Collinges, John, 1623-1690.	1658 (1658)	Wing C5348; Thomason E946_4; ESTC R207611	103,260	172

Church of Ephesus If they only say it may be but prove it must be I hope it is enough our Reverend Brethren loved to use soft words and hard Arguments But indeed they could not well say it must be for there might be but one particular Church in a Nation and then it was not necessary but surely our Brethren would not have said it may be if they had thought there was no particular or general ground for it in Gods word and surely what hath such a foundation in Gods word is jure Divino not withstanding our Brethrens critical observation Our Brethren of the Assembly do not say it may be the sense of the Texts they quote to prove it yet you Brethren must remember you tell us so for some if not all of your Texts for Election where all you pretend to is our sense may be the sense yet I hope you will say that Election is jure Divino Our Brethren know that they have pretended a Jus Divinum too for gifted mens preaching and yet for fear of their asking maintenance and to avoid our Argument from thence tell us they may preach occasionally but will not say They must preach constantly In the last place Brethren you fear we may be provoked against you and therefore you favour us with your Reasons for engaging in this service and excuse for coming into it so late A pit you say hath been digged and a long time stood open and divers have fallen into it and you come out in charity to cover it Whether you have indeed covered or uncovered a Pit Let every judicious Christian judge yea let the experiences of all the Churches of Christ testifie I beseech my dear and reverend Brethren to lay their hands upon their hearts and consider whether they have not uncovered that pit into which some years since many supposed Brethren in New England falling sank and rose up no more to a visible repentance for their Errors and Blasphemies That pit into which many Members of our Brethrens Churches in Holland fell that sadly too That pit into which many Members of their late Churches in England yea in Norfolk fell and are come out Quakers pleaders for the Jewish Sabbath for the power of Miracles as not ceased conferring as they pretend the Holy Ghost c. That pit which the most learned judicious godly-wise Brethren Pastors of our Brethrens Churches in England will not indure to stand open where they have to do which the reverend Pastors of the Chu●ches in New England dare not let stand open without a Teaching Elder present to watch it This pit our Brethren have endeavoured again to uncover and I hope it will appear as vain an attempt as his who would needs rebuild Jericho as to the issue of the work though not as to the punishment of the persons whom I desire to love honor for their work sake though not for this works sake I could have heartily wished my Brethren had left this Idol to plead for it self and I dare say they might have done it without offending one humble serious judicious Christian at least who is known to me I most humbly beseech my dear and Reverend Brethren to hear the cryes of many sober judicious persons lamenting the sad condition of the Parishes wherein they live which instead of able and godly Ministers are served with none but such as mend their trading on the week day by assuming this unbridled liberty on the Sabbath who are both obtruded upon them and unable to speak the word of God as they ought to speak so that they are forced in these days of Reformation too to go from Parish to Parish to seek one who can speak to them in the name of the Lord or to whose preaching they can go in faith and attend upon it as a publike Ordinance Doth not this Liberty dead the hearts of sober men as to acting in any Reformation by casting out scandalous ignorant and insufficient Ministers While they see little more good from it then casting out one ignorant insufficient man to make way for some others or the casting out one that would prophesie of wine and strong drink to make way for others who shall prophesie the vain imaginations of their own hearts or the errors of Millenaries Anti-Ministerial persons and high flown Anabaptists and who would not judge that if people must be under this sad destiny to have a snare for their souls stand in their Pulpits it had better be one that every one knows and would avoid than one that is covered over with the hypocrisie of a little hay or stubble and is no less dangerous and more hard to be discovered by vulgar eyes Dear Brethren I beg your pardon if in this case the zeal of my God his House People Truths glory hath eaten me up in this Cause in which I think all of them are so deeply concerned and sad experience hath proved it As to your excuse for coming so late into this Dis-service to the Church and Truth of God I have no reason to be troubled at it as thinking you have at last come too soon And I am apt to believe the Rebukes of your own Conscience might retard your expedition I have endeavoured to follow you with more speed observing it a piece of Wisdom of the GOD of Nature to plant the Antidote within view of the Poison I can truly say that while you have a just Answer of your Book so far as I am concerned in it I have the Answer of a good Conscience having spoken nothing on this Subject but what I believe to be the Truth of GOD. Nor have I willingly shewed any passion So praying that those honest Hearts of which I perswade my self you are all possessed may hereafter be found enditing a better matter I commend you to the LORD and to the blessing of his Grace Being BRETHREN Your Servant for the Lord Jesus Christs sake John Collinges Chaplyfield-House in Norwich Febr. 12. 