where it cannot be otherwise interpreted therefore we must depart from the proper notation of the word where the context of the place doth induce us and the practice of the Church and People of God in after-generations to abide by it is not tolerable arguing His next Exception is 3dly None are said to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Paul and Barnabas and they are said to do it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for them viz. tâ—â— Church or Disciples Answ 1. Nor is it necessary that we affirm any other so to do They herein presiding over them and regulating the whole affair according to the instructions received from Christ bear the name of the whole work though the Votes and Suffrages of the Disciples were in it also The Apostles ordained by Suffrages viz. the Suffrages of the Church Elders for them But this proves not that the Vote of the Disciples was excluded it rather evinceth the cantraâ—y Yet 2dly Why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be rendred creating by Suffrages or ordaining for them I do not understand It may every whit as properly be rendred with them viz. with the Church or Disciples For so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frequently rendred so Mat. 13. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye root up also the Wheat not for but with them Act. 17. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reasoâ—ed with them Heb. 8. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for finding fault with them and in many places besides That it should be so rendred here is evident 1. 'T is consonant to the practice of the Saints then and in after-generations as is known 2. How Paul and Barnabas may be said properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to ordain by Suffrages alone by themselves every understanding is not able to reach render the word with them i. e. with the Disciples and the câ—se is plain â—nd evident viz. the Apostles with the Church or Congregation of Believers by Suffrages and Votes ordained Elders which is the matter enquired after So that whatever this Animadverter is able to say to the contrary this Scripture proves the power of particular Churches to elect their own Officers and therefore if the present Ministers have not received a Commission from Christ thus mediately by the election of some one or other particular instituted Church of Christ if they pretend not to it have it in derision come barely with a presentation from a Patron Ordination Institution and Induction from a Lord-Bishop things forreign to the Scripture and impose themselves upon the People whether they will or no as it may most truly be affirmed of them they are not Ministers of the Gospel nor may be heard as such But Mr. T. hath somewhat more to adde he tells us 1. That it will be hard for us to prove that the Parish-Churches in England are not particular instituted Churches of Christ Answ 1. Of what is hard or easie for us to do or any man else our Animadverter seems a very incompetent Judge 2dly He is not ignorant that this is already done to our hands by several learned men and 't is sure no difficult task actum agere to do over again what we find done to our hands before He further affirms 2dly It will also be hard to prove that the Ministers of England are imposed on the People whether they will or no. Answ 1. The generality of the People of England will attest the verity hereof who for the most part know not their Minister till he comes to them with his Orders nor is their Consent touching his Reception desired or at all significant with respect to his exercising an Office-power over them 2dly What they do in London and some few particular places where the Inhabitants it may be are the Patrons is not considerable or worth the minding 1. For the most part they are imposed upon the people whether they will or no. 2. Were they chosen by their Parochial Inhabitants they were never the nearer Ministers of Christ Because 1. That their choice hath not the least influence upon their being constituted such 't is the Bishops Ordination that in this matter doth all 2. The Parish-Churches of England are not true Churches of Christ which we demonstrate 1. Where there is not the true matter of a Church there is not a true Church But in the Parish-Churches of England there is not the true matter of a Church Therefore The Minor which alone is capable of a denial is evident That only is fit matter of a Church which corresponds to the matter of the Primitive Churches planted by the Apostles These were Saints Ephes 1. 1. Col. 1. 2. Holy Brethren 1 Thess 5. 27. Such â—â— were not of but called out of the World Joh. 15. 18 19. whom God had received Rom. 14. 3. Such as please Christ and are dearly beloved by him Eph. 5. 29. are built upon the foundation of the Prophets anâ— Apostles Eph. 2. 20. have the Spirit of Christ Eph. 4. 4. are built up together an holy and spiritual House to God 1 Pet. 2. 5. God 's House 1 Tim. 3. 15. Heb. 3. 6. are living Stones a chosen Generation a Royal Priesthood an holy Nation a peculiar People v. 9. faithful in Christ Jesus Eph. 1. 1. The sons and daughters of the Lord God Almighty 2 Cor. 6. 17 18. Christ is said to be their Husband their Head They his Bride Eph. 5. 23. Col. 1. 18. his Temple 1 Cor. 3. 16. Now he must have a brow of brass that shall affirm that these Characters are applicable to the Parish-Assemblies of England when they themselves will confess they appertain not to them Are Drunkards Swearers Revilers Persecuters of God and Holiness loose prophane scandalous livers of which these Assemblies for the most part are constituted and made up Saints holy Brethren such as are called out of the World c. None will dare to aver it 2dly Where there is not the true form of a Church there is not the true Church But in the Parish-Assemblies of England there is not the true form of a Church Therefore The Minor which is alone liable to exception is evident The form of a Church consists in the free and voluntary embodying together of Saints giving up themselves to the Lord and one another according to his will as we have already proved Now this cannot be asserted of the Parish-Assemblies Those Civil divisions for they are no others were of the institution of man as we have demonstrated And to this day they are held together by penal Statutes and Ordinances such as never came into the heart of Christ to establish 3dly There where there is not the Church-power that of right belongs to a true Church of Christ there is not a true Church of Christ But in the Parish-Churches of England there is not that Church-power nor as such are they capable of it Therefore The Minor which alone is to be proved is perspicuous 1. The power of electing their own Officers
and what is his satisfaction to the removal of the offence given to the Church 4. The Parisian Doctors say truly Ecclesiam nunquam c. The Church cannot be taken for one person nor be govern'd by one Of which the Learned Chamier gives his reason How can it be that the Bishop should be the Church according to whose Ecclesiastical Authority things should be determined Mat. 18. when a long time after the Bishop himself by humane authority had his original of which Ambrose complains And as soon as the Lord had said tell the Church he speaks in the plural number all along afterward Verily I say unto you Whatsoever Ye shall bind on Earth c. Whence it plainly appears that the Church is not taken for one person but for many congregated together Pol. Eccles Yea Sutcliffe when disputing against Bellarmine saith Christ did not constitute the chief Tribunal in the hands of Peter but of the Church for not those who refused to hear Peter but those who refused to hear the Church were to be accounted as Heathens and Publicans De Pontif. Rom. l. 1. c. 5 6. Besides in matters of controversie Peter himself was subject to the Tribunal of the Church But a superiour cannot be judged by an inferiour If any controversie happened amongst the Apostles that could not be defined by particular persons but a Council of the Church was to be congregated This we see done Acts 15. Now one would think our present Bishops should not be so arrogant as to assume that power to themselves which when disputing with the Papists they will not allow to Peter 2dly In the judgment of our Brethren of the Presbyterian way Tell the Church is tell the Presbytery But they are I humbly conceive somewhat wide of the mark too My Reasons are 1. The Church is sometimes put for the Congregation as distinct from the Presbytery or Elders and Officers Acts 14. 23. 15. 22. never for these as distinct from the Congregation throughout the New-Testament 2. The Presbytery may be the party offending and then you must tell the Church that the Church offendeth i. e. go tell themselves But the Scripture is express that after private dealing with the offenders themselves upon non-amendment the Church as distinct from them is to be acquainted with it 3. What if the Presbytery themselves be offended whom shall they tell must they tell themselves If they are the Church they can go no further 4. Besides we find 1 Cor. 5. not the Presbytery alone but the whole Church concerned in the matter of Excommunication of which our Brethren confess Christ here treateth This Animadverter manifests his good will to interpret it of an Assembly of the Jews in their Synedrium or if extended as a direction to Christian Brethren whether to refer it to their Assembly under an Ecclesiastical consideration or Political i. e. the Christian Magistrate he seems to demur with an apparent inclination to the latter To the first of these Mr. Cotton answers †Treat of the Keys p. 40 An. 3. It is not credible that Christ would send his Disciples to make complaint of their offences to the Jewish Synagogues for is it likely he would send his Lambs and Sheep for right and healing unto Wolves and Tygres Both their Sanhedrim and most of their Synagogues were no better And if here and there some Elders of their Synagogues were better affected yet how may it appear that so it was where any of themselves dwelt And if that might appear too yet had not the Jews already agreed that if any man did confess Christ he should be cast out of the Synagogues Joh. 9. 22. To which we add 2dly Christ knew that within a little while the Synedrim and whole Church-Policy of the Jews would be at an end And 3dly in the mean while charges his Disciples to have nothing to do with them Mat. 15. 14. Tell them that they would persecute kill them and think in doing so they did God good service As it fell out afterwards accordingly So that it cannot with the least shew of reason be imagined that Christ should direct them to appeal to them and stand to their final determination 2dly The second desires not a reply Go tell the Church i. e. go tell the Magistrate is so wild an interpretation that the bare naming it is the giving it too much honour 1. The Magistrate is no where called the Church 2dly The Magistrate quâ talis hath nothing to do in the stating and determining Church-Controversies 3dly Sometimes and for the most part they have ever since been for above three hundred years afterward they undoubtedly were no members of the Church but enemies to it destroyers of it Mr. T. adds that he can find no Institution by preception or command of a Church i. e. there is no such thing as an instituted Church of Christ under the Gospel but 't is left to the prudence of men c. to determine whether they shall be Domestick Congregational Parochial Classical Diocesan Provincial Patriarchal or Oecumenical which how derogatory to the Honour and Sovereign Authority of Jesus Christ to his love and tenderness to his Children to his Faithfulness with respect to the obligation that lay upon him as Mediator to reveal the whole will of the Father to them others will judge For my part I am fully of his mind who some while since said That there were particular Churches instituted by the Authority of Jesus Christ ordained and approved by him that Officers for them were of his appointment and furnished with gifts from him for the execution of their employment That Rules Cautions and Instructions for the due settlement of those Churches were given by him that these Churches were made the only seat of that Worship which in particular he expressed his will to have continued until he came is of so much light in Scripture that he must wink hard that will not see it Which is as much as we need to say to this Animadverter in this matter what he saith herein being meer dictates of his own without proof which when he shall be able to evince that Christ hath not the Government of his Churches upon his shoulders that he is not sole King and Lord over them or having so hath not given them Rules to walk by of his own but left them to the liberty of their own wills or which is worse the wills of such as by Providence are permited to ascend the Throne though such as whilst they profess to know God in works deny him being abominable and disobedient and to every good work reprobate he will be supposed to say something in way of confirmation But of this more in Sect. 15. 'T is true de facto Parochial Classical Diocesan Provincial Patriarchical and Oecumenical Churches by the prudence of men c. have had and yet have their being it the World and the Animadverter deals ingenuously in acknowledging that their original
lawful Ministry where there is no Church Of this we have spoken at large Chap 4. of S. T. To which multitudes of Testimonies might be added The Churches of Helvetia Harm Confes Sect. 11. de min. Eccl. affirm The Ministers of the Church must be called and chosen by Ecclesiastical and lawful election i. e. they must be religiously elected by the Church or by some from her deputed thereunto So also do they speak Artic. 16. ibid. So the Bohemian Churches Men who are firm and strong in the Faith fearing God having received necessary gifts for the work of the Ministry of an honest and unblamable conversation by People fearing God must be chosen and called to the administration of holy things Harmon Confes Sect 11. cap 9. de min. Eccl. And they expresly tell us That they permit none to discharge the Office of the Ministry without such an Election of the Church as appears ibid. by the antient Canons thereof To the same purpose the Belgick Churches declare ibid. Art 31. But Thirdly Ordinary Officers cannot be before the Church Therefore where there is no Church there can be no lawful ordinary Officers The Antecedent is evident 1. All along the Acts we read first of the Constitution of Churches before the Ordination of Officers 2. The Scripture saith expresly That all Officers are set in the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. Which setting doth necessarily presuppose a Church in which they are set 2dly A true Ministry cannot be in a false Church false I mean either with respect to its first Constitution or by reason of such an Apostacy as hath destroyed the essence and being of it For first A false Church is no Church of Christ Therefore in it can be no true ordinary Ministry according to the mind of Christ for the reasons before mentioned Secondly Such a Church is intrusted with no Authority from Christ therefore cannot communicate any nor send forth any to act in his Name That Christ hath intrusted his Church with power to elect and choose Officers we manifest Chap. 4. Pag. 32 33 of S. T. That any Church not right in its Constitution as is the Case of National Churches is invested with any such power is the first-born of absurdities and improbabilities 'T is the Queen the Bride the Lambs Wife that hath the Keys at her girdle not the Concubines But Mr. T. hath more to say to evince the contrary Arg. 2. If there be a true Ministry though to or in a National visible Church or Catholick then the extent which is conceived to be inconsistent with a true Gospel-Church makes not the Ministry false But Peter and Pauls Ministry to the Jews or Gentile Churches was a true Ministry though the Church were National or Catholick Therefore Answ 1. 'T is a most sad thing upon more accounts than one to be engaged against Truth such sorry shifts are men put to and driven to the use of Sophisms so puâ—rile that at other times they would be asâ—amed of Thus fares it with this Animadverter who argues so jejunely that considering what I have heard of him for a Disputant I am ready to question whether the Arguments I read be his or no. Though Truth seeks no corners yet it makes its Adversaries frequently to do so The enquiry as Mr. T. saith rightly in p. 34. is of the ministry of ordinary Pastors c. His two first Arguments relate only to extraordinary Officers viz. the Ministry of the Apostles so that we are not concerned to take the least notice of them Many such impertinencies is thâ—s Animadverters Treatise stuft with 2. Besides the Argument is inconclusive of what Mr. T. pretends to prove viz. That in a National Church or a false Church there may be a true Ministry If there be a true Ministry though to or in a National visible Church saith he then the extent which is conceived to be inconsistent with a true Gospel-Church makes not the Ministry false But Sir whether there be a true Ministry in a National Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how it comes to be the medium of your Argument I am yet to learn Sure I am such kind of Arguings would deservedly be hissed out of the Schools being in themselves illogical I suppose he would have argued thus If that extent which is conceived to be inconsistâ—nt with a true Gospel-Church makes not the Ministry false Then there may be a true Ministry though to or in a National Church But the extent which is conceived to be inconsistant with a true Gospel-Church makes not the Ministry false for Peter's and Paul's Ministry to the Jews and Gentiles were true Ministries though the Churches were National 1 Cor. 12. 28. Ergo. To the Argument I answer 1. By denying the consequence of the first Proposition For though the extent inconsistant to a true gospel-Gospel-Church should not make the Ministry false yet somewhat else may What thinks he of an Antichristian Ordination or a Mission to officiat from the Antichristian Persecuting Beast and Whore though the Church were rightly constituted in and to which a man is a Preacher I conceive his Ministry is false But 2dly I deny his Minor Proposition if by Ministry he understands the Ministry of ordinary Pastors c. which if he doth not he speaks not a word to the question as he himself acknowledgeth pag. 34. the extent of a Church inconstent with a Gospel-Church renders the Church false and indeed no Church i. e. no Gospel-Church Therefore it renders the Ministry false as we before proved Mr. T. his proofs are weak and impertinent 1. Paul and Peter's Ministry was not the Ministry of ordinary Pastors as he grants p. 34. 2dly They were not Ministers in or to a National Church 'T is true they preached to the Jews and Gentiles but for the first their Church-state was virtually terminated at the death of Christ when the Vail of the Temple was rent as for the Gentile Nations they were no National Churches The forming of which ows its original as was said to a latter date So that hitherto Mr. T. hath onely hung out signs of Arguments to prove his Assertion being weighed in the ballances they are found wanting are plainly sophistical It may be in what follows he speaks more pertinently Thus he argues Arg. 3. If Ministry to Churches Hypocritical Schismatical and in some sort Heretical may be a true Ministry much more to a Church National c. those being greater degrees of falshood than this But the Antecedent is before proved from the Epistles to the Corinthians to the Churches of Pergamos Thyatira and Sardis Ergo. Answ No doubt but Mr. T. and his Associates in this work think they have excellently well acquitted themselves in this Argument but the emptiness and invalidity of it will soon appear 1. What if we deny the consequence of the Major Proposition upon supposition that there may be a true Ministry to Churches of such a complexion as that intimated it doth not
men signally pointed out by the Lord for the administration of holy things in his house by the Body of the Church be not now as then their peculiar priviledge What saith Mr. T. hereunto 1. The solemn deputation of Apostles and other Ministers we find not in the New Testament to have been the peculiar priviledge of the Church Answ 1. But our Question is not touching extraordinary Officers such as Apostles but of ordinary ones such as Pastors c. Yet 2dly a man need not go far to find such a deputation even of an Apostle to the work of the Lord by the Body of the Church together with the rest of the Apostles Acts 1. 14 15 16 23 24 26. being an evident proof hereof beyond exception He adds 2. Their Ordination is no where mentioned as done by the Saints or Brethren which were not Officers Answ 1. The Animadverter mistakes Ordination for Imposition of hands which is only one part of Ordination and comprehends the whole act of deputing or setting men apart to the work of the Ministry 2. That Assertion That the Church or Assembly of Believers are nowhere said to have an hand therein must be imputed to Mr. T. his forgetfulness Acts 6. 3. 14. 23. manifestly declare the contrary He grants that in the first ages there are relations of the election of their own Ministers by the Church but the management hereof with Tumults Frays Disorders necessitated an alteration and considering the present temper of the Saints how unquiet injudicious deceitful factious divided they are he thinks it not safe it be again committed to them Answ 1. The first Ages in that matter held fast to the Doctrine of the Gospel and the Priviledge which according to the Institution of Christ his Church and People were invested in 2. Many things are reported of the Saints in the first Ages notoriously false and untrue and it may be the story of their tumults frays c. in electing their own Pastors may be so Contentions I know there were early amongst them about this matter that there were tumults and frays may perhaps be coined by some ambitious spirits that they might the better take an occasion to divest the Saints of that sacred Priviledge 3. The former disorders or present distempers amongst Saints are no warrant for the variation or nullifying an Institution of Christ 4. What strange Saints it may be he means only the Parochians of his Mother the Church of England Mr. T. hath his lot cast amongst I cannot tell Blessed be the Lord there are thousands of Saints and many Churches in England this little point of the World directly of another temper and spirit being peaceable judicious upright serving the Lord with one consent according to the discovery he hath made to them And if any in any thing are of different perswasions praying the Lord to reveal that also unto them And Mr. T. doth not well thus to asperse and blacken the Generation of the Righteous The absurdities that Mr. T. supposeth will ensue upon the asserting the election of Ministers to be the priviledge of the Saints are not worth the mentioning I know not any Law that forbids Women to intermeddle herein whose priviledge reached farther than so 1. There are many Scriptures that seem to assert it as their right and liberty 1. In the choice of Officers they were unquestionably present Act. 1. 15. 6. 2 34. 14. 23. 16. 23. 2. At the deciding of Controversies Act. 15. 22. 21. 22. 1 Cor. 6. 2. 3. At the choice of Men to carry the Benevolence of the Church to the needy Brethren 2 Cor. 8. 19. 1 Cor. 16. 3. 4. At the casting-out of Offenders Mat. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4 5. 5. In their re-admission upon Repentance 2 Cor. 2. 6 to 10. They being part of the Church must necessarily be understood as concern'd in these matters wherein the whole Church are said to be concerned 2. 'T were easie to introduce above a Jury twice told of learned Writers who have written as much as this comes to As Beza Calvin Bucer Bullinger Melancthon Bucan Paraeus Junius Cyprian Trelcutias Sibrandus Rivetus Jerome Augustine Nazianzen Ambrose Chrysostom Theodoret Theophylact So the Magdeburgenses in 2 Cent. c. 7. de Consociatione Ecclesiarum who all assert that Church-affairs should be executed by the consent of the whole Church The Council of Carthage indeed decreed 4. can 99. That a Woman though never so holy and learned should not preach in publick nor baptize can 100. And Tertullian tells us that in his time it was forbid to a Woman to teach in the African Church and baptize but they deny them not liberty to vote consent or dissent in Church-matters Nor do the Scriptures mentioned by this Animadverter in the least advance themselves against what is asserted by us Not 1 Cor. 14. 34 35. 1. 'T is as much more against the practice allowed by his Mother the Church of England In that Church Women have liberty not only to say Amen to say Prayers after the Priest with a loud voice but with the Men to act their parts in Worship the Priest saying one part and they another They have at least they had not long since liberty in case of necessity to baptize which is greater than the Sisters priviledge we plead for Sure this is speaking in the Church But this is clavem clave pellere 2. That Women might be chosen Church-officers is evident from 1 Tim. 5. 9. Phaebe was a Deaconess Rom. 16. 1. Touching the management of their office they ought especially if called upon by them so to do to give an account to the Congregation How they could do this without speaking in the Church I am not able to understand Therefore 3. The sense of the Apostle is that they be not admitted to publick preaching or prophesying ordinarily by vertue of Office-power That they do not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 command as the word sometimes signifies or speak so as to usurp authority over the man as the Apostle explains it 1 Tim. 2. 12. But I suffer not a Woman to teach or usurp authority over the Man The latter expression is exegetical of the former i. e. not so to teach as to usurp authority over the man Yea I had ever till now thought that speaking so as to testifie ones consent or dissent to inform the Church of what they knew not of concern to them and the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 2. 12. had been vastly different And indeed see no reason to change my thoughts from any thing this Animadverter offers that these Scriptures make nothing for his purpose As for the second absurdity that Mr. T. supposes would follow upon the asserting the Saints Priviledge in the election of their own Ministers viz. That whom the major part choose the lesser part are not to take for their Minister scarcely deserves to be taken notice of 1. The difference supposed seldom happens
invested with authority derived to them from Christ to elect ordain officers to and for the Churches of Christ without their knowledge and consent he will be supposed to speak pertinently which in this matter hitherto he hath not done Let us consider if there be ought more to the purpose in what follows To Acts. 6. 5. he replies 1. That was but one act Answ 1. Who saith it was many Consonant to this one act was the practice of the primitive Church for many years after some prints whereof in the election of the Overseers of the Poor do yet remain amongst us He adds 2. They were not such a particular Church as made up one Congregation that could meet together for all Offices Answ This vanity we have already refelled Sect. of our Reply to Mr. T. his Exceptions against the Preface of S. T. He proceeds and tells us 3dly They did not choose the Deacons upon any conceived power delegated from Christ by vertue of any rulâ— that was to be perpetual in all ages to all Churches Answ 1. This is a meer conjecture of his own without the least tender of proof 2dly 'T is the ready way to banish all the instituted Worship of Christ out of the world 'T is but saying 't is true this or that was done but without any Rule that was to be perpetually binding and the work is effected 3dly 'T is injuriouâ— to the Apostles and the primitive Believers to imagine and indeed ridiculous that they should devise an Office in the Church without authority derived to them from Christ and that so necessary an Office as the experience of above sixteen hundred years manifests the Church of God could not have been without which was not only continued in the Churches afterwards Phil. 1. 1. but Rules laid down for their future election and choice 1 Tim. 3. 8 to 13. with a solemn injunction to Timothy and in him to succeeding Believers to keep that Commandment amongst others without spot unrebukeable until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ chap. 6. 14. So that these are but shifts our reverend Dictator scarce knows what to answer it seems to the Evidence introduced I shall only add Malè res agitur cum tot opus est remediis it is a bad sore that must be wrapped in â—â— many clouts Yet he hath not done He adds 4thly This can be no rulâ— for chusing other Officers there was a peculiar reason why they should choose Deacons whose honesty was to be discern'd and not other Officers whose sufficiency to teach was to be considered of which thâ— multitude of Church-members then and now are rarely competent Judges Answ 1. But we had thought honesty had been as necessary a qualification of a Pastor or Teacher as of a Deacon 2dly The Apostles mention it as the Churches priviledge without the least intimation of any peculiar reason thereof Act. 6. 3. 3dly There is the same reason for the election of one Officer in the Church as another those with whom power is entrusted for the choice of one it is for the choice of all the rest 4thly That the Saints then and now are not competent Judges of the abilities and Orthodoxie of other Officers this Animadverter is desired to prove 1. 'T is derogatory to the Spirit of Christ that indwells in Believers 2. Contrary to the express Testimony of the Spirit of God touching them 3. A meer Petitio principii The question is whether they did elect and choose them the Answer is they were not fit to do so but their fitness is presupposed in that they had liberty or power to do it To the other Scripture Acts 14. 23. he replyes 1. By way of seeming concession The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred by Beza They created by Suffrages i. e. when the people by lifting up their hands had testified their consent in the election of them they set them apart to that work An allusion to the custom of the Greeks in the election of their Officers by Suffrages and Votes signified by the stretching out of the hand which was unquestionably the practice of the Church for the first three hundred years Cyprian who lived an 240 often intimates as much Take one instance in the stead of many Propter quod diligenter de traditione divinâ Apostolica observatione observandum est tenendum quod apud nos quoque fere per provincias universas tenetur ut ad ordinationes rite celebrandas ad eam plebem cui Praepositus ordinatur Episcopi ejusdem Provinciae proximi quique conveniant Episcopus delegatur PLEBE PRAESENTE quae singulorum vitam plenessime novit unuscujusque actum de ejus conversatione perspexit Quod apud vos factum videmus in Sabinae collegae nostri ordinatione ut de VNIVERSAE FRATERNITATIS SUFFRAGIO de Episcoporum qui in praesentia convenerant quique de eo ad vos literas fecerant judicio Episcopatus ei deferretur Epist. â—8 2dly By way of Exception he tells us 1. This is but one example not sufficient to infer a perpetual Rule Answ 1. 'T is intended but for one example 2dly We find the thing practised afterwards Elders are ordained Tit. 1. 5. 1 Tim. 5. 22. That they should so suddenly vary from the practice of the Apostles here no intimation thereof being given but rather the contrary 2 Tim. 1. 14. 3. 10. Tit. 1. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that thou mayest set streight or according to the liâ—e or rule that thou hast learned of us the things that are wanting and ordain viz. according to that rule Elders in every City is not probable That they did not do so for some hundreds of years after Mr. T. grants and we have proved Which is a sufficient Answer to his Exception about constituting Elders without the mention of any such election of the People Tit. 1. 5. 3dly In the election of other Officers as an Apostle we find the people concerned 1. Out of an hundred and twenty persons they chose and presented two v. 23. out of which two one being câ—osen by lot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was counted amongst the Apostles by the common Suffrages of them all v 26. And this very Scripture amongst others is used by Cyprian to confirm the power of the people in châ—sing or refusing their Ministers Epist 4. l. 1. Deacons as was said was so chosen Act. 6. 3 5 6. Put all together and you have as full an evidence of the truth of the Assertion as can be desired But our Animadverter 2dly acquaints us from Dr. Field c. that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applyed to other creating then by Suffrages as Acts 10. 41. Answ 'T is granted it sometimes is so applyed but the proper and most usual signification of the word is to elect by Suffrages as Mr. T. knows That because it 's once or twice it may be used in a metaphorical sense
already answered We add 9thly The Popish Priests wait not the Churches call to the Ministry but make suit to some Prelate to be ordained Priest and giving money for their Letters of Ordination so the Priests of England Mr. T. replies To offer a person's self for ordination is in some case a duty 1 Tim. 3. 1. Isa 6. 8. Answ 1. The Scriptures produced prove not his assertion Isa 6. 8. is sufficiently remote from any such thing there 's not the least mention of Ordination therein it s only a testimony of Isaiah's readiness to obey the voice of the Lord in going forth to bear a testimony for him against an untoward rebellious people 1 Tim. 3. 1. only tels us that he that desires the office of a Bishop desires a good work i. e. as say our Annotators is inwardly moved by the Spirit of the Lord thereunto which he may do and yet I hope wait the Churches call thereunto Besides 2ly Should this be granted it signifies little till he prove that it 's the duty of any with the neglect of the Churches call to this Office to seek ordination thereunto from an unscriptural Prelate which is that we charge upon them which Mr. T. knows they do He tells us 2dly Giving money for their Letters of Ordination is only Wages to the Register for writing Answ 1. Be it so that they give money for their Letters of Ordination is all that is asserted by us which Mr. T. grants they do 2. 'T is well if there be no Simony as it 's call'd found amongst them 3. If provision be made against the Registers exacting over-much by the Canons of the Church of England he informs us that the same provision is made by the Popish Trent-Council The Parallel in this particular holds good We say 10thly The Popish Priests are ordained to their Office though they have no Flock to attend upon So the Priests of England Mr. T. replies The Priests of England are not to be ordained without some title according to Can. 33. even the Trent-Council hath made some provision thereabout Answ 1. Mr. T. doth well to consociate the Canons of the Church of England and the Church of Rome in the Trent-Council together they are in not a few things near of kin 2. However I cannot but stand astonished at his confidence in telling us that the Priests of England are not to be ordained without some title according to Can. 33. when that Canon saith expresly That they may if a Fellow or in right as a Fellow or to be a Chaplain in some Colledge in Oxford or Cambridg if a Master of Arts of five years standing that liveth of his own charge in either of the Universities if to be shortly admitted either to some Benefice or Curatship then void or if the Bishop do after his admission into the said office keep and maintain him with all things necessary till he prefer him to some Ecclesiastical Living 3. But it may be the Animadverter by title means some one of those things mentioned To which I shall only say that if so he doth openly prevaricate pretends to answer to what he speaks not one word such Titles are supposed to be without a Flock to attend upon What he adds of Ministers being necessary for Armies c. is nothing to the purpose This proves not that they may be ordained Ministers without a Flock to attend upon which they may have and by them be sent forth for the works mentioned for a season We know it hath been the practice of the Churches so to do 2. Privâ—te Brethren may act for the supply of the services mentioned and frequently have done so nor indeed do I conceive how any can act therein in any other capacity Which is not incongruous to Acts 23. 2. as this Animadverter suggests which speaks not a tittle of their ordination to the Office of Ministry which they had before but only a solemn commending of them by Fasting and Prayer to the Blessing of the Lord by the Church in the Service they were now setting upon in which they testified their consent by the laying on their hands as say our Annotators To the 11th Parallel viz. That the Priests of England must swear Canonical Obedience to their Ordinary as the Priests of Rome Mr. T. only saith That 't is true at their institution into Benefices they do so but it is so bounded that it is not intolerable 't is nothing like that which is required of the Papists Answ 1. The Parallel herein betwixt the English and the Popish Priests is acknowledged which is all we affirm 2. That the Oath is tolerable that 't is nothing like the Oath of Canonical Obedience tendred to the Popish Priests is only affirmed by Mr. T. without proof that was the copy and pattern of this as he cannot be ignorant The 12th Parallel touching their leaving their Benefices for advantage-sake without consent of the People The 13th touching their special Licence to preach without which they must not from â—he Prelates though thereunto before ordained The 14th touching their subjection to be silenced by the Prelates betwixt the Ministers of England and Rome he grants to be true nor saith he any thing by way of reply that deserves the taking notice of To the 15th viz. the Popish Priests are not of like and equal power degree and authority amongst themselves but are some of them inferiour to others herein as Pastors to Archdeacons Archdeacons to Lord-Bishops Lord-Bishops to Arch-Bishops so the Priests of England Our Animadverter replies 1. Inequality is judged to be in the Elders of the Primitive Churches by the inscription of the seven Epistles to the Angels of the seven Churches of Asia Answ But this rather proves there equality to each is a several Epistle directed whereas had there been one Arch-Bishp or Superintendent over them one Epistle had been sufficient and had been no doubt directed to him He adds 2dly It hath been in some sort in all well-ordered Churches and is necessary to setled order Answ These are his dictates which he is not at leasure to prove The Church of Rome in the Apostles dayes of Corinth Ephesus were as I remember well-ordered Churches yet cannot be manifest any inequality amongst their Elders No Superintendent Lord-Bishop or Arch-Bishop as I read of 2dly What thinks he of the Church of the Waldenses were they well-ordered Churches They were from the beginning without this Superiority of Elders one above the other The like may be said of most or all the Reformed-Churches The Churches of Helvetia reckoning up the degrees of Arch-Bishops Suffragans Metropolitans Deans Subdeans tell us plainly they are not sollicitous about them That the Apostles Doctrine touching Ministers is sufficient for them cap. Confes. Helvet poster c. 18. And afterward there is one and the same equal Power and Function in all the Ministers of the Church and though in process of time one was chosen from amongst the rest to preside in