1657. To every Christian Reader Reader THere are three or four great Truths of God the Tutelage of which from their enemies at least in these parts I have formerly undertaken 1. The Divine Ordinance of Gospel Preaching in the administration of which all who thought themselves gifted men pleaded a right of intercommonage with those who according to Gospel-Rules are separated to that work 2. The liberty of Christians from the observation of Holy Days 3. The pure administration of the holy Sacrament of the Supper and 4. The Divine Right of Church-Government in the hands of Christs proper Officers My discourse concerning the first I have already once vindicated what I said upon the second to my knowledge none hath yet answered as to the two last there hath been something published to the world under pretence of answer John Timson and Mr. Humfry have pretended something by way of answer to the third and Theoph. Brabourne to the fourth And now three Reverend Brethren have

VINDICIAE MINISTERII EVANGELICI REVINDICATAE OR THE PREACHER pretendedly Sent Sent back again TO Bring a better Account Who Sent Him and learn his ERRAND By way of REPLY To a late BOOK in the Defence of Gifted Brethrens Preaching Published by Mr. John Martin of Edgefield in Norfolk Mr. Samuel Petto of Sandcroft in Suffolk Mr. Frederick Woodale of Woodbridge in Suffolk So far as any thing in their Book pretends to Answer a Book published 1651. CALLED Vindiciae Ministerii Evangelici WITH A Reply also to the Epistle prefixed to the said BOOK called The Preacher Sent. By John Collinges B.D. and Pastor of the Church in Stephens Parish in Norwich London Printed by S. G. for Richard Tomlins at the sign of the Sun and Bible neer Pye-Corner 1658. To my Reverend and much Honoured Brethren the Authors of the late Book called The Preacher Sent. Dearly beloved Brethren I Have seriously perused your Epistle directed to those professing the Order of Church Fellowship and Government called Presbyterian of which number I must own my Self to be one though the least of all the Servants of the Lord Jesus Christ who walk in that way together with your Book to which it is prefixed and must profess my self as to several particulars in either of them very much unsatisfied both as to the truth of the Notions you contend for and to the mediums by which you endeavour to establish them putting therefore away all wrath prejudice or bitterness as in the following sheets I have endeavoured to shew you your mistakes as to the matter of your Book so I shall in this Epistle do the like as to what is contained in your Epistle In the mean time professing my self to use your own expression bound for peace as far as the shoes of the Gospel will carry me and longing for that dispensation if it may be expected in this life when all the Lords People shall be blessed with One heart and guided into one way only desiring to divide my zeal equally betwixt truth and peace knowing that God is as much the God of the one as of the other I rejoyce to see my dear and Reverend Brethren sensible of the great abuse of that Liberty for which they plead I know our Brethren have not been such Strangers in Israel but they have seen and observed that most of those spurious notions which in ●hese times of Blasphemy have been found in every Street and with an impudent forehead have called the holy Spirit of God Father and the lovely Virgin Truth mother have been found lying at the door of this Liberty and have really been born in her house That most of those sad Earthquakes which have rent the bowels of the Church and overturned some Churches of God both in Holland and in Old and New England have been caused by the wind of this Liberty which they still endeavour to keep up I know they cannot but have heard the cryes of many poor people in this County who are fed with these husks instead of bread with the chaff of these exercises instead of the more substantial wheat of publick Ordinances And surely if an Argument from the blastings of Providence or the general disrelish of judicious Christians be worth any thing we have as good a plea as against any licentious practice in the worship of God It was said once by a Learned Person in this Nation that if a Book were composed of all the English Sermons preached by men of worth containing the choicest matter contained in them which had been Preached within some few years he believed no Book in the world would be to be compared with it I believe our Brethren judge that if all the Errors Crudities Nonsense impertinencies blasphemies self-contradictions which by vertue of the exercise of this Liberty they plead for have within these fifteen or sixteen years last past been vented in open Pulpits were summed in one Book the Turkish Alcoran would scarce afford such a rapsody of error nonsense blasphemy and impertinency To give our Brethren a taste I have a Letter still by me wrote by a gifted Brother who took upon him to tell me that he heard me such a day and I did not open my Text aright my Text that day was Eph. 2. Aliens to the commonwealth of Israel He told me if I had rightly opened it I must have told my people 1. What the wealth of Israel was 2. How it came to be common 3. How far forth it was common With much more such nonsensical stuff and very teachy he was with me that I had not fallen upon his notions if either this person had understood the Greek or our Translation had Translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 polity all the jest had been spoiled which probably he would have made three Sermons upon I should have really thanked our Brethren for acknowledging an abuse of this Liberty if I could have seen 1. That any use of it other than I had granted them were not an abuse of the greatest Ordinance of the Gospel 2. Or if I could have seen that our Brethren could have fixed a rule of regulation it would have done something with me but when you tell us you plead for none but such as are really gifted and then tell us none have to do to judge whether they be so or no it is convenient the Church should but if they Preach without it is no sin To my apprehension yee do but complain of a Flood-gate that stands ope too deep when your selves put in a bar that it may not shut down more close It is true the abuse of a thing plainly necessary by a necessity of precept is no argument to take away the use but where no precept is plain the general miscarriage and accursed consequences of it are a strong topick to prove it is not according to the will of God And I hope our Brethren upon second thoughts will not judge any one Text quoted by them plainly concluding the Case All your Arguments run either from the use of gifts to the use of this gift when as yet you will not allow all gifts to be so exercised nor any judgment to be made of the gift or from examples where there is no parity as you will perceive by the following Discourse You rightly apprehend that the singular notion you have entertained of a Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of this and many other unhappy Controversies you are therefore pleased in your Epistle to endeavour to make the light of your notion concerning a Church to reflect upon our faces You tell us That a Church is a particular company of Saints in mutual union for mutual Fellowship in the means of worship appointed by Christ Ep. Dedic for the glory of God the edification of their own souls and the good of others This you say is the only Church that is capable of Officers to be immediately set in it and over it That this is a Church

we grant but that only this Church is capable of Officers we deny I shall have liberty to enter my dissent in examining the six particulars you instance in for the explication of this description First You say it is a company that we grant Ecclesia properly is nomen multitudinis one properly and strictly cannot be called a Church Secondly You say it is a particular Company and that there never was nor ever will be existing in rerum naturâ any other than a particular company I must confess to my dear Brethren that I cannot fathom their notion of particular we use to say particularis is opposed both to universalis and singularis I suppose our Brethren here oppose it to Vniversalis An universal theme in Logick is that as our Brethren know which is apt to be predicated naturally concerning many I think Church is such a Theme Thus much our Brethren I am sure will grant that their Congregations at London Norwich Yarmouth may each of them be called a Church Now the Question is whether all these Churches may not be considered together and called a Church Or if you will Whether all the Churches of God upon the earth may not by an universal notion be called a Church or is not called a Church in Scripture You acknowledge it in a reformed sense an universal company but not an universal Church that is as I suppose you mean a body capable of Officers otherwise it were a strange thing that seven persons who are visible Saints should be called a Church Mr. Hudsons Vindic. p. 31. ad p. 40. and seven hundred should not If our Brethren will please to read what Reverend Mr. Hudson hath wrote he will shew them where the word Church is both generally and indefinitely applied where it cannot be understood of particular Churches Acts 8.3 Gal. 1.13 Acts 26.11 Acts 9.31 compared together Acts 12.1 Acts 2.47 1 Cor. 10.32 Gal. 4.26 Eph. 3.10 1 Cor. 12.28 All these Texts will prove that the Scripture hath not restrained the notion of Church to a particular Company so called But you will say This is a Church not capable of Officers to be set in or over it Brethren have you read what Mr. Hudson saith to prove Ministers Officers to the Church Catholick Do they not when they Baptize admit into the Catholick Church Pag. 232 why else are not your Members baptized again when they are translated from the particular Church into which according to this principle alone they were Baptized Do they not by Excommunication cast out of the Catholick Church Or will our Brethren say that a Church may lawfully admit to its Communion a Member which another Church hath cut off from her Communion Were the Apostles think our Brethren Officers only to a particular Church If to the Vniversal then there was an universal Church once existing capable of Officers Nor is that irrefragable Text 1 Cor. 12.28 as our Brethren say prest to the service of the Catholick Church No it comes as the Lords Voluntier willing to engage for this Truth You say Brethren that what it is written ver 18. of that chapter God hath set the Members every one in the body doth as much prove a Catholick or universal Body as God hath set some in the Church proves a Catholick Vniversal Church I know my Brethren aym at greater things than quiblings about a word that passage God hath set the Members every one in the body together