c. that never entred into the heart of Christ the judicious Reader will easily from what we have already offered discern the impertinency of Ezra 6. 7. and 7. 13. Dan. 3. 29. and 6. 26. to the present design 'T is true as he saith Christianity alters not civil Relations or Estates 1 Cor. 7. 24. And 't is as true that if in the time of my infidelity I have been the servant of men that are my Political Masters with respect to Worship though I am whilst I continue their servant to perform faithful service to them with respect to things Civil yet am I not to own them or subject to them as my Lords Governours with respect to the Service of God therein one only being my Lord and Master viz. Christ 2. I say not that all the Kings of Israel were Types of Christ but that the Kings of Israel were so i. e. some of them nor do I restrain the word Israel to the ten Tribes but to the twelve headed by David Solomon a pair of eminent Types of the Messiah That Christ and the Apostles yeelded subjection to Civil Powers with respect to things sacred of which this Animadverter must speak or he speaks impertinently is a gross mistake unworthy so learned a person We say in S. T. 3dly That the Kings of Israel were Heads of the Church is false God was its alone Head and King Hence their Historian saith Their Government was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when they would needs choose a King God said They rejected him to whom even as to their Political Head a Shekel was paid yearly as a Tribute called the Shekel of the Sanctuary True indeed as they were a Political Body they had visible Political Governours but that these had any Headship over them to make any Laws introduce Constitutions of their own framing in matter relating to Worship will never be proved To which Mr. T. replies 1. That the Church of Israel was different from the Kingdom of Israel is one of the proper opinions of those who would establish from that example an Ecclesiastical Independent Government in the Church distinct from the Civil Government of the State Answ 1. 'T is no matter whose opinion 't is if Truth it ought to be imbraced 2. That there is a real and formal distinction betwixt the two Societies Church and Common-wealth is at large proved by several As Mr. Gillespy in his Aarons Rod Blossoming b. 1. c. 3. The Assembly in their Jus Divinum Hear their Reasons p. 88 89. 1st The Society of the Church is only Christ's and not the Civil Magistrates it s his House and he hath no Vicar under him as is abundantly proved by Mr. Rutherford in his Divine Right of Church-Government Chap. 27. Q. 23. Pag. 595 to 647. 2dly The Officers Ecclesiastical are Christ's Officers not the Magistrates 1 Cor. 4. 1. Ephes 4. 8 10 11. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 3dly These Officers are elected and ordained by the Church without Commission from the Civil Magistrate by virtue of Christs Ordinance and in his Name Acts 6. 3 4. with 14. 23. 1 Tim. 4. 14. with Acts 13. 1 2 3 4. 4thly The Church meets not as Civil Judicatories for Civil Acts of Government but as Spiritual Assembles for such as are spiritual viz. Preaching 5thly Should not these two Societies be acknowledged to be really and essentially distinct from one another several gross absâ—rdities would follow As 1. Then there can be no Common-wealth where there is not a Church but this is contrary to all experience Heathens have Common-wealths yet no Church 2. Then there may be church-Church-Officers elected where there is no Church seeing there are Magistrates where there is no Church 3. Then those Magistrates where there is no Church are no Magistrates And if so then the Church is the formal constituting Cause of Magistrates 4. Then the Common-wealth as the Common-wealth is the Church and the Church as the Church is the Common-wealth 5. Then all that are Members of the Common-wealth are because so Members of the Church 6. Then the Common-wealth being formally the same with the Church is as Common-wealth the Mystical Body of Christ 7. Then the Officers of the Church are the Officers of the Common-wealth the power of the Keys gives them right to the Civil Sword and consequently the Ministers of the Gospel as such are Justices of the peace All which how absurd let the world judge He adds 2dly That Solomon and other Kings did exercise power over Ecclesiastical persons is evident because he deposed Abiathar Answ 1. Who denies it How this proves the power of the Kings of Israel as Heads of the Church to innovate in Worship which is the thing to be proved I know not Hic labor hoc opus est And Mr. T. hath more wit than seriously to attempt it 2. Solomon deposed Abiathar not as High Pontifee or Head of the Church for male administration in Church-affairs but as King of Israel for treason against the Common-wealth in the business of Adonijah Ergo Solomon was the Head of the Church of Israel risum teneatis amici Of 2 Chr. 29. 30 and 30. 2. which he produceth to prove That the Kings of Israel had power in Ecclesiastical things we have already spoken What follows in this 14th Sect. is not worthy our spotting paper with the repetition of 1. He grants That God was the alone Head and King of the Church of Israel with respect to power Legislative to assign what Faith Worship Judicatories and what other things were necessary for that Congregation all which solely appertained to him which is all we need contend for The Kings of Israel had not any Legislative power with respect to these he grants from the power of these Kings then it cannot be argued that any have power now to innovate in matters of Faith and Worship they are not Heads of the Church invested with authority to introduce Constitutions of their own framing in matters relating to Worship as such nor had the Kings of Israel any such Authority Jam sumus ergo pares nec ab uno dissidet alter 2. What he talks of Kingly Government we are not at all concerned in All that we assert in S. T. is that Josephus saith Their Government was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Theocracie that when they choose a King they rejected God 1 Kings 8. 17. which when he attempts the confutation of we may attend him 3. That a Shekel was yearly paid to the Lord Ex. 30. 13. which continued to the destruction of Jerusalem Josep l. 7. c. 28. of the Jewish Wars he grants that it was paid to him as their Political Head he denies Now though this be not of any moment as to our present concern therein yet the truth thereof is easily demonstrated 1. It was paid to the Lord in token of their thankfulness for his delivering them from the Egyptian yoke which he did as their Political Head 2. None were
such thing 1 Cor. 12. 28. speaks not a tittle to it For 1. The Church vers 28. is the Body of Christ vers 27. This Paul tells them the Church of Corinth they were and every Saint in the Church a Member in particular 2. 'T is such a Church amongst whom a Schism might be vers 25. as in the Church of Corinth there actually was which was the occasion of Pauls writing to them That there should be no schism in the Body But Schism is entirely in one Church amongst the members of one particular Society saith that learned man J. O. in his Treatise of Schism Besides 3. It will be hard to prove that in the Church catholick-visible as such Officers are set and placed as 't is vers 28 29. These were in the Church of Corinth which was founded by Paul Acts 18. 8 9 10. Probably Peter had been there for he intimâ—tes That at least some of them had gloried overmuch in him 1 Cor. 3. 21 22. Cephas i. e. Peter Prâ—â—hets Teachers Miracles Gifts of heaâ—ing Helps Governments diversities of Tongues were found amongst them as is known Some of these there is no question but they relate to a particular Church That the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Teachers here are the same who are elsewhere called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyters Elders and Overseers Mr. T. will not I presume deny Arguments lie near at hand for the demonstration thereof were it needful These are placed of God in particular Churches relate to them as such Acts 14. 23. 15. 2 4 6 22 23 16. 4. 20. 17. 21. 18. Tit. 1. 5. Jam. 5. 14. Act. 20. 28. Nor am I singular in the application of this Scripture to the particular Church of Corinth Pareus hath these words upon the place Et quia c. And because he had said that the Church of the Corinthians was the Body of Christ c. manifesting his consent and harmony with us herein that Paul is not treating of the Church-Catholick-visible but of a particular Church of Christ viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Church of God that was in Corinth Nor can this Scripture be meant of the invisible Church of Christ for in it God hath placed no Officers that I know of nor will the Animadverter say he hath 2dly If by the Universal Church-visible he mean the Elect of God redeemed sanctified justified by the spirit of the Lord and the blood of Jesus These are indeed called by the name of the Church in Heb. 12. 23. Eph. 1. 22. To which we may add Mat. 16. 28. Eph. 5. 25 26. That the word Church 1 Cor. 15. 9. is taken for the visible Church indefinitely I cannot subscribe to Possible by the Church of God he means First The Churches of God by an usual Figure there being in those dayes few or no Believers but were added to one Church or other as might easily be demonstrated Acts 2. 41 42. and Acts 4. 32. The multitude of Believers is a Paraphrastical description of the Church Acts 5. 11. The great care of the Apostles was to reduce them that embraced and believed the Gospel into a Church-state or that Order of the Gospel which however oppugned by Mr. T. will be found to be of the Institution of Christ As is evident from the Churches in Jerusalem Acts 7. Samaria chap. 8. Antioch Chap. 14 15. In Syria Cilicia Acts 15. 41. Phrygia Galatia Acts 16. 5 6. Macedonia Chap. 16. Thessalonica Chap. 17. Achaia Chap. 18. Ephesus Chap. 19. Asia Rev. 1. and 2. and 3. Rome Rom. 1. c. planted by them notwithstanding the utmost attempts of the power of darkness or great Red Dragon in the Roman Pagan Empire and of the Children of the Kingdom or the chief Priests Scribes Pharisees Rulers multitudes of People especially of the baser sort fit for any desperate design contradicting blaspheming opposing them herein When once we read of the Gospel preached and mingled with Faith in them that hear it the next news we frequently hear is that these Believers embody together for the worshiping God in the same numerical Ordinances the enjoyment of those priviledges and mutual performance of those duties which in a scattered individual state and capacity they were not capable of Though Secondly By way of eminency he might in that expression and no doubt he did so I persecuted the Church of God have his eye upon that famous Church of Jerusalem in the persecution and dispersion whereof he had it seems no mean hand Acts 7. 58. and 8. 3 4. As for Saul he made havock of Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he laid waste the Church entering into every house halling 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by force and violence dragging them along the ground both men and women he committed them to Prison And the very truth is this is the most considerable instance if not the only one of Sauls Persecuting the Church of God 'T is true Acts 9. 1. 't is said And Saul breathing out threatnings and slaughters against the Disciples of the Lord but that only imports the wrath and fury that was in his spirit against them and resolution to persecute imprison waste and destroy them the usual issue of blind zeal for the Tradition of their Fathers in other places as he had already done at Jerusalem For which end he procures Letters to Damascus to bring men and women disciples bound to Jerusalem that he should find of this Heresie there But Oh the wonder of Love Before he arrive thither Christ way-layes him speakes from Heaven to him converts him and sets him upon preaching up that very way and truth he was thus violently persecuting and setting himself against So that not the visible Church indifinitely taken but some particular Churches of Jesus Christ and in especial and by way of eminency that famous Church at Jerusalem is intended 1 Cor. 15. 9. That which Mr. T. mentions in the 5 th place That the word Church is taken for the Church Topical i. e. A particular Church of Christ or a company of Believers dwelling in this or that place giving no themselves to the Lord and one another according to his will walking to gether in the fellowship of the Gospel and meeting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same place for the worshiping God in the same numerical Ordinances according to the prescription will and institution of Christ Acts 8. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 1. Ephes 1. 1. and many other places Of which Chap. 4. of S. T. we assent to as true But that we should ever subscribe 6thly To that dictate of the Animadverter That Church in Scripture is taken for a Church of a Country or Nation and then it is put in the Plural Number as the Churches of Asia Galatia Judaea being so dissonant to truth and contrary to the express language of the Spirit of the Lord he could never imagine For the Churches of Asia Christ tells us expresly they were Seven
Not one Provincial or National Church but seven particular instituted Churches First To each Church is there a distinct Epistle written Secondly Each Church had its particular Officer or Angel to whom each Epistle was directed to be communicated to the Congregation for to them in it doth Christ by his Spirit speak Rev. 2. 7 11 17 29. 3. 6 13 22. 3dly Each Church received its particular commendation bore its particular burden The Evils found in one are not charged upon the rest nor the Good found in either imputed to them generally but severally 4thly The power of Excommunication or rejection of Scandalous Offenders seems to be seated in each Church severally and apart therefore no Provincial or National Churches but Congregational For the neglect of which power some of them are expresly rebuked by Christ Rev. 2. 14 15 20. which our English Annotators apply and that truly to a non-rejection of them by excommunication and cite 1 Cor. 5. 2 6. Alas a National Diocesan Provincial Church was not then thought of Diocesan Churches were first founded as 't is said but it were no difficult task to evince that their original is antidated some scores of years by Dyonisius Bishop of Rome about 280 years after Christ or as some will about 251 he was the first that appointed the limits and bounds of Parishes Here in England they received their rise and original from one Honorius Bishop of Canterbury Polyd. Virgil. de Invent. rer lib. 4. c. 9. Nay the truth is the Churches mentioned were so far from being a Church of a Region or Nation that they were not all that lived in the same Place City or Town appertaining to the Church there As for the Church of Ephesus one of the seven Paul speaks of it as distinct from the rest of the Inhabitants Eph. 1. 1. so doth Christ of the Church of Pergamos Rev. 2. 13. I know thy works and where thou dwellest i. e. among what manner of people thine abode is Psal 57. 4. 120. 5 6. Ezek. 2. 6. Phil. 2. 15. viz. a wicked graceless ungodly people even where Satan's seat is where Satan dwelleth who were sure no part of the Church The like may be said of the rest of them 'T is strange to me that when God calls them Churches any person pretending to sobriety should dare to aver them to be but one Touching the interpretation of Mat. 16. 18. 18. 17. there are indeed great debates as our Animadverter saith betwixt Protestants and Papists amongst Protestants also and Protestants The exposition the Papists give of Mat. 16. 18. who from hence would infer that Peter and after him the Bishop of Rome was made Universal Bishop is so frivolous that 't is not worth the mentioning 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 super hanc petram is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 super hunc Petrum upon this Rock will I build my Church we English-men think to be very different from upon St. Peter will I build i◠The Faith Peter confessed we take to be one thing his person another 2. We find not notwithstanding this promise that Peter was the Prince of the Apostles at which lofty rate these Gentlemen love to speak or Universal Bishop If he had been so Paul much forgot himself when he said 2 Cor. 11. 5. For I suppose Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I conclude for certain I was not a whit behind the chiefest Apostles And much more Gal. 2. 11. But when Peter was come to Antioch I withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed Strange that he should carry it with no more respect to the Prince of the Apostles and Universal Bishop and head of the Church-Catholick-visible 3. But if these were granted them what is this to their Pope Why Peter was at Rome Answ That is uncertain Yet should it be granted he was there it would not in the least advantage them in their present cause 'T is most certain he was at Samaria Antioch Lydda Joppa Cesaria yet no Primacy or Supremacy affixed to either of them upon that bottom 4. Yea but he placed his Chair at Rome fixed his Seat there Answ This is false and untrue nor can they ever make it appear that he did so Yet if this should be granted they are never a whit the nearer the mark except they prove 1. That a succession in this universal Unlimited Archiepiscopal power was entailed to the Church of Rome and that so that 1. Though those who ascended that Chair came to be invested therein by bribery cozenage cruelty bloo◠whilst they possessed it were Hereticks and declared by Councils to be so and their Successors Conjurers Adulterers Idolaters Atheists Blasphemers bloody Persecutors destroyers of bodies and souls of men the veriest Villains and Wretches that ever the Earth bore 2. Though this Succession hath been interrupted by a Vacancy or Interregnum of some years polluted by a Woman a Whore delivered with her Cardinals about her in solemn Procession whence Papa parit Papam peperit Papissa Papillum By the setting up of Anti-Popes two or three at a time contesting to the pouring out of much Blood wasting destroying Villages Towns Cities Cursing excommunicating one another and all that adhere to each other for the Popedom or St. Peter's Chair yet when in it and those that succeed them be they as bad or worse than they that went before must infallibly be his successor which when they prove I will be a Papist and before they shall effect this it being the grand Principle of their Religion or Superstition rather it would become all that have or would be accounted to have the least spark of Wisdom remaining in them to have nothing to do with such a generation For my part I am abundantly satisfied that the Church there is neither the Church-Catholick visible nor any particular Church as such but the Invisible-Church or Elect of God Tell the Church Mat. 18. 17. hath divers interpretations put upon it according as the interests of some lead and encline them In the language of the Episcopalians it is Tell the Lord Bishop and his Consistory but this is such an heterogeneous piece so wild an interpretation that it would put a sober man if concern'd in them to a blush to hear it mentioned 1. There were no such creatures at that day nor for some hundreds of years after Alas there was somewhat else to do than to think of erecting Episcopal Seas and Consistories when they were every day fighting with beasts and made a spectacle to Angels and men for the Truth and Gospel-sake which was the state of the Church of God for the most part for the first three-hundred years and upwards as is known 2. One man as saith precious Cotton is not the Church nor can he represent the Church unless sent by them but so is neither the Bishop nor his Commissary 3. The Bishop ordinarily is no member of the Church where the offence is committed
and they also which pierced him and all kindreds of the Earth shall wail because of him And Mat. 24. 30. Then shall appear the Sign of the Son of Man either per Synechdochen the great signs of Glory and Majesty which then shall compass him round about or the Son of Man himself as the sign of Circumcision is nothing else but Circumcision it self in Heaven And then shall all the Tribes of the Earth mourn and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the Clouds of Heaven viz. in Majesty and great glory The sight whereof shall be the meaâ—s of their miraculous Conversion Accordingly you have here in Isa 66. vers 5. The appearing of the Lord. The issue whereof is 1 The ruine of his enemies vers 6 14 15 16 where you have Christs appearance largely discoursed of Rev. 19. 2 The Conversion and Restauration of the Jews vers 7 8 9. 3 The concomitant Glory in the new Heaven and new Earth state or the time of the restitution of all things vers 10 11 12 13 14 22 23. All which considered I humbly conceive I had ground enough to assert That Isa 66. 8. is a Prophesie expresly relating to the Jews and their miraculous Conversion That because t is said Rom. 11. 25 26. When the fullness of the Gentiles is come in all Israel shall be saved Therefore I may find something of a National Church consisting of several Parish Churches bounded by old Customs Laws Constitutions c. in subordination to Diocesan Metropolitan Churches with their several Officers of Priests Arch-Deacons Bishops Arch-Bishops on the head of them which is the National Church we are enquiring after in Isa 66. 8. is a Consequence I shall never see Mr. T. make good That he should do so is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst the number of those things that are impossible And once for all I desire him when he writes next not to think so highly of himself as to conceit that his dictates must pass without controle but to remember he is as well as other men obliged to give us a reason of them else we shall not think our selves bound to take any further notice of them then to reject them as sayings of no weight or value Sect. 15. Of National Ministers Peter Paul Titus no National Ministers Ephes 4. 11 12 13 explained The Body of Christ there not the Church-Catholick visible but a particular Church of Christ proved Pastors and Teachers are only belonging to one particular Congregation If a man be a Minister by the appointment of Christ of a Church-Catholick visible he cannot be a Minister of Christ of a National Church The Ministers of Christ are either Extraordinary or Ordinary Of Saints Interest in each 1 Cor. 3. 22 23 expounded THE second Querie in the S. T. is Whether National Ministers are the Ministers of Christ Or Whether there can be a true Ministry in a false Church as a National Church must be if not of Divine Institution To this Mr. T. pretends to answer Sect. 16. And after conjectures of what I mean by National Ministers he gives us such a description of them as he could not sure think any man besides himself would subscribe to but it served his design he thought By National Ministers I mean such as are members of a National Church related to it as the Ministers thereof as such Ordained and set apart by National Officers bound up by its Canons and Laws in their Ministrations who when Mr. T. shall prove to be Ministers of Christ he will be supposed to say something in answer to the Querie which as yet he hath not done His ensuing Arguments speak not a word for such National Ministers himself being Judge 1st Peter though he had the Apostleship of Circumcision and Paul of the Gentiles were not National Ministers 2dly Nor Titus though left in Crete to set in order things that were wanting and to ordain Elders in every City Tit. 1. 5. Fâ—r they were First No members of a National Church Secondly Not related to it as the Ministers thereof Thirdly Not Ordained or set apart to their Office by Natinnal Officers Fourthly Not bounded and circumscribed in their Mâ—nistrations by any devised Institutions or Canons thereof None of which were then in being as is known He goes on and tells us 3dly They that may be Ministers of Christ though they be Ministers for the Body of Christ and all the Members thereof maâ— be Ministers of Christ though National But Pastors and Teachers are given for the edifying of the Body of Christ Therefore c. Answ 1. If by the Body of Christ Mr. T. means the Church-Catholick visible The Apostle Eph. 4. 11 12 13. speaks not a word of it not the Body of Professors or multitude of persons professing Faith in Christ is there intended but some particular Instituted Church of Christ Which we prove 1. The Body of Christ Eph. 4. 11 12 13. is the same with the Body and Church of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 27 28. as by the serious perusal of both places comparing the one with the other will to the sober and judicious be evident That there it signifies a particular Church of Christ we have demonstrated Sect. 13. therefore here it also so signifies 2. Here Pastors and Teachers are said to be given for the edifying of the Body of Christ i. e. particular instituted Churches of Christ and accordingly we find them ordained in every Church Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5. and the whole of their charge limited to particular Churches Acts 20. 17 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. 1 Tim. 3. 15. Col. 4. 17. who are commanded to obey them in the Lord 1 Thess 5. 12. Heb. 13. 17. from whom they might not upon every occasion nor without â—he consent of the Congregation upon any pretext whatsoever remove See Calv. Institut l. 4. c. 3. s 7. of which Mr. Paul Bains speaks in his Exposition on the Ephesians chap. 2. 3. p. 350 351. As the Lord doth give a Calling and Grace so a People towards whom it is especially blessed It is true the Apostle had a more large Flock the care of all Churches was upon him but wheresoever God giveth a Calling there he giveth a People of whom the Minister may say Toward you Grace is given me of God Acts 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. God hath assigned every ordinary Minister a portion of his People for this is the difference between extraordinary as the Apostles Evangelists the seventy Disciples and our ordinary Pastors The Apostles had an Universal Commission and the Evangelists were Delegates of the Apostles The Seventy if not Evangelists which some of the Ancients encline to yet they were illimited helpers and fellow-labourers in the work of the Lord. But ordinary Ministers the Lord commanded to fasten them to certain places Tit. 1. 5. Ordain Elders City by City And in the Council of Chalcedon chap. 6. Let none be ordained at large lest he prove a wandring
Jonathan Every Minister must be 1. Seperated 2. Authorized 3. have allotted to him a certain portion of people which may be instructed by him which the diminutive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may seem to insinuate Now as God doth give every Pastor his several Flock so he will that we travel in leading of them we must not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we must not be Bishops in other mens Diocesses lest God say Who hath required this at your hands When the Lord lighteth Candles he doth find Candlesticks on which to set them c. The sum is 1. The Body of Christ Eph. 4. 11 12. is a particular Church of Christ for the edification of which Pastors and Teachers are given 2ly Ordinary Officers are limited to particular Churches From whence the vanity of this Animadverter's Argument is conspicuous to every eye If by Body of Christ he understand in his first Proposition the Universal Catholick Church 1. His Argument is naught consisting of four terms for we have manifested that the Body of Christ in the Minor which is the Apostles is a particular Church of Christ 2. Hiâ— Major is invalid It doth not follow that if men may be Ministers of Christ though they be Ministers for the Body of Christ and all the members thereof that they may be Ministers of Christ though National If he think Ministers for the Body of Christ and all the members thereof and national Ministers are aequipollent upon second thoughts he will be so ingenious as to acknowledge he was mistaken Nay 3dly The very truth is 't is so far from being true that upon supposition a man may be a Minister of the Body of Christ and yet the Minister of Christ i. e. by the appointment of Christ a Minister for his Body and all the Membeâ—â— Churches thereof That therefore he may be the Minister of Christ though National that ejus contrarium est verum A man cannot be a Minister of Christ if a National Minister or Minister of a National Church upon supposition that Christ hath instituted and appointed his Ministers to be Ministers for his Body i. e. his Church-Catholick-visible which is not sure confined within the narrow circumference of one Nation A mans residence wherein will be accounâ—ed but a pittiful discharge of his Ministry upon the supposition aforesaid But 4thly By the Body of Christ Ephes 4. we have proved a particular Church of Christ to be intended That there is any shew of reason in the Animadverters proposition They that may be Ministers of Christ though they may be Ministers of the Body of Christ i. e. a particular Church of Christ and all the Members thereof which by the appointment of Christ they are may be Ministers of Christ though National which none are but by the devisings of man and appointment of Antichrist he himself will not have the confidence to aver There are these things incumbent upon him to prove if he ever reinforce this Argument First That by Body of Christ Ephes 4. is not meant a particular Instituted Church of Christ Secondly That ordinary Church Officers for to run into a discourse of what was done by the Apostles extraordinary Officers who were not fixt any where nor could be whilest they made conscience of their Commission Mat. 28. 19. which was to Preach the Gospel to every Creature In which Office none are their Successors as we prove Chap. 4. is such a pittiful fig-leaf to cover ones nakedness with that every eye will see through are not limited to or fixed in a particular Congregation Thirdly Manifest the truth of this proposition shoulâ— it be granted him for disputes sake that by Body Ephes 4. is meant the Church-Catholick-visible They that may be Ministers of Christ though they may be Ministers of the Body of Christ i. e. the Church-Catholick-visible and all the members thereof may be Ministers of Christ though National The Bottom or Basis upon which it is built I must acknowledge my short-sightedness to be such that I cannot ken nor it may be a wiser man than either of us His Fourth Argument is like the rest 't is thus formed If any of the Saints as well as one particular Congregation have an Inâ—erest in all the Ministers of Christ so as that they are truly theirs then Ministers of Christ may be National But 1 Cor. 3. 22 23 Paul and Cephas and Apollos were all the Corinthians and all others who were Christ's Therefore Answ En cor Zenodoti en jecur cratetis What is most admirable in this Argument I know not A few things will manifest its nakedness to all 1st The Ministers of Christ are either such as were called extraordinary as were immediately sent by Christ or assumed to themselves by them who were so sent to be coadjutors or fellow-workers with them in that service and employment to preach the Gospel throughout the world and were fixed no where related as Pastors or Teachers to no one particular Congregation more than another or such as were mediately sent by Christ ordained in and set apart for particular Congregations Of the former sort were the Apostles c. Of the latter Pastors Teachers as we but now proved 2dly The having an interest in Ministers is either the having an interest in their gifts and abilities God hath given them or in their persons as Ministers appointed by the Lord to oversee instruct and watch over their souls as such that must give an account Heb. 13. 17. Now let him take Ministers in either sence for extraordinary or ordinary Ministers and an interest in them for an interest in their gifts or in them as Ministers appointed by the Lord to watch over and instruct them the consequence of his first proposition is most weak and invalid Though all the Saints in the world might claim an interest in Paul c. it doth not follow that they were National Ministers which 't was impossible they should be there being no such thing as a National Church from whence a National Minister hath his denomination And Mr. T. may as well surmise a King without Subjects a Father without Children or a Husband without a Wife as to surmise Paul c. to be National Ministers when there was no such thing in being as a National Church The like may be said of Pastors and Teachers in that day But 3dly If he take Ministers for ordinary Ministers as he must do if he speak to purpose extraordinary Ministers being ceased with the Apostles and their interest in them for their interest in them as Ministers to oversee and instruct them in the Lord by virtue of Office-power there is nothing more false than this that every Saint hath an interest in them as such none but that particular Congregation having in that sense an interest in them to which they are related as Ministers Nor doth the Apostle 1 Cor. 3. 22 23. say that every Saint hath 1. All is yours is no more
than all is and shall be for your good 2. He speaks to the particular Church of Corinth of which neither Paul nor Apollos nor Gephas were Pastors or Teachers 3. He is condemning them upon the account of their crying up and preferring one before another upon the supposition of the excellency of gifts some thought they saw in one others in the other which caused them to side and tumultuate the one against the other To allay which amongst other things he tells them All is theirs whether Paul c. i. e. the gifts of the one and the other were for their use â—nd emolument as the Lord was pleased in his providence to cast them amongst them 4. He speaks of extraordinary unlimited Officers tâ—at were to continue but for a season and whilst they were fixed and â—etled in no particular Church so that the Corinthians might lay as much claim to them upon that account as any other Therefore National Ministers may be Ministers of Christ is this Animadverter's Logick whâ—ch when I purpose ludicrè sophisticare I may imitate him in What follows viz. That a man may be a Commissioner for approbation of Publick Preachers throughout a Nation as Mr. T. was when that was in fashion and so a National Minister or an Itinerant Preacher and yet be a Minister of Christ is not at all to the purpose 1. If Mr. T. look'd upon himself as such an one when he sate at White-Hall amongst the Tryers I know many of theâ— that then sate there did not And in the sense I speak of National Ministers as explained in the beginning of this Section he could not be one 2dly Some at least of the then Tryers were so far from being National Ministers that to my knowledge they were not Ministers at all but private Gentlemen whom the then Powers thought fit to entrust with the management of that affair Sect. 16. No National Church under the Oeconomy of the Gospel The National Church of England destitute of what Mr. T. makes essential of a true Church Somewhat more essential to a true Church than the truth of Doctrine of Faith the truth of Worship the truth of holy Conversation viz. Segregation and Aggregation proved The Aâ—imadverter's Argument retorted upon himself Though every defect of Order doth not nullifie a Church yet the defect of that Order that is of the essence of a true Church doth Of the Disorders of the Church of Corinth Their impertinent Allegation by the Animadverter of Synods the learned Whitaker's judgment of them and General Councils These no proof for National Churches Of many particular Congregations under one Presbyterial Government These may be yet no National Church The Church of Jerusalem but one particular Congregation meeting together in the same place for celebration of Ordinances How this Church was the pattern of all other Churches Mr. T. his Cavils refuted THe next attempt of Mr. T. in this Section is to prove a National Church so denominated from their subjection to some Canon-Rulers Ecclesiastical which is the National Church we are enquiring after or conveening by Deputies in some National Synod though not of Divine Institution is a true Church This seems at first blush to be a difficult task to assert a Church not of Divine Institution to be a Church of God for so 't is if a true Church his Temple Tabernacle in which he walks and dwells is to me such a Paradox as requires a strong brain and hard forehead to make good But Aquila non capit muscas nothing but what others despair of ever accomplishing is thought by daring spirits worthy the attempting We attend his proofs Thus he argues They may be a true Church who have all things essential to a Church and nothing destructive of its being such But a National Church may have all things essential to a Church c. Therefore Answ Very good We deny his minor Proposition that a National Church may have all things essential to a Church c. What saith he for the proof of it He tells us that a National Church may have the truth of Doctrine of Faith the truth of Worship the truth of holy Conversation besides which there is nothing essential to a true Church Answ But this is gratis dictum and without proof 1. That Mr. T. can give us an account of any National Church under the Oeconomy of the Gospel concerning which it may be affirmed that the truth of the Doctrine of Faith the truth of Worship the truth of holy Conversation did appertain to it i. e. if I do not much mistake him it hath been sound in Doctrinals the true Worship of Christ hath been managed and carried on in it and the particular members thereof i. e. the multitude of the Inhabitants of the Nation holy and righteous will not hastily be believed by such as have thought themselves concerned to look into these matters As for the Church of England we suppose he will not have the confidence to assert that it may be truly affirmed of it that the members thereof are so qualified The frequent staggering and shameful spewings through excess that we daily behold in no small number even of the Captains and chief of this Herd evince the contrary Of the soundness of their Doctrine we give an account Chap. 11. and of the truth of their Worship Chap. 8. But 2dly The Animadverter full well knew that his Antagonists look not not upon the particulars instanced in to be the Essentials of a Church We Country-folk are not wont to say that when the materials of an House are fitted and brought together the House is built there must be an orderly forming and placing of each piece in the building according to the Scheme or Platform thereof before this can be affirmed of it And therefore hic pes figendus he should have manifested the truth of his dictate that besides these there is nothing essential to a true Church We are apt to think that two things over and above whâ—t is instanc'd in by him are so essential to a true Church that without them it is not such 1. Segregation or separation from the wicked carnal formal hypocritical world and the worship thereof of which chap. 4. of the S. T. and in our Epistle to the Reader prefixt to this Treatise 2. Aggregation or a solemn gathering together by free and mutual consent into particular Congregations in the fear of the great God gâ—ving up our selves to him and one another according to his will to â—alk together in the fellowship of the Gospel in obedience to all the Institutions and Appointments of our dear Lord. 1. That thus it should be in Gospel-dayes the Prophets of old bear their Testimony Jer. 50. 5. Come let us †Heb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which points forth not a casual aggregation not a forc'd conjunction but a free and voluntary giving up themselves to the Lord and to one another 'T is used of such a conjunction
as is made by marriage joyn our selves to the Lord c. so Isa 2. 3. Mich. 4. 2. Isa 44. 5. Zech. 8. 21 22 23. 2dly Accordingly we have the Churches of Christ in the New-Testament practising and commended for their so doing as acting therein according to the will of God Acts 2. 41 42. 2 Cor. 8. 5. 3dly The several names and titâ—es given unto particular Churches evince as much Every such Church is called 1. A Body 1 Cor. 12. 27. Col. 3. 15. Rom. 14. 4 5. Eph. 5. 30 32. Col. 1. 18 21. Now 't is not the multitude or number of members whether many or few that constitute or make a Body We say not if we come into a Field where a Battel hath been fought and find an Arm in one place a Leg in another an Hand in a third c. though we meet with as many members scattered up and down as are in the body yea though thrown together in heaps that here is a body no no 't is Rudis indigestaque moles Their union each with other and coalescency in one is that which gives them that denomination Particular Saints scattered here and there or casually coming together are not nor can they be called the Body of Christ their union each with other by their free and mutual consent is that which denominates them so to be 2. An House or Temple Heb. 3. 6. Ephes 2. 21 22. 1 Tim. 3. 15. 1 Pet. 2. 5. Mr. T. knows who have thought the world was made by the casual confluence of Atoms he doth not sure think that a casual concurrence of people professing the Name of the Lord without more ado are or can become an House or Temple for him 3. A City a Kingdom Eph. 2. 19. Mat. 21. 43. Heb. 12. 28. Joh. 18. 36. That a man should be any way a member of these but by his free consent cannot be asserted with the least shew of reason 4. A Fraternity or Brotherhood Zech. 11. 14. 1 Pet. 2. 17. compared with chap. 5. 2 13. 5. A Candlestick in allusion to Moses his Candlesticks Exod. 25. 31. wherein though there were many shafts yet they did all coalesce in one Rev. 1. 11 12 20. All which as they import Aggregation or a solemn union so they clearly evince that this cannot be but by free and mutual consent 4. Besides we find Christ promising his Presence to his Church and People thus aggregated or gathered an Argument of his well-pleasedness therein Mat. 18. 20. which accordingly he makes good to the Churches of Asia as to the rest Rev. 1. 13. which we have proved to be particular Congregational Churches That they were separated from the World and its Worship gathered together by their own free consent for the worshipping God Mr. T. cannot deny There were no Laws to compel them hereunto but the contrary So that 3dly we may righteously retort this Animadverters Argument upon himself There cannot be a true Church where those things essential to a true Church cannot be found But in National Churches in general in the Church of England in particular those things that are essential to a true Church cannot be found Therefore The Major is Mr. T 's The Minor we prove Right matter and form is of the essence of a true Church both wanting in the Church of England 1. The right matter Mr. T. denies not to be visible Saints visible Drunkards Swearers Whoremongers covetous persons are not such yet of such as these is the Church of England mostly composed 2dly The form of a true Church we have manifested to consist in separation from Worldly Formal Antichristian Worshippers gathering together by free consent into a Church-state or particular Societies for the Worship and Service of God neither of which can be asserted of the Church of England Much of the Worship of the Nations of Antichrist at least their rites and modes of Service is retained in it And into that Church-state such as it is in which they are fixed did they never enter by their free and voluntary consent but by the Laws of the Kingdom were they at first I speak of their National-Church-state that the Gospel was early whether by Joseph of Arimathea or some one of the Apostles is not material preached in England that then a true Church or Churches were here planted I grant but this is nothing to their present frame as a Church-National compell'd thereunto and by severe Laws retained therein to this day From which as from the Lordly Prelacy the most sober People of the Nation do every-where groaning being burdened long to be delivered What follows will receive a speedy dispatch 1. 'T is true the defect of outward order i. e. of every outward order though of the institution of Christ doth not nullifie the Church but want of that order which is of the essence of the Church as we have evinced to be the case of the Church of England doth so 2dly Mr. T 's instances of the disorders in the Church of Corinth yet a true Church are so evidently impertinent that the bare mentioning them is confutation sufficient The Church of Corinth was a rightly constituted Church made up of visible Saints 1 Cor. 1. 1. gathered together into a particular body 1 Cor. 12. 27. meeting together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same place for the Worship of God 1 Cor. 11. 20. 14. 23. Some disorders found amongst this Church did not nullifie it Ergo the defect of that Order that is instituted by Christ ad esse to the very existence and being of a Gospel-Church as is the case of National Churches doth not nullifie them will not in hast be made good When Mr. T. proves the sameness of constitution betwixt the particular Church of Corinth and the National Church of England his instance of disorders amongst the Corinthians will be acknowledged pertinent but till then he will not himself upon second thoughts say it is so The having of Natioâ—al Rulers Ecclesiastical either single persons or in a Synod or Convocation make not a false Church saith the Animadverter Answ 1. But should this be granted it would not follow that a National Church is not a false Church which it may be upon other accounts though upon the account hereof it should be acqâ—itted But 2ly National Officers or Rulers Ecclesiastical in whom all Church-power is stated as Arch-Bishop and from thence derived to Diocesan Bishops and by them communicated in part to the ordinary Parish-Priests as is the case of the National Ecclesiastical Officers of England are false and Antichristian Officers and Ministers we prove chap. 3. of the S. T. That a National Church so denominated from their subjection to these should be a true Church is beyond the reach of my understanding What he addeth touching Synods owned and submitted unto by those of the Congregational way and Churches of a greater number and at a greater distance than could meet in one place every Lord's day is
not at all to his purpose At the best it is but a recrimination I know not how this Animadverter could imagine that the owning and asserting of these things as lawful had the least tendency to the establishment of a National Church But some men are so distempered that they suppose every thing makes for the advancement of that design they are driving on If he deems Synods owned by men of Congregational Principles and his Ecclesiastical Convocation of National Officers are of the same nature he is mistaken 1. Those are chosen by the particular Churches to which they are severally related and what they act and do is in their name and upon the account of that power and authority they receive from them The Convocation of the Clergy act in their own name and authority being never chosen by any one Congregation to sit and make Laws 2ly Those pretend not to be the Church nor to any self-power to make Laws and impose them upon the Churches as obligatory and binding to be received and subjected to by them without the least judgement of discretion allowed them or liberty of dissenting if not perswaded in their consciences of the truth of what is decreed by them and its consonancy with the Scriptures of the Lord. As is known to be the case of the Convocation of the Church of England to dissent from whose Canons at least to oppose them is censured with no less than an Excommunication or delivering up to Satan Which how directly it leads to the Popish implicit faith of believing as the Church believes every one is able to discern For my part with reference to these I am much of the mind of the learned Whitaker de Concil p. 12. General Councils may erre and imbrace false opinions Nam Concilium Antiochenum veritatem damnavit haeresin apertam propugnavit Similiter Ariminense Ephesinum secundum ex quo patet veritatem non esse metiendam ex numero Episcoporum Of them he saith 1. That their calling together is a certain politick and humane invention pag. 35 77. 2. That they cannot frame Articles of Faith to binde the Conscience pag. 19. 3. That their end in coming together is not to feed as Pastors but to consult what is best for the Churches pag. 85. 4. That they are not simply necessary pag. 23. 5. That they do not give authority to the Scripture pag. 242 243. 6. That their Decrees are not immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost pag. 262 263. 7. That the ultimate determination and judgment of a General Council may be false pag. 231. 8. That there is no judgement of a Council properly in matters of Faith ibid. 9. That the truth of things determined in Councils may afterwards be called into question and again disputed pag. 283. 10. That the Churches of Christ have been kept sound in Faith without them for the first 300 years pag. 23. To which I add 11. That I never yet read of any Council or Synod since that Act 15. but 't were easie to demonstrate that in one thing or other it hath erred The most of the Hay and Stubble that is built upon the Foundation at this day not to mention their attempts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 owing its original to some of them So that I confess I am no admirer of them and am bold to affirm of any that have yet been it had been better for the Church of God that they had never been in the world But these things are little to Mr. T. his purpose That persons owning the lawfulness of Synods from Scripture-warrant as they conceive should therefore be necessitated to own a National Church as a true Church of Christ is a position that Mr. T. will never make good I suppose by the view I have taken of some of his Writings he is very confident of his own abilities but he is a rare man indeed that can compose a Rope of Sand. The lawfulness of a National Church or unlawfulness thereof having no dependance upon Congregational Synods but is to take its measure from somewhat else of which before Of Churches of a greater number â—han can meet at one place for the celebration of all the Ordinances of Christ I shall not need to say any thing till he acquaint us what Congregational men are of that perswasion it will be accounted a meer Calumny The assembling of the members of a particular Church in the same place for the celebration of the same Numerical Ordinances being one considerable part of the definition given by our Congregational Brethren of such a Church And yet if they did own Churches of a greater number 't is ridiculous to imagine that they could from thence be compelled to the owning of a National Church which wants both the matter and form of a true Church of Christ which yet the other may have So that we need not turn aside to consider the proofs used by those that held That many particular Congregations may be under one Presbyterial Government Printed 1645. Of which this Animadverter reminds us For though I am not of their mind nor do I conceive their Reasons to be cogent Yet were that true a National Church could not from thence be proved a true Church of Christ For 1st They suppose these Congregations to be particular Churches of Christ constituted and made up of visible Saints which cannot as yet be affirmed of any National Church in the world or any Parish Church as a part thereof 2dly They also affirm that these particular Churches have power within themselves to determine differences by their own Elders to excommunicate Offenders obstinately guilty of notorious scandals 3dly They are utterly against all Archiepiscopal National Officers the source and spring of a National Church 4thly They conceive not all in England nor all in a Parish to be lawful Church-members because born there nor will they compel them as such to receive the Sacrament with them which is the known case of the Church of England That at Jerusalem there were more Churches than one under a Presbyterial Government is a fond conceit which the numerous multitude of Believers thereunto belonging contribute not the least mite of assistance to Be they never so many they are called Acts 8. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church which was at Jerusalem The like may be said of the Church of Corinth it was one single Congregation the Church of God which was at Corinth 1 Cor. 1 1. 2 Cor. 1. 1. So was the Church at Ephesus Rev. 2. 1. But as was said The grant of more Churches than one under one Presbyterial Government is remote enough from the establishment of a National Church which by other bonds and ligaments than the Assertors thereof will own must be united to one National Head or it hath not cannot have a being in the world So that these things are little to his purpose The next attempt of this Animadverter is to remove an obstruction which he
seeth to lye in his way which in sum is this The first Church of Christ under the Oeconomy of the Gospel was undoubtedly formed according to the mind of Christ But this was a particular instituted Church which though numerous was not so numerous but that they might meet together in the same place Therefore not a National Church but a particular Church of Christ is of his institution c. The first Proposition is easily demonstrated It was formed by the Apostles men of integrity and faithfulness who would not durst not innovate in the things of Christ who had but lately received charge from him to teach Believers to observe and do all things whatsoever he had commanded them and had promised thereupon his presence with them To whom also after his Resurrection he opened his heart or plainly spoke of things pertaining to the Kingdom of God or Gospel Church-state Acts 1. 3. Accordingly 'tis said of them That they revealed the Counsel of God not their own but his Acts 20. 27. delivered to them what they had received of the Lord Christ 1 Cor. 11. 23. To have done otherwise had been an establishment of Will-worship which they condemn Col. 2. 13. The Minor Proposition is manifest The first Church of Christ under the Oeconomy of the Gospel was the Church at Jerusalem This was a particular Church of Christ 'T is said of them Chap. 2. 46. That they continued daily with one accord in the Temple Vers 47. Such as we converted are said to be added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to that Church viz. which was at Jerusalem See Chap. 4. 23 24 29. and 5. 12. and 8. 1 3. and 11. 22. and 12. 5. and 15. 4 22. 'T is strange to me that when the Spirit of the Lord whenever he makes mention of this Church at Jerusalem speaks of it as one particular instituted Church of Christ any persons of sobriety should dare to assert that it was not such lifting up themselves against his dictates and Testimony Let 's consider what the Animadverter replies hereunto He tells us 1. That in Luke in many places the word multitude with an universal sign is not taken for every one not one exempted as Luke 8. 37. Acts 25. 24. 6. 2. 16. 12 30. 21. 22. To which briefly 1st 'T is granted though what he produceth Acts 16. 12 30 to evince I cannot tell I am sure 't is hugely impertinent to the matter in hand Nor 2dly Is it at all material whether in the places instanced in by us where that expression is used it be taken for every one none exempted or not This only is incumbent on us to prove First That the Church at Jerusalem was a particular Church of Christ And 2dly Such a particular Church as did meet all of them when not providentially hindred might do so notwithstanding their multitude for the Worship of God There was no impossibility in rei natura of their so doing which he must wink hard that doth not see shining forth in its brightness in the fore-mentioned Scriptures which when Mr. T. offers one Argument to evert it shall be considered His 't is not likely will not pass for demonstration amongst persons that look for proof of that which is asserted The Spirit of the Lord assuring us that the multitude of the Disciples were called together 't is not only likely but most certain that they were so Nor is it likely that those whose particular duty and concern lay in what was to be managed theâ—e would willingly absent themselves Mr. T. himself tells us in his Antipaedobaptism or the 3d part p. 340. that all the Church did come together Act. 5. 11 12. were gathered together Act. 14. 27. and that they were not parts of the Church who did not come together c. His second Reply is scarce worth the mentioning If it be granted that they then met for that business yet there is no likelihood that they met for Ordinances And why so I pray why 't is said Act. 2. 46. that they did break bread from house to house Ans 1. But that because they sometimes celebrated that Ordinance more privately it should necessarily follow that they never did it all of them together that they were not in a capacity were in an utter impossibility of so doing as is the case of a National Church is beyond the verge of any mans understanding but Mr. T. And 't is desired he would at his next leizure make good that consequence I am informed and doubt not the truth of it that Mr. T. after he had been in hearing of the Parish-Priest at Lempster not long since got as many of the Church to whom he once owned himself related as their Pastor together as he could and brake bread privately with them yet may it not thence rationally be concluded that he never celebrated that Ordinance with them more publickly or that he never intends to do so much less that the Congregation he still it seems holds communion with is so numerous that they cannot break bread together in the same place Such pittiful Sophisms as these will never pass for proof amongst persons that have the exercise of their understanding or reason Yet 2dly The Animadverter's Concession is a grant of the verity of that he sets himself to oppose If Act. 6. 2. the Church did meet in one Congregation for that business as Mr. T. saith 't is evident they were not so numerous but they might meet together in one Assembly which is the matter in controversie betwixt us He adds 3dly The Church of Jerusalem cannot be said to be the pattern of all Churches Answ 1. Nor is it necessary that we assert it so to be The discovery of the Will of Christ the Laws and Rules he hath given forth touching the aggregation of his Children into a Gospel-Church-state are the pattern of all the Churches of Christ in the World and whatever Church is not constituted according to this pattern is none of his nor will ever by him be owned so to be Yet 2dly This Church at Jerusalem being planted by the Apostles according to the mind of Christ may with reference thereunto be said to be the pattern of all rightly constituted Churches What hath our Animadverter to excepâ— against this He tells us this cannot be because 1. There was no distribution of Believers under particular Offâ—cers Answ 1. But what doth Mr. T. mean by the distribution of Believers under particular Officers doth he mean that they were not distributed into several Congregations under their particular Pastors no one saith they were we assert them to be one Church They are no less a pattern of particular Churches than if they had been so distributed so long as we find them in a possibility of meeting in the same place 2dly Doth he mean that they had no Pastors amongst them This is more than he will in hast make good For 1. They had Apostles 2dly They had fixed
Officers if Presbyters and Elders be such as 't is evident they are from Act. 14. 23. 20. 17 28. whom we find in the Church at Jerusalem Act. 11. 29 30. 15. 2 4 6 22 23. 16. 4. 21. 18. 3ly What he further offers That the Church of Jerusalem was to be that Church from whence were to be taken such as might plant other Churches for which end they were after dispersed Acts 8. 1 4. therefore it cannot be said to be the pattern of all Churches is to speak modestly such a strange non-sequitur that he must take time to make good That because the Lord in his providence suffered the enemies of his Son to dissipate and scatter this Church and by it took advantage in the greatness of his Love and Wisdom for the preaching the Gospel to others also that therefore it should be a Church not formed up according to the mind of Christ or being so formed was not to be an example and pattern with respect to the matter and manner of its constitution to succeeding Churches is a consequence that will not be swallowed down because Mr. T. saith it and yet nothing but his ipse dixit is tendred towards its support and maintenance But what he saith in the 4th place wil he thinks do his work 't is this Be the Church of Jerusalem of what nature or kind soever whether Congregational Presbyterian or Parochial it was so not from any Institution of Christ but came to pass according to divine Promises and Providence which being so various as that no certain rule can be accommodated to all times places and estates of the Church We may judge that Christ hath left the shaping of Churches much to humane prudence That is in short there is no Form of Churches of divine institution An Assertion so derogatory to the honour and glory of our dear Lord Jesus that it cannot but be grievous to Christ-loving Saints to hear it abetted by any I confess if this were the state of Churches it were to no purpose to contend with him about his National Church nor is it at all to be wondred at if he hath always been for that Church-Government that was uppermost in the World But this being an Assertion wherein most of the Saints of God in the World do look upon themselves upon more accounts than one to be greatly concerned Mr. T. should have brought most irrefragable Arguments to make it good But behold in the stead hereof we meet with a deep silence he onely turns aside to consider what worthy Mr. Parker offers to prove that the form of Churches is of Divine Institution Of which in the next Section we shall speak Sect. 17. The Form of Churches of Divine Institution The learned Parker 's Arguments vindicated from Mr. T. his Exceptions Particular Churches called the Body of Christ his House and Temple The plain upon which the Antichristian Church was first erected No other foundation of the Church but Christ. 1 Cor. 3. 10. Eph. 2. 20. Zech. 6. 13. Rev. 11. 1. explained Twelve Arguments to prove the Form of Churches is of Divine appointment IN Sect. 17. Mr. T. pretends to answer the learned Parkers Arguments by which he proves Lib. 3. de Polit. Eccl. c. 17. that the Form of Churches is of Divine Institution How well he hath discharged this province is now to be considered The sum of Mr. Parker's first Argument is this The Church is the Body of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 27. But in the first forming of mans Body he shewed himself such an accurate worker in the determining the dimension and measure of it Gen. 2. that nothing might be added to or taken from it by any Therefore it cannot be imagined that he should be so regardless of his own Body as not accurately to circumscribe the dimension thereof This Mr. T. is pleased to call a Rhetorical flourish but by his good leave it will be found an Argument of such weight that he will not be able soon to remove it out of his way If the Church of Christ be his Body he hath certainly determined the dimensions of it Not to have done so had been an Argument of little care thereof of his leaving it to the arbitrary disposements of the children of men of which we reade not a tittle in the New-Testament Who or where is he that dares assume the confidence of ordering and disposing the Body of Christ without his leave or can do so without treading the Soveraignty of Christ over it under foot and proclaims himself to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that lawless one the Antichrist or Beast that ascends out of the bottomless-pit must go into perdition What saith Mr. T The Church of Christ he tells us is the Body of Christ but this is rather true of the Universal Church and Mystical Body of Christ as may be gathered from 1 Cor. 12. 12 13. Eph. 1. 22 23. 4. 4. than of a particular Congregation Answ 1. But he gives us no Argument to demonstrate that 1 Cor. 12. 27. is to be interpreted of the Universal Church we have demonstrated the contrary Sect. 13. which he should have done if he would have us think our selves concerned in his reply 2dly He himself grants That a particular Church of Christ is and may be called his Body as his words 't is rather true of the Universal Church than of a particular Congregation import That he should entrust any with a power to model figure and fashion his own Body as they please and yet never give us the least hint of any such betrustment is the first-born of improbabilities and absurdities The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very plain in the Land of Shinar upon which the cursed Fabrick of the Antichristian Church Babel was at the first erected as Mr. T. well knows The learned Parker further argues Each first Church of God is the house and building of God 1 Cor. 3. 9. Heb. 3. 3 4. 1 Tim. 3. 15. And what prudent housholder will permit the Figure and Quantity of his House to the arbitrement and will of others To this Mr. T. adjoyns 'T is true the Church of God is his House God built it Christ is the only Foundation of it yet others are subordinate Builders and Foundations too in respect of their Doctrine 1 Cor. 3. 10. Ephes 2. 20. to whom many things pertaining to the outward figure and quantity i. e. the distributing of Churches into Oecumenical National Classical Parochial c. are left c. This the Sum. Answ 1. 'T is true Paul calls himself 1 Cor. 3. 10. A Builder with respect to his instrumental planting and founding of that Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a wise Architect or chief Builder but that he or any others was to build according to the good pleasure of their own wills that they had no Idea Platform or Model given them by Christ the Lord and Master of the House according to which
Disciples to appeal in matters of Scandal found upon their Brethren with which he hath promised his Presence to which he hath given the Keys of the Kingdom power of binding and loosing is a Church of his own forming But this is a particular Congregational-Church Mat. 18. 17 18 19. as we have demonstrated Therefore Arg. 7. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment then there is either no beauty splendour glory therein or Christ bears not cannot bear that glory But both of these are absurd 2 Cor. 3. 7 8 9. Zech. 6. 13. Therefore Arg. 8. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment Then the Church of Christ may have communion with yeeld obedience to the inventions constitutions ordinances and appointments of men of Antichrist the Man of Sin But that they are charged â—ot to do upon most dreadful penalties Rev. 18. 4 5. 14. 9 10 11. Therefore Arg. 9. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment Then either Christ hath not left sufficient Laws for the government of the Saints or man may super-add to his Laws But both these are false scandalous and injurious to Christ Gal. 3. 15. 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. Rev. 22. 18 19. Arg. 10. If the Form of Churches be not of Christ's appointment Then the Church is not to be governed as 't is taught for it must be taught only by the Word of God Isa 8. 2. But the Consequence is absurd Therefore Arg. 11. If the placing of Officers in particular Churches be of the appointment of Christ then the Churches themselves are so But the placing of Officers in particular Churches is of the appointment of Christ 1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11 12. Therefore Arg. 12. Those Churches which Christ owns for his Candlesticks in allusion to the Candlesticks of the Temple which were purely of divine institution are of the institution of Christ But Christ owns particular Churches for his Candlesticks viz. the Seven Churches of Asia which we have before demonstrated were particular Churches Rev. 1. 20. Therefore Those that desire further satisfaction in this matter may consult a little Treatise lately published entituled A brief Instruction in the Worship of God and Discipline of the Churches of the New Testament p. 93. where they will find it clearly and amply debated Sect. 18. Of National Ministers What meant by Ministry Of extraordinary and ordinary Officers Upon what account the Church of Engl. is asserted to be a false Church Mr. T. his Arguments to prove that in a National Church or a Church irregular in its constitution may be a true Ministry of Christ answered The contrary is demonstrated THE Design of Mr. T. his 18th and 19th Sect. is to answer the second Query in S. T. Whether National Ministers are the Ministers of Christ Or whether there can be a true Ministry in a false Church as a National Church must be if not of divine Institution upon what pretence soever it be so denominated Before he attempts the Resolution of this Query he considers First What the Ministry is of which it is enquired whether it be true or false And having at large acquainted us with the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he tells us he understands the query to be meant of that part of the Ministry which is by preaching But I must crave leave to tell him he somewhat misseth the white of the Authors intendment who by it intends an Office-Power of Ministry for discharge of that whole work that peculiarly relates to the Ministers of the Gospel to be performed and managed by them according to the Will of Christ Whether it be the Ministry of the Word the Lords Supper c. This as Mr. T. saith rightly is either the Ministry of extraordinary Officers as Apostles c. of which our Question is not or of ordinary Officers as Pastors c. of whom it is queried Whether ordinary National Officers or Ministers are of the Institution of Christ What saith Mr. T He tells us 1. That Paul was a Minister not only to a particular Church but even to the Gentiles Answ That this doth not in the least concern the Question in debate which is of ordinary church-Church-Officers and Paul as I remember with the rest of the Apostles was an extraordinary one receiving a Commission for the Preaching of the Gospel to all Nations he will be so ingenuous as upon the review to acknowledge Secondly A Church may be said to be false many wayes Answ True it may so but in his discourse there abouts we are little concerned who assert the Church of England to be a false Church because it is destitute of the true Matter visible Saints and the true Form freely giving up themselves unto the Lord and one another to worship him together as a Community according to the revelation of his will But he will prove Thirdly That in a National Church or a Church irregular in its constitution i. e. that hath neither the matter nor form of a true Church of Christ or discipline may be a true Ministry of Christ His first Argument is Arg. 1. If the truth of the Ministry depend upon the truth of the Church or its regularity then where is no true regular Church there is no true Ministry But that is false since there may be a true Ministry where there is no Church at all and therefore no true Church Therefore Answ If by a true regular Church Mr. T. means a Church for matter and form rightly constituted according to the mind of Christ and by a true Ministry the Ministry of ordinary Officers such as Pastors and Teachers as he must do if he speak pertinently we deny his Minor Proposition Where there is no true Church at all in a false Church or Church not regularly constituted according to the mind of Christ as is the case of the National Church of England there cannot be a true Ministry which Mr. T. forgot to attempt the proof of And indeed his abilities seem to lie much in Dogmatizing and 't is great pitty but he were created a Rabbi in the Pithagorean School his accuteness therein being so incomparably excellent 1st That there can be no true ordinary Ministry where there is no Church is manifest First Where ever we read of ordinary Ministers we read of them as appertaining to some one particular Church or other Acts 14. 23. 15. 2 4 22. 20. 17 28. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 1. 5. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2. As good a man may imagine an Husband to be without a Wife or a Major without a Corporation or a Father without Children as a Minister without a Church in which he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to minister according to the will and appointment of Christ Secondly Every lawful Minister is elected and chosen to his Office by the Church or People of God Therefore there can be no true ordinary