with ver 12. and all the members of that one body being many are one body will prove that the body is Totum integrale So also saith the Apostle is Christ i. e. the Church of Christ If our Brethren will but grant us this That the Church is a Totum integrale you must grant that a particular Church is but a part of this Totum If you say there is no other Totum called a Church but only the particular Church I have proved the contrary that the term of Church is applied otherwise than to a particular Church If you say this Church hath no Officers that Text 1 Cor. 12.28 confutes you neither will your consequence follow that because an universal body is not proved from ver 18. therefore an Vniversal Church is not proved from ver 28. viz. from the whole verse If it had been said v. 18. God hath set the members every one in the body and then the Text had made an enumeration of such members some of whose use and office was not confined to the service of that particular body but would serve any other particular bodies as he doth of Church Officers ver 28. I hope it would have proved an Vniversal body You tell us Brethren you renounce the name and thing of an Vniversal or Catholick Church you must then renounce the Holy Scripture witness the Texts before mentioned and renounce right reason and renounce the most learned and judicious of your own Brethren who generally acknowledge both the name and thing only deny it to be Organical But you think you have five Arguments will prove that a particular Church cannot be a part but a Totum 1. You say first every part is in power incompleat But every particular Church hath the power of a whole Church And may act in all Church work not as a part but as a whole I must deny your Minor Brethren I hope you account a power to meet in a Synod and to consult at least a piece of Church work to which Gods word gives a power Acts 15. and yet when you think of it again you will not say that a particular Church hath a power alone to make a Synod We say the like for Ordination except in cases of absolute necessity and for excommunication where the Church is very small there are that think it is not a work fit for a particular Church See Brethren what Reverend Mr. Hudson says to all these in the Book before cited 2. You tell us next that every whole is really distinct from every part and from all its parts collectively considered they are constituting that is constituted but where that Church is which is really distinct from all particular Churches or wherefore it is you know not This is Brethren such a fallacy as scarce deserveth an answer the body of a man is a whole all his members are parts now when you have found out where that body is which is really distinct from all the members and wherefore it is you will have answered your selves The Nation of England is a whole every Parish is a part finde us where that Nation is which is distinct really from all the Parishes taken together We use to make this a Maxime in Logick Totum reipsâ non differt à partibus suis simul sumptis unitis That a whole doth not really differ from all its parts taken together and united 3. In the next place you tell us there can be no visible universal Church because

he could come near Acts 9.14 Now besides these more general distributions of a Church the Church as Visible is capable of several states from whence arise 3 other notions of it 1. There is a more imperfect state of it as considered without Officers this Divines call an Entitive or Material Church which is nothing else but any particular number any part of that company before mentioned who are found in any Nation Province City Parish so called out of the paganish world agreeing in the profession of the Gospel In this sense I allwaies thought that we and our brethren of the congregational perswasion had been agreed that there are National Provincial and Parochial Churches 2. There is a second notion of the Church resulting from the consideration of this body as having some set over it clothed with the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ authorized as his embassadours to preach the Gospel and to Baptize c. To open this notion a little We consider that it seemed good to the wisdome of God to commissionate certain persons to preach the gospel that by it the people of God might be gathered together in one Hence Christ when hee ascended up on high gave gifts unto men Eph. 4.11 12. He gave some Apostles these were to lay the foundation and then Prophets these were to be Instrumental in the building And by the Apostles he constituted Evangelists who were as to power little less than Provincial Apostles and by these Pastors and teachers Hence the Apostles created Evangelists Philip Timothy Titus and both the Apostles and these Evangelists ordained Pastors and Teachers Acts 14.23 1 Tim. 4.14 by fasting prayer and imposition of hands and in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus containing the standing rules for the settling of Churchs in their permanent state Apostles Prophets and Evangelists being shortly to cease rules are given for the constitution of these officers to the end of the world now when in any place God hath called a people from Paganism to the profession of his Gospel and set over that people any of these persons set apart for the preaching of the Gospell we say there is in such a Nation Province City Parish a Ministerial Church which is a state of of the Church more perfect than the former and differing from it we I say for