at all follow that there may be a true Ministry to and in a Church National Where is Mr. T. proof of his consequence Why these are greater degrees of falshood than are to be found in a National Church Well this is denied also What offers he to make it appear to be so Why you have his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it he saith so But seriouslly Mr. T. is so inconstant to his own words principles and practices that we are afraid if we should assent to what he asserts upon that foundation we should once in seven or eight years if the minds of men in authority over us should in that time be different believe and disbelieve the same positions What if the National Church be as Schismatical Heretical Hypocritical as the Churches instanc'd in this were a facile undertaking to demonstrate I hope then it being false in its constitution which the others instanc'd in were not we may with this Animadverter's leave assert that greater degrees of falshood are not to be found in and upon them than are to be found upon his National Church Besides supposing the Churches instanc'd in to be such as M. T. saith they were they were once true Churches of Christ to whom power was delegated from him foâ— the election and choosing of Officers to act in his Name and Authâ—rity amongst them which cannot be affirmed of any National Church in the World That because a true Ministry may be in a true Church under great degeneracy therefore there may be a true Ministry in a false Church is an Assertion that this Animadverter had need to consult with some body else to help him to make good than his present Adviserâ— But 2. We crave leave to deny his Minor A true Ministry câ—nnot be in Hypocritical Schismatical Heretical Churches If they are such they are no Churches of Christ if known to be so they are not to be owned as such by them that fear him But he hath proved this from the Epistles to the Corinthians to the Churches of Pergamos Thyatira and Sardis Answ What hath he proved that these Churches were Hypocritical Schismatical Heretical nothing less 'T is true 1 Cor. 1. 11 12. Paul tells the Corinthians that he heard there were Contentions amongst them c. that the Church was schismatical he saith not That there are Contentions amongst the members of the Church of England Mr. T. cannot deny that therefore it is to be accounted a Schismatical-Church he will scarce assert 'T is true also that there were some in the Church of Pergamos and Thyatira that held false and erroneous opinions and that the Churches were too much to blame to suffer them as they did for which Christ rebukes them In Sardis the generality of the members were wonderfully declined in their spirits a time of withering decayes deadness was upon them yet was not the one an Heretical nor the other an Hypocritical Church Nor can Mr. T. make good his charge against either of them As for the Church of Pergamos Christ witnesseth of them that although they dwelt where Satan's seat was i. e. where the Roman Governour lived who was Satan's chief instrument for persecuting the Saints yet they hâ—â—d fast his Name and did not deny his Faith which is not a description of an Heretical Church They owned Christ retained cleaved to the Doctâ—ine of the Gospel i. e. the Body of the Church did though some few amongst them held strange Heterodoxies therefore no Heretical-Church The like may be said of the Church of Thyatira doth Christ charge her with Heresie doth he say the whole Body or maâ—or part of the Church was infected with the doctâ—ine of Jezebel nothing less He saith indeed that the Church was too negligent in their duty to put a stop to her seducing his Servants and intimates as if some were led astray by her But withal testifies that there were a considerable number amongst them that had not received her doctrine nor known the depths of Satan they called them depths i. e. deep and wonderful things but they were the depths of Satan Of Sardis Christ also witnesseth that there were some things remaining that he would have her strengthen i. e. some graces that were not quite extinct and dead in them and of some of them expresly that they had not defiled their garments and that they should walk with him in white for they were worthy which cannot be affimed of Hypocrites Rev. 2. 13 19 20 24 25. 3. 2 4. Therefore no Heretical nor Hypocritical Churches And I cannot but wonder at the confidence of this Animadverter to affirm it of them after the testimony Christ gives touching them it being little less than giving him the lie to his face So that of this Argument we shall 't is probable hear no more Of his fourth Argument we need say no more but this that the Ministry therein mentioned is the Ministry of the Apostles which he grants not at all to relate to our present Question If he can make good this Consequence the Apostles who were extraordinary Officers immediately sent forth by Jesus Christ were true Ministers afore the regular constitution and discipline of Churches without their election or mission Therefore Pastors and Teachers who are to be chosen by a Church regularly constituted are true Ministers though not so chosen he will be able to reinforce this Argument else he must never bring it into the field more His fifth Argument in brief is The denomination of true Ministers is from the truth of their Doctrine and no other form denominating them But there may be a Ministration of true Doctrine in a false Church Ergo Answ 1. The Major is most false the denomination of true Ministers is from somewhat else beside the truth of their Doctrine viz. A regular Mission according to the mind of Christ or an entrance in by the Door else they are not true Ministers but Thieves and Robbers What places they are before-mentioned that he saith placeth the truth of Ministry in the Doctrine taught and no other thing I cannot tell and do assure him that when he brings one place to prove it I will be his convert Col. 1. 6 7. saith no such thing Epaphras preacheth the Truth of God to the Colossians and is said to be for them a faithful Minister of Christ therefore the denomination of true Ministers is from the truth of their Doctrine and nothing else is one of those consequences are frequently imposed upon us without the least shadow of proof 2dly That 't is the duty of true Ministers and in some sense their property to preach and promote Truth is most certain Paul tells us 2 Cor. 13. 8. that they could do nothing against the Truth but for the Truth But that the denomination of true Ministers is from the truth of their Doctrine and no other form denominating them is I suppose asserted by our Animadverter in haste and will upon second thoughts be retracted
that a conformity to any thing that God had revealed and determined as our duty had upon that account been our bondage 'T is the liberty joy and delight of the Saints to do his will Psal 119. 45. 1 Joh. 5. 3. Psal 19. 8. 119. 111. Such kind of weak impertinent arguings asserted with state and confidence as is the manner of the man must he be content to deal with who undertakes the consideration of what is proposed by this Animadverter But to recite these Arguments had been Answer sufficient to the judicious and intelligent Reader We attend his further motion Sect. 20. God had designed his own Officers for the management of the affairs of his House Who they are may be collected from Ephes 4. 11. The Animadverter proves not that Arch-Bishops c. do the work of the Ministers of the Gospel are commissionated by Christ His apprehension when he took the solemn League and Covenant not the same as now The extensiveness of the Priviledges of the Saints under the Gospel-Oeconomie What things were wanting to the Jews under the second Temple which they had under the first The Election of Ministers the peculiar Priviledge of the Church That it was practised by the Saints in the first Ages granted by the Animadverter Many things charged upon the Saints then living that are false Neither former disorders nor present distempers amongst the Saints any sufficient Warrant for the changing an Institution of Christ. The Priviledge of Women asserted from Scripture and learned Writers Of the Decree of the Council of Carthage 1 Cor. 14. 34 35. 1 Tim. 2. 12. explained What is to be done in case of difference in the Congregation touching the election of Officers MR. T. in his 21. Sect. proposes the 5th Query in S. T. to consideration viz. Whether God hath not now as then under the time of the Law designed the several Officers and Offices his wisdom thought sufficient for the management of the affairs of his House so that the Invention of new ones by the Sons of Men is not only needless but a daring advance against the soveraignty care and wisdom of God over his Churches To which after a large harangue touching Moses the 70 Elders Joshua the Judges David and other Kings the Prophets Aaron and his Sons with the Levites whom the Lord appointed for the management of the affairs of his House having also learnedly told us that God hath not in the Christian Church designed such Officers and Offices as these the twelve Disciples and amongst the rest Peter to whom he seems to assert a Primacy by way of promise to appertain He resolves the Question in the affirmative Tells us that who the Officers of Christ's designing are may best be gathered from Eph. 4. 11. of which we have formerly spoke in Chap. 3. of S. T. As for what follows when Mr. T. shall prove 1st That the Arch-Bishops Bishops c. of the Church of England do the works enjoyned by Christ and his Apostles to the Ministers of the Gospel 2dly That every one that doth those works though not Commissionated by Christ thereunto nor performing them after the order appointed by him is a Minister of Christ 3dly That its lawful for the Sons of men to make more degrees of Ministry one above the other under new Names Titles with maintenance forreign to the maintenance of Christ employed in works he no where charges upon them to do than Christ ever instituted appointed shall look upon our selves as concerned in what he offers in this Section But till then we shall neither trouble our selves or Reader with his Lordly dictates which being tendred without proof may righteously be rejected by us Only thus much I would tell him in his ear That if he had when he took the solemn League and Covenant the same apprehension of this generation of men he now seems to have he did very wickedly to swear to endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy i. e. as in the Covenant is explained Church-Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops their Chancellours and Commissaries Deans Deans and Chapters Archdeacons and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that Hierarchie What Durst he sware to extirpate the Ministers and Ministry of Christ as he now supposeth them to be But Tempora mutantur nos mutamur in illis In Sect. 22. Mr. T. takes notice of the 6th enquiry in S. T. touching the extensiveness of the Priviledges of the Saints under the Gospel whether not commensurate with theirs under the Law which if understood of Saints in appearance or the visible Church he tells us The visible Church of the Jews had in some things greater Priviledges as those mentioned Rom. 9. 4 5. 3. 1 2. and are they not as much committed to the Church and People of God now so that these Texts are little to his advantage together with Gods revealing his mind to them by Urim and Thumim extraordinary Prophets and many more which he not being pleased to particularize to us we shall not turn aside to make enquiry after But to those instanced in we Answer First That the Church and People of God are destitute of some of the Priviledges mentioned is granted and so was the Church of the Jews after their return from the Babylonish Captivity The Rabbies tell us That in the second Temple there were five things wanting which had been in the first 1. The Ark with the Mercy-Seat and Cherubims 2. The fire from Heaven 3. The Urim and Thummim Ezra 2. 63. Neh. 7. 65. whereby the Lord never answered them more 4. The Majesty or divine presence whereby they seem to mean the Oracle in the most holy place where God hath dwelt between the Cherubims Psal 80. 2. Numb 7. 89. 5. The Holy Ghost or the Spirit of Prophesie which was not in the Prophets after the second year of Darius after Haggai Zechariah and Malachie had finished their Prophesies Secondly The Inference of the Animadverter is weak Believers or visible Saints under the Gospel have not some things with which the Church of the Jews was priviledged therefore their Priviledges are not as extensive which notwithstanding they might be yea abundantly more extensive The first Temple upon many accounts was more glorious than the second which wanted as was but now remarked many things wherein its glory lay Yet Hag. 2. 9. the Prophet tells them that the glory of the latter house should be greater than of the former which it was though it had not the same things for its ornament and glory upon other accounts viz. it s being honoured with the bodily presence of Christ there c. Of the Priviledges of the Gospel-Churches and their super-eminency with respect to the Old-Testament-Church we shall not now treat They are delivered from the Yoke of Ceremonial Observances have the Gospel unvailed preached amongst them 2 Cor. 3. 18 c. Nor need we the intendment of our present enquiry being only this Whether the solemn deputation of
amongst the Congregated Churches if but once 't is too often Though Mr. T. his expression intimates as if a frequent case which I cannot but tell him is a meer calumny 'T will not one day be for his credit however it may at present serve his design that he walks so much by that rule Calumniare fortiter aliquid adhaerebit 2. When it happens the exercise of those Rules of Condescention Love and mutual forbearance enjoyned by Christ upon his Disciples would soon put an end to the differences suggested But 3. If this will not do the calling-in the help of some Sister-Church may quench the flames Yet 4. If nothing will do but through the prevalency of corruption Schisms remain amongst them and separation at the last each from other ensue to prevent this we must not lay aside an Institution of Christ 5. Besides the imposing a Minister upon a People by a Patron with a Bishops Institution and Induction hath more frequently and I am sure more justly and warrantably been the occasion of the offence and difference intimated Sect. 21. Of a visible instituted Church and its security from Apostasie What Errors and Corruptions unchurch a Church Of the National Church of England Of the Governours and Officers of a collapsed Church The condition of England's church-Church-Officers Of Separation from a collapsed Church Of Communion with a Church not rightly constituted and compulsion thereunto IN Sect. 23. Mr. T. transcribes the 7th Query in S. T. Whether any visible instituted Church in the world hath greater security against Apostasie from God and that sore judgment of having its Candlestick removed and being unchurched than that people of the Jews had If not then whether supposing a National Church to be of the Institution of Christ it may not so come to pass that it may be so overspread with corruptions â—hat it may lose the essence of a Church and justly be disrobed of that appellation To which he answers in the Affirmative and tells us that they justly plead it against the Church of Rome and that the promise Mat. 16. 8. doth not belong to any particular instituted Church in the World but to the invisible Church of Gods Elect. And we are of the same mind with him in this matter But lest any reflection of disparagement should from this Concession happen to the Church of England as a very dutiful Son he adds That not every no nor many corruptions of some kind do unchurch but such Errors as overthrow the foundation of Christian Faith Corruptions of Worship by Idolatry in life by evil manners utterly inconsistant with Christianity Answ 1. Nor did we ever assert that every or many corruptions of some kind did unchurch So that in this matter Mr. T. might have saved his pains Nor 2dly had we the least occasion to do so with respect to the Church of England which we deny to be a true Church not because dreadfully degenerate from what at first it was but because in its first Constitution as National which it received under the Paâ—acy it was never a true Church of Christ Though 3dly such fundamental Errors such corruptions in Worship and evil manners are to be found upon it that are inconsistant with the power of Godliness or Christianity and therefore such as by Mr. T. his Concession were enough to unchurch it To the eighth Query in S. T. viz. Whether the Ecclesiastick and Spiritual Rulers Governours and Officers of such a collapsed Church may not righteously as of old be accounted and esteemed as false Prophets that go about to cause the people to forget the Name of the Lord or his pure Worship by their lies or unscriptural Traditions Innovations and ceremonious Pageantries Mr. T. pretends to answer Sect. 24. which he fronts with this Every Error makes not a false Prophet which no one saith it doth And further by way of reply having placed in the Van 2 Pet. 2. 1. Jude 4. 1 John 4. 1. 2 John 7. 1 John 2. 22. which speak of false Prophets and Antichrist but advantage him not in the least in his present undertaking as we have manifested He adds that so long as they teach the Worship of Christ in his Name are without Idolatry in their Worship and Heresie in their Doctrine they are not to be accounted false Prophets Answ But this as to the present Ministers of England will not be granted They practise not the Worship of Christ but of Antichrist as we prove ch 7. of S. T. They come not really in Christ's Name though they pretend to it but in the name by the authority of the most profest enemy he hath in the world as we evince ch 3. of S. T. Though the Doctrine of the Church of Engl. be the most sincere part the greatest care of our Reformers at first being thereabout yet they own and preach false Doctrine the most of them are greatly degenerated from the Doctrine of the Church of England in not a few points as touching Election Free-will the extent of the Death of Christ c. as might be evidenced from their Sermons and printed Papers Of this we have spoken chap. 10. of S. T. The addition of this Animadverter of In Te ipsum cudetur faba as if guilty of the same things or such like as we charge upon the Ministers of the Church of England I challenge him to make good else he doth but calumniate His 25th Section is an Answer to the 9th Query in S. T. about separation from a Church so dreadfully collapsed as to lose the essence of a Church The sum is 1. Separation by reason of some corruptions is unwarrantable Answ And we say so too but this is not ad Rhombum we are speaking not of corruptions of any kind but of such as destroy the essence of a Church as is evident from the 7th Query in S. T. upon which this hath a dependance He adds 2dly Separation from a Church somewhat erroneous in judgment and corrupt in worship and conversation that is not Idolatrous nor heretical nor requires that to their Communion which would be sinful especially if from all attending on Ministers and Ministry at all times is unjustifiable Answ 1. All this might be granted without the least disadvantage to the Cause we are pleading 2dly By his own Sword is the Cause he undertakes the defence of wounded under the fifth rib We prove the Church of England Idolatrous Heretical She requires that to her Communion that is sinfull viz. Conformity to the Mass-book I should have said the Liturgie from thence stolen bowing at the Name of Jesus communicating with a Drunken Parish-Priest and a company of Swearing Drunken Parishioners whereby persons become one Bread with them kneeling at the act of receiving having their Children signed with the sign of the Cross which we are apt to think are things sinful and till Mr. T. is pleased better to inform us are like to abide in our present apprehension thereabout from
act as Ministers of Christ when they prophesie for the edifying the Body of Christ by vertue of any Office-power so that they need not any such Election What follows is a Rhapsody of words that the ingenuous Reader knows proves nothing introduced to cast the â—dium of Irreligion-upon the men of his Contest The best is the Nation knows him to be at least in this matter a false Accuser He tells us 3dly That it may be doubted whether Christ be meant by the Door John 10. 1. Answ But why it should be doubted when Christ expresly tells us v. 9. that He is the Door I cannot tell That the Door v. 1 v. 9. is not the same Door is not probable and less probable that by the Door v. 9. should be meant the Scriptures of the Prophets who although they foretold of Christ yet can in no sense that I know of be said to be the Door through which he entred But this he is unwilling to abide by He adds 4ly That if the door be the same Joh. 10. 1 9. the entering in v. 9 cannot be entring into the Ministry by the lawful election of a particular Church for then it would follow that every one that so enters in shall be saved but that is manifestly false Answ 1. But if by saved he mean everlastingly saved this doth not at all follow he knows right well that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not alwayes to be restrained to such a signification 2ly The whole expression he shall be saved and shall go in and out and find pasture seems to intimate no more than this that he may expect the blessing of God with him the defence of God upon him in his Ministry that thus enters into it according to his mind according to Deut. 28. 6. So the Assembly Beza c. interpret the words which I think is so far from being manifestly false that nothing is more true Of immediate Calls to the Ministry and the wayes whereby men may prove themselves to be so called I shall not now turn aside to speak nor in what sense I asserted that persons receiving Commission immediatly from Christ to preach the Gospel will never be made good without the working of miracles it not being pleaded as I know of that the present Ministers have any such Commission nor do they pretend to it Of Petrus Waldo and other Reformers I think as honourably as this Animadverter They were worthy and eminent witnesses for Christ in their day no small part of their Testimony was against the Abominations pleaded for by Mr. T. in his Theodulia They admited nothing into their Church but what is written in the Bible no Decrees no Epistles Decretals nor the Legends of the Saints nor the traditions of the Church They held that the Preaching of the word of God is free to every man that hath received abilities from the Lord for that work That the Priests Vestments are little worth That no day a man may cease from his labour except the Lords day and not the feasts of of Saints Zanchy introduceth a certain Orthodox man speaking thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and afterwards adds the Churches are to be reformed according to the best form a better from of the Church cannot be invented than that which Christ and his Apostles in the beginning of the Church did constitute and appoint And afterwards all Doctrines of Worship and Discipline are to be examined not by the Lesbian rule of humane judgment but by the Touchstone of the Divine Word Zanch. de ver Eccl. reformand ration Johannes Gerson affirms That the authority of the Primitive Church was greater than now it is for it is not in the power of the Pope or Council or Church to change the Traditions taught by the Evangelists and Paul as some dream de vit Spirit animae Budaeus saith Canonum canities vel caries potius nulli jam usui est sed velut anus delira è foro explosa est de ponte enim jam diu comitiorum paracleti dejecta est disciplina Canonica ut annis sexaginta major atque etiam sexcentis de Translat Heclerismi lib. 2. And afterwards Navis nobis disciplinae à servatorâ— relicta est Ecclesiae conditore quae Cantico Ministerio instrumento miraculisque instructa fuit ab ipso aut ejus auspiciis These were some of the Witnesses of Christ in their day whom we honour as such that bear their Testimony against what Mr. T. thinks good for the present to espouse to himself 5ly This Animadv speaks of the proof of our Assertion that those that receive authority to preach the Gospel mediately from Christ have it from some particular instituted Church of Christ to whom power is solely delegated for the electing their own Officers according to Acts 6. 5. 14. 23. as weak and impertinent He tells us 1. That though this should be granted yet power may be given to others to choose send and ordain Preachers for the unconverted who are and may be heard as Ministers of the Gospel Ans 1. This we deny the Keys being given to the Church by Christ Mat. 16. 19. with 18. 17 18. we cannot conceive how any can legally choose or send forth persons to act by vertue of an Office-power in the preaching of the Gospel but the Church 2dly We never yet understood that Interrogations were sufficient Answers his may not for all this is no evidence that it may He adds Yea may not some others ordain Elders for particular Instituted Churches Answ 1. Without the Churches consent Election c. they may not 'T is true Titus was left by Paul in Crete to ordain Elders in every City Tit. 1. 5. but that he might do this without the choice election and concurrent act of the Church as a Diocesan Bishop as some fondly imagine is a fancy that as it hath over and over been confuted by many Godly Learned so Mr. T. will never be able to make it good 2ly Should it be granted which yet is most false contrary to the practice of those times and many years after that Titus ordained by himself without the knowledg counsel and approbation of the people Elders it doth not in the least follow that any persons may do so now For. 1. He had express warrant and direction from the Apostle to do what he did 2. He was an extraordinary Officer an Evangelist not limited to a certain Church the continuance of which office we have no direction for in the Scripture 3. The officers that were to be continued in the Churches are said to be Elders or Bishops which were not names of distinct officers but of the same Tit. 1. 5 7. to be confined or limited to oâ—e particular Congregation not having or exercising jurisdiction over many Phil. 1. 1. Acts. 14. 23. 20. 17 28. Tit. 1. 5 6 7. so that this instance makes little to his purpose When he proves his suggestion that there are any
that they might not be heard as gifted Brethren Of which he gives us three learned reasons 1. Because the withdrawing themselves from every Brother that walks disorderly cannot be meant of their excluding themselves from Hearing Praying or receiving the Lords Supper if such an one be present Answ Right but though this withdrawment from such a Brother cannot be meant of exclusion from hearing whilst he is present yet I hope it may from hearing him who walks thus disorderly The same may be said of receiving the Lords Supper If he be there as a looker-on meerly this ought not to hinder any from waiting upon Christ in that institution though the Church of England in imitation of the old Pagan custom of the Druides c. of old interdicts the Priests saying service whilst an excommunicate person is there but if he shall be forced upon the Congregation as a member to joyn with them in that ordinance and much more as their Minister to celebrate it as is our case it is the duty of the Saints to surcease the performance of that duty for that season It was the keeping themselves from being polluted that caused them to sever from him that reason remaining which it doth till he hath testified his repentance their withdrawment is to continue He adds 2ly That the withdrawment mentioned 2 Thes 3. 6 14. is only from arbitrary communion in entertainments c. Answ This is an old shift of Mr. T. we have already refuted He further tells us 3ly If we omit it we omit the Worship of God and so break his Commandments Answ 1. This is a meer petitio principii we deny the ministration of the Sacraments according to the rights of the Church of England to be the Worship of God strictly so called 2ly There 's no need through grace of omitting the Worship of God if we worship not with them there are meetings of his people whither we may have recourse to worship him in his own way To what follows in this chapter we have already answered We attend his advance towards the discussion of our third argument of which in the next chapter CHAP. IIII. Sect. 1. Such as act from an Antichristian calling not to be heard proved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifies Who is Antichrist what is Antichristian explained The Ministers of England derive their Office-power from the Papacie The Bishops of England Petty-Popes 'T is unlawful to attend upon the teachings of Antichrist therefore upon the teachings of such as act by a power derived from him Christ calls his People to separate from every thing of Antichrist Rev. 18. 4. and 14. 9. explained Of trying the Spirits 1 Joh. 4. 1. of Christs instituting Officers of his owâ— No promise of a blessing in attending upon an Antichristian Ministry IN Chap. 3. of S. T. a third Argument is produced against hearing the present Mâ—nisters viz. Those that act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian Power Office or Calling are not to be heard but to be seperated from But the present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian Power Office or Calling Therefore The Major is evident for 1. The Power Office and Calling of Antichrist is opposite and contrary to the Power Office and calling of Christ not to separate from such as act by vertue of such an Office-power is to stand by and plead for Antichrist against Christ The sum of what Mr. T. answers hereunto is If by Antichristian Power Office and Calling be meant the Papal Power and the acting in the holy things be by preaching the doctrine of the Trent Council in the points determined therein against Protestants by administring Sacraments according to the Roman Missal and Discipline according to the Canon-Law of the Popes the Major is granted and the Minor denied But if by Antichristian power c. be meant by vertue of ministry according to the Liturgy Articles of Religion and Homilies of the Câ—urch of England from the Ordination and Licence of the Bishops his Major is denied that which he calls Antichristian is not truly such and it is denied that what he calls Antichristian is opposite and contrary to the Power Office and Calling of Christ Answ 1. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as this Animadverter tells us found only in the Epistle of John and principally 1 John 2. 18. where the Apostle distinguisheth between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 between the mean Antichrists and the main Antichrist The best interpretation of the word seems to be a false Christ or â— Counter-Christ one that under the pretence of being for Christ doth really oppose Christ the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both in opposition and composition signifies For in the Scripture as Mat. 2. 22. Acts. 13. 7. and in Classical Writers as Homer Hesycheius c. in his Offices Ministry Discipline Worship He is Antichrist that under the pretence of acting for Christ doth indeed though covertly act against him in his name and under the vizard of his authority That is Antichristian that though it be pretendedly for and from Christ it really is not And in this sense the Major is to be understood Those that act in the holy things of God viz. Praying Preaching Administration of Sacraments c. by vertue of a Power Office and Calling that is not though pretendedly really from Christ are to be separated from as we plainly declare in the first proof of the Major proposition in S. T. which Mr. T. would have disproved if he could But in the stead thereof he labours to raise a dust with a multitude of words before the eyes of the Reader that he might not be able to perceive wherein the weight of the Argument lay 2ly He acknowledges the Major to be true if understood of the Papal Power Office and Calling so that he which acts in the Holy things of God i. e. in Preaching for whether it be the doctrine of the Trent Councel or otherwise is not in this case considerable for if he act from an Antichristian Office-Power 't is not his preaching Truth which would make that Antichristian Office-Power Christian administration of Sacraments according to the Roman Missal and discipline according to the Canon-Law by vertue of an Antichristian Papal Power is not to be heard but in this sense he denies the Minor And I cannot but wonder at the confidence of the man doth he not know that they derive their Office-Power from the Papacy he is not so ignorant as noâ— to know it Do not the Bishops of England exercise the same power over the Clergy and Laity as they are called thereof as the Pope doth over his so that they are upon the matter Papilli Petty-Popes Is this power Antichristan in the Papacy and not so in the Prelacy Is not the manner of administation of Sacraments in use amongst us taken out of the Popish Missal Mr. T. knows