distinction sake call it a Ministerial Church That is a Company of people called out of the Pagan world to an owning of the Gospel of Christ among whom also are some clothed with the authority of Jesus Christ for the preaching of the Gospel and administration of the Sacraments According to that commission Go Preach and Baptize Indeed as to the administration of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper in regard that none are to be admitted to it but such as can examine themselves and the steward of Christs mysteries must be faithfull in order to which there must be an act of Judgment pass upon the Receiver which is jurisdiction and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction is no where committed to a ●ingle person it seems that in such a Church according to perfect rules it cannot be administred except there be more than one officer nay I think there should be some Ruling Elders or a Ruling Elder at least concurr in this judgment yet Number making a Church in case Ruling Elders cannot be had I conceive in case there be more than one Teaching Elder in a Church who allso are ruling or in case 2 or 3 such particular churches can in such extraordinary cases unite they may also ordinarily administer that Ordinance Nay farther in such an extraordinary case which is the present case of many in England this day I think an extraordinary power may be by one assumed rather than people should want that Ordinance as in Hezekiah's passeover the Levites for every one not clean killed the passeover which else had been against Gods order 2 Chron. 30.17 Exod. 12.3 4 5 6. 3. But lastly the most perfect notion of a particular Church is when it is perfectly Organized A particular ●hurch considered in relation to the Universal is any ●●r● of it whether that in a Nation Province Parish or ●he like each of these is but a particular because no more than a part of the wh le But we usually take particular in a more restrained notion For that part of this universal company which can or may or doth ordinarily meet together in one place at the same numerical administrations or who have by an explicit or implicit consent chosen or submitted to the same officers as those whom God hath set over their souls and this is a Church perfectly Organized and the most perfect notion of a particular Church This Church either without officers or with is the onely Church our Brethren can see wee hope the fault is in their eyes Now the question is whether he that is a preaching Elder in such a particular Church or indeed rather whether all the preaching Elders in all the particular Churches in the world have any farther relation or be in any office to any but that particular company over which they are respectively more especially set because they cannot watch over all c. We affirm they have and in this sense we assert not onely a Church Catholike Visible but a Church Catholike Visible Organical too By which we mean not what our brethren dream of viz. An Vniversal visible society of Christians actually subjected to one or more Vniversal Pastors or guides from whom subordinates must derive their office and power and with whom they must sometimes meet and communicate in some general sacred things which may make them as the Jewes one Church and which same general acts or sacred services can only be performed by that Vniversal head or those Vniversal officers No Nor that all the whole Church should be subject to one Grand senate of officers erected and constantly sitting Mr. Hudson hath in our names long since disowned this same Abominable thing Our Brethren indeed dress up some in this dress to the world and shew them for Presbyterians But we defie their notion of a Church Catholike in this sense and say that it is but an odious representation nothing corresponding to our principles Our Brethren do or may know we are equally with themselves engaged against Popes Patriarchs Arch-Bishops Bishops with all the rest of those Antichristian Derivatives And learned Mr. Hudson hath long since told our Brethren that by Church Catholick visible Organical we mean no other than An habitual Politico-Ecclesiastical society body flock in one and the same sheepfold of the Militant Church in uniform subjection to the same Lord the same lawes united in the same Faith and under the same Baptism performing the same worship and service Mr. Hudsons vindication c. p. 127. c. in kind concerning which body we say that although the members of it be dispersed far and wide and divided into several parts places societies and secondary

who preacheth is that which makes the action of him that heareth a duty This is so rational that none can deny it for sin is the transgression of a law and all duty must be an act of obedience to some law natural divine positive or humane now this is certain that Gods law hath not commanded me to hear every one that speaketh a good discourse or reads a chapter he must be specially authorized to preach or I shall not be specially obliged to hear 2. The second principle is this That an act of office cannot be done by him who is no officer I think that none in their right wits will deny this hence I say these five absurdities will notoriously follow from this principle 1. That in all places where are no particular Churches formed let who will preach none are bound to come to hear but they may all stay at home and read a good book if they please for none there hath any authority or is in office to preach and so none under an obligation