it is Is not the Discipline of their Church from the Canon Law with what forehead can he deny it Whence is the Hierarchy Ecclesiastical decrees Episcopal jurisdiction Procurations Dispensations Pluralities Non-residencies Popish-retained-Ceremonies their Excommunications by a Commissary Ordinations Absolutions Degradations Visitations Offerings Courts Silencing of Godly Preachers disquieting the Lords people for Non-conformity if not from the Cannon-Law These things are notoriously known to be from them So that Mr. T. grants the present Ministers may lawfully be separated from But this might be a slip of his pen before he was aware That it is our duty to separate from persons acting from an Antichristian Power Office or Calling we prove 2ly 'T is unlawful to attend upon the Teachings of Antichrist therefore upon the teachings of such as act by vertue of a power derived from him To this Mr. T. replyes If by teachings of Antichrist be meant the teachings of the present Doctrine of the Church of Rome and the power derived from him be meant the English Bishops Ordination it is impudency to say they derived their power from Rome Answ 1. We are not yet speaking of the Ministers of England to separate from those that act from an Antichristian power be they Ministers of Germany Holland if they so act in their Ministry they are to be seperated from and that because we may not attend upon Antichrist in his Teachings or Ministration doth Mr. T. deny tâ—is He saith indeed if they preach truth we may attend upon their Ministry though they so act Answ But this hath been often said without the least proof and as frequently replyed to and its inconsutilousness in its applâ—cation to the present Ministers who preach Popish Errours and are interdicted the preaching all truth manifested 'T is an assertion most derogatory to the Dignity and Authority of our Lord and King and not to be born by his Loyal Subjects Hath not he Servants enough of his own to do his work to preach his Gospel but he must be beholding to the greatest enemies he hath in the world to send forth Servants into his Vineyard 2dly The present Ministers of England deny their power from the Papacy or they do not if they do not it had been my mistake not impudency to say they did If they do as most certain it is they do and they themselves acknowledge it and plead it the Impudency is rather in Mr. T. to deny it I add in S. T. 3dly Christ calls his to separate from every thing of Antichrist Rev. 18. 4. 14. 9 10 11. Therefore from his Ministry or such as act by vertue of an Antichristian power To which our Animadverter replies 1 Rev. 18. 4. may be understood of a local departure from Babylon when her judgment of destruction from the Kings of the Earth draws nigh Answ 1. And who can hinder Mr. T. from making conjectures his it may be is no proof that it is However the ground of the Lord 's calling them out of Rome should it be granted him that by Babylon were meant the City of Rome is plainly intimated to be lest they should partake of their sins Not their dwelling in Rome but their complying with the Antichristian Ministry Worship thereof their abominable Rites and Ceremonies is that which is loathsom to the Lord. 2dly 'T is true God calls not his People to depart from every doctrine the Pope teacheth there is some truth remaining amongst them which is to be cleaved to because truth much less a rejection of the Bible These are but vain words empty flourishes this Animadverter knows full well that these things are not affirmed by those with whom he hath to do 3dly To a departure from her by forsaking Communion with her in Worship and leaving subjection to her Government he grants this Scripture may be extended which is all we need contend for The Worship of Rome and England are much the same as we prove The Church-government in use amongst us by Arch-Bishops Bishops issues from the same sourse and spring as is known Therefore a separation from the Worship and Ministry of England lawful by the Animadverter's confession 4thly When God commands to come out of her he must be interpreted to come out of every thing of her viz. that which is truly hers whatever hath not the stamp and authority of God upon it for the reason why the Lord would have his forsake any thing of hers is because it is hers and hath not his own Image and Superscription 'T is ridiculous to imagine that God should command a separation from her Worship and Government and not from her Ministry when this is a main part of her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Church-Government He adds 2dly By the Beast and his Image Rev. 14. 9 10 11. is meant some Empire or State which promotes Idolatry the Roman Papacy the worshipping of which is undoubtedly the acknowledging of its power and subjection to their Idolatrous Decrees and Edicts The receiving his mark is a profession of our being the servants of the Pope to subject to his authority and after the citation of Mr. Brightman and Mr. Mede speaking to this purpose he saith which doth evince that the worship of the Beast and his Image is not retaining every usage of the Papists though superstitious and corrupt but acknowledging the universal Monarchy of the Popes adoring Images the Host c. Answ 1. But what doth evince that this is all that is intended by worshipping the Image of the Beast Mr. T. would bear his Reader in hand as if he had produced somewhat for the confirmation of his Assertion when he hath not said the least word tending thereunto The very truth is 2ly The Beast mentioned Rev. 14. 9 10. is the same with the Beast mentioned Rev. 13. 11. or the false Prophet Rev. 19. 21. or Antichrist consider'd in his Ecclesiastical State composed of head the Popes and members the rest of the Antichristian Clergy whether at Rome or elsewhere for as the learned Mede saith the Pope alone maketh not up the Beast except the Clergy be joâ—n'd with him since the Beast doth signifie a company of men composed of a certain order of members like as the Beast hath not one man alone the Image of the Beast cannot be a dumb Image 't is expresly said to be a speaking one viz. the Ecclesiastical policy that in its Cannon-Laws upon which both that of Rome and England is founded breatheth forth nothing but Excommunication against such as shall disobey them upon which they are deliver'd over to the Secular Power here with us though not to be burned yet to perpetual Imprisonment The worshipping the Beast and receiving the mark is subjection to an Antichristian Ministry and Church-polity from which it is the duty of the people of God to separate and if we prove not the Ministers of England to be so we acknowledg this Argument to be null and that notwithstanding any thing in it
hitherto asserted it may be lawful to attend them We say in S. T. 4ly That there is not a command in the Scripture enjoyning Saints to take heed of being deceived to try the spirits but is an abundant demonstration of the truth of the first Proposition To which Mr. T. subjoyns 1. If by acting in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian power be meant their acknowledging the power teaching the doctrine owning the calling of him that is truly Antichrist 't is granted Answ To this we have already replyed 'T is enough to prove any person ought to be separated from if he act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian power though the doctrine he preach be true He adds 2ly The Scriptures mentioned forbid command he means only to reject Antichristian Doctrine and Worship not every thing said by any without proof to be a thing of Antichrist Answ 1. Very well If we prove then the Worship of the Church of England to be Antichristian it is to be reiected Now it being the Worship of the Papacy which is acknowledged by him to be so I cannot see how it can be otherwise 2ly The Scriptures mentioned fairly import not only a command for the rejection of the Doctrine and Worship which is Antichristian but them also that pretend to be but really are not of God The persons are to be proved and tryed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 try them as Goldsmiths try Gold whether it be pure and right and if you find them not to be so reject them 1 John 4. 1. We proceed and in S. T. say further 5ly The institution of Officers of his own by Christ to be continued to the end of the World Eph. 4. 11. evinceth the truth of the Major proposition To this our Animadverter answers 1. 'T is true some of the Officers mentioned Ephes 4. are to be continued to the end of the World in the way appointed by him but that there is any particular way of Election of ordinary â—astors and Teachers in those words appears not Answ Who saith there is 'T is sufficient they prove the continuation of the Officers in the Church to be an Institution of Christ Of the particular way of their election we have mentioned elsewhere as we have shewed 2ly 'T is well this Animadverter will acknowledg that there is a way appointed by Christ in which Church-Officers are to be continued which as I conceive is a part of Church-Government which therefore cannot be left to such an indifferency as he sometimes intimates He tels us 2ly How the Major is proved by it he discerns not unless this be the Argument Christ hath appointed these therefore no other are to be heard which overthrowes the hearing of Gifted-Brethren Answ We are contented with the form our words are by him cast into only with this alteration therefore no other are to be heard as Ministers acting by vertue of an Office-Power which makes nothing against the hearing of gifted Brethren We further add in S. T. 6ly That there is no promise of a blessing in the whole Scripture upon persons attending upon such a Ministry Mr. T. replies 1. Though there be no promise of a blessing upon persons attending on such a Ministry yet if they Preach the Gospel truly there is Luk. 11. 28. Answ 1. 'T is not probable they should Preach the Gospel truly as touching the present Ministers of England they do not so 1. They preach it from a false mission 2ly They preach it by halves as is known 3. They mixt many humane traditions therewith and thereby obscure the Gospel as Mr. T. himself in his Fermentum Pharisaeorum asserts 4ly There is no blessing promised to persons attending upon such a Ministry Luk. 11. 28. Christ speaks not there of any such Ministry the whole of his intendment is that no external pâ—iviledge though it were to bear him in the Womb c. who was a true Messiah renders a man glorious blessed and excellent as a conformity to the divine will which how much it is to his purpose others will judge He saith 2ly If there were no promise of a blessing the Major is not proved unless this were true They are not to be heard but separated from to whose Ministry as such a blessing is not promised which makes unlawful the hearing of gifted Bretheren unless they can produce such a promise Answ Let me seriously ask this Animadverter whether he doth not when he goes to hear go to meet with God in that duty and to receive a blessing from him This he will not sure deny now I would know further whence it is he expects to meet with God and be blessed by him in his so doing can he or any one in the world give any other reason but this Because God hath promised to meet and bless his people while they are waiting on him in his own wayes Whether the work be managed by a Minister of Christ as acting by Office-power or a private Brother acting by vertue of Talents received for the profiting and edification of the Body we are not destitute of a promise of a blessing Exod. 20. 24. Isa 64. 5. Mat. 18. 20. Eph. 4. 11 to 15. But if we run to a false Ministry to such as act from an Antichristian office and calling I know not any promise of a blessing but rather the contrary So that the Major Proposition remains unshaken notwithstanding Mr. T. his Battery against it His next attempt is against the Minor of which in the next Section Sect. 2. The present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian power office or calling proved They are not from Christ There is a twofold Church Ministry Worship Of Luthers Ministry The names office of the present Ministers their admission thereinto forreign to the Scripture Of Suffragan Bishops THat the present Ministers of England act in the holy things of God by vertue of an Antichristian power office or calling which is the Minor Proposition of the last mentioned Argument we say in S. T. wants not sufficient demonstration 1. The present Ministers of England are either from Christ or from Antichrist there is no medium That they are not from Christ besides what is already proved may be further evinced To which our Animadverter answers 1. Mr. Bradshaw asserts that there is a medium and that a Ministry may be from Christ in reâ—pect of the thing ministred though from Antichrist in respect of the way of entry into it yea he saith it is not necessary that the ministry of Priests and Deacons though ordained by Antichrist himself should be the ministry of his apostasie but notwithstanding his Ordination their ministry may be the Ministry of Jesus Christ as was the Ministry of Luther Hus c. Answ 1. All that Mr. Bradshaw saith is not Gospel nor to be believed because he saith it 2dly That the thing ministred should render that Ministry that
with respect to the way of entry into it is Antichristian a Ministry of Christ is to me such a riddle as needs an Oedipus to unravel I am sure the distinction is unscriptural We reade therein but of two Churches 1. The Woman cloathed with the Sun afterwards in the Wilderness the Bride the Lambs Wife with her Ministry Ordinances Worship though in a mean persecuted state called the Ministers of Christ Men of God Stewards of the Mystery of God Angels Pastors c. 2. The false Antichristian Church called Babylon the Whore the Mother of Harlots the Woman in pompous array outward splendour and glory drunk with the blood of the Saints Rev. 17. 2 3 4. her Worship called the Wine of her Fornication Abominations of the Earth her Ministry called False-Prophets Locusts as some think Rev. 9. 3. unclean spirits like Frogs Rev. 16. 13. And to one of these every called Christian Minister in the world must appertain if to the first they are of Christ if to the second of Antichrist 3dly That a Ministry of Priests ordained by Antichrist himself is not a Ministry of his Apostasie but a Ministry of Christ had need be attended with more evidence than a bare assertion it being so evidently false and untrue How there should be any Antichristian Ministry in the world if that were true I know not 4ly The Ministry of Luther was the Ministry of Christ but he received not his Ministry from Rome but his Friardom Mr. T. adds of his own If by being from Christ or Antichrist be understood of outward calling Ministers may be neither from Christ nor Antichrist and yet true Ministers he should have said of Christ as those that preached Christ even of envy Phil. 1. 15 18. Answ 1. That a man should be a Minister of Christ and not from Christ or externally called according to his appointment i. e. a Minister of Christ and not a Minister of Christ is somewhat a strange Assertion 2dly How doth he prove that those mentioned Phil. 1. preached Christ by vertue of an Office-power as Ministers and not as gifted Brethren 3dly If Ministers how proves he that they were not from Christ in respect of outward calling This he should have proved if he would have made good his Assertion his failure wherein exposes it to the contempt of the judicious Reader But our Animadverter delights in dictates without proof His next advance is to the consideration of the evidence we bring to prove the present Ministers not to be from Christ 1. Their names are foraign to the Scripture where read we of Priests as distinguished from Christians in the new Testament Deans Canons Petty-Canons these are only found in the Popes Pontifical whence they are derived To this he answers 1. That the term Priests is the same with Presbyters and that is sure found in Scripture Acts. 11. 30. Answ 1. Thus indeed Hooker Eccles Pol. l. 5. and before him Whitgift Answer to the Admonit say but in vain For 1. The words are never used to signifie the same thing but divers 2. The first Assumers of the title under the times of the Gospel never intended to signifie any such thing thereby They assumed it not meerly to distingush themselves from the people but as a note of distance amongst themselves 2dly The other names saith M. T. note not any Ministry different from the Ministry of Christ Answ 1. I stand astonished to hear Mr. T. say so if they do not those who bear those names are the Ministry of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is this the draught of that hand which was solemnly lift up to Heaven when he swore to extirpate them as none of Christ's Ministry 2dly Where read we of any such Officers of Christ in the Scripture who are not so called as Lecturers with respect to the manner of their doing the work of the Ministry but with respect to some place in the Church higher or lower then the residue of the Clergy 3dly The Author of the S. T. argues not the names are forraign to Scripture therefore the things as this Animadverter falsly pretends he asserts as fast as he can that both name and thing is so 4thly 'T is a shrewd sign that those Ministers came out of the Mint of Antichrist who bear the names wherewith he stamps his Ministers We add 2dly As their names are forraign to the Scripture so are their Offices Deacons attending tables we read of But Deacons praying preaching administring Sacraments by vertue of an Office-power an order of the first step to the Priesthood we find not Priests in the old Testament we read of in the New Saints are so called but an Office of Priesthood in men for the Ministry of the Gospel that are to be bounded by men in that their Office must preach what they would have them and cease when they would have them as in the case of the present Ministry of England the Scripture is a stranger to To which Mr. T. adjoyns 1. If they be appointed to pray preach and administer Sacraments they have this to say that Pâ—â—â—ip did so Acts. 8. Answ 1. The Church at Jerusalem to which he was related as a Deacon was first scatter'd 2. It appears not that he preached by vertue of an Office-power as a Deacon or in any other capacity then as a gifted Brother 3. 'T is most certain it was no part of his work as Deacon Acts. 6. 2. the attending on the Ministry of the Word is peculiarly distinguished from the attending Tables 4. His baptizing seems to be by the extraordinary and immediate call and impulse of the Spirit none of which can be asserted of these Deacons He adds 2dly The Deacons Office may be well conceived the first step to the Priesthood in that Paul requires of the Deacons that they hold the Ministry of Faith in a pure Conscience and tells us that they who have used the Office of a Deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree 1 Tim. 3. 9 13. Answ 'T is true Paul saith so but that thence this Animadverter should be able to inferre therefore the Deacons Office may be well accounted the first step to the Priesthood must be imputed to that acuteness of his whereby he is enabled to deduce quidlibet ex quolibet what conclusion he hath a mind from any premisses There being not a tittle more or less spoken by Paul of any such thing nor thought of in those dayes As for the name Priest he saith if the Saints as Saints may be termed Priests then may the Elders Answ 'T is true the Elders as Saints may be so called but not as Elders or in respect of their Office of drawing nigh to God nor doth the expression used by Paul Rom. 15. 16. prove any such thing Mr. T. proceeds As for that which is added that the present Ministry of England is bounded by men in their Office so as that they must preach what they would have them and cease when they
ever he met with hath judged them Antichristian must be imputed to the shortness of his memory He haâ—h I suppose met with Zuinglius Keckerman who say little less The former Art 34. p. 254 255 tells us That for any to claim any Rule Power or Superiority over any Church of Christ which we know out Bishops do is Devilish Proud and Popish Arrogancy And Aretius in his Problems producing Christ's prohibition of Superiour power to his Apostles Mar. 10. 5. Luke 22. 25. saith None but Antichrist dare be so fancy as to usurp it Marlorat on Rev. 17. 3. saith That Arch-Bishops are in Office under Antichrist And on Chap. 19. The tailes of Antichrist Bale on Rev. 17 saith That Canterbury and York are the Beastly Antichrists Metropolitans And on Chap. 13. That Arch-Bishop Diocesan are very Names of Blasphemy Of these we spake pag. 28. S. T. who I dare say were sober Writers and considerate men Mr. T. his answer to their Testimony viz. That they writ thus against the Romish Hierarchy is ridiculous they writ against the Offices of Arch-Bishops as such which are not a whit the better because they constitute the English Hierarchy We mention Cartwright the seekers of Reformation in Queen Elizabeths dayes proclaiming them to come out of the bottomless Pit of Hell to be Antichristian Devilish These also must pass in the Roll of inconsiderate fellows yet others as wise as Mr. T. think otherwise of them For the proof of the Antichristianism of the Office of Lord-Bishops I propose a few things briefly in the S. T. as 1st That Office that is not to be found in the Scripture of the Institution of Christ but is contrary to express Precepts of his is Antichristian But the Office of Lord-Bishops is not to be found in the Scriptures is contrary to express Precepts Therefore The Major Mr. T. is nibling at but he doth but think he tells us if Universal it is not true The Office of the Religious Votaries he talks of is Antichristian If there be any Antichristian Office in the World that must needs be so that is introduced into the Church of Christ though not of his Institution directly contrary to express Precepts That this Assertion should necessitate any one to affirm every sin to be Antichristian though in a large sence as Antichristian signifies that which is against Christ every sin every errour is so is absurd to imagine The Minor I say consists of two parts 1. That the Office of Lord Bishops is not to be found in Scripture of the Institution of Christ This I manifest by considering the most remarkable places where the Officers and Offices that are of Christs appointment are enumerated in which we have a total silence of them Ephes 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Tim. 3. 12. Acts 14. 23. Tit. 1. 5 7. Acts 20. 28. I add also that they were never dreamt of in the world for some hundreds of years after Christ We introduce the Testimony of Clemens Lombard Dr. Hamonds acknowledgment of their Rise To which Mr. T. answers The whole Discourse is impertinent the thing to be proved was that the Office of Lord-Bishops was not to be found in the Scriptures and the whole Discourse is about the Superiority of Order above Presbyters Primacy or Supremacy of Degrees among Bishops Answ 1. We have examined the particular places wherein mention is made of the Officers of Christs Institution and find no Lord-Bishops instituted in any of them which manifests that they are not If this be not taken for proof I know not what will If this be not to the purpose I am in dispair of producing any thing that he will account so 2dly The Office of Lord-Bishops as such consists in the Primacy Superiority and Supremacy mentioned as is known If Mr. T. grants this not to be found of the Institution of Christ in the Scripture he gives away the Cause 3dly They themselves do own and avow a great part of their Office to consist in the foresaid Primacy Jurisdiction And if this be not it I am sure some of them are seldom or never minding their Office these things are what is most attended by them Of whom we may complain as Bernard of old Vides omnem Ecclesiasticum Zelum forvere prâ— sola dignitate tuenda honori tantum datur sanctitati nihil aut parum Si causâ requirente paulo submissius agere aut socialius to habere tentaveris absit inquiunt non decet tempori non congruit majestati non convenit quam geras personam attendito De placito Dei ultima mentio est pro jactura salutis nulla cunctatio quod sublime est hoc salutare putamus quod gloriam redolet id justum De Considerat Lib. 4. His following Exceptions are not worth the heeding I mention Diotrephes in S. T. and say That some appearances of a Spirit striving to ascend into this Chair of wickedness was seen in him and others in the Apostles dayes To this Mr. T. But this was not the usurping the Superiority of Order of a Bishop above a Presbyter Answ Nor do I say it was I expresly affirm the contrary whâ—n I say that such a Superiority was not in the world for some hundred of years after Christ we only say that some appearances of that Spirit was seen in him which the Apostle affirms John Epist 3. Vers 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He loveth the preheminence among them attempts the Primacy so Beza Which if it be not an appearance of the Spirit mentioned I know not what is he endeavoured to rule all himself carried it proudly pragmatically arrogantly over the Church the Brethren John himself who was an Elder saith Mr. T. He that cannot see somewhat of our Episcopal Spirit in this is I fear willfully blind I am fure he must wink hard He takes notice that in reciting Ephes 4. 11. I twice leave out Evangelists which he knows not the reason of Answ Nor do I my self possibly it was an oversight it may be an omission of the Amanuensis However it was it was not I assure him any fear I had that he or any one could justly plead that our Prelates were Evangelists 1. I know that Title is declined by Pleaders for Episcopal Jurisdiction 2. Our Bishops do not the works of Evangelists They had no setled residence but travelled up and down with or after the Apostles to help forward the work of Christ that was set on foot in the world by them We find Titus who was an Evangelist somtimes at Crete Gal. 2. 3. At Dalmatia 2 Tim. 4. 10. appointed to meet Paul at Nicopolis Tit. 3. 12. Sent to Corinth 2 Cor. 12. 18. At Macedonia 2 Cor. 7. 5 6. Such an itinerant laborious life that our Bishops are unacquainted with 3. Evangelists were such extraordinary Officers as ceased with that Age for we find no directions given touching their future Election in in the Churches Mr. T. tells us Our Prelates
chalenge the term of Pastors and Teachers this I had said was too great a debasement of their Lordships he tells us This is a Satyrical Sarcasm no proof Ans 1. However it is evidently true Pastors and Teachers we have already proved are Officers appertaining to one particular Church 'T is certainly a debasement of their Lordships who preside as petty Princes over hundreds of Pastors and Churches so called to be reduced to a laborious over-sight over one 2dly I had said in S. T. That their Parochial Priests over whom they preside are supposed to be Officers in that degree The Argument is this which Mr. T. may take time to answer If the Parochial Priests over whom the Bishops of England preside be such Pastors and Teachers as the Scripture mentions then the Bishops of England are not cannot be such for they are an Order and Degree above them to them as their Superiours they promise and swear fealty But tho former according to the judgment of the Church of England is true Therefore The Story he after tells us of a Presbyters having in case of infirmity Assistants who notwithstanding may be called a Teacher is so remote from the business in hand that though some would cry out Quis temperâ—t a risu For my part I heartily pitty him 1st This is known not to be the reason of the Bishops having Parochial Priests under them were they never so strong it were impossible they should perform the Office of Pastors to the several Congregations in England 2dly The Presbyter is not an Order above his Co-adjutor as is the case of the Bishops he is a Co-Presbyter one of the same degree with himself So that of this we shall I suppose hear no mere We add in S. T. That they pretend to be and are so accounted by some the Apostles Successors but if they derive their sâ—ccession through the Papacy 't is an evident Argument they are Antichristian if the Pope be the Antichristian head over many Countries as Protestants affirm In respect of their Office we prove they are not their Successors Because 1. The Apostles were immediately sent by Christ 2. Extraordinary Officers sent forth to preach the Gospel throughont the Nations of the world 3. We find no Apostles after them 4. None appointed by them to succeed them 5. None are qualified with gifts for the discharge of such an Office and Christ sends not forth servants in any imployment but he furnisheth them with gifts suitable thereunto This the summe To which our Animadverter pretends to answer Sect. 5. Chap. 3. 1. Apostles he grants they may not be reckoned yet 2. They may be their Successors 1st Dr. Owen of Schism Cap. 6. Sect. 55. grants That persons adhering to ordination by succession from Popish Bishops may be right worthy Ministers of the Gospel but not upon the account of that their Successional Ordination but the eminent gifts God hath vouchsafed them and the Lords people submitting themselves to them in the administration of Ordinances And the Author of S. T. denies not they succeed them as Christians and if so they may be heard as gifted brethren which was denied by him Chap. 2. Answ 1. How all this proves the Bishops of England to be the Successors of the Apostles in respect of their Office which was what he pretends to attempt the proof of I know not 2. I deny indeed that they may be heard as gifted Brethren Chap. 2. and give my reasons of my so doing which I have vindicated from this Dictators exceptions That we are to have communion with all that we cannot deny to be Christians in that wherein they act not as such but by virtue of an Office-power we know they have not received from Christ Mr. T. will not in hast attempt the proof of He asks Why may they not succeed them in Office Answ I wonder he should ask such a Question En Tabulas The reasons thereof are given in the place he undertakes the confutation of They were it seems too weighty for him he wisely lets them alone without burthening himself so far with them as to attempt their removal The Apostles Office was indeed no other than that mentioned Mat. 28. 19 20. Mar. 16. 15. but that was 1st An Office of Preaching not of Lording and Loytering 2dly Into it they were immediately invested by Christ 3dly They were to preach the Gospel through the Nations of the World not to stretch themselves upon Beds of Ivory in a Lordly Pallace which was as much their Office as Preaching the Gospel upon the account whereof Paul saith He was a debtor both to the Greeks and to the Barbarians Rom. 1. 14. Christ its true promiseth his presence with them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But 1. I am not satisfied that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Consummation of this world is any more than the winding up or perioding of that Age. I am sure the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the space of 70 or 100 years and sometimes not near so many as Mark 13. 30. which came to pass within 50 years And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no more than the perioding of the Jewish Paedagogie or Church state Heb. 9. 26. 2. I hope Christ is with them now so that there needs not a succession of persons in the same Office which we have proved there never was to whom Christ may make good his promise 3. The Lord promised Joshua never to leave him nor forsake him Josh 1. 5. This Promise he will not say doth necessarily suppose a succession of Officers in the place of Joshua which upon all accounts there was not The Apostle applies it to the Saints Heb 13. 5. And I am of the mind Christ doth as really fulfill that Promise Mat. 28 20. made originally to the Apostles when he vouchsafes his presence to the Saints to comfort quicken uphold defend them according as their exigencies do require as ever he did to the Apostles themselves So little reason is there of asserting the necessity of Officers as successors of the Apostles in their Office of Apostleship to vindicate the faithfulness of Christ in that Promise of his The succession we speak of which the present Ministers pretend to is a personal succession through Papacy i. e. that the Apostles ordained Bishops these ordained others downwards to this day a Catalogue of whom from time to time some pretend to That when Antichristianism overspread the world and the Pope as the Head thereof ordained and sent forth Ministers from whom they received their Office-power these should be notwithstanding not Antichristian is a fond conceit He could not communicate that he had not that he had any true power any other than a false Antichristian Office-power Mr. T. will not have the consideâ—ce to aver So that the whole fardle of words that ensue are not at all to the purpose A succession in doing the same work after them and preaching the same Gospel
Province with them did minister Justice and made his abode there ordinarily Whereupon by reason that men for their business made great concourse thither the Church was wont to furnish it of Godly Polity with the worthiest Bishop eâ—dued with gifts above his Brethren And they reposed in him such assiance that they did not only commit the Presidentship of their Assemblies to him Concil Antioch â—an 20. Chalced. can 19. But agreed also that none throughout all the Province should be made Bishop without his consent nor any weightier matter be done by them without him Concil Nic. can 4 6. Concil Antioc can 9. Now the Roman Empire was governed in such sort that the Circuits of the Lord-Presidents had many Provinces within them and were called Diocesses Through occasion whereof the Bishops of those Cities in which these Lievtenants of the Emperor were resident The state Ecclesiastical following the Civil Wolfgang Luzu Comment Reip. Rom. l. 2. c. 2. did grow in power too Neither were they only named Arch-Bishops and Patriarks of the Diocess i. â— the chiefest Bishops and Fathers of that Circuit which the Lieutenant ruled but also obtained that the Metropolitans of the Provinces in their Diocess should be likewise subject and obedient to them as Bishops were to Metropolitans So the Arch-Bishop and Patriarch of Antioch had Prerogatives given him through the Diocess of the East wherein were seven Provinces Concil Const 1. can 2. Concil Antio in exord So nothing could be done in the Diocess of Egypt which under the Bishop had ten Metropolitans without the consent of the Arch-Bishop and Patriarch of Alexandria Conc. Chalc. Act. 4. so it was granted to the Arch-Bishop and Patriarch of Constantinople that the Metropolitans of the Diocesses of Pontus Asia Thracia within which were twenty eight Provinces should be ordained by him Finally so was it decreed that if a Bishop had any matter of Controversies with the Metropolitan of his own Province the Patriark of the Diocess should be Judge thereof Concil Chalced. can 9. 17. as also if any man did receive injury of his own Bishop or Metropolitan Thus were the Roman Popes as they are called now first Bishops over Elderâ— within their own City next Metropolitans over Bishops within their own Province Then Arch-Bishops and Patriarks over Metropolitans within their own Diocess And this is the Princely Diocess which I meant when I said that the Pope in the time of Pelagius was become Arch-Bishop of the Princely Diocess but he was yet but an Arch-Bishop He was not universal Pope and Patriarch of the whole World For although the Patriark of Constantinople being puffed up because in his City the Emperor himself was resident he would be called the Patriark of the whole world as the Emperor was called the Lord of the world Greg. Regist l. 4. Epist 39. yet the Roman Patriarks Pelagius Gregory did withstand his Pride Rainolds Confer with Hart c. 8. Beza also Thes Geneves tells us that the Fathers in the distribution of Churches under Bishops Arch-Bishops c. followed the type or pattern of the Roman Emperor And the learned Brightman in Rev. 13. 4. tells us that they are the worshipers of the Dragon in the Beast who wonder at the Pâ—imacy for the Political Majesty of the Dragon granted by the Councel of Chalcedon Act. 16. Indeed in Clements Constitutions we find if possible a more filthy source from whence their original is asserted In the place where they were before first-Flamines Petâ—r commanded Patriarks to be placed and in Cities where before were Arch-Flamines Arch-Bishops the rest were only Bishops That we had hâ—re in England twenty eight Head-Priests which they called Flamineâ— and three Arch-Priests among them which were called Arch-Flamines which had the oversight of their manners and were as Judges over the rest is known hence the pattern of our Arch-Bishops and Bishops Sect. 5. The office of Lord-Bishops contrary to express precepts of Christ Mat. 20. 25. Mark 10. 42. Luke 22. 25. 1 Pet. 5. 3. considered Of the titles of Dr. of Divinity c. The office of Lord-Bishops derived from and only to be found in the Papacy The Popes of Rome the head of Antichrist No Lord-Bishop till after Constantine Of the first Nicene Council whether there were any Lord-Bishops before what difference betwixt Lord-Bishops then and now Of the retention of the same office in the Greek Eastern Russian Churches The difference betwixt the Superintendency of the Lutheran Churches and our Bishops An Objection answered The Bishops of England act not in the matter of Ordination as Presbyters THat the office of Lord-Bishops is contrary to express precepts of Christ in the Scripture is the second part of our Minor Proposition which in S. T. we prove from Mat. 20. 25. Mark 10. 42. Luke 22 25. 1 Pet. 5. 3. To which Mr. T. answers 1. That we shoot wide of the mark Answ This we have already replied to His instance of the Titles of Doctor of Divinity in the Schools is not at all to the purpose They pretend not to any Ecclesiastical jurisdiction over Elders and Churches by vertue of their being invested into such titles as our L-Bishops do 2dly He considers the particular Scriptures instanced in to which what to reply he seems to be much at a loss 1. He would have the words of the Evangelists not to be a precept shewing their duty but a prediction manifesting the event of what should be Answ 1. This is expresly contrary to the letter of the Text. 2. The Lordship Supremacy Superiority call it what you please is a Lordship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst themselves over one another that is interdicted and forbidden by Christ that it was lawful for them to exercise such a Supremacy this Animadverter will not say now this must be supposed if the words be not a precept but a prediction 3dly He expresly tells us in his Romanism discussed Art 7. Sect. 8. p. 174. l. 14. That Superiority is in these words plainly forbidden 2ly He is inclined to think that if it be a precept it is a precept to the Apostles only not to others Answ 1. Then not to the Pope then Mr. T. palpably abuseth this Scripture in his Roman discussed Art 7. Sect. 8. p. 173. where from hence he argues and enveighs against the Pope's Supremacy But 2ly as good he may say that the great Doctrines of Self-denial frequently pressed by Christ upon the Apostles is a precept only to them 3ly We find the Apostle charging the same thing upon the Elders 1 Pet. 5. 3. who knew the mind of his Lord in this matter it 's to be thought as well as Mr. T. He tells us 3dly If it be a precept to others besides the Apostles whether to all Christians or only to Ministers of the Gospel and whether it forbid simply Dominion at all or tyranical Dominion is doubtful Answ And yet the first he positively affirms within ten or eleven lines
afterwards and here and in his Roman discussed asserts that 't is not tyrannical Dominion but the Dominion of one Apostle over another that is interdicted So that the same thing is doubtful and not doubtful with Mr. T. in the writing a few lines And this he proves by no fewer than ten reasons in his Rom. discussed 2dly Here he tels us that 't is an affectation of the Rule which a person may have and lawfully exercise that is forbidden there that the Dominion or Rule it self is interdicted which he would do well to reconcile and answer his Arguments he there produceth for its confirmation The sum whereof is Christ would have none amongst them superiour but all equal he forbids not only tyrannical Dominion but also any Dominion at all over one another which is saith he apparent 1. From the occasion of the words Christ forbids what they sought for but they sought for chief Dignity Seniority and priority of Order as do the Bishops of England 2dly From the Subjects whose Dominion is forbidden viz. Kings that had lawfull Authority and therefore such Rule is forbidden as the best Rulers used amongst the Nations 3dly The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although sometimes meant of meer lordly forcible Rule against the will and good of the person ruled yet here it cannot be so meant sith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to use Dominion at all and to have power at all over one another is forbidden Luke 22. 25. 4thly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the simple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is used still of Rule without abuse is forbidden 5thly It is forbidden to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to affect that title which implies one to be under another and to be beholden one to another as persons that could gratifie one another which doth imply superiority in some sort 6thly The additional speech of Christ commanding in the stead of Dominion Mat. 20. 26 27. rather Ministry and Service shews he would have none among them superiour but all equal 7ly Christ's propounding himself as their example only in service 8â—y He requires such a mutual debasement as takes away the taking to themselves priority of order or place or rule over one anotheâ— Mat. 20. 26 27. Mark 10. 43 44. Luke 22. 26. 9ly This is confirmed by other places upon a like occasion Mat. 18. 1 2 3 4. Mark 9. 33. Luke 9. 46. In which Christ resolves them that they should be as a little child that assumes not Empire but is humble and accounts others as equal to him 10ly From Luke 22. 28. that Christ having forbidden superiority in any of them among themselves promises them a Kingdom afterward in recompence of their abiding with him in his temptations All which manifest 1. a Superiority interdicted 2. That the Superiority interdicted is not interdicted to all Christians as he would in his Theodulia bear us in hand for then Christians should be forbidden to exercise Civil Dominion and Power as Mr. T. his ten Arguments manifest But 3. a Superiority of order over one another as the Bishops of England exercise over their fellow-Ministers That the Apostles exercised any such Superiority over the Church of God or Ministers of a lower order as the Bishops of England exeâ—cise over them this Animadverter will never prove And if he were able so to do this would not justifie the Bishops in their exercise of such Superiority who are invested with no Apostolical Power that I know of 'T is true a rule over the Faith of Saints is disclaimed by the Apostle 2 Cor. 1. 24. but that this is not the whole of what is interdicted in the places before-cited he hath himself proved by ten Arguments but now repeated by us As for 1 Pet. 5. 3. he tells us what the Assembly in their Annotations say on the place viz. that is not imperiously commanding your own inventions in the stead of the Doctrine of the Gospel not carrying hemselves insolently and magisteriously towards Gods People 3 Joh. 9. Answ 1. All this is known to be practised by the present Bishops They command imperiously their own inventions to which the preaching of the Gospel must give place when there is not time for both as in the case of Liturgy-worship is known to be true How insolently and magisterially they carry it towards the people of the Lord the whole Nation is witness 2. The Elders being interdicted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to exercise Lordly Rule over the Heritage of God is certainly an interdiction of the introduction of any such Officer into the Churcâ— of God as against the will of the Lord's People should by vertue of an Office-power exercise a Lordly jurisdiction over them and their Ministers as a superiour order of Priesthood and certainly more forbidden than the office of an Elder Jurisdiction is not an abuse of our Prelates Office as is known though they too often abuse it by exercising it exorbitantly even contrary to their own Canons but a great a chief part of it wherein they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exercise dominion over the People of God and that against their will by fore and violence to their utter undoing and that in execution of that office they have received and exercise according to their Canon Laws in their Courts Ecclesiastical We further prove in S. T. That the office of Lord-Bishops is Antichristian because derived from and only to be found in the Papacy none of the Reformed Churches have retained it the Woman in her flight into the Wilderness carried it not along with her it 's rejected by the true Spouse and Witnesses of Christ in all ages We instance in several as Hierom the Churches of Helvetia c. To this Mr. T. replies 1. Though the latter Popes viz. from the time of Boniface the third about the year 606. be the head of Antichrist yet it doth not follow that the office that is derived from and is only to be found in the Papacy is surely Antichristian there having been bad Officers perhaps derived from good Popes and continued only in the Church of Rome Answ 1. That the Popes of Rome were not the head of Antichrist till the time of Boniface the third this Animadverter will never prove 2dly Should it be granted him what good Popes he will find from the time of Sylvester about the year 320 I know not nor what Officers were derived from them Lord-Bishops there were none till afterwards When Constantine coming to the Throne the Man of Sin began by little and little according to the prophesie of Paul touching him 2 Thess 2. 7. to shew himself in the following Popes The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Letter viz. the Roman Pagan Emperours being removed out of the way about which time many report a Voice was heard Hodie Venenum c. This day Poyson is poured forth into the Church of Christ And from this time the noble and renowned
Witnesses of Christ the Waldenses state the Defection of the Church Catal. Test 1509. From which time at least whatever Offices or Rites were introduced being introduced by the Antichrist that was now gradually revealing himself are justly to be accounted Antichristian 3dly Would Mr. T. had told us what Officers they are that are only continued in the Church of Rome that are of divine appointment that we might have considered the truth of his suggestion Lord-Bishops we prove are not such He further tells us 2dly That it is not true that the office of Lord-Bishops is derived from and is only to be found in the Papacy 1. It is manifest in the first Nicene Council can 6. that then and before were Patriarchs Metropolitan Bishops and Lord-Bishops with their Office Answ 1. That they were before is not so easily proved Hither as to their source and spring are they usually referred The learned Hooper tells us A Bishop ought to be a Bishop only of one City it is to be lamented that the Episcopal Office is so greatly degenerated Iâ— was not so from the beginning when Paul commanded Titus to constitute Bishops through every City And certainly if the ancient love toward the people did flourish in us we should confess that there is more to be done in one City than can easily be performed by the best 'T is sufficiently known that the Primitive-Church had no such Bishops as were over more Cities or Congregations than one before the time of Sylvester the first In whose time was the first Nicene Council 2dly That because the first Nicene Council acknowledged Metropolitane and Lord-Bishops therefore they are not derived from the Papacy is not so easily demonstrated This Council was in oâ— about the year 315. Long before the Spirit by which the body Antichristian is animated visibly manifested it self not once nor twice aâ— is known What other spirit shewed it self in Victor who excommunicated the Eastern Bishops for not keeping Easter with him at the same time which brawl continued till the first Council of Nice which sides with Victor an Argument that they were acted by the same spirit 3dly What assurance will our Animadverter give us that this Canon as well as some others which confessedly are is not foisted into the Acts of that Council by persons of after-ages He is not ignorant that Protestants plead this against the Papists who for the establishment of the Tyranny of the Roman Primacy produce a fictitious Canon of the Nicene Council 4thly 'T is incumbent upon him to prove that such Metropolitane Bishops and Lord-Bishops as are now in England were in and before the first Nicene Council which he knows to be false and untrue 1. The English Episcopacy is an order above the order of Presbyters then Episcopacy and Presbytery was accounted one and the same order 2. Ruledom and Jurisdiction is the peculiar flower of the Garland of our English Episcopacy of that it was not so As the Presâ—yters were to do nothing without the Bishop so neither was the Bishop to do any thing without the Presbyters He adds 2. That in the Greek Eastern Russian Churches the same Office is continued Answ 1. Nor do we affirm the contrary that we should do so is not necessary The Greek-Churches were at the first involved in the same Apostasie with the Roman at least with respect to the matter in debate betwixt us 2. We only say that 't is only found in the Papacy with respect to the Reformed-Churches none of them have continued it He therefore adds 3. That it is also pleaded that the Lutheran Churches Reformed that have separated from the Papacy in Germany Denmark Swethland have retained the same Office under the name of Superintendents Answ 'T is indeed thus pleaded by Downham c. who 't is like took up the story of Hadrianus Saravia a known Patron of the Popish Hierarchy who asserts it in a way of reproach to the Lutheran Reformation whether it be truly pleaded or otherwise Mr. T. tells us not though he cannot be ignorant of the contrary The Superintendency of the Lutheran Churches is exceeding different from the Office of our Bishops 1. Their Superintendent is only as a President or Chairman for the preservation of order in an Assembly 2. He is only so during the Session out of it he exerciseth no authority at all more than the rest of his Co-Presbyters as do the Bishops of England 3. He is subject to the Presbytery our Bishops Lords over them 4. He differs not in order and degree from the rest of the Ministeâ—â— as do the Bishops of England 5. He is but a Pastor of one particular Church our Bishops are of scores hundreds He proceeds after the same rate of confidence and verity 4. That it is false that the true Spouse and Witnesses of Christ have in all ages utterly rejected the Office of Lord-Bishops and that it hath its entertainment only by the false Antichristian Church Answ 1. 'T is much he doth not produce one instance of this Assertion and yet so confidently avers it which could he have done he would as well have proved it false as said it was so 2dly For the confirmation of the truth of what he saith is false we have produced several Testimonies his Answer thereunto such as it is we have already taken notice of it and manifested its lightness and vanity He adds This is manifest by the many Epistles written to the English Prelates by their reception at the Synod of Dort Answ 1. What the Epistles are he intends what the Reception mentioned is not of such import as to spend our time in enquiring thereabout 2dly That they have rejected the Office of Lord-Bishops is known they have published their dislike and detestation of it in their Confession to the world What respect any of them give them either in point of civility or as Messengers or persons sent from the King or perhaps not being truly informed what the Jurisdiction and Office is they exercise in their private Letters or otherwise is not considerable in the matter in hand The Office of Lord-Bishops or a superiority of Order above Presbyters or Elders they absolutely condemn as we have proved We add in S. T. One Stone of Offence must be removed out of our way It is said that though Lord-Bishops are Antichristian yet it doth not follow that the Office and Ministry derived from them is so for they are also Presbyters and ordained as Presbyters To which Mr. T. subjoyns 1. There is nothing replied to the allegation that Bishops ordain with Presbyters Answ 1. Nor is there any such allegation in the objection proposed 2ly If there were it s not so considerable as to deserve to be taken notice of They are only assistants to the Bishop 't is he not they that sets them apart admits them into Sacred Orders as they heathenishly call them He adds 2dly Nor to this that some of the Bishops have acknowledged Episcopacy
not to be an order above Presbytery Answ 1. Who they are that have thus acknowledged I know not 2. Mr. T. saith not that any of the present Bishops do so 3. If they did in words their practice contradicts it exercising jurisdictions over the Presbyters or Elders 3dly Nor to this saith he that though the Bishop imposing hands do act as of superior order yet being a Presbyter his act is valid as he that convey's a thing as conceiving himself as Heir and Executor if he be not Heir yet if he be only Executor by that hath power to convey iâ— the Grant is good Answ 1. But this is Mr. T. his mistake I say expresly though it should be granted that they act as Presbyters yet their act is not valid because they act not as Presbyters of the institution of Christâ— of which he afterwards takes notice Though 2dly Mr. T. will never be able to prove that the Bishop imposing hands as a Bishop and acting under that capacity yet being a Presbyter his act is valid For. 1. when a Bishop he is no longer a Presbyter but one of an higher order and degree as a Presbyter is no longer a Deacon when once made a Presbyter 2. As a Bishop he hath no authority from Christ at all to act in the business of imposition of hands therefore acting as such his act is invalid which his once being a Presbyter cannot make otherwise because he is not now so nor acts as such but avowedly the contrary 3. His instance of a persons conveying a thing as conceiving himself as Heir and Executor is not pertinent For. 1. He hath originally and legally the same right if he be one as if both and pretends to a right to both in his conveyance 2ly Should he refuse his Executorship and make a Conveyance as Heir and he prove not to be so his Conveyance is naught Nay 3. if he make a Conveyance of what neither as Heir or Executor he hath any right to the Grant is undoubtedly not good This is evidently the case of our Lord-Bishops To the objection as proposed by us we answer 1. That they act in the capacity of Presbyters in the matter of ordination is false 2. Contrary to their avowed principles Mr. T. replies This is uncertain Answ And he may as well say it is uncertain that the Sun shines at noon-day The least smatterer in the usages of the Church of England and principles of these Doctors thereof see and know it to be certainly true 2. Contrary to the known Law of the Land by which they receive power to act therein in which they are known and owned only in the capacity of Lord-Bishop Mr. T. replies This is not true for the ordination of Suffragan-Bishops who are not Lords is valid by Law Answ A weak proof of such a crimination A Suffragan-Bishop is a Titular-Bishop when he acts in the matter of ordination he represents the Lord-Bishop whose Suffragan he is And the Law accounts his act not his own but the act of the Lord-Bishop whose Representee hee is And this Mr. T. could not be ignorant of We say 3dly 'T is contrary to their late practice whereby they have sufficiently declared the nullity of a Ministerial Office received from the hands of a Presbytery in thrusting out of doors several hundreds of Ministers so ordained Strange that it should be pleaded they act as Presbyters in the matter of ordination and yet they themselves judge a Presbyterian ordination invalid What saith Mr. T. Why 1. They do not nullify ordination by a Presbytery in forrain Churches Answ But this is not at all to the purpose have they not done so at home To attempt to do so in forraign Churches where they have no power were but to expose themselves to greater contempt as busy Bishops indeed 2dly In England they do it because the Laws saith he require Episcopal Ordination Answ But Sir the question is not upon what accounts they have so done in England but whether their so doing be not a manifestation that they act not in the capacity of Presbyters in the business of Ordination for if they did they fore-condemn their own act in condemning Presbyterian ordination their ordination being upon this supposition onely such 2dly He grants The Law requires Episcopal ordination if so it doth sure tie them that act in it to think themselves Bishops to act with such an intention and under that notion which not many lines before he denyed We further answer in S. T. What if this should be granted it would avail nothing except it can be proved that they are and act as Presbyters of the institution of Christ which these being only in a particular instituted Church of Christ will never be to the worlds end To which our Animadverter replies If this be held then all the Presbyters of the French Dutch and other Churches under Presbyterial goverment are not of Christs institution and so a separation avowed from all Protestant Churches except their own Answ 1. But this is no proof that the Bishops of England act in the matter of ordination as Presbyters of the institution of Christ which is the one and onely thing he should have heeded in his reply but of that he is wholly silent 2dly No doubt he thinks he hath sufficiently bespatter'd uâ— but if he account it a discredit to speak palpable untruths it will be his own 1. 'T is false that we avow separation from all Churches but those of our own way that our Assertion tends to such an end I challenge our Dictator to make good 2. The Presbyterians own particular Churches of the institution of Christ have their Presbyters fixed officers in and amongst them and that both in England and beyond the Seas What satisfaction he will think meet to make us for so foul an aspersion whereby he labours to render us odious to the Godly at home abroad we shall know by the next In the mean while we are ready to attend his motions in the next Chapter CHAP. V. Sect. 1. The fourth Argument in S. T. against hearing the present Ministers vindicated A twofold denial of the Offices of Christ Whether the Papists are guilty of a verbal professional denial of Christs Offices 'T is not lawful to hear such as are guilty of a verbal or real denial of Christs Offices The present Ministers oppose the Kingly and Prophetical Offices of Christ They do so who hearken not to that revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders of his House Deut. 18. 18 19. Act. 3. 23. Mat. 3. 17. Isa 9. 6. explained The vanity of Mr. T. his dictates to the contrary evinced IN Chap. 4th of S. T. we advance a fourth Argument against hearing the present Ministers which is this Those that deny any of the Offices of Christ are not to be heard but separated from But the present Ministers deny some of the Offices of Christ Therefore Before we come to clear the several
1. 1 5. 2 Cor. 8. 5. John 15. 19 and 17. 6. 1 Cor. 5. 12. Acts 2. 40. 2 Cor. 6. 17. Acts 19. 9. Rev. 18. 4. considered Of the acception of the word World Characters of persons that are not of the World A third Institution of Christ remarked Of the power Christ hath intrusted his Church with Acts 1. 23. 1 Cor. 5. 5. explained Of the Officers of Christ's appointment Their Election by the Church Of the Liberty of Prophesying Nothing must be offered up to God in Worshiâ— but what is of his own prescription The present Ministers of England refuse to subject to these Ordinances of Christ An Objection answered Mr. T. his Exceptions considered and removed out of the way 2dly THat the present Ministers of England do not hearken and conform to the Revelation Christ hath made touching the Orders and Ordinances of his House we prove in S. T. by the induction of seven particulars To this Mr. T. replies in Sect. 3. Chap. 4. 1st In the stead of Argument he proves all with Interrogations Answ False and untrue I wonder at the conscience and confidence of the man in asserting it He knows I prove it by the induction of the most remarkable Orders of the House of Christ which they hearken not to 2dly He askes Which of the Ordinances of Christ have they made void Answ They were under his view whilest he wrote these words so that his question is frivolous I enumerate seven of the Orders and Institutions of Christ they have so dealt with He adds 3dly He should have reckoned up seven times seven Answ 1. And why so If guilty of a rejection of these which are the principal they oppose his Kingly and Prophetical Office though they embrace some others that are of his appointment The Romanists do so yet this Animadverter grants they are guilty of the crime instanced in 2. Mr. T. cannot reckon up seven times seven Institutions of Christ that are of the peculiar Institutions of his House to be performed by Saints embodied and united together in the fellowship of the Gospel nor many more than these seven mentioned by us He instanceth in hearing the Word praying to the Father in the Name of Christ which he tells us they have not made void by their Traditions Answ 1. The first of these is in a great measure if not totally made void by them 1. They oppose and deny the management of this duty in the way of Christ's appointment whilest they debar Christians from electing their own Officers or attending upon the Ministry of such as are according to the mind of Christ elected by them 2. The Preaching of the Word must give way to their Service-Book-Worship or Forms of humane devising which I am much mistaken if it be not in a great measure a making void of that Institution of Christ he speaks of by their Traditions 2. I wish the same may not be said with respect to the most of them at least of praying to the Father in the Name of Christ which none can do but by the Spirit whom they despise reproach set up their stinted Formâ— in opposition to him and his breathings The first of the Orders of Christ's House instanced in is That all Power for the Calling Institution Order and Government of his Church is invested solely in him as the alone Lord Soveraign Ruler and Head thereof Mat. 28. 19. 1 Tim. 6. 14 15. John 3. 35. Acts 3. 22. and 5. 31. Hence Christ chargeth his Disciples not to be called of men Rabbi nor to call any Father viz. not to impose their authority upon any or suffer themselves to be imposed upon by any in the matters of their God Mat. 23. 8 9 10 because one is their Master and Lord viz. Christ. Hence also the Apostles lay the weight of their exhortations upon the Commandment of Christ 1 Cor. 11. 23. and 14. 37. proclaim all to be accursed that preach any other Gospel Gal. 1. 8. Charge Chrâ—stians not to receive such as bring any other Doctrine 2 John 10. The Spirit terribly threatens such as shall add to the Revelation of God Rev. 22. 18. This Institution we say they conform hot really unto they own other Lords Heads and Governours that have a Law-making Power over his Churches beside him To this Mr. T. 1. That all power for the Calling Institution Order and Government of his Church is invested solely in Christ as the alone Lord Soveraign Ruler and Head thereof he grants as a Truth Though 2dly He assents not to our Paraphrase on Mat. 23. 8. As if Christ did forbid the Apostles to impose their Authority upon any in the matters of their God which they did Acts 15. 25 28. Answ 1. By imposing their Authority is meant giving forth Commands Doctrines in their own Names as from themselves without the Authority of Christ Where did they so Do they not every where disavow it 1 Cor. 1. 15. 2 Cor. 4. 5. 1 Cor. 11. 1. Divine Revelation not the Dictates of men one or other of them is the Foundation of a Christians Faith 2. Mr. T. mistakes when he saith they did this Acts 15. 25 28. For 1st They enjoyned nothing but what was before enjoyned by the Lord only acquainted the Gentile Believers therewith as is 1. Abstinence from Fornication Exod. 20. 14. Ezek. 16. 26 29. Mat. 5. 32. 2. From things Strangled Deut. 12. 24. 3. From Blood Gen. 9. 4. 5. i. e. the Life-Blood or any member of the creature pulled from it whilest it is yet alive as the Jewish Rabbins expound it and that truly 2dly He speaks against the express Letter of the Scripture vers 28. It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us Expressions very remote from the countenancing such an authoritative imposition as he speaks of 2. He askes How comes this to be an Order of the House of Christ he took such Orders to be Precepts of Christ to us but this seems to be Gods gift to him Answ That Christs Ruledom and Soveraignty over his House is a gift of God to him we grant but such a gift as doth necessarily imply a duty on the part of his Houshold viz. That they own obey subject to none in the matters of Worship but only him admit no Laws or Institutions amongst them but his And this is expresly asserted in S. T. which we took then and still do for an Order of Christ's House 3. He tells us further That to assert the present Ministers of England own other Lords that have a Law-making Power over his Churches besides him is to unchristen them Answ 1. And however Mr. T. his Book came to be licensed with an intimation from the reverend Licenser That he finds nothing in it contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England Some of them think though I assure him I do not he hath asserted that pag. 123 that doth indeed unchristen them 2. However if the assertion mentioned unchristens them they
into the Jewish Synagogues c. we shall speak in its proper place Though we have no command to separate from the true Worship of God and the professors of the true Faith walking suitable thereunto yet we have express precepts to have no communion in Worship that is of the devising of man the Pope Antichrist with persons as members of the same Body and that have the very Lineaments of Satan the portraiture of Hell upon them with whom Christ doth not will not walk The Scriptures but now instanced in evince as much Rev. 18. 4. commands separation from a false Church false either in constitution or by apostacy The Church of England Rome is so as we have proved and the false Worship thereof of this we have already spoken Let the Reader seriously consider the Scriptures he will find it to be so In a word the Babylon mentioned our Animadverter will grant is the Roman Church Chap. 17. 1 2 3. The scarlet coloured Beast is th Civil Power not once represented under the notion of Beasts Dan. 7. 3 17. by which she hath ever been supported from the beginning The seven Heads are the seven sorts of Governments viz. Kings Consuls Dictators Decemvirs Tribunes Caesars Christian Emperors and the seven Mountains upon which Rome was built Rev. 17. 9 10. The ten Horns are the ten Kingdoms which her abominations and filthiness of her fornications did overflow of which England was one as is known and generally granted vers 12 13. The coming out of her is a separation from the whole of her Abominations Ministry Rites Inventions which if we do not we come not out of her she hath in the ten Kingdoms by the power of the Civil Magistrate that supported her erected and by external force and violence compelled persons to bow down to with respect hereunto she is represented as drunk with the blood of the Saints and Martyrs of Jesus This is all we plead for from this Scripture We would not have the Institutions Inventions of this old Bawd and bloody Strumpet imposed upon us and subjected to as if from Christ Let the Animadverter or any one for him prove the Hierarchy of Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Chapters c. their Parish-Churches as such Organs Singing-Service bowing before Altars Candles there placed Copes holy Vestments Service-Book to be of the Institution of Christ and we are ready to stoop to them and own those that practise them but if they have no other foundation but what â—he Mother of Harlots compelled the Civil Powers to give them when she rid them at her pleasure and made them serve her Lusts to the muâ—thering of millions of the Servants of Christ in the Nations as most certain it is they have not as it would be the honour of the chief Rulers of the Nations to eradicate them they remaining as a badge of their old slavery to the worst of Strumpets So it s eminently the duty of the Children of God by virtue of express precept from this Scripture in the mean while whatever they may suffer to separate from them The Church of England i. e. the best and most enlightned amongst the chief of the Nation thought it their duty in dayes past to separate from the Doctrine of the Papacy and some of her Trinkets to cast over-board we plead but for separation from her Discipline and Ministry and the rejection of the rest of her fopperies that as we profess our selves Christians we may have not the Canons of Rome but the Laws of our dear Lord for our Rule and sole guide in this matter which one would think above many Mr. T. might permit one peaceably to do 1 Cor. 5. 12 13. Phil. 1. 5. Act. 2. 41. and 17. 4. were brought to prove it the duty of Saints as such to walk together distinct and apart from the world not to distinguish of the duties of Pastors and People nor to prove any written Church-Covenant which we were not treating of So that in what follows in this Sect. we are not at all concerned We have thrown no dirt upon the face of the Church of England as he is pleased to talk we only tell her what diâ—t and filth is there that evety body sees but her Admirers Nor are we solicitous touching his throwing dirt in the face of the separated Churches from the Writings of any railing false accusers God will plead their Cause and bring forth their Righteousness in the fit season The third Institution of Christ mentioned in S. T. is this That he hath intrusted his particular Churches with power for the carrying on the Worship of his House to choose Officers admit Members excommunicate Offenders Acts 1. 23. and 6. 3 5. and 14. 23. 2 Cor. 8. 19. Mat. 18. 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. The Ministers of the Church of England own not conform not to this Institution of Christ we manifest in the said Treatise Mr. T. his Reply hereunto is 1. The Election Acts 1. 23. was of an Apostle and that by Lot and contains no Institution of Christ we are bound to follow Answ 1. This last is Mr. T. his dictate which 't is fit should be rejected till he proves it especially considering that the Churches for some hundreds of years afterwards chose their own Officers 2. Though it was the Election of the Apostle yet he was I hope an Officer of Christ and that to the Churches 3. His being chosen by Lots doth not evince that he was not chosen by the Church they gave forth the Lots seems to be expressive of the way they took to manifest the person whom they chose What he hath said of Acts 6. 3 5. and 14. 23. is already answered The Election 2 Cor. 8. 19. being of a person imployed in service by them manifests that none are to do services for the Church but by their appointment Of Mat. 18. 17. we have at large spoken already and vindicated it from Mr. T. his Exceptions That 1 Cor. 5. 5. is more than Excommunication practised by the Churches of the Saints he cannot prove his turning Mat. 18. 17. also to another sence is an argument of his denial of any such Institution of Christ to be practised by the Churches in the World 1st That 'T is a Church-Act is evident from the words vers 4 5. The Church is to be gathered together for this end to deliver the Incestuous person over to Satan But no Church saith Mr. T. had power over unclean Spirits to command them to cruciat the Bodies of persons Therefore say we that cannot be here intended 2dly The Church comes together to do that which Paul condemns them that they had not done before stirrs them up to set about vers 2. Now it had been absurd to have condemned them for not doing that which they had no power or Authority to do 3dly That which he calls here a delivering to Satan he calls a purging out from among them the old leaven vers 7. 4thly To the working of
Miracles by the Apostle there had been no need to have assembled the Church but it was necessary that to the doing of this act the Church be assembled vers 4 5. 5thly He is to be delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved which is not likely to be effected by Satans Ministry 6thly 'T is more than probable the Church did what the Apostle commanded them to do Now this is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the publick rebuke inflicted by many which many cannot signifie the Apostle but the Church of Corinth all which evince that it was a Church-act and no more than what is practised by the Churches of Christ at this day Though 't is true it is more than the ordinary Excommunication of the Church of England by a Chancellour or Proctor several miles from the Parish-Church to which the person is related and it may be unknown to them an argument they own not this Institution of Christ We add in S. T. as another Institution of Christ 4. That the Officers of his appointment are only such as these Pastors Teachers Elders Deacons Widows or Helpers who as they are in one particular Congregation so they have not any Lordly authority over each other Ephes 4. 11. Rom. 12. 7. and 16. 1. 1 Cor. 12. 28. Phil. 1. 1. 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. Acts 6. 5. and 15. 2. and 20. 17. and 28. 21 28. 1 Tim. 3. chapt and 5. 9 10 17. This Law of Christ they subject not we say unto set up other Officers and Offices To which Mr. T. 1st There were other Officers given by Chrst besides these mentioned viz. Apostles therefore these are not the only Officers of his appointment Answ 1. Had he said therefore These were not the only Officers of his appointment he had spoken more properly Apostles were of his appointment are not now as we have proved 2. We are speaking of ordinary fixed Officers in the particular Churches of Christ which the Apostles were not so that his instancing these and inference thereupon is frivoâ—ous and impertinent If these had Superiority over others it will not advantage the Animadverter except he can prove the Bishops in respect of Office to be their Successors which he will never be able to do That because the Elders mentioned 1 Tim. 5. 17. must be accounted worthy of double honour therefore they were of a Superiour order of Ministry to lord it over the rest is one of Mr. T. his Consequences that a youth of half a years stâ—nding in the University would be ashamed of Besides Sir the double honour is due to the working Presbyter not the lording loytering Bishop as is the custom of England The person mentioned 2 Cor. 8. 19. was chosen by the Churches for the present expedition was no standing fixed Officer amongst them therefore appertains not to our present disquisition He adds Whether all the Officers and Offices be rightly ordered in the Church of England is not our present inquiry Answ But this is no small part of our present enquiry for if they are not rightly ordered they are not Officers of Christ if they are not such 't is evident they reject this Institution of his set up other Officers and Offices What he tells us is notoriously false viz. That the present Ministers of England have neither Name nor thing required by Christ in this Law is manifestly true Their Parish Ministers are called Priests not Pastors or Teachers 'T is true they have those are called Doctors which signifies Teachers but that is a School not a Church-Title they are call'd so with respect to an Academick degree not with relation to any particular Church or Churches in whom they are placed They have those thaâ— are called Deacons but they are not such Officers as Christ calls so those that come nearest to these are those they call Church-wardens oâ— Overseers of the Poor But they have the thing the Office of preachâ—ng the Gospel continues with them Answ 1. 'T were well if it could be said of many of them that they preached the Gospel Alas they understand it not 2dly However they have not the Office as we prove whilest he suggests the contrary he doth but beg the Question Whether the Assertion That they set up other Officers and Offices as if in open contempt and defiance of Christs Authority be very unrighteously said others will judge I am sure as was said in S. T. They are such of which it may righteously be said he did at no time command them neither did it ever enter into his heart so to do And I challenge Mr. T. to give an instance of the contrary We remark a 5th Institution of Christ in S. T. viz. That these Officers be chosen by the common Suffrage of the Church of Christ according to Acts 1. 15 23 26. and 6. 1 2 3 5. and 14. 23. and 9. 26. which we find the Church in the practise of for some Centuries of Years As the Epistle of Clemens to the Church of Corinth Martin Luther Cyprian Lambard Peter Martyr Bullinger Gualter Zanchy Calvin Beza the united Brethren of Bohemia manifest Of which at large we there treat This Institution of Christ we say the present Ministers conform not to Mr. T. replies 1. He finds not this to be an Appointment of Christ in the Scriptures mentioned Answ Whether it be or not let the Reader judge the impertinency of his Answer to the three first we have already shewed Acts 9. 26 27. proves thus much That 't is in the Churches power to reject any one or refuse to receive him as a Preacher amongst them till they have received satisfaction touching him which doth not a little demonstrate the power of Election of their own Officers to be seated in them For he assayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to joyn himself to the Disciples as a Brother in the fellowship of the Gospel as the word signifies Acts 5. 13. 1 Cor. 6. 16 17. but they would not suffer him so to do till better informed of him and then he comes in and goes out at Jerusalem ver 28. i. e. is owned received by them What follows is a repetition of what he had before said Sect. 22. in answer to the Preface to which we have there spoken Clemens speaks fully to our purpose Ministers must be appointed by famous and discreet men with the good liking and consent of ALL the Church without which it seems they could not be constituted In that which follows in Clemens his Epistle touching a readiness in the Elder or Pastor to depart or return according as the multitude of Believers should determine We have sure a proof that the choice or rejection of a Pastor is seated in them That Luther Bullinger meant no more than the not obtruding unable Ministers on the Churches of Christ is Mr. T. his mistake They both assert the Churches priviledge in the choice of their own Pastors Their voice saith