to hear 2. That if you divide England into an hundred parts ninety-nine of them cannot upon the Lords day wait upon any publike Ordinance which shall lie under a more appointment of God to save their souls than reading a chapter at home doth The reason is because no particular Churches are formed and there can be none in office It is not the place or company but the person administring who makes the ordinance publike 3. Where there is a particular Church formed it is true the members are bound to come on the Lords day and hear their officer but for all others if they do stay at home and read a chapter or a good book they sin not for he that preacheth hath no more authority to preach to them than they have to preach at home one to another 4. Suppose any should come to hear any man preach if he be not a member of his particular Church he cannot come in faith believing upon the account of any precept or promise that the word heard shall profit him any more than if he had staid at home and heard his servant read a chapter for he that preacheth stands in no office is clothed with no more authority toward him No he is only in office to the members of his own Church 5. If any pastor of any particular Church at any time uppon any occasion gives the Sacrament to any one person who is not an actual member of his Church he sinneth against God doing an act of office to a person to whom he is in no office and hath no authority And I am mistaken if this would not make the greatest schism ever yet heard of And now I beseech my dear and Reverend Brethren to consider to what Athei●m and confusion this one principle improved would in a short time bring us And I am verily perswaded that most of our Brethren of the Congregational perswasion are of another mind from these three in this point for so wise and learned men can never surely think that when at any time they preach in any place or to any people saving to their particular respective Churches they preach but as gifted brethren so that a weavers discourse who hath spent all his week in his loom is under as much appointment of Gods for the salvation of souls as theirs is yet this is a true conclusion from this principle up to which also our brethren cannot walk unless each of the Churches keep so distinct as never to have communion Each with other in any act of publike worship to be performed by an officer which would unquestionably be the highest schism in the world As for their third chapter I might spare my pains in answering of it for it is but a conclusion from their premises in the first and second chapter and it is too much to deny the premises and conclusion too In this third chapter they give us the description of office then indeavour to prove it and lastly draw two conclusions from it their description is this Office is a spiritual Relation between a particular Church of Christ and a person rightly qualified Preaching without Ordination p. 14. founded upon a special and regular call 1 This definition offends two logick rules say we which are these Aristot l. 6. top cap. 5. That all definitions should be adequate That is nothing must be in the definition but what is in the thing defined Nor any thing omitted in the definition which is essential-to the thing defined A particular Church is not necessary to one that is by office a minister of the Gospel as I proved before yet that is put into the definition secondly Ordination which is essential to a minister in office is omitted unless out brethren will say it is included in the notion of a person duly qualified or in the notion of a regular call which I suppose our brethren will not grant Arist top l. 6. a p 1. 2. A second rule is this That the definition of a Genus should agree to every species The ministerial office is a Genus here defined but there are diverss ministers say we that have no such particular Church for we cannot think but a minister may be set apart for the work though at present he hath no place the order of the Church in ordaining none Sine titulo without a title to a place was no divine order but prudential to avoid the scandal of a Vagrant Ministery and therefore Hierom refused Ordination from Paulinus because he insisted upon the ordaining him to his particular Church we grant that the office of a pastor in strict sense doth relate to a particular Church but not the office of a pastor in a more large sense and as it is used in Scripture both in Jeremy 3.15 Eph. 4.13 Our Brethren expound their description For the Genus we allow what they say Office is a Relation Their terms of relation we deny we say the particular Church is not the only correlate but the Vniversal Church is also a correlate to the office yea and the work yea God himself and all Nations of which before Here 's nothing more to prove than what I have already answered besides that term Angel of the Church used Rev. 2.1.8 c. To which I answer that our Brethren know that sub Judice lis est it is very disputable whether a single person or the Presbytery be meant by that term 2. But secondly it will be very hard for our Brethren to prove those were particular Churches The efficient cause we allow to be the Lord and the Church But not the flock as our Brethren say The Apostles ordained the Deacons not the flock It was the prophets and teachers in the Church of Antioch Acts 13. whom the Spirit commanded to ordain Paul and Barnabas Paul and the Presbytery ordained Timothy Acts. 6. and Titus was to ordain ministers in Crete As to the formal cause