is to be served after that way that pleaseth him best That â—he Will of God who is the alone Master of the House not man is solely to be heeded in the Ordering of his Family and Houshold Mr. T. would take it ill should I prescribe Rules to him for the well-ordering of his Family and that without his Licence and that after I know he hath Constituted and appointed Laws himself for that very end And yet I conceive he is not so far above me as the great and only wise God is above the mightiest and wisest of mortals So that whilest he would avoid the horns of the Dilemma that of the Poet is verified of him Incidit in Scyllam qui vult vitare Carybdim Nor do I see how he avoids the horns of the Dilemma by what he replies in this matter The Rulers Ecclesiâ—stical are either when they make Laws binding the Conscience indirectly bounded in their so doing by Scripture or they are not i. â— they must impose no Laws upon us without Scripture Precept or they may If the first we are bound to obey them no further than they are able to evince the justness and righteousness of their Commands upon the account of their being bottomed upon the Scripture Then no Obligation lies upon us to observe the Canons Ceremonies of the Church of England any further than they can manifest their Observation commanded therein then she and her Ministers do wickedly to Excommunicate Imprison Ruine us for not yeelding subjection when and where none is due If the second then whatever Ceremonies they introduce under the notion of Decency and Order that are not contrary to the Scripture must be subjected to which is an open in-let to the whole Farrago of Popish Inventions We fear the General Rules in Scripture the Laws of Nature right Reason other laudable Customs that Mr. T. tells us must be observed in this matter will be but a weak defence against them For who shall be judge of their consonancy to these Principles Shall every man be judge for himself This our Rulers think to be absurd and contrary to the Principles asserted by our Animadverter to be observed If our Governours they will tell us whatever they impose 't is consonant to all the forementioned Principles that we subject to them therein Ask our Bishops they will tell you so with respect to the whole of their Popish-English-Canon-Laws and Ceremonies Ask Mr. T. and he will tell you little less than That a blind obedience should be yeelded to them in undetermined particularities Chap. 1. Sect. 1. Ask the Pope and his Conclâ—ve they will tell you 'T is consonant to the fore-mentioned Principles that we subject to all his Ceremonies Nor indeed can we say of most of them that they are more dissonant to right reason than some that are retained amongst us So that the horns of the Dilemma are piercing the heart of the Cause whose defence Mr. T. hath undertaken We further argue in S. T. Yet were this also yeelded them they were never a jot nearer the mark aimed at except it can be proved that supposing a power of introducing Ceremonies to be invested in the Church thence a power for the Institution of new Orders and Ordinances the introducing of Heathenish Jewish and Superstitious practices in the Worship of God may be evinced And yet should all this be yeelded them how will they prove the Constitutions mentioned to be the Constitution of a right constituted Church a National Church the Church of England is not so Yet if all this were granted where are the Constitutions of this Church that we may pay the homage to them that is meet When was it assembled in the same place together in its several Members freely to debate and determine what Laws and Constitutions were fit to be observed by them If it be said That it is enough that it be assembled in its several Officers or such as shall be chosen by their Officers whose Laws every Member is bound to be obedient to We Answer But these Officers being not the Church nor are true Officers of a right constituted Church any where so called in the Scripture I owe no subjection to their Laws or Constitutions it being pleaded that 't is the Church that hath only power in this matter It remaineth therefore notwithstanding what is pleaded in this Objection That the present Ministers of England own Laws and Constitutions that are not in any sence of Christ's revealing and therefore oppose the Kingly and Prophetical Office of Christ To which Mr T. 1. I do not plead for the Constitutions of the Church of England Answ But the framers of the Objection proposed do Which if Mr. T. will justifie he must also plead for them but I shall not coâ—pel him to a warfare he is not willing to engage in he may take his liberty to stand by and look on but then he had done fairly not to have pretended to justifie what he scarce speaks a word to The impertinent Questions he speaks of are pertinent to the Objection and Objectors we have to deal with What he hath spoken of a National Church in answer to the Preface Sect. 15. we have removed out of the way by our Reply thereunto He tells us 2dly That the Church of England was Assembled at London in its several Members by Deputation freely to debate things at was the usage of the Synods in the antient times as the Kingdom is said to meet in the Parliament so the whole Church may be said to meet in their Synod Answ 1. No doubt Mr. T. and his Abettors thinks he hath now spoken to the purpose indeed but the emptiness of the whole is soon manifested No Synods whether antient or new can be supposed to represent the Church but upon the account of the free Election of the persons constituting them and deputation by the Members of that Church which they represent Whosoever is sent by the Church represents the person of the Church saith the Learned Whittaker De Concil q. 3. c. 3. p. 103. Yea Bilson himself tells us None are bound to the Council but those who send to the Council No Council doth bind the whole Church except the consent be general Con. Ap. p. 49 51. And Saravia tells us The Council represents no Churches except those who send their Messengers to the Churches Con. Gretz p. 379. Yea in every rightly constituted Synod the Laity as they are called are not to be excluded 'T is a Rule founded in Nature and Reason Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debet That which concerns all ought to be handled by all Although the Priests and Clerks do alone exercise Judgements Ecclesiastical yet where a matter is agitated that pertains to the Church Universal which consists not only of Clerks but also of Laicks it is not equal that the Laicks or Lay-People should be removed from these deliberations but all Decrees ought rather to be confirmed by
be called of sent by him So was Aaron Acts 14. 23. 6. 3 5. manifest that the Way of the Lord's mission is not by Lord-Bishops but by his Churches and People What he tells us he hath said in answer to any of these Scriptures we have replyed to Chap. 2. We add in S. T. 3ly That Prelates their Chancellors and Officers have power from Christ to cast out of the Church of God is owned by them contrary to Mat. 18. 16 17. 1 Cor. 5. 4. To which our Animadverter subjoyns He finds no such Law Answ It may be he is willingly ignorant hereof This he cannot but know that in the Name of Christ the Officers mentioneâ— do excommunicate out of the Church so call'd of Christ Do they do this without Law Is it not one of their Church-constitutions that they may do so Do not the present Ministers own them herein Whilst they cite present persecute their Neighbours for not coming to Divine Service as they call it it may be for refusing to pay them a four-penny-due in the Ecclesiastical Courts even to an Excommunication whose Act therein they afterwards publickly denounce and declare once and again in obedience to them What more evident The weakness of his answer to Mat. 18. 1 Cor. 5. we have already manifested We say further in S. T. That they own 4ly that the Office of the Suffragans Deans Canons are lawful and necessary to be had in the Church contrary to 1 Cor. 12. 18 28. Rom. 12. 7. Ephes 4. 11. The Officers instituted by Christ are sufficient for the edification and perfecting of the Saints till they all come unto a perfect man v. 12 13. In what sense the forementioned being not one of them of the Institution of Christ may be owned as lawful and necessary without an high contempt of the Wisdom and Sovereignty of Christ I am not able to conceive this is the sum Mr. T. replies 1. He knows not where this imagined Ordinance is Answ That there are such Officers and Offices in the Church of England established by the Laws thereof he cannot be ignorant To say They are Antichristian or repugnant to the Word of God is censured by the Canons thereof Can. 7. That the Ministers own submit to some of them is known The vanity and impertinency of Mr. T. his pleading for them not to mention his perjury therein is discovered in our present Vindication of Chap. 3. from his exceptions against what is by us therein argued We say they own 5thly That the Office of Deacons in the Church is to be imployed in publick Praying administration of Baptism and Preaching if licensed by the Bishop thereunto contrary to Act. 6. 2. Ephes 4. 11. Mr. T. replies 'T is not contrary to Christ's Revelation that they should be imployed in those works Ans 1. But when Christ hath instituted the office of Deacons for this end to attend Tables or look after the provision and necessities of the Saints That any persons may own an Office of Deacons in the Church to be imploy'd by virtue of Office-power in any other work than that for which they are intrusted by Christ and called unto Office without an advance against that Institution of Christ is absurd to imagine 2. That the present Ministers own such an Office he doth not deny 3. What he speaks of Stephen and Philip he had said before and to it we have replied already and need noâ— add more A sixth Law or Ordinance that we say they own is this That the Ordinance of Breaking Bread or the Sacrament of the Lords Supper may be administred to one alone as to a sick man ready to die Which is diametrically opposite to the Nature and Institution of that Ordinance 1 Cor. 10. 16. and 11. 33. Mat. 26. 26. Acts 2. 42. and 20. 7. To which Mr. T. This is not easily proved from the Scripâ—ures instanced in Answ Whether it be or not is left to the judgment of the judicious Reader to determine I am weary in pursuâ—â—g him in his impertinencies He grants a Communion is proved in that Sacrament 1 Cor. 10. 16. but vers 17. and 1 Cor. 12. 13. prove the Communion to be rather with all Christians Of which yet there is not one word in either of the places In vers 17. He speaks of the Church of Corinth that was one bread one body The other Scripture speaks nothing of Saints Communion one with another in this Ordinance 1 Cor. 11. 33. Acts 20. 7. he confesseth prove That it should be administred when all the Communicants Church or Brethren he should say are come together Whether its administration to one alone be not diametrically opposite hereunto as also to the very first Institution of this Ordinance Mat. 26. 26. let the Judicious judge Though it be said Act. 2. 46. that they brake bread from house to house it doth not follow there was none beside the Minister and the sick man the words import the contrary We manifest further in S. T. That they own 7thly a prescript form of Words in Prayer that a ceremonious pompous Worship devised â—y man and abused to Idolatry is according to the will of God and may lawfully be used under the New Testament Dispensation contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. John 4. 23. Deut. 12. 32. Jer. 51. 26. Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. By this prescript form of Words this ceremonious pompous Worship the Common-Prayer-Book Collegiat-Worship and Service is intended This I say is devised by man the owning whereof is contrary to Mat. 15. 9. and 28. 20. Deut. 12. 22. abused to Idolatry The owning hereof is opposite to Jer. 51. 26. It is Ceremonious and Pompous the abetting whereof is adverse to Joh. 4. 23. as is the owning of a prescript Form of Words to Rom. 8. 26. 1 Cor. 14. 15. To which our Animadverter replies 1. He should have told us what part of the Common-Prayer-Book was abused to Idolatry Answ The whole of it is so being Worship not appointed by the Lord and used in that Church that is the most Idolatrous Church in the world What he hath said in this Chap. Sect. 3. or in Chap. 3. Sect. 4. We have already answered His great out-cry of our abuse of Jer. 51. 26. produced to prove it unlawful to use any thing in the Worship of God abused to Idolatry will soon be evinced to be an empty sound Vox praeterea nihil 1. We have for our Companions in this Exposition persoâ—s not contemptible for wisdom and holiness who make conscience of applying Scriptures and abusing the Reader 2. Of all men Mr. T. iâ— the most incompetent for the management of this charge who most egregiously perverts Scriptures in this Treatise contrary to former Interpretations given by himself to them and to the plain intendment of the Spirit therein As we have in part manifested and may do further in our Appendix 3. He egregiously abuseth the Reader in this very passage whilst
said to be the Bodies of their Governours Whether the Apostles were the Heads of the Church Ojections answered Mr. T. his Exceptions thereunto considered 1 Tim. 2. 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13. expounded Whether the Kings of Israel were Heads of the Church Isa 44. 28. explained The Government of the Church and State proved distinct WE further manifest in S. T. That the present Ministers deny the Prophetical and Kingly Office of Christ thus 3dly Those that acknowledge another Head over the Church beside Christ deny his Prophetical and Kingly Office But the present Ministers of Engl. do own and acknowledge another Head over the Church beside Christ Therefore To which Mr. T. Sect. 11. The Author of S. T. speaks darkly and thence falls to conjecturing what I mean by the Head of the Church Answ To satisfie this Animadverter once for all By the Head of the Church I mean the King and Bishops that as Heads and Law-givers thereunto assume unto themselves a power to institute Laws and Ordinances of their own and create Officers in the Church which were never of the appointment of Christ which Danaeus and others make to be some of the essential parts of Church-Government and they are indeed so And if the owning such an Head-ship be not a denial of his Kingly Authority I must profess I know not what is This Mr. T. denies But 1. without giving us the least reason of his so doing 2. In contradiction to what is affirmed by himself p. 119. chap. 4. of his Theodulia 3. 'T is avowedly condemned by many sober judicious Protestant Writers and Churches as Rivet Calvin c. He tells us 2dly That no such Headship is owned by the present Ministers as the Pope claims Answ 1. The question is not whether such an Headship be owned by them as the Pope assumes but whether such an one as is not a denial of the Soveraignty of Christ 2. With respect to the extent thereof it is acknowledged there is no such Headship owned by them The King is not Universal Monarch of the Church Yet 3. For the kind of it it is the same i. e. Henry the 8th having cast off the Popes supremacy rests himself with it in his own Dominions Hence the learned Fuller in his History of the Church of England tells us That the King became the Popes heir at Law And it was indeed evidently so 1. Did the Pope claim a right to that Title Summum Caput Ecclesiae sub Christo The Supream Head of the Church under Christ 2. Did he account himself the Fountain of all Ecclesiastical Power 3. Did he undertake to make and dispense Laws pro libitu according as he saw meet So did H. 8. and his Successors the Kings of England with respect to the Church of England The Title of Supream Head or Governour under Christ is given to them They are the Fountain of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction it being by Statute Law annexed to the Crown The Bishops Courts ought to be held all Processes to go out in their Name With a Synod of Priests or without sometimes they can make and dispense with Laws for the binding or loosing of the Members of the Church thereof Hear what the learned Rivet saith Explic. Decal Edit 2. p. 203. touching this matter taxing Bishop Gardener for extolling the Kings Primacy For he that did as yet nourish the Doctrine of the Papacy as after it appeared did erect a new Papacy in the person of the King And reverend Mr. Calvin And at this day saith he how many are there in the Papacy that heap upon Kings whatsoever right and power they can possible so that there may not be any Dispute of Religion but this power should be in one King to Decree according to his own pleasure whatsoever he list and that should remain fixed without controversie They that at first so much extolled H. King of England certainly they were inconsiderate men gave unto him Supream power of all things and this grievously wounded me alwayes for they were Blasphemers and yet the present Ministers avow the same when they called him The Supream Head of the Church under Christ Thus he in Amos 7. 13. What this Animadverter saith Hart the Jesuite acknowledgeth of the Pope with respect to the whole Church is for the most part acknowledged by the present Ministers of the King with respect to the Church of England The Power which we mean to the Pope the King and Arch-Bishop by this Title of the Supream Head is that the Government of the whole Church of Christ throughout the World of the Church of England doth depend of him In him doth lie the power of judging and determining causes of Faith of ruling Councils or National Synods as President and ratifying their Decrees of Ordering and Confirming Bishops and Pastors of deciding Causes brought him by Appeals from all the Coasts of the Earth all the parts of the Nation Of reconciling any that are Excommunicate of Excommunicaâ—ing Suspending or inflicting other Censures and Penalties on any that offend Finally all things of the like sort for governing of the Church even whatsoever toucheth either preaching of Doctrine or practising of Discipline in the Church of Christ of England which whilst the Animadverter goes about to insinuate as not appertaining to the King he advanceth himself against the Royal Prerogatives of his Crown and Dignity Nor doth the Explanation mentioned Artic. 34. and 37. contradict what we have asserted Jurisdiction and Power of exteriour Government is acknowledged to belong to him which comprehends the substance of what we are contending for In what follows we are not in the least concerned we abhor the Primacy of the Papal Antichrist we deny not the Kings Headship and Supremacy over the Church of England by the fundamental Laws of the Nation it appertains to him We only infer from hence 1st That the Church of England is no true Church because Headed by some one else besides Christ 2dly That whilst the present Ministers account it Christ's Church and own another Head over it besides himself they deny his Soveraignty and Kingship they make another King over it and thereâ—y really unking him We add in S. T. as a proof of the Major Proposition If the assertion of another King in Engl. that as the Head thereof hath power of making and giving forth Laws to the free born Subjects therein be a denial of his Kingly authority as no doubt it is the Major cannot be denied If Christ be the alone King of his Church as such he is its alone Head and Lawgiver If he hath not by any Statute-Law established any other Headship in and over his Church to act in the holy things of God from and under him besides himself the assertion of such a Headship carries with it a contempt and denial of his Authority If there be any such Headship of the Institution of Christ let us know when and were it was Instituted Whether such a Dominion and
things we are to pray for for at that time they were not bound to the use of so many words and syllables as are Tertullian Cyprian Cornelius a Lapide Musculus c. But 3dly should it be granted that Christ enjoyned the use of that form of Prayer as a form this will not prove that stinted forms of Prayer are lawful and as such may lawfully be imposed and used which can have no other basis then this 't is as lawful for Civil or Ecclesiastical Rulers to devise and impose forms of Prayer upon the Churches as for Christ a most absurd and blasphemous assertion As touching what he adds 2. Christ justifies the Childrens crying of Hosanna uses himself the forms which David used before in the Psalms c. We answer That in all this he doth but beat the Air and speaks not one word to the purpose We find no footsteps of any enjoyned Liturgie or stinted forths of Prayer imposed either in the old Testament or the New though we find the same words used sometimes by them yet that they might never use any other in their publick devotions which is the condition of stinted enjoyned forms the known case of the Ministers of Engl. with respect to their Church-Service we find not which is also a full answer to what he cites out of Cyprian touching their use of the Lord's Prayers and other Forms if they used any they were not bound to use them and no other When he proves this consequence the Saints of old used the same words in prayer sometimes and Christ used words before used by them Therefore a set and stinted Liturgy was in use amongst them and such an one as our Common-Prayer-Book-Worship I will be his Convert He knows the contrary His answers to Justin Martyr and Tertullian are impertinent and not worth the reciting The words of the former are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Atheists we are not seeing we worship the Maker of the World And in all our Oblations we praise him according to our abilities in the way of prayer and thanksgiving And afterwards tells us that the President of the Assembly poureth our prayers according to his ability and continues long in this work Tertullian tells us The Christians looking towards Heaven not on their Common-Prayer-Book with their hands spread abroad prayed without a Moniter because from their hearts expressions wholly exclusive of inconsistant with the formes of prayer contended for The sayings of Socrates in his Eccl. Hist l. 5. c. 21. who lived about the year 430. tells us That among all the Christians in that Age scarce two were to be found that used the same words in prayer He passeth over in silence as he doth the account I give of the use of them not till about the year 600. and the imposition by Charles the Great of Gregories Liturgy as is thought and the support thereof by threats and punishments ever since These things hâ— knows to be true and yet they are such as the Dragon he labours to support cannot possibly stand before Sect. 3. Common-Prayer-Book-Worship not of the appointment of Christ because an obstruction of some positive Duty charged by Christ upon the Saints Mr. T. his Exceptions refuted Of resting on the Sabbath Day Whether Sacrificing was an obstruction of that Duty Mat. 5. 12. explained Following Christ no obstruction of positive Duties to Parents Of the gift and grace of Prayer Rom. 8. 26. opened 'T is the duty of Saints to improve Gifts received Common-Prayer-Book-Worship contrary to Scripture 'T is not necessary to the edification of the Saints The Judgment of the Reformed Churches A Second Argument advanced in S. T. to prove that Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is not of the appointment of Christ is thus formed That Worship which is an obstruction of any positive Duty charged by Christ to be performed by the Saints is not a Worship that is of his appointment But this is undeniably true of the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship Therefore Christ hath given Officers to his Church Ephes 4. 11. to them he hath given gifts every way suiting the imployment he calls them forth unto the improvement whereof he expects and charges upon them 2 Tim. 1. 6. 1 Cor. 12. 7. Ephes 4. 11. Prov. 17. 16. Luke 19. 20. To think after all this that any Worship should be of the institution of Christ that shuts ouâ— as unnecessary the exercise of the gifts given is absurd and injurious to Christ To which Mr. T. answers Sect. 5. 1. The major is not in all cases true resting on the Sabbath Day was a positive Duty yet sacrificing which was an obstruction of that Duty called prophaning the Sabbath Mat. 12. 5. was Worship of Gods appointment following Christ preaching of the Gospel were Worship of Christs appointment yet they were obstructions to positive duties to be done to Parents Answ 1. Resting from our own works on the Sabbath Day was a positive Duty not from the works of Religion and the Worship of God as was Sacrificing 'T is true Christ saith Mat. 12. 5. That the Priests in the Temple prophaned the Sabbath but this is spoken in respect of the vulgar Opinion that thought the Sabbath violated if any necesâ—â—ry work were done therein not that indeed the Sabbath day was broken by them So Dr. Willet on Exod. 20. 9. and our Annotaâ—ors upon the place expound it 2. That following Christ is an obstruction of any posstive duty we owe to Parents Mr. T. will prove Quum durae quercus sudabunt roscida mella i. e. never 'T is true Christ sometimes calls us to leave Father and Mother for his Name and Gospel-sake but then our abiding with them is no longer any positive duty enjoyned us by him but the contraty so that the major Proposition abides firm To the minor viz. That the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is an obstruction of a positive duty viz. the exercise of the gift of Prayer which is excluded hereby He answers 1. 'T is supposed that the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship is a different sort of Worship from such as is used by those who exercise the gift of Prayer Answ And so it is the one being of the Earth earthy carnal devilish the other from Heaven as good he may say the Ark and Dagon are the same as that the Common-Prayer-Book-Worship and the Worship of Jesus Christ is so When he proves the absurdities mentioned are the proper issue of this assertion we shall think our selves concern'd to take notice of them but till then we reject them as the spurious off-spring of his own begetting He adds 2dly The Author intimates that ability to conceâ—ve compose and utter in variety of Expressions Petitions to God is the gift of Prayer and the exercise of it is the exercise of that gift Answ I do so indeed That there are some that have ability so to do Mr. T. will not cannot deny nor that this ability may be where there is not true Grace what will Mr. T. call this Ability to
Mr. T. Just as if one should say he that heard Judaâ— preach the Gospel was partaker with him in his theft which is like the inference of a man crazed in his intellectuals Answ 1. With thanks to him for the civility of his expression I answer the case is not at all the same Judas acted from a tâ—ue Commission was not a known Thief nor guilty of any notorious visible wickedness till he betrayed his Lord The Ministers of England act from a false Antichristian Authority and some of them are visibly scandalous and prophane 2. Had Judas acted from a false Commission as these do such as had attended on his false Ministry had been guilty of the sin thereof whilst by their so doing they had encouraged him in the exercise of it 3. Paul was sure sound in his Intellectuals yet he tells the Corinthians That their not casting the incestuous person out of their Communion was a partaking with him in his sin We add in S. T. Our hearing them is a secret consenting with them and encouraging them in their evil deeds Our Animadverter replies 'T is not so but a consenting with them and encouraging them in preaching the Gospel which is well-doing Answ 1. Many of them preach not at all 2. Many of them that do preach not the Gospel 3. Few or none preach it without the mixture of humane Inventions 4. They all preach it from an Antichristian call 5. They read the Service-Book and conform to the Rites thereof which is evil doing and our attendment upon their preaching encourageth them herein In what nextly follows we are little concerned till he prove That because mens withdrawment from a godly lawful Christian Ministry was to them ground of discouragement and complaint therefore we must hear such as act from an Antichristian calling in their Office of Ministry and for the most part are vicious and deboyst Of Phil. 1. 18. we speak afterwards We righteously blame them that attempt to silence good Preachers for non-assenting to the Liturgie because it 's a setting up an Idol of Man in opposition to the Command and Work of God He tells us The Prelatists may as well argue If we should permit the Separatists to preach we should consent secretly with them and encourage them in their evil deeds such as gathering a separate Congregation and taking a Commission from it Answ 1. But they must prove these things to be evil deeds they are as we have proved the Institutions of Christ 2. Betwixt hearing men preach and permitting them so to do we conceive there is a vast difference For our parts were it in our power we should not by outward force and violence hinder a Prelatist from preaching We know Christs Kingdom admits of no such weapons for its propagation in the world We add in S. T. That hearing the present Ministers is very remote from the discharge of those duties are incumbent upon us if we account them as Brethren for their reclaiming 't is not separating from them 't is in respect of some or all the particulars remarked a participation with them in their sin To which our Animadverter adjoyns If it be not the discharging their duty for their reclaiming them which as it 's stated would perhaps be rather their sin yet it is to discharge their duty in hearing Gods Word Answ 1. But that 't is our duty to hear the Word of God from Antichristian Officers when Christ hath appointed some of his own to dispense it should have been proved and not beg'd 2. That it should be the sin of any Brother to reprove his Minister for what he sees evil upon him in the way of the Gospel is something strange Doctrine which we know not what to make of that when he hath done so and no Reformation follows and he hath proceeded as far as he is able for his amendment that he ought to attend still on his Ministry to his grief and wounding and not separate from him is contrary to the many Scriptures produced by us in this Argumenâ— 3. Not to reprove rebuke admonish a guilty sinner being a Brother of his sin I have but now proved to be a partaker with him in his sin to which Mr. T. sets his probatum est p. 295. That the same act neglected and done should be a sin seems to me to be inconsisâ—ent That I should be guilty of sin in not reproving an offender and gâ—ilty when I reprove him seems to me a contradiction He adds Hearing them fits them for the reclaiming of Ministers from any sin they are to reprove in them for this shews they account them not as their or the Lords enemies which is agreeable to the Apostles Rule 2 Thes 3. 15. Answ 1. In hearing them I joyn with them in am paâ—taker of their sin viz. the sin of their false ministry That partâ—king with others in their sins should fit me for the reclaiming them from them is an absurd dictate 2. Thâ— Apostle intends not in that Rule 2 Thes 3. 15. That we still hold Communion with the Brother there spoken off nor saith he that our so doing is the best way to reclaim him but the contrary v. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Note him with a brand of infamy that all may avoid him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and be not mingled with him have no such familiarity with him as a man with his friend But that in tenderness and love as I have opportunity I am still seeking to reclaim him from the evil of his wayes Mr. T. doth ill though we take liberty to weary men with his unproved dictates by them to oppose the Spirit of the Lord. What follows being a very dunghil of unsavoury words and unhandsome reflections upon the men of his dislike not having the least of Argument or Answer in them I pass over and attend his dictates in the following Chapter CHAP. X. Sect. 1. The 9th Argument against hearing the present Ministers 'T is a casting contempt upon the wayes and Institutions of Christ a hardning persons in a false way of Worship and rebellion against him Separation from the World and ways of false Worship an Institution of Christ proved Who meant by World Numb 23. 9. explained The Children of Israel in what respects Typical of the People of God John 15. 19. 2 Tim. 3. 5. Hos 4. 15. Prov. 14. 7. Mat. 13. 30 39 40 49 expounded The distinct Meetings of the Saints for their mutual edification an appointment of Christ proved Particular Congregations of Believers for the celebration of the Worship of God in opposition to National Churches an Ordinance of Christ manifested Christ hath instituted Officers of his own for his Churches given them abilities for the discharge of the services he calls them to evinced Whether Ministers belong to the Câ—tholick Church or particular Churches discussed IN Chap. 9th of S. T. We propose several Arguments for the Demonstration of the truth enquired after of which the 9th is
of God in opposition to any National-Church or Churches whatsoever are of the appointment of Christ Acts 1. 13. 12. 1. 13. 14. 15. 22. 18. 22. 20. 14 28. 1 Cor. 1. 2. 6. 4. Acts 9. 1. 1 Cor. 16. 19 Rom. 16. 4. 2 Cor. 8. 1. Gal. 1. 2. Acts 16. 4 5. 14. 23. 1 Cor. 11. 16. 14. 4 5 12 19. 2 Cor. 1. 1. Rev. 1. 2 3 11. To which Mr. T. Sect. 3. 'T is questionable whether Acts 15. 22. 18. 17. be not a Provincial Church Answ 1. Of this we have formerly spoken 2. That it was the particular Church of Corinth v. 2 4 12 22 23 25. evince 3. That a Provincial Church had not as yet a being in the World Mr. T. knows and we have proved Chap. 1. Sect. 13. The same line of Interpretation is to be drawn over Acts 18. 22. for that he intends instead of v. 17. The Texts he grants mention Churches in several Cities and Provinces but he questions Whether they were by their voluntary agreement under Pastors of their own choice gathered into one Body for the celebration of the Worship of God They are call'd the Church of such a City as of Jerusalem from their Habitation where they had many meetings from House to House for celebration of Worship as Acts 2. 46 47. Answ That there is any thing of weight in this Answer none will imagine but Mr. T. 1. 'T is built upon this rotten Foundation that the particular form of Churches is not of the Institution of Christ of which we have at large treated Chap. 1. of this Treatise 2. It plainly contradicts the Spirit of the Lord speaking in some of the Scriptures mentioned He questions he saith whether they were by voluntary agreement gathered together into one Body But this the Spirit of the Lord affirms Acts 2. 41. 2 Cor. 8. 5. Nor can it be otherwise there was no external force or Law to compel them thereunto Whether they were under particular Officers of their own see Acts 20. 28. 15. 4. 23. 21. 18. that these were chosen by themselves that the Church consisted of no greater a number than could meet together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same place to worship God in the same numerical Ordinances we have before demonstrated The reason why there were not more Congregations than one in a City was because that the multitude of Disciples was not so great but that they might so do No wonder that we read onely of the Elders of the Church Acts 15. 4 23. when there was but one Church at Jerusalem none ever pleaded for one's being an Elder of one part of the Church another of another but such as assert Provincial-National-Churches with us he that is an Elder to a part is an Elder to the whole That the Churches mentioned in the Scriptures instâ—nced in were not particular Independent Churches Mr. T. attempts not the proof of What he adds from 1 Cor. 12. 28. is already answered nor is there any thing more in this matter replied by him that requires our stay 'T is added in S. T. 4thly That Christ hath appointed Officers of his own to act in the holy things of God in and over these Assemblies whom he furnisheth with gifts every way suiting their imployment to whom without turning aside to the voice of strangers or attending upon the Ministry of such as are not of his appointment ' it s the duty of Saints to hearâ—en is very evident from Ephes 4. 11. Heb. 13. 7 13. Mat. 24. 4 5 23 24. 1 John 2. 18. 4. 1. 2 John 10. Acts 20. 29 30 31. Rev. 2. 14 15 16. Which exactly agrees with what was practised by Primitive Believers who it seems received none without the testimony of some Brethren of known Integrity in the Churches 1 Cor. 16. 3. Acts 9. 26. To which Mr. T. 1. That Christ hath appointed Officers of his own and furnished them with gifts whom we are to follow and obey in opposition to the Ministry of strangers viz. Such as are deceivers false-teachers Antichrists he grants which being the substance of what is pleaded for at present with his subsequent Discourse we are little concern'd Whether we have proved the Ministers of England to be deceivers the judicious Reader will determine and if such Mr. T. grants we have proved they are not to be heard Whether Christ hath appointed Officers to the Universal Church or appropriated them to particular Congregations is not of our present disquisition The forâ—er Mr. T. hath not demonstrated The latter we have in part evinced Chap. 1. Sect. 15. To which may be added If by virtue of Christs appointment Ministers are not fixed to particular Congregations then Ministers are no more by virtue of Christs appointment Ministers of this Company or Flock of Christians than of another which is expresly contrary to Acts 20. 28. 2. Then either Ministers have no Authority over this or that particular Flock to which as such they minister or if so they have as much authority over every particular society of Christians to whom they providentially preach and this without their actual consent which is absurd and tyrannical 3. Then no Church can claim by virtue of Divine appointment a greater right and Interest in one Minister than in another nor is any by virtue of such an appointment more obliged to minister to them then to others though we deny not but the gifts given to Ministers to Brethren are given for the Edification of all Christians amongst whom by the Providence of God they are cast which they are bound for that end to improve nor that its unlawful to hear others besides Pastors of Congregational Churches we assert the contrary in the Treatise he undertakes to confute Yet doth it not hence in the least follow that we may lawfully hear the present Ministers we have proved the contrary the non-attendment upon whom tends not to the decay of Spiritual Life it promotes it rather We say in S. T. That the hearing the present Ministers pours forth contempt upon each of these Institutions of Christ It supposeth 1st That separation from the Assemblies of England though in their Constitution carnal and worldly and the Worship thereof although false and meerly of Humane Invention was and is our sin and evil 2dly That it 's not by virtue of any Institution of Christ the duty of Saints to meet together as a Body distinct without going out to other Assemblies to worship with them for their mutual edification 3dly That particular Assemblies are not solely of the Institution of Christ but that National Churches are also to be accounted true Churches of Christ 4. That the Officers of Christs appointment are not sufficient for the Saints but together with them the help of false and Idol Shepherds is to be sought after Than which what greater contempt can be poured forth upon the forementioned Institutions of our dear Lord. The
the Sion of God nor to be accounted so Of this we have already spoken and shall only add Those Churches that have no answerableness to Mount Sion the Type of the true Gospel-Churches but are the very Picture of old Babylon the Type of Antichristian Churches are not the Gospel-Churches typed out by Mount Sion but the Babel out of which 't is the duty of the Lords People to flie in whom God dwels not But National-Churches are not answerable to Mount Sion but old Babel Therefore Look upon Sion consider her diligently 1. She was an Holy Mountain or Hill Psal 2. 6. 15. 1. where the holy People dwelt 2dly There was the Temple of God built according to his appointment of hewen stone ready fitted and prepared precious costly stones 2 Chron. 3. 6. 3dly There was the Worship of God managed by Officers of his own according to his own direction and appointment What more evident then that National Churches the Church of England is most unlike hereunto May it be call'd an Holy Hill rather a Mountain of Corruption Are its Members an Holy People What less A Generation of Atheists Drunkards Swearers Adulterers and Adulteresses cannot be so accounted If God's Worship managed according to his own appointment by Officers of his own in their Assemblies we have proved the contrary Are not they the very Picture of old Babylon in their self-invented Worship rigid pressing of Uniformity under Penal Laws the onely support of their Service and murdering the Children of the Lord who dissent from them All that know any thing know these things to be so Nor can they be called his Candlesticks who are not of pure Gold fashioned in all respects so near as humane frailty will admit according to the Idea and platform given forth in the Scriptures of Truth upon which account the New-Testament-Churches are so called with allusion to Exod. 25. 31. but the contrary Their matter for the most part is Reprobate Silver the very dross of the Earth and scum of the World instead of pure Gold They are formed according to the devices of men laid in a subservency to their pride arrogancy and lusts of them we have not the least print in the Scriptures nor for some Ages after as we have proved Nor can they be called his Garden being constituted of such as were never chosen and separated by him from the rest of the World in whose hearts the Fruits of Paradise are not planted as their outward deportment shews who are not dressed by him nor bring forth fruit to him who are not inclosed by his own Rules but the Canon-Law of Antichrist his professed Enemy His answer to the following Reasons hath nothing in it but what we have already considered To the Question Where are the Souls that are converted comforted strengthened stablished that are waiting at the doors of their House He Answers 1. That though there were none such yet this proves not God not to be present in them in respect of his special presence and Grace Answ 1. This I confess is to me a most strange Paradox that no Souls should be converted comforted strengthened stablished in the Parochial Assemblies of England and yet God be present there in respect of his special Presence and Grace when these things are as much the proper issues of such a presence as light and heat are of the shining of the Sun in its brightness 2. The Scriptures cited by him are impertinent 1. Because they expresly relate to the people of the Jews to whom I speak with respect to the body and bulk of them as a Church National God gave not of his special Presence and Grace at that day he had blinded them Isa 6. 9 10. John 12. 40. 2. Because notwithstanding those complaints there were some yea many converted comforted strengthened stablished Isa 49. 4. is a Prophesie of Christ Were none converted by him Isa 53. 1. John 12. 38. Rom. 10. 16. Isa 65. 2. Rom. 10. 21. Mich. 7. 1. Luke 7. 31. Mat. 23. 37. are the complaints of the Lord and his Messengers against the Church of the Jews for their obstinacy against Gospel tenders of Grace and Love but say not that God was with that Church in respect of his special Presence and Grace which had he been they had most assuredly believed and obeyed the Gospel nor do they intimate that there were none converted We read of many yea of some thousands converted by Christ and his Apostles notwithstanding these complaints What follows being an heap of impertinencies we might omit 1. We design not to beget enmity and prejudices in the minds of men against the present Ministry they themselves for the most part are the occasion hereof by their covetousness and debauchery 2. We know not any of the Churches of whom they may say you are the Seal of our Ministry 3. Our groans to the Lord are for poor England that God would shew mercy to it and give them hearts to receive the Truth in the love of it We hope he hath a great Harvest yet to reap in the midst of us and we are incessantly praying him to send forth Labourers into his Harvest Though to be plain we think not that God will use any in this work of gathering Souls to Christ who come with an Antichristian Call and the Wooden Sword of a Common-Prayer-Book and Homilie under their Arms which will never pierce so much as skin deep but such as come with a glorious Gospel-Unction upon them the great Character of Gospel-Ministers 4. He grants That a sad Spirit of withering and visible decaies are to be found upon the Auditors of the Ministers but reflects upon the Congregational Churches To which I shall only say That through the good presence of God with them things are far otherwise with them than this Animadverters words import They meet with choice Springs of Life and Royal establishments from the God of Glory the sâ—out of the King the Lord of Hosts is many times heard in the midst of them and they tryumph gloriously in him Sect. 4. The 12th Argument against hearing the present Ministers vindicated 'T is one step to Apostacy proved Heb. 10. 25. considered Some Reasons why persons may not hear Parochial Ministers as formerly Mr. T. his Answers to the Queries in S. T. considered His agreement with Bellarmine in the qualification of Church-Members evinced THE 12th Argument produced in S. T. for the proof of the unlawfulness of hearing the present Ministers of England is this That the doing whereof is one step to Apostacy is not lawful to be done But the hearing the present Ministers of England is one step to Apostacy Therefore To which Mr. T. adjoyns Sect. 9. 1. If the Major be understood of Apostacy from the living God and the Christian Faith it 's true if of the Congregational Principles and Practices it 's false Answ 1. The Congregational Principles and Practices we have in this Treatise in part proved to be
the 5th Whether Officers instituted by Christ are not only Pastors Teachers Deacons and Helpers he replies I find not Helperâ— Officers instituted by Christ but others I find here mentioned 1 Cor. 12. 28. Eph. 4. 11. Answ 1. Of helpers you may read Rom. 16. 3 9. 2. There are indeed other Officers mentioned of Christ's Institution in the places cited by him but they being such as are confessedly gone off the Stage we purposely omitted them Those mention'd are the alone knownstanding Officers in the Churches of Christ directions touching whose qualifications Election Office Work are laid down in the Scriptures To the 6th Whether the Offices of Arch-Bishops Lord-Bishops Deans Subdeans Prebendaries Chancellors Priests Deacons as the first step to a Priesthood Arch-Deacons Subdeacons Commissaries Officials Proctors Registers Apparitors Parsons Vicars Curats Canons Petty-Canons Gospellers Epistolers Chanters Virgers Organ-players Queristers be Officers any where instituted by the Lord Jesus in the Scripture He Answers Some are some are not See the Answer to Chap. 3. Answ To our Reply thereunto we refer the Reader for satisfaction in this matter To the 7th Whether the Calling and admission into theâ—e last mentioned Offices their Administration and Maintenance now had and received in England be according to the Word of God he replies This is answered before in sundry places Answ The vanity of his Answers we have already discovered To the 8th Whether every true visible particular Church of Christ be not a select company of People called and separated from the world and the false worship thereof by the Spirit and Word of God and joyned together in the fellowship of the Gospel by their own free and voluntary consent giving up themselves to Christ and one another according to the will of God He answers The terms are so ambiguously used that in some sence it may be answered Affirmatively in some Negatively Answ We have already explained the terms and demonstrated the truth of the Question in the Affirmative in all the branches thereof To the 9th Whether a company of People living in a Parish though the most of them be visible Drunkards and Swearers or at least strangers to the work of Regeneration upon their souls coming by compulsion or otherwise to the hearing of publick Prayers or Preaching are in the Scripture account Saints and the Church of Christ according to the pattern given forth by him He answers If their Faith be right they are i. e. if I mistake not If they assent to the Doctrine of the Church of England if they own no other Doctrinals but what are right for as to true saving Faith the persons described are undoubtedly strangers to it 't is impossible but they should be so whilst they abide such Now I believe never man in the world gave such an account of Saints Saint Drunkard and St. Swearer and St. Whoremaster sounds but harsh in the ears of men of understanding they themselves will swear they are no Saints That external profession of Faith is sufficient to constitute a person a Church-Member Bellarmine indeed affirms it may be Mr. T. received his notion from him and is therein opposed by the learned Whitaker who cites that saying of August Collat. 3. cum Donat. The Church is one Body in which is both a Soul and Body the Soul is the internal gifts of the Holy Ghost i. e. the internal graces The Body is the external profession of Faith and Communion of Sacraments And Sutliffe one of their own saith better To the Church not only profession of Faith but also holiness is required If the persons characterized by us are not the Church of Christ the Bride the Lambs Wife as we have proved they are not they must be accounted Daughters of the old Whore and Babel spoken of in the Scripture To the 10th Whether in such a Church there is or can rationally be supposed to be a true Ministry of the Institution of Christ He replies It may But we have proved the contrary To the 11th Whether the Book of Common-Prayer or stinted Liturgies be of the prescription of Christ and not of mans devising and invention he saith The Worship or matter for the greatest part of the Common-Prayer-Book is of Christ though the method and Form of Words be of men Answ 1. Modestly spoken however The whole of the matter of the Common-Prayer-Book he seems to grant is not of God though the greatest part he thinks is 2. Sufficiently impertinent 't is the method and Form of words that is the Liturgie or stinted Service to these men are tied If these are not of Christ as he grants their Liturgie is not To the 12th Whether some part of the Worship used by a People be polluted the whole of the Worship be not to be look'd upon in a Scripture account as polluted and abominable according to 1 King 18. 21. 2 King 17. 33. Isa 66. 3. Hos 4. 15. Ezek 43. 8. Zeph. 1. 5. So that if their Prayers be nought and polluted their Preaching be not so to He answers No nor is any such thing said in these Texts Answ Let the Reader consult them and he will find that they condemn the whole of the Worship though they did somwhat that was for the matter of it right and of the appointment of the Lord as polluted and accursed because some part of it was so His talk of the Imperfections of Ministers in prayer is impertinent every imperfection in Prayer renders not the Prayer naught and polluted in that sence in which we affirm the prayers of the Church of England or their devised Liturgie to be so upon the account of its non-institution by the Lord and oblation to an Idol To the 13th Whether a Ministry set up in direct opposition to a Ministry of Christ which riseth upon its fall and falls by its rise can by such as so account of it be lawfully joyned unto He replies No but they are bound to leave this account if it be erroneous Answ 1. But they think it not to be erroneous And 2. Mr. T. was lately of their mind when he swore to extirpate the Hierarchy To the 14th Whether such as have forsworn a Covenant-Reformation according to the Word of God and swear to a Worship that is meerly of humane devising that have nothing of the essentials of a Ministry of Christ to be found upon them may be accounted of as his Ministers and be adhered to He replies No. Wherein he hath given away the Cause pleaded for by him The Ministers of England are known and we have evinced it in this Treatise to be persons of the Complexion intimated To the 15th VVhether such as shall do so be not guilty of casting contempt upon the Institutions of Christ and disobedience against his Roâ—al Edicts commanding them to separate from persons of the complexion intimated He saith They would be if they should do so wittingly and willingly Answ But if they do it ignorantly though their sin be not
which one of their Reverend Prelates hath been moâ—e than once heard to say That the presence of Christ in the Sacramenâ— is not Symbolical but Realiter and upon that account we give adoration 't is like more are of his mind as horrible Idolatry as bowing before a Crucifix or Image 2. That Christ is not alone the Head of the Church 3. They seem to attribute greater efficacy to the Blood than the Body of Christ whilst they pray That their bodies may be made clean by his Body and their souls by his most precious Blood as they do in the prayer before that which is used at the Consecration 4. That Christ descended into Hell as if he descended into the place of the Damned as â—he Papists hold To which Mr. T. 1. 'T is in the Creed call'd the Apostles Answ 1. This is no part of Scripture Nor 2. ever composed by them whose name it bears Nor 3. is it certain when or by whom it was so done 4. To this very day it was never in any full and general Council confirmed and established So that its being in the Creed proves it not so authentick as that we are bound to believe it 5. What is said by Bishop Usher touching this matter I have not leisure to enquire since it 's put after his burial it can signifie no other descent but into the place of the damned which is as rotten a figment as ever was invented 3. Touching Man 1. They generally own I speak especially of them who are called the Church free-will And 2. an implicite Faith not in words but really and indeed whilst they say We must practise in Worship the determinations of the Church though we our selves see no reason for them because she hath determined them and that this is reason sufficient for our so doing i. e. We must in these things believe â—or Faith must preceed practice in the Worship of God as the Church believes 4. Touching Worship They hold 1. That Worship devâ—sed by man though abused to Idolatry is the Worship of God with which he is well-pleased 2. That God is more particularly to be worship'd in one place than in another and that these places being Consecrated are the Houses and Churches of God and upon that account holy and to be reverenced 3. That reading an Homilie or a few Prayers out of the Liturgie is a more excellent worship of God though no where commanded in the Scriptures than Preaching which must therefore give way to it 4. That none must be suffered publickly to worship God or privately except in their own Families but according to Forms of mans devising Which 5. they say Is the Worship of God 5. Touching the Sacraments 1. They seem to intimate that there are more than two when they say there are two only generally necessary to salvation 2. That Women may Baptize in casu necessitatis as the Papists hold and that such Baptism is valid 3. That Baptism is to be administred with a Cross in the fore-head 4. That all Children when baptized are regenerate and received by the Lord for his own Children by adoption Common-Prayer-Book of Publick Baptism 5. That Children being baptized have all things necessary for their salvation and shall undoubtedly be saved 6. That all that are baptized have received remission of sins Confirmation before the imposition of hands 7. They seem to make the imposition of hands a Sacrament when they say 'T is a sign to certifie Children of Gods grace and favour towards them Ibid. in the Prayer after the imposition of hands Yea they really do so if the definition they themselves give of a Sacrament be right viz. That it is an outward and visible Sign of an inward and spiritual Grace 8. So they to make Matrimony by that expression used by them consecrated the state of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery in one of the Collects in the form of the solemnization of Matrimony 9. They adore before the Elements of Bread and Wine 10. That the wicked and ungodly may receive it 11. That though the most notorious offenders be partakers of it yet the People that joyn with them are not defiled thereby 12. That the Body of Christ was broken the blood of Christ was shed particularly for them 6. Touching the Church 1. That under the time of the Gospel there is a National Church 2. That the most wicked and their seed may be compelled and received to be members of the Church which is notoriously known nor have they the face to deny it though Mr. T. talkes as if they would to be consonant to their principles and practice 3. That 't is not lawful to separate from this Church whoever do so are Sectaries Schismaticks to be excommunicated imprisoned a bloody error 4. That the Clergie is the Church as is the Pope and his Conclave to the Romanists 5. That these is another Head of the Church besides Christ 6. That 't is not in the power of the Church to choose their own Officers 7. That 't is in the power of Kings to appoint the highest church-Church-Officers 8. That Lord-Bishops are Officers of the Church of Christ though no where of his appointment 9. That Lord-Bishops can give the Holy Ghost and power to forgive and retain sins 10. That 't is in the power of a Priest to absolve from sins In the Visitat of the Sick 11. That 't is not in the power of the Church to excommunicate but the Bishop 12. That Pastors and Teachers are to be ordained by Lord-Bishops 13. That dumb Ministers are lawful Ministers of Christ 14. That the Ministry Worship and Government which Christ hath appointed to his Church is not to be received or joyned unto unless the Magistrates where they are reputed Christians do allow it And this their practice preacheth forth 7. Touching things supposed indifferent 1. That 't is in the power of the Church i. e. the Bishops in their Convocation to make that which is in it self indifferent a necessary part of Worship 2. To devise what Rites it pleaseth and add to the Worship of Christ 3. That Marriage may be forbidden at certain Popish seasons as in Lent Advent Rogation week 4. That the Cope Surplice Tippet Rochet are meet and decent Ornaments for the Worship of God and ministry of the Gospel 5. That Altars Candles Organs are necessary and useful in the Church of God Mr. T. his thoughts are vain when he thinks that they will not assert this Certainly they will not be so imprudent as to aver that they lavish the Gold out of the Bag for the erection of that in the Service of God which is neither necessary nor useful 6. That there may be Holy Dayes appointed to the Virgin Mary John Baptist the Apostles all Saints and Angels together also with Fasts on their Eves on Ember dayes Fridayes Saturdayes so called heathenishly enough Mr. T. answers They will deny this to be their Tenent and câ—tes Whitgift c. telling
us That they mean not that on these â—ayes the Saints should be honoured Answ 1. To these Saints for their Worship and Service dayes were instituted by the Popes of Rome to be observed Lessons peculiar and proper thereunto appointed to be read in their Service-Books If no intendment of honour to the Saints were in their present observation whence is it that the very same dayes the very same Lessons the very same Collects and Prayers are appointed to be used in the Church of England on many of the Saints dayes that are appointed in the Church of Rome on the same dayes 'T were easie to demonstrate the truth of this by particular instances but that would be too â—edious 2. They are called still in their Common-Prayer-Book by the names of the Saints as St. John's day and are accounted Holy for not resting on them persons are more liable to be excommunicated by their Church than for Swearing and Drunkenness which as it is an imitation of Heathenish and Antichristian Superstition so it is an occasion of nourishing a most horrid error if not Idolatry in the hearts of the simple and ignorant who think that day to be set apart in honour of the Saint whose name it bears Which 3. if it be not I see no ground why it should be called by his name as the same day is in the Papacy from whence the rise and spring of our observation thereof Now although we say not that 't is unlawful to hold communion with persons that hold some errors yet this we are bold to affirm 1. That the ground or foundation is laid by Mr. T. upon which we may hear the present Ministers viz. Their preaching truth is hereby discovered to be sandy and rotten they being guilty of so many errors Which 2. being of such a nature as enwrap in them some of them a denyal of the Offices of Christ 3. Such as lie at the bottom of that superstitious corrupt idolatrous Worship and Service that is directly contrary to the simplicity of the Gospel Clouds and obfuscates the splendor and glory thereof as this Animadverter elsewhere acquaints us Yea 4. Such as they have frequently sacrificed the Liberty Estates and precious blood of the Children of the Lord for the support of they may well cause a Saint to enter his demurrer against hearing them yea if they obstinately hold and maintain them as they do Though many of the Witnesses of Christ have born a testimony against them whom they have no otherwise been able to resist but by force and violence utterly to separate from them and have nothing to do with such an hardned and bloody Generation Sect. 4. The Answer to the 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th Objection vindicated Of the case of Judas his preaching Of hearing good men Of the practice of Learned and good men in this matter Of the Magistrates command how far obligatory Of mens converting Souls whether an Argument of true Gospel-Ministers Of spending the Lords Day Wherein the sanctification of it consists THE fifth Objection in S. T. is Judas preached though a wicked man and no doubt it was lawful yea the duty of Saints to hear him To this we say no doubt it was so But 1. Judas was not a visible wicked man at the time of his preaching that Christ as God knew him to be so is not in our case considerable but so close an Hypocrite that he was not known no not to the Disciples to be so but some of the present Ministers are visibly wicked and prophane What Mr. T. answers hereunto hath already been considered There was a special reason in the case of Judaâ— his preaching to answer the Prophesie Psal 41. 8. of which Acts 1. 16. Nor can any thing rationally from hence be deduced more than this that 't is lawful to hear visible Saints known only to God to be Hypocrites for so was Judas We add 2. Judas was chosen and called by Christ to be an Apostle commissioned by him to preach but the present Ministers of England are not so as hath been proved To which when Mr. T. shall be pleased to offer any thing that deserves consideration it shall be considered His reflection upon the Congrational Ministers as 't is false is no answer That because Judas a commissionated Officer by Christ was to be heard though an Hypocrite therefore 't is lawful to hear such as are not commissionaâ—ed by him though visibly prophane will be an hard task for any to prove We proceed in S. T. Object 6. But there are some good men amongst them and such as belong to God may we not hear such Answ 1. That there are some good men amongst them we deny not Mr. T. adjoyns With what face can he acknowledge them good men who hath represented them as walking disorderly deniers of Christs Offices Answ 1. Mr. T. thinks there are good men in the Papacy yet I presume he will thus represent them and that with a better face â—e may do so than build again the things he hath destroyed 2. Good men may be guilty of the greatest enormities the sin unto death excepted 3. Noah David Solomon Peter were good men yet represented by the Spirit of the Lord as guilty of hainous iniquities We add in S. T. Yet we crave leave to say That they are all of them such as are sadly polluted by their compliance in respect of their standing in the Ministry Antichristian whose teachings Saints have no warrant to attend upon Mr. T. subjoyns 1. That their Ministry is Antichristian when they minister the Word of God is a contradiction Answ 1. This is meerly his dictate without proof 2. The Ministry of Rome he grants is Antichristian yet they minister the Word of God He adds 2dly That they stand in that Ministry which they received by Episcopal Ordination is their virtue which for any to disclaim is to go back from the service of God for that Ministry is no other than of the Doctrine and Sacraments and Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and aâ— this Church and Realm hath received the same Answ 1. 'T is true thus they speak in their Book of Ordination but these words imply a contradiction Christs Ministry Administration of Sacraments and Discipline and the Church of England are sufficiently remote hers being received not from Christ but Austin the Monk and the Apostatick Church of Rome 2. Their Priests have no Ministry of Discipline 't is reserved in other hands 3. That Lord-Bishops are no Officers of the Institution of Christ but Antichristian we have proved that any should receive from them any Ministry but what is Antichristian is the first born of absurdities to imagine 4. That to stand in such a Ministry is to stand in a Ministry of Christ is oppositum in opposito a contradiction indeed We add 3dly The greater hopes we have of their goodness the more caâ—telouâ— we should be of incouraging them in a false way What Mr. T.
odious with Ministers and People whereby they were necessitated to joyn in Communion by themselves Praecurs Sect. 12. p. 48. Because it is manifest from Acts 2. 41. 46. 1 Cor. 10. 1 2 3. 12. 13. Persons were Baptized before they brake bread together therefore the taking any without Baptism to the Lords Supper will but strengthen men in their opinion that their Infant Sprinkling is sufficient Therefore he sees a nececessity of desisting from that enterprâ—se of admitting persons of different perswasions touching Baptism into their communion ibid. p. 49. The Christian-Church-constitution of Volunteers is better ibid. Sect. 11. pag. 431. In the Worship of God it was wont to be accounted a certain Rule that Gods Worship should be observed according to his appointment and no otherwise ib. Sect. 16. p. 66. My opposing the Bishops began with the soonest And for my non conformity Reasons were given with some of the first I justifie not the Ceremonies ibid. Sect. 21. p. 89. It is true our English Prelatical Divines do account Baptism sufficiently administred that is so done yea though it were by a Popish Priest or a Midwife ibid. p. 91. However for the Tenet of the Peoples governing by Vote I know no reason why they he speaks of those called Independants should be called a Sect rather than their opposites The Excommunication which â—he Scripture speaks of is no where made a part of Government or of the Elders Office any more than the Peoples In Antiquity its apparent out of Cyprian That the People had a great hand in Elections Excommunications Absolutions ibid. p. 93. No one Country City or Tribe together were gathered by the Apostles or other Preachers into the Christian visible Church but so many of all as the Lord vouchsafed to call by his Word and Spirit 1 Cor. 1. 26. Not many wise men Ergo Not the whole Nation And afterward to Mr. B. Question Hath he not commanded to disciple Nations He answers Yes to make Disciples of all Nations by preaching the Gospel to every creature but no where by Civil Authority to gather a whole City Country or Tribe and to draw them into a National and City-Covenant together â—bid Sect. 22. p. 97. Jeroboams Sacrificing and keeping a Feast at another time thâ—n God appointed Ahaz his forming an Altar after the pattern of that of Damascus Nadab and Abihu their offering strange fire keeping Holy Dayes to Saints he condemns as Will-worship Full Review of the Dispute conceâ— Infant-Baptism p. 3. 1 Pet. 2. 9. Which are meant only of the Elect and true Believers of every Nation are applied to a National Church consisting of a great part of either ignorant persons that know little or nothing of Christianity or persecutors of Godliness profanely despising the Word and hating the Godly ibid. pag. 27. God forbad Infants under eight dayes old to be circumcised in that he appointed the eighth day to be Circumcised Now if this be a forbidding to Circumcise before as I acknowledge it is and so do many Protestant Divines as Paraeus Com. in Gen. 17. 11. then that is forbidden which is otherwise than God appointed ibid. p. 81. And p. 180. He reckons the Cross in Baptism amongst Popish usuages such as Bell Baptism Baptizing of Dead persons I said it is a carnal imagination that the Church of God is like to civil Corporations if persons were admitted to it by birth nor is it to the purpose to prove the contrary that Mr. M. tells me the Jewish Church was in the like civil Corporations for I grant it was the whole Nation whereas the Christian Church hath another constitution ibid p. 265 266. If Christ did say to Judas that his Body was broken for him and his Blood shed it will be hard to avoid thence the proof of Universal Redemption I think it the safe stand most likely tenent that Judas went out afore the Lords Supper p. 291. ibid. Christ is the Head of the visible Church in giving them Officers outward order direction ibid. p. 294. But all these are alterd now the Church is not National no one High-Priest Temple Sanhedrim ibid p. 334. I know that our Army hath done so much for the setling the Church as that the Anti-Prelatists Congregations had been either none or much oppressed if they had not broken the force of the opposite party Nor dare I be so unthankful to God or them as not to acknowledge the great Mercy and benefit we at this day enjoy thereby however Mr. B. fret at our Liberty and jibe at the Instruments ibid. p. 383. A not commanding is a plain forbidding Mr. Collings provoc pro. ch 5. Nothing is lawful in the Worship of God but what we have precept or president for which whoso denies opens a door to all Idolatry and Superstition and Wil-worship in the world which Mr. T. approves of ibid p. 408. Of divine Institution there is no reason can be right but what is from Gods own appointment though it may seem right to us it should be so In things positive our reason is deceivable and Gods appointment is only to be attended ibid p. 461. And now Sir though I might to these Collections which are diametrically opposite to the main principles of your Theodulia the very basis upon which that Fabrick stands have added many more as you well know yet am I willing to spare you not knowing but the Lord may give you to see and bemoan your evill in gladding the hearts of the Wicked sadning the Righteous or confirming them in crooked paths who have turn'd aside thereunto which notwithstanding your natural temper and heâ—ght of spirit with which we are sufficiently acquainted that will pâ—oâ—pt you to say something in a way of self-justification is not impossible for God to do If you write in Answer to our Reply and to the purpose you shall receive a Return 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a spirit of meekness and christianity If we meet therein wiâ—h meer dictates without tender of proof impertinent citations of Scriptures without the least attempt to minifest their congruity with the assertion they are introduced to prove and a parcel of passionate railing expressions in the stead of the words which the Wisdom that is from above and the Spirit of our dear Lord teacheth which we too often meet with in your Theodulia you have your Answer Farewell FINIS